There's going, and there's going too far. Syndicated columnist Rick Horowitz sifts through the Hubbell rubble.

Webb Walks, Starr Stung

By Rick Horowitz

I say "rebuke," and you say...?

"Stinging."

Exactly. Here in the heart of News World, the only kinds of rebukes worth mentioning are "stinging rebukes." Occasionally we'll stumble across a "stunning rebuke," but that's nothing more than a "stinging rebuke" we weren't expecting. When you're talking rebukes, you're talking "stinging" or you're not talking at all.

Like the rebuke Ken Starr took home the other day. Seriously "stinging" -- no doubt about it.

What you want if you're Ken Starr -- aside from Bill Clinton's head on a platter, that is -- is a clean shot at every last man, woman and child standing between you and Bill Clinton's head. That's what you want.

What you need if you're Ken Starr is the full cooperation of the Robed Ones -- the various judges and justices and high-level whatnots who have to approve your mission, rule on your motions, pass on your methods, wink at your messes. If they let you do exactly what you want to do, you can tighten the screws on the folks who can tighten the screws on the Big Guy.

If they don't let you do exactly what you want to do...

Say hello to James Robertson. Judge James Robertson, of the Federal District Court in Washington, D.C. James Robertson said "No" to Ken Starr, and "Have a nice day" to Webster Hubbell, the president's pal. Actually, he said more than just "No" to Ken Starr. More like "Get lost."

It seems Judge Robertson didn't appreciate the way Ken Starr has been going after Webb Hubbell, who has already served 17 months for fraud in an earlier turn-up-the-heat case brought by Starr. In this latest chapter, Starr had recently indicted Hubbell (not to mention Mrs. Hubbell, and Hubbell's lawyer, and Hubbell's accountant) on tax evasion charges. The judge didn't appreciate it at all.

For one thing, he couldn't find the slightest connection between these tax matters Starr was so ardently pursuing and the Whitewater matters he was hired to investigate so many moons ago.

"He has identified no common witnesses," said the judge, "described no similar patterns of conduct, cited no similar applicable law." There wasn't the slightest connection except the name "Webster Hubbell." Not good enough, said the judge.

For another thing, the judge couldn't help noticing that the thousands of pages of documents used by Starr to build his tax case against Webb Hubbell came from Webb Hubbell. That without those documents, Starr wouldn't have had the vaguest hint that there was any possible wrongdoing worth pursuing in the first place. And that to get those documents, Starr's office had offered Hubbell an immunity agreement.

Now the prosecutors were arguing that they could use Hubbell's own documents against him anyway. All "immunity" meant, the prosecutors were now insisting, was that they couldn't tell a jury where the documents came from. Thanks a lot.

The judge was less than impressed with the prosecutors' creative linguistics. "Immunity" means "immunity," and a promise is a promise. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution protects people (even presidential confidants, apparently) from being compelled to incriminate themselves. Starr's tactics, the judge concluded, had crossed the line.

I say "expedition," and you say...?

"Fishing expedition."

Worse than that, according to Judge Robertson -- the "quintessential fishing expedition." And everyone knows you can't fish for quintessentials without a license.

Case dismissed.

Posted 7/3/98. Fresh stuff right here twice weekly!

Search the Web Search Rick's!