Ken Starr’s Investigation of Bill Clinton: Perjury and Obstruction

Ken Starr, the independent counsel appointed to investigate Bill Clinton, sought to establish whether the President had committed perjury and obstructed justice. This article delves into the details of the investigation, focusing on the claims of perjury and obstruction, and sheds light on the broader context and implications of Starr's probe.

Introduction to Ken Starr and His Role as Independent Counsel

Ken Starr, a prominent and ambitious Republican lawyer, was appointed as the independent counsel to investigate President Bill Clinton in 1994. The initial allegations against Clinton were related to his relationship with Monica Lewinsky, a White House intern, and subsequent claims of a cover-up. Starr's appointment was significant, as under the Inspector General Act and Federal Courts Improvement Act, an independent counsel could be appointed to investigate a wide range of allegations without executive interference.

The Charges of Perjury and Obstruction

The investigation focused specifically on two overarching charges: perjury and obstruction of justice. According to the investigators, Clinton had misled Congress and the public regarding his relationship with Lewinsky, and his actions may have obstructed justice.

Perjury Allegations

Perjury involves making false statements under oath. In this case, the focus was on whether Clinton lied when he denied having a sexual relationship with Lewinsky. The investigation revealed that Clinton had been interviewed by Starr's team and had issued a statement denying the allegations. However, subsequent testimony from Clinton, particularly during the deposition between Starr and Lewinsky's lawyer, showed inconsistencies with the denial of a sexual relationship.

Obstruction of Justice Claims

Obstruction of justice involves attempting to hinder an investigation or an official proceeding. The allegations centered around some of Clinton's actions, such as firing White House travel aide Cirineh Ali Rendleman, a Lewinsky close associate, and attempts to influence or mislead the Attorney General Janet Reno to testify in favor of Clinton.

The Excerpts from Starr's Report

The most salient excerpts from Starr's report, which were later used in legal proceedings and public discourse, are worth noting for their framing of the allegations. For instance, Starr's statement that Clinton 'lied about the nature of his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky' is a pivotal claim in the investigation. Another critical point is Starr's assertion that Clinton 'took special steps to conceal his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky from his office staff and to prevent witnesses from discussing their observations or knowledge of the relationship.' Both these claims are significant in the context of obstruction of justice.

Legal and Ethical Implications

The implications of Starr's findings on Clinton are multifaceted. From a legal perspective, the charges of perjury and obstruction of justice could lead to significant consequences for the President. Ethically, the investigation posed questions about public trust in government and the rule of law. Starr's findings also ignited public debate and political maneuvering, ultimately contributing to Clinton's impeachment in the House of Representatives but not enough to secure a conviction in the Senate.

Conclusion

In summary, Ken Starr's investigation of Bill Clinton, focused on perjury and obstruction of justice, was pivotal in reshaping the political landscape of the United States. The findings and their legal implications remain a critical chapter in American political history.