Democrats Say Starr Is Trying to Sway Trial

President Clinton’s impeachment trial, although in recess, became embroiled anew in partisan controversy Sunday as Senate Democrats bitterly accused independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr of attempting to influence the proceeding.

They leveled that charge in televised interviews amid published reports that Starr believes he has the authority to seek the president’s criminal indictment before Clinton leaves office.

“There is just no end to what this man is willing to do to continue to pursue the president,” said Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) on NBC-TV’s “Meet the Press,” referring to the court-appointed prosecutor.

“Ken Starr is once again running amok,” declared Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) on CBS-TV’s “Face the Nation.” “The timing is very suspicious.”

Some GOP senators dismissed Starr’s conclusions as irrelevant to the Senate trial. But several Republicans rued the timing of the disclosure, made by the New York Times, which attributed the information to unnamed Starr associates.

Charles G. Bakaly III, a Starr spokesman, declined to discuss the independent counsel’s intentions on Sunday and said of the report’s timing: “This wasn’t something we put out. . . . We certainly don’t have any control over when news organizations go with things.”

The latest controversy erupted as House GOP prosecutors prepared to interview former White House intern Monica S. Lewinsky today in a last-ditch effort to bolster a case that appears headed for acquittal, perhaps by mid-February.

Discussing the impeachment proceedings in appearances on Sunday talk shows, 15 senators also debated the merits of two alternatives to conviction: a censure resolution, or a more recently proposed “finding of fact” measure that would stipulate the facts of the case against Clinton but not remove him from office.

The debate highlighted the considerable differences of opinion among senators, as well as divisions within each party over how to proceed--a stark reminder that a tidy conclusion to the trial remains elusive.

The controversy over Starr marked the second consecutive weekend in which he has figured prominently in the Senate trial, which is to resume Thursday after Lewinsky, presidential friend Vernon E. Jordan Jr. and White House aide Sidney Blumenthal have been deposed by House GOP prosecutors and White House lawyers.

Starr went to court to require Lewinsky to meet here Jan. 24 with three House prosecutors so they could gauge her value as a potential witness before the Senate.

That move angered many Senate Democrats, who complained that the House prosecutors and Starr were meddling in Senate affairs.

The 13 House Republicans presenting the case against Clinton have steadfastly argued that senators must hear directly from Lewinsky and at least several other key figures in the yearlong scandal.

Rep. James E. Rogan (R-Glendale) renewed the plea on “Meet the Press.”

“I would prefer to skip the deposition phase, personally, and just bring the witnesses into the well of the Senate,” he said. “There’s no substitute for live testimony.”

The Senate has voted to allow all three depositions to be videotaped. But, although they will be available for viewing by senators later this week, the tapes will not be released publicly unless a majority of the Senate votes to do so.

Whether any witnesses are called to testify live also has not been settled.

“Whether we see live and breathing witnesses on the floor during this trial is going to depend on what comes out of the depositions,” Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) said on “Meet the Press.” “If it’s explosive testimony, I would say yes.”

Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio), who will sit in on Lewinsky’s deposition today, noted on ABC-TV’s “This Week” program: “It’s possible that something new will come out. We clearly have discrepancies in the testimony.”

Rogan said the report that Starr has concluded he has the authority to seek a grand jury indictment of the president would not have “any impact at all” on the trial, adding: “I don’t think it is an intrusion.”

But many Senate Democrats disagreed.

“The talk about trying to prosecute the president now separately from this whole investigation is the wrong thing to do,” Sen. John B. Breaux (D-La.) said on “Meet the Press.”

On the same program, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) added: “I thought that the timing was extremely unfortunate and that it was inappropriate to come out while the Senate is concluding the president’s trial.”

Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) offered one of the harshest reactions. “I just think it shows terrible judgment on the part of that office,” he said on “Face the Nation.” “It is worse than a distraction, it’s irresponsible.”

The ongoing debate over a Senate censure of Clinton versus the adoption of a “finding of fact” focused largely on timing.

Most Democrats favor censuring Clinton while opposing a “finding of fact” vote. The latter, they said, is not provided for by the Constitution within an impeachment trial; rather, they favor a censure resolution condemning the president’s actions--after the trial ends, presumably in acquittal.

Collins, a proponent, argued that since acquittal seems probable, a statement putting the Senate on record as to the facts of the case would simply increase “the accountability of our decisions to our constituents and to future generations as well.”

The likelihood that the president will be acquitted on both articles of impeachment--which accuse him of perjury and obstruction of justice--was foreshadowed Wednesday when 44 out of 45 Democrats voted to dismiss the case at once.

House Republicans increasingly are focusing on the obstruction of justice charge because support for the perjury allegation appears to be waning among senators.

When asked on “Meet the Press” how many Republicans would vote to convict Clinton on the perjury charge, Shelby replied: “Not as many as a lot of people believe.” He added that “perhaps” fewer than 50 senators would vote to convict Clinton on the perjury charge.

*

WRANGLING OVER WITNESSES

Deposition phase marks GOP House managers’ final chance to prove their case. A8