Claim Could Sap Strength of President

WASHINGTON — President Clinton’s sweeping reelection victory last fall seemed to validate the conventional wisdom that most Americans had made their peace with doubts about his honesty and integrity.

But Tuesday’s Supreme Court decision allowing Paula Corbin Jones to proceed with her sexual harassment claim against him could powerfully test the limits of that tolerance.

With Jones’ lawyers indicating that they believe her charges fit into a “pattern of conduct” by the president, Clinton now faces the prospect of a protracted legal proceeding that could yield embarrassing revelations, revive old doubts about his personal morality and drive down his job approval rating--the key source of his current strength on Capitol Hill.

In his roller-coaster presidency, Clinton has survived and even thrived politically despite a swarm of allegations about his ethics that many Republicans have long believed would be fatal. And Clinton’s lawyers still have more options to head off a public trial or narrow the scope of admissible evidence if they cannot stop it altogether.

But even the prospect of hearings that focus on Jones’ explosive allegations might prove so risky that many legal and political observers believe Clinton will feel overwhelming pressure to settle out of court--pressure that Jones’ lawyers immediately heightened Tuesday when they suggested that, if the case goes to trial, they intend to take testimony about other allegations of marital infidelity involving the president.

“This is something that will never go to trial in my opinion,” said Brian Lunde, the former executive director of the Democratic National Committee. “The president will have to cut his losses . . . to prevent the potential humiliation.”

Since he was introduced to much of the public during the 1992 Democratic primaries with allegations that he had dodged the draft during the Vietnam War and cheated on his wife, Clinton always has labored under unusually high levels of doubt about his honesty and integrity. In Gallup polls during last year’s campaign, Americans split evenly when asked whether Clinton is honest and trustworthy--hardly a ringing endorsement.

Yet such skepticism did not prevent voters from comfortably reelecting him--nor from continuing to give him high ratings for his job performance in 1997. Though he faces intense opposition from hard-core opponents inflamed by the assorted allegations against him, Clinton has been buoyed by satisfaction over the economy, his ability to find the center of public opinion on issues such as the budget and crime and by a general sense that all politicians color outside the lines.

By itself, Tuesday’s decision is not likely to significantly change that dynamic, predicted pollster Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. But a trial over Jones’ allegations, he believes, could prove more damaging than questions about campaign fund-raising and the Whitewater land deal that continue to swirl around the president.

“This is real simple and potentially ugly and it also goes to one of his real strengths--being seen as understanding women . . . and saving them from the clutches of ‘ugly Republicans,’ ” Kohut said.

Likewise, GOP pollster Bill McIntuff said that, while renewed attention to Jones’ allegations probably would not produce a precipitous decline in Clinton’s public standing, it could well induce enough doubts to weaken his hand with Congress.

“You are at the point where he governs based on the presumption of mobilizing public appeal,” said McInturff. “There is no question that, if the guy is under 50% [in approval], as opposed to 60%, and the story hanging overhead is this kind of active trial, that takes one more edge off in his ability to pursue serious policy initiatives.”

White House officials generally avoided public comment on Tuesday’s decision. But privately, some conceded that a trial would prove a political burden and an enormous emotional distraction for the president--factors that could prod his legal team to reach a settlement.

At their press conference Tuesday, Jones’ lawyers laid out a strategy that appeared designed to create maximum pressure. Lawyers Joseph Cammarata and Gilbert Davis made it clear that they will act promptly to take sworn statements from past or present Arkansas state troopers familiar with Clinton’s activities as governor. Cammarata said that troopers would be questioned under oath about allegations that they were used “at state expense . . . for the procurement of women” for Clinton.

In addition, the lawyers said that they would subpoena confidential memorandums and other documents from Arkansas state police files that may have referred to such alleged activities by the troopers--as well as other records from the governor’s office and the Excelsior Hotel in Little Rock, where Jones alleges that Clinton asked her to perform a sex act.

Sworn statements, in which a verbatim transcript is made of questions and answers, are known as depositions. In many cases, they are kept under seal until disclosed at a trial, which must be public. But Cammarata and Davis served notice Tuesday that they would seek to have the depositions made public as soon as they are completed, including any deposition obtained from the president himself.

A judge has the power to control such publication. In the Jones case, it is expected that Clinton’s lawyers will argue to U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright that such wide-ranging depositions are “unnecessary and not germane” to Jones’ allegations and should be curtailed.

First, in all likelihood, Clinton will seek to have the lawsuit dismissed altogether. Lawyers unconnected with the matter predicted that Wright would be reluctant to take that step.

The two sides appeared close to a settlement in late 1994 that would have precluded Jones’ litigation. But the talks broke down amid charges of bad faith on both sides. If they resume now, most attorneys agree, they will begin with Jones and her lawyers in a much stronger position than when the two sides last walked away from the table.