|
|
|
|
||
|
Week 4: All Eyes on Grand Jury, Lewinsky's Mother
CHRONOLOGY
By Dan Balz On the plaza between the trucks and the courthouse, a temporary village of cables, barricades, microphone stands and risers has sprung up. On the days when the grand jury impaneled for independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr is sitting, there is an atmosphere within the village that reflects the strange mixture of boredom and anticipation that comes from waiting and waiting for something big -- or nothing at all -- to happen. The unfolding investigation into whether President Clinton had an affair with Lewinsky and then urged her to lie about it under oath has played out in many locations over the past few weeks, from the shopping mall at Pentagon City to the White House to the Capitol building. But increasingly, the focus has narrowed to the proceedings inside the blocky courthouse. There, the grand jury meets in a drab, third-floor room -- 23 ordinary citizens locked away in secret proceedings that have the capability to change the country.
As the Lewinsky story entered its fourth week, something unusual happened: Pictures became as important as words in conveying the story of the investigation; the video images beamed out of the temporary village on the courthouse plaza were as telling as blind quotes in the morning papers. No image was more revealing last week than that of a slender, blonde woman who appeared before the grand jury on successive days. On Tuesday, Marcia Lewis, Lewinsky's mother and confidante, emerged from the grand jury after several hours of questioning, her head high, a smile on her face. She was wearing a black jacket, skirt, stockings and shoes, and she carried a black Gucci handbag. She looked as chic as one might expect of someone whose life has caromed between Beverly Hills, New York City and Washington, D.C. She had sought not to testify, but her request had been rejected. She testified under a grant of limited immunity. But on that first day, she appeared to have maneuvered through the questioning with relative skill, and her attorney, Billy Martin, promised reporters "a full statement" at the end of her testimony. Lewis's only comment was "no comment," but Martin said "part of what she's feeling is a lot of pain for her daughter's going through this ordeal." She departed with what seemed an air of confidence. By Wednesday, that self-confidence was gone. Lewis emerged after a full day of testimony with her head down and her arms clutched around her sides, as if she were ill. It was clear the questioning in the grand jury room had cut deeply. Lewis was in black again, but this time she might have been a woman in mourning, a distraught mother overcome by emotion. She did not pause to speak to reporters. This time the pain she felt was as much for herself as for her daughter. "This is a very emotionally draining and difficult time for my client," her attorney said later. "No mother should be forced by federal prosecutors to testify against her own child."
Parade of Witnesses The list of witnesses who have appeared before the Starr grand jury numbers at least a dozen. The patterns of the investigation are difficult to discern, in part because Starr's investigators have interviewed more people than have testified before the grand jury. But as the investigation has continued, there appear to be several categories of witnesses who have been called to testify -- or who are due to appear soon. The first category includes those who know how the White House operates, from a former chief of staff (Leon E. Panetta) or a former deputy chief of staff (Evelyn S. Lieberman) to Betty Currie, the president's personal secretary, or a White House steward, who works out of the pantry-kitchen near the president's private study. With their help, Starr's team conducted a primer on the Executive Office of the President; the physical layout of the West Wing; the corridors that lead to the Oval Office; the lines of sight into and around the Oval Office and the study and private presidential dining room; the security arrangements; and who stands or sits where at any particular time. These witnesses could tell a grand jury who would be in a position to see what was going on around the Oval Office -- and some were in a position to say whether they had seen anything directly. They were among the first round of witnesses to testify. Among this group of witnesses, the latest person to surface was Lewis C. Fox, a retired member of the uniformed Secret Service, who told The Washington Post that on a weekend afternoon in the fall of 1995, Lewinsky had arrived outside the Oval Office with papers for Clinton. She was ushered in at the president's request, Fox said, and remained there for about 40 minutes. Fox said he believed they were alone, but his attorney said he could only testify that they were together because he could not be certain that no one else had entered the Oval Office. Fox was subpoenaed but did not testify on Thursday, as Starr's office negotiated the terms of his appearance with the Treasury Department, which oversees the Secret Service, and the Justice Department, which serves as Treasury's lawyer. The two sides reached agreement on Friday, setting the stage for Fox to testify, perhaps this week. A second category of witnesses could bring the investigation closer to corroborating evidence that Clinton and Lewinsky had a sexual relationship. Starr's team already has in its possession the audio tapes recorded by Linda R. Tripp, Lewinsky's Pentagon colleague, of telephone conversations between the two women in which Lewinsky reportedly describes her relationship with the president. Starr also has the tape made by his investigators when they wired Tripp during one of her meetings with Lewinsky. They also have a copy of a potentially damaging document -- author still unknown -- that Lewinsky gave to Tripp on Jan. 14. The document explained to Tripp how she could alter her previous story about an encounter between the president and Kathleen E. Willey, a former White House employee, when she was called to give a deposition in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case. To bolster that evidence, Starr last week called three people who were believed to have firsthand knowledge of a relationship between Clinton and Lewinsky. The first was Ashley Raines, a White House aide and close friend of Lewinsky. She testified on Monday, a day after Newsweek magazine reported that she had told investigators that Lewinsky shared details of her relationship with the president. A second witness in that category was Neysa Erbland, a high school friend of Lewinsky's who appeared before the grand jury on Thursday. According to several news reports, she told investigators that Lewinsky had shared with her details of a sexual relationship with the president. Attorney Ralph J. Caccia confirmed Friday night that he represents Erbland but would not discuss what she told the grand jury. But much more significant than either of the two young women was the appearance of Lewis, the 49-year-old writer. No one doubted the close relationship mother and daughter shared. Lewinsky lived at her mother's Watergate apartment during her time at the White House and later the Pentagon. On Jan. 16, when Lewinsky was detained by FBI agents at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel at Pentagon City, the only telephone call she made was to her mother. Lewis was in New York and joined her daughter at the hotel as a deadline for a grant of immunity came and went. It was Lewis who called Lewinsky's father in California, who asked longtime family friend William H. Ginsburg to become Lewinsky's lawyer. A family friend told The Post, "Monica worships her mother. The two are incredibly close. And alike. Marcia is Monica squared." On one of the tapes recorded by Tripp shortly before Christmas, Lewinsky received a call from her mother as she and Tripp were talking. According to an account by Newsweek, Lewinsky and Tripp had been discussing whether Tripp could stage a "foot accident" to avoid having to give a deposition in the Jones case. After talking to her mother, Lewinsky returned to the other line and told Tripp that Lewis believed the idea of having a foot accident was "brilliant" and offered to pay any medical expenses. Lewis arrived at the federal courthouse Tuesday morning, and when Starr also showed up there -- the independent counsel rarely attends grand jury hearings -- it was clear that the stakes once again had been raised. Martin, Lewis's attorney, met privately with Judge Norma Holloway Johnson, the chief judge who oversees Starr's grand jury in a courtroom where the windows on the doors had been covered with brown paper. Martin tried to quash the subpoena for Lewis, but failed. For Starr, already under assault from Clinton supporters who say he is conducting a politically biased, partisan investigation and allowing his office to leak material damaging to the president, the spectacle of a mother being forced to testify against her daughter represented another public relations nightmare. Unlike the spousal privilege, which prevents one spouse from being compelled to testify against another, there is no such privilege when it comes to parents and children. Starr's decision to squeeze Lewis on her second day of testimony appeared to be part of an acceleration in the pace of the grand jury activity. Starr was no longer building a case from the outside in; he was going straight at the heart of the matter. His handling of Lewis also seemed to signal his determination to press forward relentlessly with the politically explosive case, no matter the risk to his reputation. On Wednesday afternoon, after a day of testimony, Lewis -- who briefly required the assistance of a courthouse nurse -- was exhausted, but not done. She would be required to return again to complete her testimony. Her daughter's lawyer said Lewinsky was outraged by what Starr had done. A friend of Lewis who watched the television clips of her departure from the courthouse Wednesday said, "I have never seen her so bummed out."
Defending Clinton For the president's defenders, the video of a distraught Marcia Lewis was an almost irresistible new talking point in their war against Starr. Instead they bit their tongues. The video, they believed, spoke for itself. "I think most Americans get that one," an administration official said. Beginning with last weekend's talk shows, Clinton's supporters had seized the offensive against Starr, liberated by the earlier decision by David E. Kendall, the president's normally camera-shy chief attorney, to go out and publicly denounce the independent counsel for alleged leaks. On the Sunday shows, presidential advisers Rahm Emanuel and Paul Begala enthusiastically attacked Starr's investigation. "Sources in Starr's office are leaking, and that might be criminal -- a much more serious crime, frankly, than signing a false affidavit by a 24-year-old in a civil lawsuit," Begala said on NBC's "Meet the Press." Emanuel, appearing on CNN's "Late Edition," pointed to the investigation into the crash of TWA Flight 800, completed in a year, and wondered why Starr's probe was still unfinished after nearly four years. "I'll tell you, the difference is one is done professionally, the other is done with real questions being raised by serious, serious former prosecutors and legal scholars wondering what is going on." On the surface, the White House operated more normally than it had since the scandal first broke on Jan. 21. On Monday, Clinton promoted his proposal for a national debate to reform Social Security. The next day, he attended a retreat with House Democrats, where he received a rousing ovation. On Thursday, he and Vice President Gore traveled to Capitol Hill to promote the Democratic legislative agenda and call for an increase in the minimum wage. On Friday, he went to Philadelphia to challenge Congress to pass comprehensive tobacco legislation. Throughout the week, administration officials continued to build pressure on Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and began to prepare the American people for military action. Even bad news did little to throw the administration off stride. Portions of a report by the Senate committee investigating 1996 campaign fund-raising abuses were disclosed, with Gore taking a hit over his Buddhist temple fund-raiser. The story disappeared almost overnight. Attorney General Janet Reno called for an independent council to investigate whether Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt had lied to Congress about a decision on an Indian casino. Clinton carried on almost as if oblivious to this and the other problems swirling about his presidency. Senior administration officials continued to operate in the dark about the Lewinsky scandal, hoping that the combination of attacks on Starr and silence on the facts would, for a time, satisfy the public. Some Democratic friends of the president speculated on defense scenarios should things change -- how Clinton might cast his relationship with Lewinsky if she directly contradicted his claim that there was nothing sexual about it. But the president's advisers knew the high approval rating Clinton was enjoying in the polls was either artificial or temporary, depending on the course of the investigation, and talked openly about the stakes involved. White House Press Secretary Michael McCurry spoke to students on Monday at Harvard, where he was questioned about defending a president who many Americans believe has lied about Lewinsky. McCurry assured his audience that he believed the president's denials. But later in an exchange, he weighed the potential implications for both the press and the president. "If it turns out what the president said has not been fair and square with the American people, that has enormous implications," he said. "If it turns out that much of what has been reported in this environment ends up being not true, the damage that has been done to the institution of the press itself -- which is an indispensable institution of our self-government -- will be grievous, and I think that's lamentable."
Approval in the Polls One of the most interesting aspects of the Lewinsky matter is what it has revealed to the American people about themselves. The president's standing in the polls, already high, has risen further since the initial news broke, seemingly in defiance of the laws of physics. In a Washington Post poll, Clinton's approval rating has risen from 59 percent in the first week of the scandal to 67 percent at the end of the second week. A CBS-New York Times poll saw his approval rating climb from 55 percent to 73 percent on the night of his State of the Union address and then settle back to 66 percent last week. An NBC-Wall Street Journal poll, with a relatively small sample, topped out Clinton's approval at 79 percent. Clinton's ratings were not inconsistent with attitudes about other issues and institutions. Over the past few months, impressions of Congress have shown a similarly dramatic rise. The Post poll has recorded a 19 percentage-point increase in congressional approval since last fall, with 55 percent now approving of the way Congress is doing its job. A poll by the Republican firm American Viewpoint recorded a 24-point increase during the same period. Similarly, the belief that the country is heading in the right direction has increased dramatically in the past few months. In just two weeks, the Post poll recorded a 17-point increase in that barometer, with 64 percent on the positive side of the ledger. Andy Kohut, who directs the Pew Research Center for People & The Press, cautioned that the president's higher approval ratings were not in any way endorsements of Clinton personally. Kohut said he believes Clinton has benefited both from a backlash against the press and support for the agenda the president outlined in the State of the Union address. Kohut said his research shows that among those who are new converts to Clinton, those newly in the "approve" column since the scandal broke, fewer than one in five like both Clinton and his policies, while three in five like the president's policies but not the president. Among those who have long approved of the president's performance, Kohut said, three in five like both the president and his policies, while less than one-third said they liked only his policies. In addition to the bipartisan boost Clinton has received because of the prevailing optimism in the country right now, he also has been aided by an element of partisans rallying behind him. The Post poll has asked people whether they believe Clinton has the honesty and integrity to be president. Between Jan. 25 and Jan. 31, the percentage who said he did rose from 51 percent to 55 percent. There was virtually no change in the attitudes of Republicans or independents, but among Democrats, Clinton's positive rating on that question jumped from 69 percent to 82 percent. There are sharp differences in perceptions of Democratic women vs. GOP women on some aspects of the scandal. The CBS-New York Times poll has offered respondents several choices if it turns out that Clinton obstructed justice by attempting to persuade Lewinsky to lie about their relationship. The choices are to admit it and apologize; resign; face impeachment if he refuses to resign; or simply drop the whole matter. Almost three-quarters of Democratic women say he should either apologize or the country should let the matter drop. About half of Republican women say he should either resign or be impeached, with four in 10 saying he should get off with an apology or less. The question for Clinton and his advisers is what will happen to public opinion if the facts -- or more importantly public perception of the facts -- change over time. In the current polling, there is a clear distinction between attitudes of those who think he had an affair and those who don't think he did. In the Post poll, for example, among those who don't believe Clinton had an affair, nine in 10 approve of his job performance. Among those who think he did have an affair, about half approve and the other half disapprove. Among those who say they still don't know, three-quarters approve of the way he is handling his job. But a question asked in the most recent CBS-New York Times poll offers at least some further comfort to the president and his advisers. Asked whether Clinton owes the country a "completely truthful" response to questions about his sexual conduct, the country was evenly divided: 48 percent said he should be truthful; 47 percent said it wasn't necessary. Peter Hart, a Democratic pollster who conducts the NBC-Wall Street Journal poll with Republican Robert Teeter, said that what is interesting to him is how many Americans continue to withhold judgment about what really happened. "The people who've withheld judgment will weigh in once the facts become known, and if the facts turn in favor of the president, these people will essentially say that is the end of the story," Hart said. "If the facts weigh in against the president, this group will want answers. To anybody who thinks we've reached the final chapter or even the midway point, they aren't looking deeply enough at public opinion on this issue."
The Unheard Voices Witnesses in the third and most important category in the Starr investigation have yet to be heard from. They are the central characters: Clinton, Lewinsky and Vernon E. Jordan Jr., the Washington lawyer and presidential confidant who helped the former intern find her first attorney and who made multiple efforts to help find her a job in New York after she decided to leave the Pentagon. Jordan has been subpoenaed but has yet to appear before the grand jury. Clinton has promised full cooperation in the case, without being specific, and there are indications that Starr and the president's legal team have had at least preliminary discussions about questioning Clinton. As for Lewinsky, her saga as the crucial witness continued. Last Monday, Lewinsky attorney Ginsburg confirmed that the former intern had been subpoenaed and was scheduled to appear before the grand jury on Thursday. "Nobody's going to run over her constitutional rights," he said. "Nobody's going to abuse her. I'm not going to let that happen." The scheduled appearance seemed to be a clear sign that the long negotiations between Ginsburg and the independent counsel had broken down. Starr's office was losing patience with Lewinsky and Ginsburg, and the feeling was reciprocated. Where Ginsburg once had described Starr and his team as professional and described their relationship as cordial, he turned suddenly to criticize the independent counsel's operation. Without directly accusing Starr of encouraging his client to lie on the witness stand, he strongly suggested they wanted something she could not deliver. Ginsburg also complained that Starr had reneged on an earlier offer for immunity, a charge Starr's office denied. There had been offers, but they were based on the condition that Lewinsky would tell everything she knew. From the independent counsel's perspective, she was not fully forthcoming in the proffers offered by Ginsburg. Worse, she was inconsistent and contradictory on some key elements of the case. Ginsburg said he would fight to quash the subpoena. On Tuesday, Ginsburg reiterated his determination to protect his client, but he made it clear that she would testify even under a grant of limited immunity. "She will not go to jail like Susan McDougal," he said, referring to Clinton's former Whitewater business partner who was jailed for contempt after refusing to answer questions under a grant of immunity in that case. "She has no intention of falling on her sword." He remained vague about when Lewinsky would return to Washington. When Lewinsky remained in Los Angeles on Wednesday, it was clear she would not be testifying the next day. Ginsburg jokingly complained about the lack of contact from Starr's office: "He never calls, he never writes." He also contradicted his earlier statements about her appearance, telling reporters she never was scheduled to appear on Thursday and there still was not a "date certain" for her testimony. By then he had said so many different things that no one knew quite what to believe. Ginsburg reiterated Lewinsky's anger over what had happened to her mother at the grand jury, and if anything, his comments suggested that the person who was to be Starr's key witness was growing potentially more hostile to the independent counsel.
Lewinsky's Return On Thursday, Lewinsky left her father's home in Los Angeles and was driven to Los Angeles International Airport to catch her flight back to Washington. She had achieved a status few ever attain and was treated accordingly, traveling in the style of a president or presidential candidate. Her black limousine, under police escort, ferried her through the gates, onto the tarmac and directly to the waiting airplane, United Airlines Flight 60. She shook hands with the police officers and took a seat in the first row. Four-and-a-half hours later, Lewinsky bounded down the steps of the plane at Washington's Dulles International Airport, where another car waited for her on the tarmac. As photographers pressed against the glass inside the gate, she was whisked away into the darkness to be reunited with her mother. The grand jury awaited their testimony. Staff writers Peter Baker, Susan Schmidt, Toni Locy, John F. Harris and Justin Blum, assistant polling director Claudia Deane, and researcher Ben White contributed to this report.
© Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||
 |
||
