3. Summary of Gifts
The uncontroverted evidence demonstrates that the President
had given gifts to Ms. Lewinsky before December 28, 1997; that
the President told Ms. Lewinsky on the phone on December 17,
1997, that he had more gifts for her; that Ms. Lewinsky met with
the President at the White House on December 28; that on the
28th, Ms. Lewinsky was concerned about retaining possession of
the gifts the President had previously given her because they
were under subpoena; that on the 28th, the President gave several
Christmas gifts to Ms. Lewinsky; and that after that meeting,
Ms. Lewinsky transferred some gifts (including one of the new
gifts) to the President's personal secretary, Ms. Currie, who
stored them under her bed in her home.
Ms. Lewinsky testified that she spoke to the President on
December 28 about the gifts called for by the subpoena -- in
particular, the hat pin. The President agreed that they talked
about gifts, but suggested that the conversation might have taken
place before Ms. Lewinsky was subpoenaed on December 19. The
President said, however, that his memory is unclear on the
timing.(256)
The testimony conflicts as to what happened when
Ms. Lewinsky raised the subject of gifts with the President and
what happened later that day. The President testified that he
told Ms. Lewinsky that "you have to give them whatever you
have."(257) According to Ms. Lewinsky, she raised the possibility
of hiding the gifts, and the President offered a somewhat neutral
response.
Ms. Lewinsky testified that Betty Currie called her to
retrieve the gifts soon after Ms. Lewinsky's conversation with
the President. Ms. Currie says that she believes that
Ms. Lewinsky called her about the gifts, but she says she has a
dim memory of the events.(258)
The central factual question is whether the President
orchestrated or approved the concealment of the gifts. The
reasonable inference from the evidence is that he did.
1. The witnesses disagree about whether Ms. Currie called
Ms. Lewinsky or Ms. Lewinsky called Ms. Currie. That issue is
relevant because Ms. Currie would not have called Ms. Lewinsky
about the gifts unless the President directed her to do so.
Indeed, because she did not know of the gifts issue, there is no
other way that Ms. Currie could have known to make such a call
unless the President told her to do so.
Ms. Lewinsky's testimony on the issue is consistent and
unequivocal. In her February 1, 1998, handwritten statement, she
wrote: "Ms. Currie called Ms. L later that afternoon a[nd] said
that the Pres. had told her Ms. L wanted her to hold onto
something for her."(259) In her grand jury testimony, Ms. Lewinsky
said that several hours after she left the White House,
Ms. Currie called and said something along the lines of "The
President said you have something to give me."(260)
Ms. Currie's testimony is contrary but less clear.
Ms. Currie has stated that Ms. Lewinsky called her, but her
memory of the conversation, in contrast to Ms. Lewinsky's,
generally has been hazy and uncertain. As to whether she had
talked to the President about the gifts, for example, Ms. Currie
initially said she had not, but then said that Ms. Lewinsky (who
said that Ms. Currie had talked to the President) "may remember
better than I. I don't remember."(261)
Ms. Lewinsky's testimony makes more sense than Ms. Currie's
testimony. First, Ms. Lewinsky stated that if Ms. Currie had not
called, Ms. Lewinsky simply would have kept the gifts (and
perhaps thrown them away).(262) She would not have produced the
gifts to Ms. Jones's attorneys. And she would not have given
them to a friend or mother because she did not want to get anyone
else involved.(263) She was not looking for someone else to take
them.(264)
Also, Ms. Currie drove to Ms. Lewinsky's house to pick up
the gifts. That was only the second time that Ms. Currie had
ever gone there.(265) More generally, the person making the extra
effort (in this case, Ms. Currie) is ordinarily the person
requesting the favor.
2. Even if Ms. Lewinsky is mistaken and she did call
Ms. Currie first, the evidence still leads clearly to the
conclusion that the President orchestrated this transfer.
First, it is unlikely that Ms. Lewinsky would have involved
Ms. Currie in this matter unless the President had indicated his
assent when Ms. Lewinsky raised the issue with him earlier in the
day. Indeed, there is a logical flaw in the President's story:
If the President had truly suggested that Ms. Lewinsky produce
the gifts to Ms. Jones's attorneys, Ms. Lewinsky obviously would
not have turned around and called the President's personal
secretary to give the gifts to her, in direct contravention of
the President's instruction.
Second, it also is unlikely that Ms. Currie would have
driven to Ms. Lewinsky's home, retrieved the gifts from
Ms. Lewinsky, and stored them under her bed at home without being
asked to do so by the President -- at least, without checking
with him. It would have been out of character for Ms. Currie to
have taken such an action without the President's approval. For
example, when helping Ms. Lewinsky in her job search, Ms. Currie
said that she told the President of her plans and agreed that she
"would not have tried to get Ms. Lewinsky a job if . . . [I]
thought the President didn't want [me] to."(266)
3. Even if the President did not orchestrate the transfer
to Ms. Currie, there is still substantial evidence that he
encouraged the concealment and non-production of the gifts by
Ms. Lewinsky. The President "hoped that this relationship would
never become public."(267) The President gave Ms. Lewinsky new
gifts on December 28, 1997. Given his desire to conceal the
relationship, it makes no sense that the President would have
given Ms. Lewinsky more gifts on the 28th unless he and
Ms. Lewinsky understood that she would not produce all of her
gifts in response to her subpoena.
4. The President had a motive to orchestrate the
concealment of gifts, whether accomplished through Ms. Currie
indirectly or through Ms. Lewinsky directly. The President knew
that Ms. Lewinsky was concerned about the subpoena. Both of them
were concerned that the gifts might raise questions about the
relationship. By confirming that the gifts would not be
produced, the President ensured that these questions would not
arise.
The concealment of the gifts also ensured that the President
could provide false and misleading statements about the gifts
under oath at his deposition (as he did) without being concerned
that Ms. Lewinsky might have produced gifts that the President
was denying (or minimizing the number of). If Ms. Lewinsky had
produced to Ms. Jones's attorneys all of the gifts that she had
given to Ms. Currie, then the President could not plausibly have
said "I don't recall" in response to the question, "[H]ave you
ever given any gifts to Monica Lewinsky?" He could not have
said, "I don't remember a specific gift."(268) Indeed, unless the
President knew that Ms. Lewinsky had not complied with the
subpoena, it is unlikely he would have risked lying about the
number and nature of the gifts he had given her.
In analyzing the evidence on this issue, it also bears
mention that President Clinton likely operated no differently
with respect to the gifts than he did with respect to testimony.
It is clear that he lied under oath and that Ms. Lewinsky filed a
false affidavit after the President suggested she file an
affidavit. So there is little reason that he would not have
attempted to ensure (whether directly or subtly) that
Ms. Lewinsky conceal the gifts as a corollary to their mutual
lies under oath. (Also, it was the President's pattern to use
Ms. Currie as an intermediary in dealing with Ms. Lewinsky.(269))
The President's apparent response to all of this is that
Ms. Lewinsky on her own contacted Ms. Currie and involved her in
this endeavor to hide subpoenaed evidence, and that Ms. Currie
complied without checking with the President. Based on the
testimony and behavior of both Ms. Currie and Ms. Lewinsky, those
inferences fall outside the range of reasonable possibility.
202. Clinton 1/17/98 Depo. at 70-71 (emphasis added).
203. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 123; Lewinsky 8/26/98 Depo. at 57-58; Lewinsky 2/1/98 Statement at 4.
204. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 123-24; Lewinsky 2/1/98 Statement
at 4 ("When asked what to do if she was subpoenaed, the Pres.
suggested she could sign an affidavit to try to satisfy their
inquiry and not be deposed.").
205. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 123 (emphasis added); Lewinsky
2/1/98 Statement at 4 ("In general, Ms. L. should say she visited
the WH to see Ms. Currie and, on occasion when working at the WH,
she brought him letters when no one else was around.").
206. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 123-24.
207. Jordan 5/5/98 GJ at 136, 142, 144-45; Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ
at 133, 135.
208. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 151-52; Lewinsky 8/20/98 GJ at 65-66; Lewinsky 2/1/98 Statement at 6.
209. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 152; Lewinsky 8/20/98 GJ at 66.
210. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 152; Lewinsky 8/20/98 GJ at 66.
See also Lewinsky 8/1/98 Int. at 11 (noting that the President
said something like "I don't know" or "I'll think about it").
211. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 154-59. See also Lewinsky 8/1/98
Int. at 11-12.
212. (213)
213. Although Vernon Jordan is an attorney, he has clearly
stated that "I have never represented William Jefferson Clinton
as an attorney." Jordan GJ, March 3, 1998, at 8. Thus, the
questions that excluded the President's lawyers from their scope
did not exclude Vernon Jordan.
214. Clinton 8/17/98 GJ at 33.
215. Id. at 36-37 (emphasis added).
216. Id. at 39-40 (emphasis added).
217. Clinton 1/17/98 Depo. at 68.
218. Id. (emphasis added).
219. Jordan 5/5/98 GJ at 144; Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 138-39.
220. Clinton 8/17/98 GJ at 36 (emphasis added).
221. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 149-153, 191-192, 195-198;
Lewinsky 8/20/98 GJ at 35-36, 47, 49, 65-66.
222. Clinton 8/17/98 GJ at 106.
223. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1503, 1512, 1621.
224. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 121-26.
225. Id. at 126; Lewinsky 8/20/98 GJ at 70.
226. 920-DC-00000013-18.
227. 920-DC-00000018.
228. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 132.
229. Id. at 132.
230. Id. at 133.
231. Jordan 3/3/98 GJ at 159. Mr. Jordan stated that
Ms. Lewinsky was crying both on the telephone earlier that day
and then again in his office. Id. at 149-150.
232. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 149.
233. Id. at 149.
234. Id. at 152. This statement was false. Ms. Lewinsky had
"in fact . . . told people about the hat pin." Id.
235. Id. at 152. In a later grand jury appearance,
Ms. Lewinsky again described the conversation, and said "I don't
remember his response. I think it was something like, 'I don't
know,' or 'Hmm' or -- there really was no response." Lewinsky
8/20/98 GJ at 66.
236. Lewinsky 8/26/98 Depo. at 58.
237. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 166-67 (emphasis added).
238. Id. at 154; Lewinsky 8/20/98 GJ at 71.
239. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 154-55.
240. Lewinsky 2/1/98 Statement at 7 (emphasis added); see
also Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 179; Lewinsky 8/20/98 GJ at 62 ("I was
truthful in my [February 1] proffer").
241. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 155.
242. Id. at 154.
243. Currie 1/27/98 GJ at 57-58.
244. Currie 5/6/98 GJ at 105-06.
245. Id. at 126 (emphasis added).
246. Id. at 108.
247. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 156-58.
248. Id. at 158.
249. Currie 5/6/98 GJ at 105, 107-08.
250. Lewinsky 8/20/98 GJ at 72-73.
251. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 158.
252. FBI Receipt for Property Received, 1/23/98; 824-DC-00000001-2 (letter from Karl Metzner, attorney for Betty Currie,
dated 1/23/98, to the OIC, listing items in the box).
253. Clinton 8/17/98 GJ at 43-44 (emphasis added). In his
grand jury testimony, the President repeated this "whatever you
have" language several times. Id. at 45, 46-47, 115.
254. Id. at 51.
255. Id. at 114-15.
256. Id. at 46-47.
257. Id. at 46.
258. Ms. Currie testified that she was taking St. John's Wort
to try to remember, but it was not helping. Currie 7/22/98 GJ at
172.
259. Lewinsky 2/1/98 Statement at 7 (emphasis added).
260. Lewinsky 8/6/98 GJ at 154-55; see also Lewinsky 8/20/98
GJ at 70-72.
261. Currie 5/6/98 GJ at 126.
262. Lewinsky 9/3/98 Int. at 2.
263. Id.
264. Id. In addition, under her immunity agreement,
Ms. Lewinsky has no apparent motive to shift blame on this issue.
In fact, just the opposite. If the truth were that she had
called Ms. Currie, she could have said as much, and it would not
have affected Ms. Lewinsky's legal rights or obligations at all.
Moreover, she stated that does not want to harm the President
with her truthful testimony. Lewinsky 8/26/98 Depo. at 69.
265. Currie 5/6/98 GJ at 108.
266. Currie 5/6/98 GJ at 32; see also id. at 44, 45.
267. Clinton 8/17/98 GJ at 106.
268. Clinton 1/17/98 Depo. at 75.
269. Lewinsky 8/20/98 GJ at 5 (Ms. Lewinsky could not visit
the President unless Ms. Currie cleared her in); see
also Lewinsky 7/31/98 Int. at 4-5 (Currie was "in the loop" when
it came to keeping Lewinsky's relationship with the President
discreet); Currie GJ 5/6/98 at 14-15, 57-58, 97-98.
Previous
Next