President Clinton's testimony to the grand jury on Monica Lewinsky and his subsequent television broadcast to the American people have got him over one large and necessary hurdle in this shameful and embarrassing affair. But it will continue to dog him personally and politically. From here, it looks as if he can and should survive as president. But he has a very large job on his hands to retrieve his own credibility, trust and authority as well as that of the powerful office he holds.
There was ample evidence yesterday that his expression of regret was too grudging and adversarial to appease the Republican opposition, much less the special prosecutor, Mr Starr. Likewise, his admission of having had inappropriate sexual relations with Ms Lewinsky may prove too much of a volte face for a number of his Democratic colleagues and personal intimates. Potentially most important of all, his overall handling of the affair has proved too weak to prevent a substantial fall in his personal standing among the electorate according to the initial opinion polls - significant evidence that he could lose the crucial battle for public support if there are further legal or political miscalculations to come.
Mr Clinton's strategy has been to play the crisis politically rather than legally. By emphasising the motley cast of Republican characters ranged against him, he hopes to convince the general public that this is essentially a partisan rather than an ethical/legal matter. His overall standing in the opinion polls, including those taken after this broadcast, remains strong. This reflects the buoyancy of the economy and the sharp divide between the political class in Washington and the rest of the country as to the political importance of the affair.
Mr Clinton will hope to repair relations with his family and political colleagues over the holiday, demonstrate his international role and standing by his visits to Russia and Ireland (both of which are now clearly more in need of his close attention as a result of events in the last few days), and then throw himself into a vigorous congressional election campaign to demonstrate his continuing political appeal.
It is a plausible approach, with a better chance of succeeding than is immediately apparent from the rather negative media and political response to his broadcast. Mr Starr's report to the House of Representatives may indeed fall short of the evidence necessary to convince a sceptical Congress to initiate impeachment proceedings. The serious economic and political crisis building up in Russia and its links to other vulnerable elements in the world economy, call out for firm US international leadership in coming weeks and months. And there is much Mr Clinton, ever resourceful and resilient in adversity, can do to galvanise the forthcoming congressional campaign.
But it would be wise to be alert to the parallel realities thrown up by this affair. However tawdry and trivial its details, there can be no doubt that his personal recklessness has joined together legal and ethical issues with political ones in such a way as to affect President Clinton's authority and credibility. These could yet produce a combination of legal evidence, political mismanagement and popular disenchantment which would consume him.