WASHINGTON — In the nation's capital, where standard wisdom rumbles down every marble corridor and pours out over every broadcast network, C. Boyden Gray listens to a different beat.
Aloof, aristocratic and an avowed libertarian, Gray, who built his reputation during four years as White House counsel for President George Bush, clearly takes pride in coming to conclusions, both legal and political, independent of other Republicans. For that reason, his views on the issues raised by independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr's time-consuming investigation of President Bill Clinton have come to be valued by the press and other lawyers.
Gray is no newcomer to the topic. Indeed, he is among a small handful of men and women who have hands-on White House experience with important constitutional issues, such as executive privilege. As the top legal advisor to Bush as president and vice president, Gray dealt frequently with the demands placed on his boss by the Iran-Contra investigation headed by independent counsel Lawrence E. Walsh. In the aftermath of the probe, felony convictions against two Reagan White House aides were overturned on appeal, and Bush pardoned seven other administration officials who were either convicted or charged.
In an interview, Gray, his 6-foot-6 frame slouched in an office chair, is characteristically thoughtful, precise and unsmiling. While he holds the independent- counsel statute in low regard, he leaves no doubt that he views Clinton as an unscrupulous leader who has demeaned the office of the presidency.
An heir to the R.J. Reynolds tobacco fortune, Gray, 55, grew up in the white-columned presidential mansion on the campus of the University of North Carolina, where his father was president. He received an undergraduate degree from Harvard, a law degree from North Carolina, then clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren. He is divorced and the father of a teenage daughter.
Question: Does a grant of immunity for Monica Lewinsky mean that the president is about to be indicted?
Answer: It means difficulty for the president. But, ultimately, I believe that a sitting president cannot be indicted and tried prior to impeachment and conviction by the Senate. But he does have to respond to an independent counsel, even if the end result is a report to Congress, and not an indictment.
Q: If a president cannot be indicted, was it proper for Starr to subpoena him?
