explainer
columns
- What's So Exotic About an "Exotic Loan"?
Its zany repayment plan.
Juliet Lapidos
posted July 8, 2008 - Will Cockroaches Inherit the Earth?
What Wall-E gets wrong about the apocalypse.
Daniel Riley
posted July 8, 2008 - Do Fireworks Cause Air Pollution?
Air quality on the Fourth of July.
Jacob Leibenluft
posted July 7, 2008 - The 500,000 Artifacts of George Washington
How did archaeologists find half a million objects at one site?
Jacob Leibenluft
posted July 3, 2008 - Secret Muslims
Are Muslims allowed to hide their faith?
Juliet Lapidos
posted July 2, 2008 - Search for more explainer articles
- Subscribe to the explainer RSS feed
- View our complete explainer archive
What Did Ken Starr Do Wrong?
Bruce GottliebPosted Friday, Oct. 16, 1998, at 9:14 PM ET
Critics of Special Prosecutor Ken Starr have long called him "out of control" or other general epithets, but during the last couple weeks the complaints have gotten specific. Specific, yet confusing. What exactly is Starr alleged to have done and what allegedly is wrong with it?
Allegation One: Starr learned about Lewinsky from Jones' lawyers
Starr says he first heard of Monica Lewinsky from Linda Tripp on January 12. But the New York Times reported that Starr heard Tripp's tale at least a week earlier--from Jerome Marcus, a fellow member of the conservative Federalist Society who previously had been involved in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Marcus had heard about Lewinsky from the ubiquitous Lucianne Goldberg.
So what? What difference does it make that Starr may have known about Lewinsky earlier than he claimed? His critics say (a) this shows that Starr is more connected to the "vast right-wing conspiracy"--and the Jones lawsuit in particular--than he has admitted; and (b) in any event, he lied about it when asking to expand his jurisdiction to cover the Lewinsky matter. Starr maintains that all he got from Marcus was a vague "heads-up."
Allegation Two: Starr leaked evidence (and manipulated judges)
A limo driver says that, on January 15, he overheard Newsweek's Michael Isikoff place a backseat phone call saying Starr had just played the Tripp tapes for him. One day later, Starr asked his supervisory judges to authorize an investigation into Tripp's charges. The decision ought to be expedited, argued Starr, because Isikoff was on the verge of breaking the story. (Starr had hoped to pressure Monica into getting President Clinton and Vernon Jordan incriminating themselves on tape before the story became public.)
Both Starr and Isikoff deny the allegation. What would be wrong if it's true? First, it's against the rules for Starr to leak evidence to a reporter--and Starr has repeatedly insisted he never did so. Second, if true the limo driver's story would expose Starr's urgent request to the judges as disingenuous to say the least.
Allegation Three: Starr lied in court (and manipulated judges)
In a July court hearing, Starr argued that Clinton's conversations with aide Bruce Lindsey were not covered by lawyer-client privilege because any thought of impeachment--the only relevant legal proceeding--was "premature." Three days later Starr asked his supervisory judges, in secret, for permission to release his report--which recommended impeachment. If this isn't lying in court, say Starr's critics, it's very close.
Allegation Four: Starr gave legal advice to Paula Jones
One of Jones' attorneys, Gilbert Davis, consulted Ken Starr four or six times during early 1994 about whether a sitting president could be sued. Starr was not Independent Counsel at the time of the consultations nor was he paid for his time. But he didn't disclose the contact to the Justice Department, either when he was appointed in August 1994 or when the Lewinsky matter brought the Paula Jones case into his inquiry.
And this is wrong because? Because, first, he should have disclosed his involvement, however minor, in a lawsuit against the president--especially when that lawsuit became central to his own investigation. Second, say his critics, because it shows once again that Starr is not a neutral pursuer of justice but an ideologically motivated pursuer of President Clinton.
Next question?
feedback | about us | help | advertise | newsletters | mobile
User Agreement and Privacy Policy | All rights reserved
- Today's Headlines
- Class Of '88 Reunion Attendees Once Again Trick Sue Thorpe Into Thinking Jeff Urban Likes Her
Tue, 08 Jul 2008 10:00:03 -0400 - Talking Through Tragedy Not Necessarily Beneficial
Tue, 08 Jul 2008 07:00:59 -0400 - [audio] Area Sauce Perfect
Tue, 08 Jul 2008 01:00:57 -0400 - » More from the Onion
Unsung StatesmanMarc Thiessen | By the time he left office, Jesse Helms had become a mainstream conservative.
David Broder: Unabashed Racist
- E.J. Dionne: Obama, Iraq and a Hard Place
- Fareed Zakaria: America Is Not at War
- Robert Novak: Mutiny on the GOP Bounty
- Michael Kinsley: Al Franken, Funny but Serious
- Today's Headlines
- How the Kabul Embassy Attack Could Affect the Region
Tue, 08 Jul 2008 21:26:46 GMT - Challenges for New Washington Post Editor Brauchli
Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:50:29 GMT - Wall Street: Senator Phil Gramm's UBS Problem
Tue, 08 Jul 2008 15:48:53 GMT - » More from Newsweek
- Today's Headlines
- Speaking Ill of the Dead
Tue, 8 July 2008 18:52:46 GMT - Growing Into My Big-Girl Clothes
Tue, 8 July 2008 20:03:04 GMT - Oh, What a Tangled Web, My Weave
Mon, 7 July 2008 16:12:27 GMT - » More from The Root

explainer









