Ken Starr's Trek

0 Comments | Insight on the News, Dec 14, 1998 | by Jennifer G. Hickey

The independent counsel went where no special prosecutor has gone before and, despite a hostile reception by Democrats, presented the case for impeachment.

As the night's darkness crept across the capital city, leaving nothing of the Hill exposed but the floodlighted Capitol dome, the show went on in Room 2141 of the Rayburn House Office Building -- and on and on. A little more than 12 hours after it began, the all-Starr circus droned to a conclusion. There had been long lines, animal acts, freaky sideshows and standing ovations for the headliners. It had everything but midgets and an Elvis sighting.

Since his appointment as independent counsel by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington in August 1994, Kenneth W. Starr has been Satan to Democrats and a savior to Republicans. He has been called everything from the Antichrist to a religious zealot on a witch-hunt. Democrats had hoped to provoke Starr into miscues by suggesting ethical lapses in his investigation, and Republicans hoped to avoid further responsibility for impeachment by placing the obligation on the shoulders of the independent counsel.

Starr's decision to testify -- something he could not avoid in any case since both sides were prepared to subpoena him -- earned the independent counsel new respect on Capitol Hill and elsewhere, but it cost him his chief ethics adviser. The day after his testimony saw the resignation of Samuel Dash, a Watergate-era prosecutor who had been brought in to counsel Starr on issues of ethics. Dash always had said he would resign if Starr ever failed to take his advice, and Dash opposed the Starr appearance.

Despite the Monday-morning recriminations, Thursday was game day and it was Starr who filled the seats and drew the TV audience. Shortly after House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde of Illinois slammed down his gavel, however, the trick plays began as Massachusetts Democratic Rep. William H. Delahunt demanded more time for questioning be provided to the president's counsel, David Kendall.

The issue already had been dealt with by Hyde in a Nov. 17 letter to White House Counsel Charles F.C. Ruff. Hyde noted Michigan Rep. John Conyers' 1974 votes against allowing President Nixon's counsel to make objections during hearings and in favor of preventing the president's counsel from so much as cross-examining witnesses. Hyde denied the request by Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. When the matter was raised again, the chairman simply called for a roll-call vote, which broke down along party lines, and the Democratic diversion was defeated.

In his opening statement -- in the same room that saw the Nixon impeachment hearings a quarter-century ago -- Hyde spoke in a deliberate voice, saying that as the committee begins consideration of impeachment, "we turn to one person, Judge Start, who has a comprehensive overview of the complex issues we face." It was a telling remark.

Conyers' opener followed. Overreaching to call the almost stuffy Starr a "federally paid sex policeman," the Michigan Democrat pictured him as an obsessed prosecutor. Hyperbole stood on tiptoes as Conyers danced into polemical ballet. "It is not acceptable to force mothers to testify against their daughters, to make lawyers testify against their clients, to require Secret Service agents to testify against the people they protect or to make bookstores tell what books people read," Conyers said. "I and many others believe that Mr. Starr has crossed the line into obsession."

After 30 minutes of partisan wrangling, Starr at last began to narrate his 58-page tale of how William Jefferson Clinton, as the chief executive of the United States, had failed to adhere to his oath faithfully to execute the laws. With his quiet voice and sturdy manners, the man in front of the committee was not at all the angry and vindictive fanatic painted by the Clinton administration and some in the media.

But Starr's self-control and patience soon would be tested. The Democratic tag team of Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas and Maxine Waters of California soon was slamming bizarre invective into the process with screwball objections.

But Starr not only kept a straight face, he continued resolutely to deliver his two-hour opening remarks with a slow and mildly punctuated cadence reminiscent of Chinese water torture. Emphasizing that his charges are not concerned with "a private matter," Starr stated, "The propriety of a relationship is not the concern of our office. The referral is instead about obstruction of justice, lying under oath, tampering with witnesses and misuse of power. The referral cannot be understood without appreciating this vital distinction."

Having previewed his statement on Wednesday evening, some reporters in Room 2141 read newspapers or stared blankly toward the portraits of former Judiciary Committee chairman Peter Rodino and current chairman Hyde. Some members even attended to business elsewhere. New York Rep. Charles Schumer is one who left the hearing room, as did Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Barney Frank, who reportedly had gone out to exercise.