Editor's Note: In this special section, The Washington Post is publishing the full, unedited transcript of President Clinton's sworn, videotaped testimony Aug. 17 at the White House to a federal grand jury watching on television at the federal courthouse in Washington. The President was questioned by lawyers from the Office of the Independent Counsel led by Independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr. Also present were the President's own lawyers, led by David E. Kendall of the Williams & Connolly law firm, and White House counsel Charles F. C. Ruff. We recognize that some of the transcript contains sexually explicit material that is not suitable for children and normally would not be published in The Post. By providing the transcript in a separate section, we have made it possible for readers who wish to do so to remove it. Federal Document Clearing House For the Independent Counsel: Kenneth W. Starr, Independent Counsel; Jackie M. Bennett Jr., Robert J. Bittman and Solomon L. Wisenberg, deputy independent counsels; Michael W. Emmick, Mary Anne Wirth, and Bernard J. Apperson, associate independent counsels, For the President: David E. Kendall and Nicole Seligman, of Williams & Connolly; Charles F.C. Ruff, counsel to the president. Following is a transcript of President Clinton's testimony before the grand jury on Aug. 17, concerning his relationship with Monica S. Lewinsky: Apperson: Mr. President, would you raise your right hand, please. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Clinton: I do. Questioning by Wisenberg: Question: Good afternoon, Mr. President. Clinton: Good afternoon. Question: Could you please state your full name for the record, sir? Clinton: William Jefferson Clinton. Question: My name is Sol Wisenberg and I'm a Deputy Independent Counsel with the Office of Independent Counsel. With me today are some other attorneys from the Office of Independent Counsel. At the courtroom are the ladies and gentlemen of the grand jury prepared to receive your testimony as you give it. Do you understand, sir? Clinton: Yes, I do. Question: This proceeding is subject to Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure as modified by Judge Johnson's order. You are appearing voluntarily today as part of an agreement worked out between your attorney, the Office of the Independent Counsel, and with the approval of Judge Johnson. Is that correct, sir? Clinton: That is correct. Kendall: Mr. Wisenberg, excuse me. You referred to Judge Johnson's order. I'm not familiar with that order. Have we been served that, or not? Wisenberg: No. My understanding is that that is an order that the judge is going to sign today. She didn't have the name of a WHCA person. And basically, my understanding is that it will cover all of the attorneys here today and the technical people in the room, so that they will be authorized persons to be permitted to hear grand jury testimony that they otherwise wouldn't be authorized to hear. Kendall: Thank you. Wisenberg: The grand jury, Mr. President, has been empaneled by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Do you understand that, sir? Clinton: I do. Question: And, among other things, it's currently investigating under the authority of the Court of Appeals upon application by the Attorney General, whether Monica Lewinsky or others obstructed justice, intimidated witnesses or committed other crimes related to the case of Jones v. Clinton. Do you understand that, sir? Clinton: I do. Question: And today, you will be receiving questions not only from attorneys on the OIC staff, but from some of the grand jurors, too. Do you understand that? Clinton: Yes, sir, I do. Question: I'm going to talk briefly about your rights and responsibilities as a grand jury witness. Normally, grand jury witnesses, while not allowed to have attorneys in the grand jury room with them, can stop and consult with their attorneys. Under our arrangement today, your attorneys are here and present for consultation. and you can break to consult with them as necessary, but it won't count against our total time. Do you understand that, sir? Clinton: I do understand that. Question: You have a privilege against self-incrimination. If a truthful answer to any question would tend to incriminate you, you can invoke the privilege and that invocation will not be used against you. Do you understand that? Clinton: I do. Question: And if you don't invoke it, however, any answer that you do give can and will be used against you. Do you understand that, sir? Clinton: I do. Question: Mr. President, do you understand that your testimony here today is under oath? Clinton: I do. Question: And do you understand that because you've been sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, that if you were to lie or intentionally mislead the grand jury, you could be prosecuted for perjury and/or obstruction of justice? Clinton: I believe that's correct. Question: Is there anything that you -- I've stated to you regarding your rights and responsibilities that you would like me to clarify or that you don't understand? Clinton: No, sir. Question: Mr. President, I would like to read for you a portion of Federal Rule of Evidence 603, which discusses the important function the oath has in our judicial system. It says that the purpose of the oath is one, "calculated to awaken the witness' conscience and impress the witness' mind with the duty" to tell the truth. Could you please tell the grand jury what that oath means to you for today's testimony? Clinton: I have sworn an oath to tell the grand jury the truth, and that's what I intend to do. Question: You understand it requires you to give the whole truth, that is a complete answer to each question, sir? Clinton: I will answer each question as accurately and fully as I can. Question: Now, you took the same oath to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth on January 17, 1998, in a deposition in the Paul Jones litigation, is that correct, sir? Clinton: I did take an oath then. Question: Did the oath you took on that occasion mean the same to you then as it does today? Clinton: I believed then that I had to answer the questions truthfully, that's correct. Question: I'm sorry, I didn't hear you, sir. Clinton: I believed that I had to answer the questions truthfully, that's correct. Question: And it meant the same to you then as it does today? Clinton: Well, no one read me a definition then and we didn't go through this exercise then. I swore an oath to tell the truth, and I believed I was bound to be truthful and I tried to be. Question: At the Paula Jones deposition, you were represented by Mr. Robert Bennett, your counsel, is that correct? Clinton: That is correct. Question: He was authorized by you to be your representative, your attorney, is that correct? Clinton: That is correct. Question: Your counsel, Mr. Bennett, indicated at page five of the deposition, lines 10 through 12, I'm quoting: "The president intends to give full and complete answers as Ms. Jones is entitled to have." Question: My question to you is, do you agree with your counsel that a plaintiff in a sexual harassment case is, to use his words, entitled to have the truth? Clinton: I believe that I was bound to give truthful answers. Yes, sir. Question: But the question is, sir, do you agree with your counsel that a plaintiff in a sexual harassment case is entitled to have the truth? Clinton: I believe when a witness is under oath in a civil case or otherwise under oath, the witness should do everything possible to answer the questions truthfully. Question: I'm going to turn over questioning now to Mr. Bittman of our office, Mr. President. Questioning by Bittman: Question: Good afternoon, Mr. President. Clinton: Good afternoon, Mr. Bittman. Question: My name is Robert Bittman. I'm an attorney with the Office of Independent Counsel. Mr. President, we are first going to turn to some of the details of your relationship with Monica Lewinsky that follow on your deposition that you provided in the Paula Jones case as was referenced on January 17, 1998. The questions are uncomfortable and I apologize for that in advance. I'll try to be as brief and direct as possible. Mr. President, were you physically intimate with Monica Lewinsky? Clinton: Mr. Bittman, I think maybe I can save the, you and the grand jurors a lot of time if I read a statement, which I think will make it clear what the nature of my relationship with Ms. Lewinsky was, how it related to the testimony I gave, what I was trying to do in that testimony. And I think it will perhaps make it possible for you to ask even more relevant questions from your point of view. And with your permission, I'd like to read that statement. Question: Absolutely. Please, Mr. President. Clinton: When I was alone with Ms. Lewinsky on certain occasions in early 1996, and once in early 1997, I engaged in conduct that was wrong. These encounters did not consist of sexual intercourse. They did not constitute sexual relations, as I understood that term to be defined at my January 17, 1998 deposition. But they did involve inappropriate, intimate contact. These inappropriate encounters ended, at my insistence, in early 1997. I also had occasional telephone conversations with Ms. Lewinsky that included inappropriate sexual banter. I regret that what began as a friendship came to include this conduct. And I take full responsibility for my actions. While I will provide the grand jury whatever other information I can, because of privacy considerations affecting my family, myself and others, and in an effort to preserve the dignity of the office I hold, this is all I will say about the specifics of these particular matters. I will try to answer, to the best of my ability, other questions, including questions about my relationship with Ms. Lewinsky, questions about my understanding of the term of "sexual relations", as I understood it to be defined at my January 17th, 1998, deposition, and questions concerning alleged subornation of perjury, obstruction of justice and intimidation of witnesses. That, Mr. Bittman, is my statement. Question: Thank you, Mr. President. And with that, we would like to take a break. Clinton: Would you like to have this? Question: Yes, please. As a matter of fact, why don't we have that marked as Grand Jury Exhibit WJC-1. Clinton: So, are we going to take a break? Question: Yes, we'll take a break. Can we have the camera off now, please? And it's 1:14. Question: Good afternoon again, Mr. President. Clinton: Good afternoon, Mr. Bittman. Question: Mr. President, your statement indicates that your contacts with Ms. Lewinsky did not involve any inappropriate intimate contact. Kendall: Mr. Bittman, excuse me. The witness... Clinton: No, sir, it indicates... Kendall: The witness does not have... Clinton: that it did involve inappropriate and intimate contact. Bittman: Pardon me. That it did involve inappropriate, intimate contact. Clinton: Yes, sir, it did. Kendall: Mr. Bittman, the witness -- the witness does not have a copy of the statement. We just have the one copy. Bittman: If he wishes Kendall: Thank you. Bittman: ...his statement back? Was this contact with Ms. Lewinsky, Mr. President, did it involve any sexual contact in any way, shape or form? Clinton: Mr. Bittman, I said in this statement I would like to stay to the terms of the statement. I think it's clear what inappropriately intimate is. I have said what it did not include. I -- it did not include sexual intercourse, and I do not believe it included conduct which falls within the definition I was given in the Jones deposition. And I would like to stay with that characterization. Question: Let us then move to the definition that was provided you during your deposition. We'll have that marked as grand jury exhibit WJC2. This is an exact copy, Mr. President, of the exhibit that was provided you during that deposition. And I'm sure you remember from the deposition that paragraph 1 of the definition remained in effect. Judge Wright ruled that that was to be the guiding definition, and that paragraphs 2 and 3 were stricken. Do you remember that Mr. President? Clinton: Yes. Specifically what I remember is there were two different discussions, I think, of this. There was quite an extended one in the beginning, and everybody was entering into it. And in the end, the judge said that she would take the first definition and strike the rest of it. That's my memory. Question: Did you, well, at page 19 of your deposition in that case, the attorney who provided you with the definition asked you, "Would you please take whatever time you need to read this definition." And later on in the deposition, you did, of course, refer to the definition several times. Were you, during the deposition, familiar with the definition? Clinton: Yes, sir. My, let me just ask a question. If you're going to ask me about my deposition, could I have a copy of it? Does anybody have a copy of it? Question: Yes. We have a copy. We'll provide you with a copy. Wirth: We will mark it as grand jury exhibit WJC-3. Clinton: Now, did you say that was on page 19, Mr. Bittman? Bittman: It was at page 19, Mr. President, beginning at line 21. I will read it in full. This is from the Jones attorney. "Would you please take whatever time you need to read this definition, because when I use the term sexual relations', this is what I mean today." Clinton: All right. Yes, that starts on 19. But let me say that there is a -- just for the record -- my recollection was accurate. There is a long discussion here between the attorney and the judge. It goes on until page 23, and in the end, the judge says, "I'm talking only about part one in the definition." And "Do you understand that?" And I answer, "I do." The judge says part one and then the lawyer for Ms. Jones says he's only talking about part one, and asked me if I understand it. And I say I do. And that was my understanding. I might also note that when I was given this and began to ask questions about it, I actually circled number one. This is my circle here. I remember doing that so I could focus only on those two lines, which is what I did. Question: Did you understand the words in the first portion of the exhibit, Mr. President? That is, "For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in sexual relations' when the person knowingly engages in or causes"? Did you understand, do you understand the words there in that phrase? Clinton: Yes. My, I can tell you what my understanding of the definition is if you want me to... Question: Sure. Clinton: ...do it. My understanding of this definition is that it covers contact by the person being deposed with the enumerated areas, if the contact is done with an intent to arouse or gratify. That's my understanding of the definition. Question: What did you believe the definition to include and exclude? What kind of activities? Clinton: I thought the definition included any activity by the person being deposed where the person was the actor and came in contact with those parts of the body with the purpose or intent of gratification, and excluded any other activity. For example, kissing is not covered by that, I don't think. Question: Did you understand the definition to be limited to sexual activity? Clinton: Yes, I understood the definition to be limited to physical contact with those areas of the body with the specific intent to arouse or gratify. That's what I understood it to be.