Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (38475)	3/15/1999 11:15:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Don't pump your petrified unit too hard, JLA. It might break off.

To: jlallen who wrote (38475)	3/18/1999 5:52:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Cleaning Up a Leaky Mess newsweek.com This article refers to Starr, of course, not Allen's various orifices. It's just as ugly, but I'm sure the local spin experts will find a way to blame it all on somebody else. Just as Starr was apparently trying to do with Bakaly. The office of the independent Counsel has begun eating its young. Last week Ken Starr forced out his own spokesman, Charles Bakaly III, after an internal inquiry concluded Bakaly was the source of information in a Jan. 31 New York Times story on Starr's belief that he had the constitutional authority to indict Clinton while the president was still in office. Starr also referred the case to the Justice Department for possible prosecution of leaks of grand-jury material. Sources close to Starr told NEWSWEEK they find Bakaly's ouster perplexing. The information, even if it was disclosed by Bakaly, appears to be legal opinions, not grand-jury secrets. Moreover, the Times story was old news; NEWSWEEK had reported Starr's conclusions about indictment back in August. The whole fiasco may have more to do with the ongoing leaks investigations of the OIC than with Bakaly's own role. At the OIC last week, the mood was grim. Starr believes Bakaly may have lied to FBI agents during the course of the leaks probes, and given that the independent counsel's own investigation of Clinton was based on allegations of obstruction and lying under oath, sources say Starr thought he had to act swiftly to maintain his own credibility. (Bakaly's lawyer, Howard Shapiro, issued a statement denying that any "statute, regulation or court order" was violated.) Though Starr has spent weeks arguing vociferously that Janet Reno is too conflicted to supervise any investigations of his office, he did an about-face and referred the Bakaly matter to Justice. If Starr is looking to deflect attention from his office, this may not be the best way to do it. One senior Justice official told NEWSWEEK he was "mystified" by Starr's referral on the matter of the Times story and is skeptical it will ever lead to a prosecution. As the leaks probes continue, Starr's headaches are far from over.