There is substantial and credible information that President Clinton
lied under oath in answering those questions.
A. Evidence that President Clinton Lied Under Oath During the Civil Case
1. President Clinton's Statements Under Oath About Monica Lewinsky
During pretrial discovery, Paula Jones's attorneys served the President
with written interrogatories.(6) One stated in relevant part:
Please state the name, address, and telephone number of each and every
[federal employee] with whom you had sexual relations when you [were]
. . . President of the United States.(7)
The interrogatory did not define the term "sexual relations." Judge
Wright ordered the President to answer the interrogatory, and on
December 23, 1997, under penalty of perjury, President Clinton answered
"None."(8)
At the January 17, 1998, deposition of the President, Ms. Jones's
attorneys asked the President specific questions about possible sexual
activity with Monica Lewinsky. The attorneys used various terms in their
questions, including "sexual affair," "sexual relationship," and "sexual
relations." The terms "sexual affair" and "sexual relationship" were not
specially defined by Ms. Jones's attorneys. The term "sexual relations"
was defined:
For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in "sexual
relations" when the person knowingly engages in or causes . . . contact
with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any
person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any
person. . . . "Contact" means intentional touching, either directly or
through clothing.(9)
President Clinton answered a series of questions about Ms. Lewinsky,
including:
Q: Did you have an extramarital sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky?
WJC: No.
Q: If she told someone that she had a sexual affair with you beginning
in November of 1995, would that be a lie?
WJC: It's certainly not the truth. It would not be the truth.
Q: I think I used the term "sexual affair." And so the record is
completely clear, have you ever had sexual relations with Monica
Lewinsky, as that term is defined in Deposition Exhibit 1, as modified
by the Court?
Mr. Bennett:(10)
I object because I don't know that he can remember --
Judge Wright:
Well, it's real short. He can -- I will permit the question and you may
show the witness definition number one.
WJC: I have never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. I've never
had an affair with her.(11)
President Clinton reiterated his denial under questioning by his own
attorney:
Q: In paragraph eight of [Ms. Lewinsky's] affidavit, she says this, "I
have never had a sexual relationship with the President, he did not
propose that we have a sexual relationship, he did not offer me
employment or other benefits in exchange for a sexual relationship, he
did not deny me employment or other benefits for rejecting a sexual
relationship." Is that a true and accurate statement as far as you know
it?
WJC: That is absolutely true.(12)
2. Monica Lewinsky's Testimony
Monica Lewinsky testified under oath before the grand jury that,
beginning in November 1995, when she was a 22-year-old White House
intern, she had a lengthy relationship with the President that included
substantial sexual activity. She testified in detail about the times,
dates, and nature of ten sexual encounters that involved some form of
genital contact. As explained in the Narrative section of this Referral,
White House records corroborate Ms. Lewinsky's testimony in that the
President was in the Oval Office area during the encounters. The records
of White House entry and exit are incomplete for employees, but they do
show her presence in the White House on eight of those occasions.(13)
The ten incidents are recounted here because they are necessary to
assess whether the President lied under oath, both in his civil
deposition, where he denied any sexual relationship at all, and in his
grand jury testimony, where he acknowledged an "inappropriate intimate
contact" but denied any sexual contact with Ms. Lewinsky's breasts or
genitalia. When reading the following descriptions, the President's
denials under oath should be kept in mind.
Unfortunately, the nature of the President's denials requires that the
contrary evidence be set forth in detail. If the President, in his grand
jury appearance, had admitted the sexual activity recounted by
Ms. Lewinsky and conceded that he had lied under oath in his civil
deposition, these particular descriptions would be superfluous. Indeed,
we refrained from questioning Ms. Lewinsky under oath about particular
details until after the President's August 17 testimony made that
questioning necessary. But in view of (i) the President's denials, (ii)
his continued contention that his civil deposition testimony was legally
accurate under the terms and definitions employed, and (iii) his refusal
to answer related questions, the detail is critical. The detail provides
credibility and corroboration to Ms. Lewinsky's testimony. It also
demonstrates with clarity that the Pres ident lied under oath both in
his civil deposition and to the federal grand jury.(14) There is
substantial and credible information that the President's lies about his
relationship with Ms. Lewinsky were abundant and calculating. >
|
