Independent counsel Kenneth Starr reportedly has decided he has the power to seek an indictment of President Clinton on criminal charges before he leaves the White House.
But the prosecutor has not determined whether he will ask a Washington federal grand jury to indict the president on perjury and obstruction-of-justice charges.
“He is persuaded by precedent and logic that a sitting president can be indicted,” The New York Times today quoted a Starr associate as saying.
“But he has given no hint about whether he would do it, either now or sometime down the road.”
Constitutional scholars in Starr’s office agree that a president can be indicted while in office – especially after the Supreme Court allowed Paula Jones to proceed with her sexual-harassment case against Clinton in 1997.
The Times said Starr has four options: seek an indictment and trial, seek an indictment but ask a judge to seal it until Clinton leaves office, get an indictment now but postpone a trial until Clinton leaves the White House, or drop the case entirely.
Starr aides did not return calls seeking comment, but the White House reacted quickly.
“Besides reinforcing his own stereotype as an out-of-control prosecutor, Ken Starr is tampering with the Senate trial,” said White House special counsel Jim Kennedy.
“Somebody ought to tell him he’s not the 101st senator.”
If Starr decides to seek an indictment, it could throw a wrench into Monica Lewinsky’s upcoming television and book deals.
The former White House intern’s immunity deal requires her to cooperate with congressional proceedings and any criminal trial – and forbids her from talking to the media until both are wrapped up, a source close to Starr told The Post.
Lewinsky would not be able to hold a scheduled heart-to-heart interview with Barbara Walters or publish her tell-all tale, which she is writing with Princess Di biographer Andrew Morton.
Lawyers said they did not think Starr is on solid ground.
“There’s nothing in the Constitution on it, and very little in the way of precedents that might relate to it. They’re in uncharted waters.” said Albert Rosenthal, former dean of Columbia Law School.
Even if the Constitution permits charging a sitting president, it’s unclear whether the independent-counsel statute gives Starr the authority to do it, Rosenthal said.
Top criminal lawyer Benjamin Brafman said Starr is showing a lack of faith in the impeachment process.
“Him even allowing the story to percolate is a slap in the face to the Congress and the United States Senate,” the lawyer said.
Criminal lawyer Kyle Watters said the impeachment process should be the only way to charge a sitting president.
And O.J. Simpson defense attorney Barry Scheck said, “I think it would be a wise exercise of discretion not to prosecute him.”