"Any allegation that the president assaulted Mrs. Broaddrick more than 20 years ago is absolutely false," said Clinton lawyer David Kendall over the weekend in response to public charges by Juanita Broaddrick, a former Clinton campaign worker.

That sounds like a denial of Broaddrick's charges, made first to NBC reporter Lisa Myers in an interview never broadcast, and, later, to the Wall Street Journal's Dorothy Rabinowitz. But let's remember. This is a Clinton lawyer. So we had better analyze that statement carefully. Where are the loopholes? How can this statement be, perhaps, legally accurate yet totally untrue at the same time.

Let's diagram this sentence.

The first word of the statement is interesting -- "any." Why does he say "any" allegation? We're talking about one very specific allegation by the alleged victim of the crime. Yet Kendall doesn't use the more obvious article "the" in this situation. The implication is that such allegations are being made by people who don't know what they are talking about -- perhaps more members of the "vast right-wing conspiracy."

The fifth word of the statement -- "president" -- is also noteworthy. Of course, no one, including Mrs. Broaddrick, suggests Bill Clinton was president at the time of the assault. And no one suggests the president at the time of the crime, Jimmy Carter, was responsible for the attack.

Notice that it refers to the victim as Mrs. Broaddrick. Of course, in 1978, when she was raped in a hotel room, her name was not Mrs. Broaddrick. So here's another possible lawyerly hairsplitting technicality.

Since a great deal of thought and planning went into this non-denial denial, there are probably more areas of implausible undeniability. But I'm not a Clinton lawyer, so forgive me for only spotting a few obvious ones. Remember, we're dealing with people here who will question what the word "is" means while under oath. Kendall was just speaking to a reporter for the Associated Press. With no perjury at stake yet, the real linguistic gymnastics haven't even begun.

The bigger question, of course, is why won't Clinton answer the important questions raised by this lady's accusations? Calling her a liar is not enough. He has called too many women liars in the past to have any credibility now.

Was it a case of mistaken identity? Was there an impostor running around Little Rock in 1978 pretending to be Arkansas Attorney General Bill Clinton? Does he have an evil twin? How did she get this idea that he forced himself sexually upon her? Is she delusional? Is she motivated by politics, money, fame? Is she, too, a stalker -- overcome by Clinton's raw animal magnetism and now ashamed of her weakness?

Clinton owes the nation -- and certainly Mrs. Broaddrick -- much more than he is offering.

But what should we expect? The establishment press is not eager for another Clinton scandal -- of the sexual kind or otherwise. It is ready to drop this hot potato as fast as it arose. NBC demonstrated that by spiking Lisa Myers' story. The rest of the press didn't bother pursuing it despite the fact that so much of the story had dribbled out. It took an editorial page writer for the Wall Street Journal, conveniently marginalized by this White House as part of the "right-wing conspiracy," to break it.

The Washington Post put 11 reporters on a story that ran page one in its Saturday edition. No follow-up was forthcoming yesterday. The New York Times continues to pretend nothing happened. Meanwhile, the Sunday morning talking head shows were on to more important issues, such as whether Hillary Clinton will really run for a New York Senate seat.

The reason no one pushes it, is because we all know the truth already. Clinton is a rapist. Juanita Broaddrick's horror story oozes credibility. Clinton is a congenital liar. So who are we to believe?

And there's little point in exploring the story further because Clinton is going to get away with the crime -- just as he has gotten away with so many others. There's no controlling legal authority, as long as people with as little character as the president himself occupy at least 34 seats in the U.S. Senate. That's the harsh reality of the world in which we live.

So, too bad, Juanita. I guess you were right to keep your mouth shut all those years. And let that be a lesson to the rest of you women out there. Know your place.