One of Washington's most widely-held suspicions was finally confirmed yesterday after Mr Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel investigating President Clinton's alleged affair with the White House intern Ms Monica Lewinsky, admitted he had frequently briefed reporters "off the record" about the scandal.
"I have talked with reporters on background on some occasions," Mr Starr told Steven Brill, the editor of Content, a new magazine, aiming to root out corruption in the media. Insisting that there was "nothing improper" in leaking information, Mr Starr added that his deputy, Mr Jackie Bennett, "has been the primary person involved in that. He has spent much of his time talking to individual reporters."
The White House immediately renewed its call for an independent investigation of Mr Starr's office and his "pattern of violating grand jury secrecy laws". As part of the investigation, a grand jury is hearing evidence against Mr Clinton to decide if there is sufficient cause to bring charges of perjury against him.
Mr Starr's unexpected admission was treated as a total vindication by presidential aides who have constantly complained about leaks from the independent counsel's office.
"This article raises grave concerns about Mr Starr's entire investigation," said Mr Jim Kennedy, a White House spokesman. "There are now very serious questions about the way this investigation began and whether Mr Starr has a conflict that prevents him from investigating his office's conduct in this matter."
In May, lawyers for the President accused Mr Starr's office of leaking a judge's secret ruling on executive privilege. Prosecutors denied it, as they have denied past allegations of leaking.
Mr Starr has yet to give an official press conference on the state of the investigation.
Grand jury proceedings are secret and federal law prohibits prosecutors from revealing testimony given by witnesses. But Mr Starr defended his decision to brief reporters claiming that neither he nor his deputy discussed testimony but talked only about other issues raised before or after witnesses had spoken to the jury.
But arguing against Mr Starr's distinction of what is permissible, Mr Brill cited a recent Appeal Court decision which stated that any leaks from a grand jury constituted "a criminal violation of Rule 6 (e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure".
Bizarrely, Mr Starr himself has said that such discussions would violate the law. When asked why it was necessary to speak unattributably, he circumvented the question.
The interview is an undoubted coup for Mr Brill and his new magazine, which is being viewed with trepidation by the American media. A self-appointed media watchdog, Content promises to expose media humbug. Analysing the first three weeks coverage of the Lewinsky affair, the first issue out today attacks the Washington media for producing a torrent of poorly sourced pieces.
In Watergate, the press fulfilled its historic mission to "check" an "official abuse of power," writes Mr Brill. "This time the press seems to have become an enabler of Starr's abuse of power."