[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 108 (Monday, August 8, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: August 8, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                      APPOINTMENT OF KENNETH STARR

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Moran). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of February 11, 1994, and June 10, 1994, the gentleman from New 
Mexico [Mr. Richardson] is recognized during morning business for 5 
minutes.
  (Mr. RICHARDSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, many of us, hoping that the Whitewater 
controversy had ended, woke up this weekend with another Whitewater 
controversy: the replacement of Robert Fiske with Kenneth Starr. The 
White House has already expressed its views on the matter. So has the 
President's lawyer.
  Let me just say that I am concerned about this appointment. I am not 
calling for Starr's resignation, nor am I criticizing him. He appears 
to have excellent legal and academic credentials and he appears to be a 
man of integrity.
  The question that comes to mind is whether Kenneth Starr, based on 
past actions, is too partisan a Republican to do a fair job. Is he the 
only individual that we can find to fill this position? What was wrong 
with Fiske? He was a Republican, and I understand a Republican had to 
get this job.
  Did that letter from those House Republicans influence the judges?
  Mr. Speaker, here is why I am concerned about Kenneth Starr: Just 
this year, Starr planned to file a legal brief supporting the Paula 
Jones lawsuit. Starr admitted that he was involved in discussions with 
attorneys for Paula Jones, but he will not specify with whom--the 
Washington Post, June 24, 1994.
  Additionally, Starr said he planned to file a legal brief supporting 
Paula Jones' contention that the President is not immune from her suit. 
And it was widely reported in the press that Starr was considering the 
filing of a brief--the Washington Post, June 24, 1994, and the Dallas 
Morning News, June 11, 1994.
  Starr publicly criticized President Clinton's legal defense team for 
arguing to delay the Paula Jones lawsuit until after he had left 
office, saying, ``It is a very serious step to take to say that the 
President of the United States is simply too busy to respond to a 
lawsuit''--the Daily Telegraph, June 30, 1994.
  According to other news reports, Starr is active this year in a 
campaign to unseat a Democratic incumbent, Jim Moran. According to the 
news reports, he serves with Jay Stephens, William Barr, Edwin Meese, 
and Henry Hudson on the list of cochairmen of the Kyle McSlarrow 
campaign to unseat Democratic incumbent Jim Moran in Alexandria, and 
apparently, according to many, Starr has made statements that, ``We are 
going to try to tie Jim Moran to Bill Clinton.''
  In 1993, Starr was mentioned as a Republican Senate candidate in 
Virginia. Starr said he was considering a bid for the Republican Senate 
nomination in Virginia--Newsweek, February 15, 1993, and Roll Call, 
January 18, 1993.
  In 1992 Starr was deeply involved in the Presidential campaign and 
was criticized in two Clinton campaign releases. On October 16, 1992, 
the Clinton campaign statement criticized Starr for actions taken in 
his role as former President Bush's Solicitor General. Specifically, 
Starr was criticized for backing a Federal court ruling allowing 
employers to cut health insurance coverage for seriously ill employees, 
including those who contract AIDS--Clinton campaign statement, October 
16, 1992.
  Again, on October 24, 1992, a Clinton campaign statement criticized 
Starr for filing a brief with the Supreme Court, reversing the Bush 
administration's opening on ``Federal construction contracts to 
nonunion labor without regard to prevailing-wage requirements of the 
Davis-Bacon Act.''
  The point of this is that Kenneth Starr is a partisan Republican, and 
I am concerned. I am not calling for his resignation. But I am going to 
be watching this, I think like everybody will.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. RICHARDSON. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. HOYER. The gentleman has been very measured and temperate in his 
observations with respect to this appointment.
  I want to tell the gentleman, when I read about this in the paper, I 
was outraged. I believe, in my opinion, it calls into question the 
judgment of the judges who made the appointment. It calls into question 
the judgment of Mr. Starr, who took the appointment.
  This is a very weighty matter. It is a very important matter that the 
American public know the full truth and that the judgment and 
recommendation made by the special prosecutor are not tainted with 
partisan politics.
  It seems to me, based upon the information that the gentleman has 
discussed just now, that it is almost impossible to conceive of an 
outcome that would not reflect on the partisanship of the particular 
individual selected by the court.
  I believe this matter needs further study and further comment, and I 
intend to do that in the future.
  Mr. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, I am including two newspaper articles 
and other documents at this point in the Record, as follows:

                            Kenneth W. Starr

       Kirkland & Ellis Citicorp Center, 153 East 53rd Street, New 
     York, New York, 10022-4675.
       Political: Member, Fairfax County Republican Comm. 1979-
     1981; Ops. chmn. Fairfax Co. Republican party Dranesville 
     Dist., VA 1979-1980; Legal advisor CAB transition team office 
     of pres.-elect 1980-1981; Legal advisor SEC transition team, 
     1980-1981, and Co-chairman of the 1994 Kyle McSlarrow 
     congressional campaign to unseat Democratic Rep. James Moran 
     of Alexandria. (Along with former federal law enforcement 
     officials William P. Barr, Edwin Meese, Henry Hudson and Jay 
     B. Stephens.)
       Government Exp.: Clerk, Chief Justice Warren E. Burger 
     1974-1977; Counselor to U.S. Attorney General (William French 
     Smith), 1981-1983; Circuit Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, 
     District of Columbia Circuit, 1983-1989; and U.S. Solicitor 
     General, 1989-1993 (nom. 4/9/89; confirmed 5/18/89).
       Work: Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, 1974-1981 (Associate 
     Partner, 1977-1981).
       Born: July 21, 1946, Vernon, Texas
       Concentration: Appellate Litigation; Commercial Litigation; 
     Antitrust Law.
       Admitted To Bar: 1973, California; 1979, Virgnia and 
     District of Columbia.
       Rating: AVT.
       Position: Member.
       Law School: Duke University (Formerly Trinity College of 
     North Carolina) (J.D. 1973).
       College: George Washington University (A.B. 1968); Brown U. 
     (M.A. 1969).
       Kirkland & Ellis lobbies for: American Ass'n for Laboratory 
     Accreditation; the American Petroleum Institute; Amoco Corp.; 
     CF Industries, Inc.; Chicago Board of Trade; General Motors 
     Corp.; and Safe Buildings Alliance.
       Personal: M. Alice Jean Mendell, 8/23/70; children; 
     Randall, Carolyn, Cynthia.
                                  ____


               [From the Washington Post, June 24, 1994]

             The Country Lawyer, Taking a Swing at Goliath

                            (By Kim Masters)

       Maybe once in a lifetime it comes--terrifying, alluring, 
     irresistible. The big one. The leviathan. Your own personal, 
     say, Moby Dick. So it is with Gilbert K. Davis, the Fairfax 
     lawyer who did not shrink from a task that no one else, it 
     seemed, would undertake: suing the president of the United 
     States on behalf of Paula Corbin Jones--accusing the 
     commander in chief of sexual misconduct in the most repugnant 
     detail. It is an unprecedented, ugly and politically charged 
     case that has inflamed conspiracy theorists on the left and 
     right while throwing the motives of all involved into 
     question. Including the plaintiff's lawyers.
       ``He's an avid Republican who would go to any lengths, 
     within the confines of propriety, to embarrass the 
     president,'' says one former colleague.
       Davis, who's taken on the case with co-counsel Joseph 
     Cammarata, portrays himself in nobler terms. He's in it 
     partly to establish the principle that in the United States, 
     the president is not above the law. ``We don't call our 
     leader `king,''' he says. ``We call him Mr. President.''
       Gil Davis is a big man--a bulky, genial, double-chinned, 
     pipe-smoking sort who occupies a small suite in an 
     unremarkable office town house on Lee Highway. His 
     bookshelves are lined with classics, though he cheerfully 
     confesses, ``I didn't read more than half of 'em.'' He is an 
     avid teller of stories--even when he is the butt of the joke. 
     The Jones case, however, he takes seriously.
       It is uncertain whether his experience has prepared him for 
     litigation in the most major of leagues. In local legal 
     circles, it is fair to say, the 51-year-old Davis hasn't been 
     especially visible in recent years. Much of his practice 
     comes from what a colleague in Northern Virginia calls the 
     ``bib-and-overall crowd'' in southwest Virginia mountain 
     country--but even there, local attorneys say, he isn't a 
     towering presence. ``He's gregarious, likable--
     extraordinarily nice on a personal basis,'' says Jackson 
     White, a veteran attorney in the area, ``but I don't think 
     he has been high-profile.'' Davis is no ``dragon-slayer,'' 
     White adds, but ``he's not somebody that just handles 
     speeding tickets and drunk driving.''
       Many of Davis's cases are personal-injury matters, usually 
     for a percentage of the damages. He has handled an array of 
     other matters--including, he says, several sexual harassment 
     cases. But one of his most recent trials did involve a 
     traffic ticket--and he lost.
       Which leads to the question: How did Gil Davis end up 
     representing a secretary from Arkansas in a suit filed in the 
     federal courthouse in Little Rock just days before the 
     deadline imposed by the statute of limitations.
       Davis says no conservative group approached him. But his 
     explanation of how he got the case--through ``a friend'' who 
     ``very coincidentally'' happened to be in his office and 
     mentioned it--has led to all manner of speculation about 
     whether Davis or his co-counsel, Commarata, had secret 
     connection to the religious right or other Clinton foes.
       But the real explanation for Davis's involvement in the 
     case holds no particular intrigue, says a former Davis 
     colleague. ``He just let it be known that he was available,'' 
     says Frank Dunham, an Arlington lawyer and former fellow 
     federal prosecuter who has discussed the case with Davis.
       Pressed on this point, Davis is vague, ``Either Joe 
     Cammarata or I made a call or received a call from Mr. 
     [Daniel] Traylor,'' he says, referring to Jones's attorney in 
     Arkansas. ``I have a feeling that Mr. Traylor heard about our 
     names before. . . . But I don't know that to be the case.''


                          a case for paranola?

       If there was no conspiracy behind Davis's entry into the 
     case, that doesn't mean the Clinton camp shouldn't be on red 
     alert. Already there are signs that Davis isn't exactly 
     flying solo. High-powered Washington lawyer Kenneth W. Starr, 
     who was the Bush administration's solicitor general, 
     acknowledges that he may file a brief in the case supporting 
     Jones's contention that the president is not immune from her 
     suit. Starr says he was approached by counsel associated with 
     Jones but he won't specify who.
       Davis acknowledges that he is a Republican, and active 
     enough that he usually attends the party's annual convention. 
     But this year he stayed home to avoid the appearance of 
     partisanship--for my client's purposes,'' he says. State and 
     local GOP officials say they have seen little of him in 
     recent years. ``If somebody's trying to make a case that Gil 
     is a partisan Republican who has been thirsting to make a 
     political impact. I don't think that case can be made,'' 
     says state party official Morton Blackwell.
       Some fund-raising groups with conservative affiliations 
     have said they will raise money for Jones. But Davis has 
     attempted to eliminate any appearance of collision with 
     politically motivated donors by getting a friend. Cindy Hays, 
     to set up a fund to solicit contributions for Jones. Davis's 
     fund-raisers cost the effort in terms that are personal or 
     feminist, rather than political--but they are not divulging 
     the names of contributors.


                            Joe Bag-o-Donuts

       Davis says he already has lost a client or two who objected 
     to his decision to sue the president. That's nothing compared 
     with the fate suffered by Cammarata, a 36-year-old tax and 
     trial lawyer who worked with Davis part time before the suit 
     was filed. Cammarata's other employer--the D.C. law firm of 
     Beaozzi, Gavin & Craver--dropped him instantly when his 
     investment in the Jones matter was announced. Several lawyers 
     associated with that firm have ties to the Clinton 
     administration. The firm declines to comment on Cammarata.)
       Cammarata is an alumnus of the Justice Department's tax 
     division, where former colleagues remember him as a bright 
     young man. ``I was not surprised when I saw him on CNN,'' 
     says Boston attorney Ellen Carpenter, one of Cammarata's 
     former associates. ``He's always been very aggressive and--I 
     don't want to use the word `hustler,' but that's sort of the 
     impression he would give, that he was very much out for his 
     best benefit. . .  He could alienate people. He's got that 
     edge to him.''
       At Justice, Cammarata was assigned to handle Chicago cases 
     and was dubbed ``Joe Bag-o-Donuts'' because of the gift he 
     always proffered to assistant U.S. attorneys who helped 
     handle his cases: He also coached the office softball team 
     and helped organize an annual Red Cross fund-raiser in 
     Alexandria. Cammarata appeared at that fund-raiser this 
     month--rockin' to the music with his high-profile client.
       Once he left the Justice Department, Cammarata worked for a 
     D.C. tax firm but went out on his own after a couple of 
     years. He spent part of his time at the Beaozzi firm, where a 
     college classmate practices. And he hooked up with Gil Davis 
     by picking his name out of a lawyers' directory and calling 
     cold to offer his services.


                            Plenty of Moxie

       Cammarata and Davis face formidable white-collar attorney 
     Robert Bennett--a man with famous clients and $450-an-hour 
     fees. The clearly enjoy the image of themselves in a Davis-
     and-Goliath confrontation. Without visible outside 
     assistance, they've taken on a complex case that raises novel 
     constitutional questions. ``What stirs a warrior's blood is 
     battle,'' Davis intones.
       His friends say he is quite capable of putting up an 
     impressive fight on his own.
       ``Gilbie ain't no slouch,'' says Joseph Duvall, a former 
     partner who cackles with glee at the consternation his one-
     time colleague must be causing Clinton. ``He's got plenty of 
     moxie.''
       ``Gilbie'' is the nickname Davis got as an assistant U.S. 
     attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia. He came there 
     out of the University of Virginia law school in 1969, where 
     he impressed his associates with his skill at trying criminal 
     cases. ``He was a natural from the very beginning, especially 
     with juries,'' says former U.S. attorney Brian Gettings. ``He 
     demonstrated an easy ability to communicate and persuade and 
     before long was winning more than his share of cases.''
       ``He is a world-class lawyer,'' says Jim Tate, another 
     former law partner. ``These lawyers in Fairfax may not know 
     it, but I know it.''
       Nonetheless, Davis never emerged as a lion of the local 
     bar. He bounced in and out of a couple of partnerships but 
     seemed destined to practice on his own. He says his biggest 
     flaw is that he's ``disorganized.'' Ron Lynch, who was one of 
     a group that briefly teamed up with Davis years ago, 
     remembers Davis as a man with an abundant ego: ``I remember 
     him sitting there saying, `I know you fellows came over here 
     to latch your wagon to my star'''.
       Duvall calls Davis a friend now but the two men quarreled 
     when they were partners. Duvall actually had a deadbolt--
     ``the Gilbie guard''--installed on his office door to prevent 
     Davis from barging in. The story might suggest that Duvall 
     bears Davis ill will--except that Davis tells it on himself, 
     with evident relish.


                        a brief political foray

       Davis says he decided to go to law school partly because he 
     had read that Woodrow Wilson called law a path to politics. 
     And he had noticed that a half-dozen sitting senators at that 
     time--the mid- `60s--were U-Va.-trained lawyers.
       His brief political career was a rocky one. He was elected 
     chairman of the state Young Republican Federation in 1973 but 
     a conservative faction quickly invalidated the election and 
     won control of the group. Those who prevailed in that battle 
     ``weren't wild about Gil,'' recalls attorney Ray LaJeunesse, 
     who represented the triumphant conservatives. In later years, 
     he adds, Davis mended fences by supporting party nominees.
       In 1975, Davis challenged Democratic Commonwealth Attorney 
     Robert Horan in a campaign that became exceptionally bitter. 
     Davis accused Horan of everything from fixing parking tickets 
     to being soft on organized crime. Horan called Davis ``an 
     apostle of the half-truth'' and trounced him in the election. 
     ``That inoculated me from seeking elected office,'' Davis 
     says. From then on, he satisfied himself with supporting 
     other people's candidacies. He was a Howard Baker man in 
     1980 and favored George Bush in 1988.
       None of this suggests right-wing fervor. And those who know 
     Davis well dispute a view held by more casual acquaintances 
     that he would do anything to humiliate a Democratic 
     president--or that he would take the case just for publicity. 
     ``Gil really doesn't care about his image,'' Dunkan says. 
     ``But he's not a sleazebag third-rate lawyer. He's a very 
     educated, high-minded lawyer. And he takes the Constitution 
     seriously. It's not a lark for him.''
       Others say Davis has an appetite for combat. ``It's just 
     his nature,'' says Tate, his former partner. ``He just loves 
     the challenge. When he found out other lawyers didn't want 
     the case, I think that excited him the most.''
       Even if a couple of clients have abandoned him, Davis 
     doesn't seem to be putting much on the line professionally by 
     taking the Jones case. Locally, he hasn't had a newsmaking 
     case since 1985, when one of his clients--then-owner of the 
     Tony Galileo restaurant--faced drug charges (he received a 
     fine and a five-year suspended sentence). Several years ago, 
     Davis sent out letters soliciting drunk-driving cases--though 
     he says he dropped the practice after he decided it was 
     ``kind of demeaning.''
       His practice hasn't made him rich or famous, but Davis says 
     he enjoys the plain-folks cases he takes in the southwest 
     part of the state. ``It's refreshing because the people are 
     sincere,'' he says. ``They're not cases that you read about 
     every day, but they're important to these people.''
       Davis also says he was slowed down after a 1991 wreck when 
     a truck slammed into his van on Interstate 66. Hit from 
     behind, he smashed into the windshield with so much force 
     that he not only broke the wheel, but the steering column as 
     well. He was pulled from his vehicle moments before it was 
     engulfed in flame and had injuries that kept him in the 
     hospital for two months.
       But his sense of honor didn't flag. When he was wheeled 
     into the emergency room, he recognized the doctor as one 
     Herbert Lane, who had frequently testified as an expert 
     witness in personal-injury cases--always disputing the injury 
     claims of Davis's clients. The doctor had made so many such 
     courtroom appearances, Davis says, that he was nicknamed 
     ``no-pain Lane.'' So Davis says he was relieved when he saw 
     Lane in the emergency room.
       ``I said, `Doctor, I'm so glad to see you're on the 
     case,''' Davis remembers. ``It must mean I'm not hurt.''


                       a matter of ``principle''

       Davis's practice may involve more traffic tickets than big 
     tickets, but he could collect a percentage of a major payoff 
     soon if the Kentucky Supreme Court doesn't reverse its own 
     ruling in long-standing litigation against Bethlehem Steel 
     Corp. Davis represents a family accusing the company of 
     illegally mining its coal. The case has been on appeal since 
     1987 but his clients stand to collect more than $35 million 
     if the verdict stands. Meanwhile, Davis says, he's been 
     paying costs of that case--about $200,000--out of his own 
     pocket.
       If Jones's fund-raisers are unsuccessful, Davis would have 
     to cover the potentially hefty cost of the Jones litigation. 
     But he says he isn't worrying about money; to him, this is 
     about America--about a country where the law levels the 
     playing field. ``Before the courts, we're all the same,'' he 
     says. ``I'm interested in establishing that principle * * * 
     It says something about what this country is. In some 
     countries, if you were to sue the president, you would be 
     faced with a barrage of bullets rather than a barrage of 
     cameras.''
       He is prepared to fight at least to the metaphorical death, 
     he warns. ``I'm like Lincoln,'' he says. ``I think cases that 
     go to trial--somehow there's been a failure because it's an 
     expensive and time-consuming and difficult process for 
     litigants. But once in the courtroom, it's a different 
     matter. Then there is a winner and a loser. It is, as 
     [lawyer-author] Gerald Spence has called it, a killing 
     ground. The end result is that someone is wounded, mortally.
                                  ____


                             Kenneth Starr

       1994 Starr Planned To File A Legal Brief Supporting Paula 
     Jones' Lawsuit. Starr admitted that he was involved in 
     discussions with attorneys for Paula Jones--but he won't 
     specify who. [Washington Post, 6/24/94]
       Starr said that he planned to file a legal brief supporting 
     Paula Jones's contention that the President is not immune 
     from her suit. It was widely reported in the press that Starr 
     would in fact do so. [Washington Post, 6/24/94; 6/10/94; 
     Dallas Morning News, 6/11/94]
       Starr publicly criticized President Clinton's legal defense 
     team for arguing to delay the Paula Jones lawsuit until after 
     he has left office saying, ``It's a very serious step to take 
     to say that the President of the United States is simply too 
     busy to respond to lawsuits.'' [Daily Telegraph plc, 6/30/94]
       1994 Starr Served With Partisan Jay Stephens On McSlarrow 
     Campaign. Starr joined Republicans Jay Stephens, William P. 
     Barr, Edwin Meese, and Henry Hudson--on the list of co-
     chairmen of the Kyle McSlarrow campaign to unseat Democratic 
     Rep. James Moran of Alexandria, Virginia. [Washington Times, 
     3/21/94]
       1993 Starr Mentioned As A Republican Senate Candidate in 
     Virginia. Starr said he was ``considering'' a bid for the 
     Republican Senate nomination in Virginia. [Newsweek, 2/15/93; 
     Roll Call, 1/18/93]
       1992 Starr Criticized in Two Clinton Campaign Releases.
       An October 16, 1992 Clinton campaign statement criticized 
     Starr for actions taken in his role as former-President 
     George Bush's Solicitor General. Specifically, Starr was 
     criticized for backing a Federal court ruling allowing 
     employers to cut health insurance coverage for seriously ill 
     employees--including those who contract AIDS. [Clinton 
     Campaign Statement, 10/16/92]
       An October 24, 1992 Clinton campaign statement criticized 
     Starr for filing a brief with the Supreme Court reversing the 
     Bush administrations and opening ``federal construction 
     contracts to non-union labor without regard to prevailing 
     wage requirements of the Davis-Bacon Act.'' [Clinton Campaign 
     Statement, 10/24/92]
                                  ____


                      [From the Washington Times]

                   Friend of Court Is Foe of Clinton


                   starr mulls brief against immunity

                          (By Michael Hedges)

       Former Solicitor General Kenneth W. Starr is planning to 
     file a legal opinion in the sexual misconduct lawsuit against 
     President Clinton that could bolster arguments against 
     immunity for the president.
       Mr. Starr would examine the constitutional issues in his 
     friend-of-the-court brief, delineating his reasoning that the 
     presidency is not immune from lawsuits such as the one filed 
     by former Arkansas state employee Paula Corbin Jones.
       ``I'm not going to comment at all on that,'' Mr. Starr, a 
     short-list candidate for the Supreme Court during the Bush 
     administration, said last night.
       But informed sources said Mr. Starr has had discussions 
     with Mrs. Jones' attorneys and, while not committed to doing 
     so yet, was leaning toward writing an opinion exploring the 
     constitutional issues the case raises.
       Mr. Starr, now in private practice in Washington, already 
     has partially signaled his views on the immunity issues.
       Appearing on PBS' ``MacNeil-Lehrer News Hour'' in late May, 
     he said, ``It is a very serious step to take to say that the 
     president of the United States is simply too busy to respond 
     to lawsuits the way others have to, even if we're willing to 
     bend over backward to protect his schedule and so forth.''
       On May 18, White House Counsel Lloyd Cutler asked the 
     Justice Department to determine whether Mr. Clinton is immune 
     from lawsuits. The move came shortly after Mr. Clinton's 
     attorney in the Jones lawsuit. Robert S. Bennett, referring 
     to a 1982 Supreme Court decision, said he would argue that a 
     sitting president cannot be sued because it would paralyze 
     the presidency.
       Mr. Starr said in the PBS interview that concern that a 
     president would be hamstrung by too many lawsuits could be 
     addressed by Congress. He also said that federal judges have 
     various methods to control case proceedings in a way that 
     would protect the office of the presidency.
       Mr. Bennett said ``I don't want to comment on that at all'' 
     when asked if a brief by Mr. Starr would have an impact on 
     the case.
       Mr. Bennett said he continued work on Mr. Clinton's 
     response to the charges. Under the law, those responses must 
     be filed by mid-July.
       Mrs. Jones' attorney, Gilbert K. Davis, said last night, 
     ``I have nothing to say on this matter.''
       Bruce Fein, a constitutional scholar, said if Mr. Starr 
     files a brief in the case it could add weight to the Jones 
     lawsuit.
       ``I think it certainly would be an exceptionally persuasive 
     document,'' he said. ``Kenneth Starr has exceptional 
     credibility. It would place Paula Jones in the company of a 
     legal opinion that would at least be the equal to any opinion 
     on the constitutional issues filed for Mr. Clinton.''
       Erwin Chemerinsky, a law professor at the University of 
     Southern California, said, ``Mr. Starr is an extremely 
     eminent attorney, and is also someone identified as sensitive 
     to the executive branch of government. It is hard to imagine 
     anyone filing a brief in this case that would have more 
     influence than one filed by Mr. Starr.''
       As solicitor general, Mr. Starr, 48, handled virtually all 
     the litigation involving the executive branch of government 
     that went before the Supreme Court. The solicitor general's 
     office handles about two-thirds of all the cases going before 
     the Supreme Court each year.
       Mr. Starr, a graduate of George Washington University and 
     Duke Law School, was a law clerk for Chief Justice Warren 
     Burger.
       From 1983 to 1989, he was a judge on the U.S. Court of 
     Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, In the year, he became 
     President Bush's solicitor general, Mr. Starr was 
     considered very close to being picked for the Supreme 
     Court when the openings occurred that were eventually 
     filed by Justices David Souter and Clarence Thomas.
       Mrs. Jones filed her lawsuit May 6 in U.S. District Court 
     in Little Rock, seeking $175,000 on each of four complaints 
     against Mr. Clinton for ``willful, outrageous and malicious 
     conduct'' during a Governor's Quality Conference held May 8, 
     1991, in the Excelsior Hotel in downtown Little Rock.
       Mrs. Jones, then 24-year-old Paula Corbin, was a low-level 
     state employee and Mr. Clinton was the governor of Arkansas. 
     In her four-count complaint Mrs. Jones said Mr. Clinton 
     exposed himself and made abusive sexual overtures to her, 
     then warned her to keep quiet about it. This was five months 
     before he announced he would be a candidate for president.
       Meanwhile, a second co-defendant in the suit, Arkansas 
     State Trooper Danny Ferguson, is expected to file his 
     response as early as next week, according to his attorney, 
     Bill Bristow of Jonesboro, Ark.
       Trooper Ferguson's account of what happened could prove 
     critical to the issue of credibility in the case, legal 
     experts have said.
       Mrs. Jones said Trooper Ferguson escorted her to a room at 
     the Excelsior at the request of Mr. Clinton. She said when 
     she was alone with the governor, he solicited oral sex from 
     her.
       The White House and Mr. Clinton have said he had no 
     recollection of ever meeting Mrs. Jones, and characterized 
     her charges as ``pathetic.''
       But Trooper Ferguson, in interviews with the American 
     Spectator magazine and the Los Angeles Times newspaper, has 
     said Mr. Clinton did direct him to approach a woman he 
     identified as ``Paula'' on the same day Mrs. Jones said the 
     incident occurred.
       His only public comment about the suit so far came to 
     reporters last month when he said he would ``tell the truth'' 
     about Mrs. Jones' charges when he filed his answer to the 
     lawsuit.

                          ____________________