GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY

By ERIC POOLEY/WASHINGTON

Every so often in the charmed life of Bill Clinton, when things have been going a little too smoothly for a little too long, the fates decide to thicken the plot. The Oxford-bound scholar comes up 1-A in the draft, the boy Governor gets tossed out by Arkansas voters, the earnest presidential candidate morphs into a skirt-chasing tabloid cartoon--and Clinton has to run harder and smarter to catch up with his dreams. Which is why some of the President's closest advisers have been anxiously peering beyond his gaudy poll numbers to the next, and inevitable, setback.

It came last week. In the fraud-and-conspiracy trial brought by Whitewater independent counsel Kenneth Starr, a jury in Little Rock returned 24 guilty verdicts against Arkansas Governor Jim Guy Tucker and Clinton's former partners in the Whitewater land deal, Jim and Susan McDougal. After nine weeks of dry courtroom exposition, the jury essentially concluded that the defendants had used McDougal's savings and loan as a private cookie jar, dipping into it for bogus loans to bankroll their many business schemes. Clinton wasn't a defendant in the case (merely a witness for the defense), and most jurors said they believed his testimony but found it tangential. Nevertheless their verdict was a blow to the White House.

Instead of giving Clinton the hoped-for acquittal--which could have buried the issue and discredited Starr--the jurors handed the G.O.P. a bright flag to plant in the Whitewater muck. For one thing, they rejected a central tenet of Clinton's Whitewater theology. By basing their decision on documentary evidence and discounting the testimony of both Clinton and the defendants' chief accuser, David Hale, they undermined the White House argument that the investigation is a baseless, partisan witch hunt. Now it doesn't matter so much that no one can follow the storyline, says G.O.P. chairman Haley Barbour, because "they said 'guilty' 24 times."

After the verdict, White House advisers were relieved to see polls register little movement--evidence that Whitewater had already been fully priced in by the political market. "People who were going to vote against him over Whitewater made up their minds a long time ago," says Clinton strategist George Stephanopoulos. But "if there were three [new] Whitewater stories a week for the next 20 weeks," he adds, that could move votes for Bob Dole.

That scenario isn't so very farfetched. First, there is the chance that in exchange for a shorter sentence, Tucker or one of the McDougals might cooperate with Starr and provide evidence that would directly implicate Clinton. But even without that development, Whitewater has half a dozen other tentacles that could ensnare the President or First Lady. Among them:

The Second Little Rock Trial. On June 17 Arkansas bankers Herby Branscum and Robert Hill go to trial for allegedly submitting $13,000 in phony expense vouchers to their bank, then using some of the money to reimburse themselves and others for contributions to Clinton's 1990 gubernatorial campaign. Defense attorneys call the case prosecutorial overkill, a multimillion-dollar probe of a small-potatoes violation, but it could tie Clinton more closely to wrongdoing than the McDougal trial did and will probably force him to testify again. Branscum was a key Clinton moneyman, and Clinton made him state highway commissioner in 1991. The prosecution will try to prove a connection between the contribution and the job.

The Senate Investigation. Starr's victory has given Alfonse d'Amato's Whitewater committee new life just as the New York Senator was ready to close up shop. Before issuing the obligatory scathing report, he will make one last play--probably by hearing testimony from Hale, the perjurer and fraudster from the McDougal trial.

The Billing-Records Mystery. How did Hillary Clinton's long-missing Rose Law Firm records turn up in the White House residence? Did the First Lady obstruct justice by keeping them from investigators? Starr's investigators are trying to answer these questions. Aide Carolyn Huber, who found the records in January, was questioned a few months ago by a Little Rock grand jury; Mrs. Clinton testified under subpoena in Washington last winter. Starr's official fingerprint analysis of the documents hasn't yet been released, but if her prints turn up, so what? They were, after all, her documents.

The Travel-Office Purge. Starr is looking into allegations that Hillary Clinton applied pressure for the firing of the entire White House travel-office staff in 1993, raising dubious charges against the employees so she could install her own people. Starr has hired two seasoned lawyers to investigate whether Mrs. Clinton and aide David Watkins concealed her role in the purge. Almost no one expects Starr to bring charges against the First Lady, but Republicans may use his findings in the campaign. And how ugly will it get? That could depend on how far Dole is trailing Clinton.

--With reporting by J.F.O. McAllister and Viveca Novak/Washington

With reporting by J.F.O. MCALLISTER AND VIVECA NOVAK/WASHINGTON