I. There is substantial and credible information that President Clinton
lied under oath as a defendant in Jones v. Clinton regarding his sexual
relationship with Monica Lewinsky.
>
(1) He denied that he had a "sexual relationship" with Monica Lewinsky.
(2) He denied that he had a "sexual affair" with Monica Lewinsky.
(3) He denied that he had "sexual relations" with Monica Lewinsky.
(4) He denied that he engaged in or caused contact with the genitalia of
"any person" with an intent to arouse or gratify (oral sex performed on
him by Ms. Lewinsky).
(5) He denied that he made contact with Monica Lewinsky's breasts or
genitalia with an intent to arouse or gratify.
On May 6, 1994, former Arkansas state employee Paula Corbin Jones filed
a federal civil rights lawsuit against President Clinton claiming that
he had sexually harassed her on May 8, 1991, by requesting her to
perform oral sex on him in a suite at the Excelsior Hotel in Little
Rock. Throughout the pretrial discovery process in Jones v. Clinton,
United States District Judge Susan Webber Wright ruled, over the
President's objections, that Ms. Jones's lawyers could seek various
categories of information, including information about women who had
worked as government employees under Governor or President Clinton and
allegedly had sexual activity with him. Judge Wright's rulings followed
the prevailing law in sexual harassment cases: The defendant's sexual
relationships with others in the workplace, including consensual
relationships, are a standard subject of inquiry during the discovery
process. Judge Wright recognized the commonplace nature of her discovery
rulings and stated that she was following a "meticulous standard of
materiality" in allowing such questioning.
At a hearing on January 12, 1998, Judge Wright required Ms. Jones to
list potential trial witnesses. Ms. Jones's list included several "Jane
Does."(1) Ms. Jones's attorneys said they intended to call a Jane Doe
named Monica Lewinsky as a witness to support Ms. Jones's claims. Under
Ms. Jones's legal theory, women who had sexual relationships with the
President received job benefits because of the sexual relationship, but
women who resisted the President's sexual advances were denied such
benefits.(2)
On January 17, 1998, Ms. Jones's lawyers deposed President Clinton under
oath with Judge Wright present and presiding over the deposition.
Federal law requires a witness testifying under oath to provide truthful
answers. The intentional failure to provide truthful answers is a crime
punishable by imprisonment
and fine.(3) At the outset of his deposition, the President took an oath
administered by Judge Wright: "Do you swear or affirm . . . that the
testimony you are about to give in the matter before the court is the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?" The
President replied: "I do."(4) At the beginning of their questioning,
Ms. Jones's attorneys asked the President: "And your testimony is
subject to the penalty of perjury; do you understand that, sir?" The
President responded, "I do."(5)
Based on the witness list received in December 1997 (which included Ms.
Lewinsky) and the January 12, 1998, hearing, the President and his
attorneys were aware that Ms. Jones's attorneys likely would question
the President at his deposition about Ms. Lewinsky and the other "Jane
Does." In fact, the attorneys for Ms. Jones did ask numerous questions
about "Jane Does," including Ms. Lewinsky.
|
