TIME Washington correspondent Michael Weisskopf says that it's a simple matter of thorough cross-examination. "If Starr can get their testimony before August 17, maybe he'll be able to use their testimony to test the veracity of Clinton's responses to similar questions," he says. "Of course, that assumes that the lawyers have different stories to tell than their boss. Perfect consistency -- either in truth or in lies -- should trump Starr. Of course, that kind of agreement is what got Clinton in trouble in the first place.
WASHINGTON: The White House has finally run out of privileges, and all the President's lawyers (except personal counsel David Kendall) are open to subpoena by Ken Starr's grand jury. The White House is already simpering that it hopes the full court will take the matter up in the fall. But now that the President is testifying two weeks hence, why should the White House or Ken Starr -- or us, for that matter -- care what Clinton's confidants have to report anymore?