Starr: A Reassessment

Library Journal

Each of Starr's investigations is succinctly summarized, and Wittes explains how each . . . failed because of Starr's interpretation of the law.

Washington Monthly

[A] balanced and insightful analysis of how Starr conducted his operation-and why it went so disastrously awry.

Publishers Weekly

Many Americans and members of the press think that Ken Starr, motivated by conservative political ideology and seeking partisan advantage, was obsessed with bringing down the Clinton presidency. Few doubt that the Starr-Clinton confrontation was personal as well, a clash of cultures between Starr, a deeply religious man with a puritanical bent, and Clinton, a political animal of protean ethics and unabashed cupidity. Wittes, an editorial writer for the Washington Post, refuses to accept this view. Instead, based on hours of interviews with the independent counsel, he suggests that Starr's errors and egregious misjudgments were the result of a fundamental misreading of the special prosecutor statute. In Wittes's analysis, Starr's adamant belief that the statute required him to act, not as a normal prosecutor might when searching for a provable crime, but as the chief investigator of a Truth Commission with an unlimited mandate, led him to repeatedly engage in excesses and abuses that left his reputation tattered and his investigation in disrepute. Wittes's depiction of how Starr's misconceived notion caused him to mishandle the investigation is both coherent and plausible. Nonetheless, so extreme do Starr's misjudgments seem that even the most open-minded readers may remain skeptical of Wittes's contention that Starr's intentions were honorable. A happy side benefit of the book is that Wittes's thumbnail sketches of a wide range of events the original Whitewater charges, the issues surrounding the Vince Foster suicide, the details of the elusive Travelgate and the equally elusive FBI file scandal, Webster Hubbell's role in the investigation and the famously boggled negotiations between Monica Lewinsky's lawyer and Starr's staff make these obscure elements of the scandal intelligible for many, perhaps for the first time. (May) Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information.

Library Journal

An editorial writer for the Washington Post who has written extensively on the federal court system, law, and criminal justice, Wittes reevaluates Kenneth Starr's role in the independent counsel investigation of President Bill Clinton. He effectively argues that Starr should not be characterized as an "unethical lawyer or sex-obsessed Puritan" who set out to destroy Bill Clinton's presidency. Rather, Starr should be seen as an independent counsel who interpreted the independent counsel law as a "truth commission" bound to uncover anything and everything occurring in the Whitewater, Vince Foster, travel office, FBI files, and Lewinsky scandals and their relationships to President Clinton. Each of Starr's investigations is succinctly summarized, and Wittes explains how each case failed because of Starr's interpretation of the law. Interviews with Starr, as well as magazine and journal articles, newspaper reports, and final reports from the independent counsel's office are skillfully used to support his evaluation. Wittes's book is recommended for public and academic libraries, which should also consider Susan Schmidt's Truth at Any Cost: Ken Starr and the Unmaking of Bill Clinton and Richard Posner's An Affair of State: The Investigation, Impeachment, and Trial of President Clinton. Joyce M. Cox, Nevada State Lib. & Archives, Reno Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information.

Kirkus Reviews

Washington Post editorialist Wittes takes a sympathetic second look at Kenneth Starr. There's little middle ground in opinions on the controversial special prosecutor. Depending on whom you ask, Starr is either the man who brought virtue back to Washington or a politically driven witch-hunter. Wittes, by contrast, argues that Starr is an intelligent, sincere, and not particularly partisan person who made significant if well-intentioned mistakes during his tenure as independent counsel. He came to that office with a stellar reputation and a publicly stated opposition to its existence. At the time of his appointment, it was thought that this opposition would lead Starr to a limited view of his role. Instead, ever the good soldier, he set aside his personal opposition to the law and moved forward aggressively. Wittes views this willingness to broadly interpret the role of the independent counsel as an inexcusable error that laid the groundwork for Starr's later excesses, most important among these the mistaken understanding of his office as an American truth commission. Starr's predecessors, Wittes claims, correctly understood that the unique power of their position required that they either bring charges or close up shop, whereas Starr felt no such pressure. As a result, he kept cases open longer than a prosecutor solely concerned with charging lawbreakers would have. In the investigations of the Vincent Foster suicide, the White House Travel Office firings, and the Whitewater case, exhaustive inquiries resulted in precious few arrests. Of course, Starr hit the jackpot with Monica Lewinsky, but this too, Wittes suggests, was mishandled. By focusing on the lurid details, he missed anopportunity to move forward at a time when he might have ended Clinton's presidency. The author presents his case with admirable skill, but one cannot help but wonder if people will want to read about a man who exhausted their patience. Great for anyone still interested.