And, by the way, if Miss Tripp recorded these conversations illegally, Mr. Starr doesn t get to make that decision. Someone will have to make that decision under Maryland or D.C. law. Like, for example, in Illinois, one party consent is not enough to record conversations, and Miss Tripp would be under a grand jury investigation, herself, right now. That s a much-debated point. It s never been resolved in constitutional law.
Legal scholars disagree on it.
There is disagreement on it within the Watergate special prosecution force. I believe the Watergate special prosecutor had a different view of the bottom line legally but thought the prudent course was impeachment, not indictment, and I think that s a widely shared view among a lot of lawyers but not all of them. Well, I certainly would not minimize the seriousness if all of the allegations swirling around were some day proved to be true. And we are very far from that point. Whether the country would go through the trauma of an impeachment of a President under such circumstances as these, whereas Dan Webb and Stuart have both pointed out, you know, the evidence to make these charges would, at best, be very difficult to prove conclusively, whether we go through the trauma of an impeachment for these reasons I think is very questionable.