WASHINGTON -- President Clinton sought to bring closure to the sex scandal that has engulfed his presidency by apologizing last night for misleading the country about his relationship with Monica S. Lewinsky.

At the same time, Clinton portrayed himself as a victim of independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr's investigation. He said he had truthfully answered "questions no American citizen would ever want to answer," during a steamy afternoon spent facing prosecutors' questions.

But while Clinton's day of reckoning before a grand jury may be over, the Lewinsky matter isn't. Some politicians in Washington, including top White House advisers, think it could drag on well into next year and into the 2000 presidential campaign.

Much more remains to be known, despite Clinton's declaration that "now this matter is between me and the two people I love most, my wife and my daughter." That includes the details of Clinton's testimony, as well as the voluminous evidence that Starr has gathered in his investigation into whether Clinton took part in a broad effort to obstruct justice.

Ultimately, it will be the public's verdict on Clinton's behavior -- including his tacit admission that he lied to the nation about his relationship with Lewinsky -- that determines whether Starr's investigation becomes a full-fledged impeachment proceeding. Under the Constitution, only Congress can decide what constitutes an impeachable crime and whether the president should be removed from office for any misdeeds.

"It's not just law, it's politics . . . once it hits the House" where the impeachment process begins," remarked Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch, who said he was deeply offended by Clinton's attack on Starr.

The speech was Clinton's latest attempt to short-circuit that investigative process and begin to put the Lewinsky matter behind him.

"It was masterful expression," said Charles O. Jones, a University of Wisconsin political scientist, who was struck by Clinton's "use of the bully pulpit of the presidency to protect himself. It was virtually a presidential declaration to pre-empt the process" of the investigation.

Designed as a coda to Clinton's secret grand jury testimony, the four-minute address may well mean as much to his future as the four hours he spent taking questions from prosecutors.

Members of Congress, as well as Clinton himself, now will closely monitor the public's reaction over the coming days and weeks. One sign of the cautious approach that other politicians are taking to Clinton's troubles was the reluctance of many senators and representatives of both parties to comment last night.

Political strategists and opinion analysts are similarly leery of forecasting the public's response, even though surveys have indicated since the scandal broke in January that most Americans don't want to see Clinton driven from office for lying about his private life.

In light of those results, several commentators saw Clinton's decision to admit that he had an inappropriate relationship with a 21-year-old female intern as largely a poll-driven strategy. His remarks closely tracked surveys that showed most Americans wanted a contrite statement from Clinton, while continuing to view Starr as a villain.

The fact that Clinton misled the country for months -- and may have committed perjury when he denied a sexual relationship with Lewinsky in sworn testimony in the Paula Jones case -- could make it difficult for the president to sustain his historically high 70 percent job approval rating, however.

Even First Lady Hillary Clinton said, when the investigation began in January, that if it were proven that her husband had an "adulterous liason" with Lewinsky, that "would be a very serious offense."

'Unpredictable public'

"This has been an unpredictable public, and we misjudged it in January," said pollster Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center. "It can change its mind."

Of particular interest to analysts will be the reaction of Clinton's most loyal supporters, especially women.

"I don't think it's over," said Sherry Bebitch Jeffe of Claremont Graduate University in California. "The polls are telling him: as Hillary goes, so goes most of the women, and most of the country."

But, she added, the fact that Mrs. Clinton wasn't at her husband's side, as she was in the 1992 campaign when Clinton admitted on "60 Minutes" to problems in his marriage, "was telling."

Sen. Hatch predicted the polls would change, particularly if Starr delivers a toughly worded investigative report to Congress.

"I think when the American people start thinking it through and realize that Judge Starr is doing his job, and if his report is a devastating report, I don't think those polls are going to stay the same way," the Utah senator said.

Another unpredictable element is round-the-clock media coverage, including several all-Monica, all-the-time cable TV hTC networks, which initially repelled many Americans and worked to the president's advantage. Now the TV screens are juxtaposing videotape of Clinton's heated denial, back in January, of a sexual relationship with "that woman" with his latest admission.

"The key is whether the public thinks this is just about sex or whether they think it's really about veracity," said Ben Ginsberg, a Republican strategist in Washington.

What next?

Exactly what happens next is difficult to predict with certainty. It is possible that the grand jury could decide to indict Clinton on criminal charges in connection with the Lewinsky matter. But that is considered unlikely, because of constitutional considerations.

And though Clinton may have lied to the public and members of his own staff about his private behavior, it is not clear that his testimony in the Paula Jones case -- in which he denied having an affair with Lewinsky -- represents sufficient grounds for Starr to refer the matter to Congress. Indeed, he specifically insisted last night that his testimony in thaty case was "legally accurate."

The law that created the independent counsel's office requires Starr to report any evidence of possible impeachable offenses to Congress. A 300-page draft report has reportedly been written by Starr's staff and is expected to be given to the House Judiciary Committee sometime this fall, perhaps as early as next month. Starr's spokesman, Charles G. Bakaly III, has said that any report would be sent "quickly, without regard to a political calendar."

Some conservative Republicans believe that report should be examined publicly as soon as it reaches Capitol Hill. But most Republicans appear wary of dealing with such politically explosive material so close to the Nov. 3 congressional elections.

Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the leading Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said Democrats would cry foul if the report is sent to Congress near election time.

"If he serves up an October surprise, I don't think there will be anybody left to argue how this thing has been hopelessly politicized," said Conyers. "If you want to divide an almost evenly divided Congress, you would have done that. It would be characterized as only a political document."

'Seven months of hell'

Present and former Clinton aides took up the president's cause yesterday, arguing that it was time to bring the matter to an end, even as many of them said they felt betrayed by Clinton's deception.

"We've been through seven months of hell. It's weakened the presidency. It's undermined confidence in our judicial system. It's bankrupted a lot of staff people who've had to testify. I think it's challenged families with their kids. And it's produced gridlock in the Congress," said Leon Panetta, Clinton's former chief of staff. "The time for healing has come."

White House spokesman Mike McCurry said Clinton "looks forward to getting this matter behind him."

Asked whether he thought Clinton's testimony would do just that, he replied: "I think, really, the American people will be more the judge of that than people who work here at the White House,"

Pub Date: 8/18/98