ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, May 30, 1996 TAG: 9605300059
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-10 EDITION: METRO
SMOKE HAS hovered awhile over the failed Whitewater real estate development and its aftermath. Now a bit of fire is visible.
How far the flames will spread, though, no one knows.
No one can dismiss the possibility that the fraud convictions, brought Tuesday against President Clinton's former business partners and Gov. Jim Tucker of Arkansas, could lead to a bigger conflagration.
But neither should the public discern, in either the legal or political controversy, a raging inferno about to consume the White House. It just isn't there.
Certainly, the convictions of Tucker and James and Susan McDougal for arranging nearly $3 million in fraudulent loans from two federally backed lenders, including the McDougals' Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan, vindicate various Whitewater probes. While valid questions remain about the motives of independent counsel Kenneth Starr and Senate Whitewater Committee Chairman Alfonse D'Amato, the jury's verdict says the investigations aren't a trumped-up political persecution.
Certainly, the convictions suggest Whitewater will linger as an issue in the presidential campaign, and with some cause. These were Clinton's former associates and his successor as governor, in a tight Little Rock political and business circle, who have been convicted of conspiring to exert political influence for financial gain.
And certainly, the convictions will reinvigorate the remaining parts of Starr's multifaceted investigation, including into activities after the Clintons took occupancy of the White House. In another Arkansas case, scheduled to go to trial June 17, two bankers are accused of funneling illegal contributions to Clinton's 1990 gubernatorial campaign. Also still under investigation is the suspicious disappearance and reappearance, two years later, of Hillary Clinton's law-firm billing records on her work for McDougal's savings and loan.
All this notwithstanding, it still should be emphasized that Tuesday's convictions do not implicate the president in any way. Lead prosecutor W. Ray Jahn himself stressed that Clinton and his wife weren't involved. "Why isn't the president of the United States on trial?" Jahn asked in his closing argument. "Because he didn't set up any phony corporations . . . didn't backdate any documents. . . . He didn't lie to any examiners, he didn't lie to any investigators."
The convictions don't even discredit Clinton's videotaped testimony for the defense, which touched on only a small portion of the charges. Both Starr and jurors say the verdict turned on documentary evidence, not Clinton's testimony. Indeed, several jurors say they found his testimony convincing. Said one: "He was the most credible witness." Said another: "His testimony didn't really relate to the transactions we were dealing with."
Meanwhile, most of the public has yet to get excited about complicated financial transactions years ago in Arkansas. And D'Amato's Senate inquiry is slouching toward its conclusion without having established any solid potential criminal charges, such as obstruction of justice or perjury, that could be referred to prosecutors with any hope of an indictment.
The president is feeling the heat, with reason. There's little doubt he and his wife have been less than fully forthcoming about Whitewater, and the scandal may well grow worse for the Clintons before it gets better.
And yet, given the known facts - including this week's convictions - there's no basis for believing Clinton's presidency is headed for a meltdown.
LENGTH: Medium: 64 linesby CNB