Chief Justice William Rehnquist has returned to the majesty of the Supreme Court. The House managers are back in the House. The television crews have dismantled their cameras and departed. The references to Andrew Johnson have noticeably slackened.
But one figure plows ahead, still pursuing the controversies swirling around President Clinton. Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr’s continued investigations– with four trials pending, and grand juries plugging away in Washington and Virginia– mean the public will be hearing of his work for months and perhaps years to come.
Starr, by law, must issue a final report once his work is done. It is likely to be massive, detailed, and bitterly accusatory of the Clintons, including Starr’s findings not only on the Monica Lewinsky episode but also the Whitewater land deal, the White House travel office firings and the alleged misuse of FBI files.
Starr spokesman Charles Bakaly said he could not predict when the independent counsel would close up shop and issue his final report.
“We’re not quite at the final report stage,” Bakaly said. “If there are no further actions–and we have not concluded our investigation–we still have four trials and perhaps appeals. That makes it difficult, if not impossible, to predict.”
The Lewinsky matter, Bakaly added, set back the office’s work by a year. “We basically took a year plus on the Lewinsky matter, with all those issues in litigation and in the congressional process,” he said.
In his report to Congress last summer, Starr told lawmakers that “all phases of the investigation are now nearing completion.”
White House officials mock such promises.
“The word `soon’ to this independent counsel is a geological frame of reference,” said White House spokesman James Kennedy. “It’s not as you or I understand it. The time is long since past for the books to be closed on Whitewater, the FBI files and the travel office matter. Yet it hasn’t occurred, even after more than four years and $40 million.”
With the impeachment saga behind him, the biggest question hanging over Starr is whether he will indict Clinton, forcing the president to confront the same charges in a courtroom that he faced in his impeachment trial.
More Top Picks Best Amazon Prime Day Air Conditioner Deals 2026
But that seems increasingly unlikely until after Clinton leaves office, if at all.
Most scholars believe the Constitution prohibits indicting a sitting president. And even if an indictment of Clinton is not struck down by the Supreme Court, it would be tied up in court for most of the rest of Clinton’s term.
Several of Starr’s top deputies are leaving, which minimizes the chance that a presidential indictment is on the way. And in case Starr might be tempted, a string of Republican lawmakers, led by Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), have urged him to let the matter rest.
Bakaly declined to comment on whether Starr was contemplating such an indictment. “I don’t want to send any signals,” he said. “It is just inappropriate to discuss it in any way.”
One possibility being mentioned around Washington is that Starr could indict Clinton but keep the indictment under seal so that it would kick in when Clinton leaves office.
If that happens, Starr would face a fairly big risk. Washington juries are known for being liberal, Democratic and pro-defense, confronting Starr with a tough challenge if he chooses to prosecute Clinton.
It is possible, in theory, that Starr still has a few bombshells in his investigative briefcase. He could, for example, indict major figures from the Lewinsky scandal, such as Clinton friend Vernon Jordan, presidential secretary Betty Currie or counsel Bruce Lindsey. Or he could charge First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton with wrongdoing arising from her work as a Little Rock lawyer representing Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan, which was heavily involved in the Whitewater land deal.
But by all indications, Starr’s office is winding down. The FBI files and travel office prongs of Starr’s investigation are finished, with no charges filed. Only a handful of investigative trails remain open, and they show little sign of producing surprises.
Starr is tracking allegations, for example, that Nathan Landow, a prominent Maryland Democrat, sought to intimidate Democratic volunteer Kathleen Willey into keeping quiet about an alleged sexual advance by Clinton.
Landow said in an interview that he has heard “absolutely nothing” from Starr. He denied ever intimidating Willey, and said the allegations against him come from the media, not from Starr.
In addition, Starr is preparing for four upcoming trials.
Susan McDougal, charged with contempt for refusing to answer Starr’s questions about Whitewater, goes to trial March 8. Julie Hiatt Steele, a friend of Willey, faces trial March 30 for allegedly lying under oath about Willey’s allegation that Clinton groped her. Steele has said that Willey asked her to support Willey’s story by lying about the episode.
Clinton associate Webster Hubbell, who already served time for overbilling clients at his former law firm, faces two more trials. He is charged with lying to investigators about work he and Mrs. Clinton did for Madison Guaranty. And he is charged with tax evasion, in a case that has been thrown out and reinstated.
While Starr is conducting his last few investigations, he is the target of several inquiries himself.
Atty. Gen. Janet Reno seemed to indirectly confirm to reporters last week that the Justice Department is moving toward investigating Starr’s office.
Department officials apparently are interested in whether Starr’s prosecutors, when they first confronted Lewinsky with evidence of her affair with Clinton, improperly tried to discourage her from calling a lawyer.
Officials also question whether Starr was forthright when he sought Reno’s permission to investigate the Lewinsky matter. Starr may have had contacts with lawyers for Paula Jones, a possible conflict of interest, which he reportedly failed to tell Reno.
Starr’s office also is under investigation for allegedly leaking information to the news media. A federal judge in August found presumptive evidence that Starr’s office was guilty of improper leaks, and she assigned an investigator to delve into the matter. That report is pending.