A L S O +T O D A Y The other Republican smear By James C. Hormel Jr. The son of meatpacking heir James Hormel describes the homophobic campaign waged against his father's nomination as U.S. ambassador to Luxembourg T A B L E+T A L K Is the financial domino effect in international markets preventable? Discuss the Asian market crises and other hot spots in Money D A I L Y+Q U O T E My good friend, tobacco R E C E N T L Y Arkansas trooper considered demanding money from President Clinton By Murray Waas Source for Los Angeles Times' "Troopergate" story discussed trading silence about Clinton's private life for hundreds of thousands of dollars (04/09/98) See some evil, hear some evil ... By Gene Lyons Kenneth Starr says his only concern is the truth. Then why is he giving free passes to people who have lied and broken the law? (04/08/98) Kenneth Starr has lost his credibility By Joe Conason and Murray Waas Legal experts raise questions about the prosecutor's apparent conflicts of interest (04/08/98) The man behind the mask By Karen Rothmyer Shy, secretive and of regal bearing, Richard Mellon Scaife has worked hard and spent millions to dictate the nation's political agenda (04/07/98) Clinton's "Soviet connection" By Murray Waas GOP money man discussed digging up dirt on Clinton (04/07/98) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Browse the Newsreal Archives - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
		CASE CLOSING | PAGE 2 OF 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - If Holder's letter was a singularly unwelcome arrival on Starr's doorstep, his own office had already telegraphed that there was more bad news to come when it leaked news earlier this week of the independent counsel's impending findings in Whitewater and related investigations. Sugar-coated as a possible report to the House of Representatives on matters that might (in the language of the independent counsel law) "constitute grounds for impeachment," in fact the leak seemed to forewarn the opposite: that the investigation was collapsing from its own insubstantiality. Indeed Starr himself had begun hinting as much during his own curbside press conference the day after the Paula Jones ruling. "The real issue is that we're examining, were there crimes committed? We hope for the sake of the nation that we would conclude that no crimes were committed." Press leaks concerning Starr's report this week suggested that far from "impeachable offenses," the independent counsel's long and costly inquiry was turning up absolute zero. The original Whitewater scandal? "Would not raise impeachment issues," reported Susan Schmidt in the Washington Post. Vincent Foster's suicide, the White House travel office firings, a junior administration employee's rifling of FBI files, Hillary Clinton's billing records -- all touchstones for the "Clinton Chronicles" crowd? "Concluding without charges." Which leaves only the Lewinsky affair. But here, too, it was a bad week for Starr. The same day that Deputy Attorney General Holder delivered his letter, federal Judge Norma Holloway Johnson delivered another message: Starr's subpoena of Lewinsky's book-buying records amounted to a "chilling effect" on booksellers' and book purchasers' First Amendment rights. Johnson ordered Starr to demonstrate a "compelling need" for Lewinsky's records or withdraw his subpoena. Holloway's ruling, barely a week after the Jones case was dismissed, served only to underscore the fundamental source of public unease with Starr's Lewinsky inquiry: the seemingly irresistible impulse that drives him to invade relationships protected either by the Bill of Rights or by a general understanding of what constitutes privacy and propriety. With the single exception of Linda Tripp's illegally recorded telephone tapes -- itself a gross invasion of individual privacy -- the perjury strand of Starr's investigation rests entirely upon incursions into privileged terrain: Lawyers and clients; mothers and daughters; now bookstores and their patrons. What's next? Lewinsky's psychotherapy records? Despite all the congressional and pundit bluster about impeachable offenses, in hard legal terms Starr's long, expensive inquiry is running out of oxygen. It's now vividly clear that the Jones lawsuit amounted to artificial life-support for an already-expiring investigation. Last week I had a conversation with a sex-crimes detective from a Midwestern city. "Do you know how many rapes and murders I could wrap up for $30 million?" he asked incredulously as we watched Starr on television. The office of independent counsel may yet stir and rattle before finally giving up the ghost. But it's time to administer the last rites. SALON | April 10, 1998 Bruce Shapiro writes the Law & Order column for the Nation and is a regular contributor to Salon.