Transcript provided by FDCH |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Transcript: Closing arguments by Republican chief counsel David SchippersHouse Judiciary Committee hearing, December 10, 1998(continued)CLERK: Mr. Canady. Mr. Inglis. INGLIS: No. CLERK: Mr. Inglis votes no. Mr. Goodlatte. GOODLATTE: No. CLERK: Mr. Goodlatte votes no. Mr. Buyer. BUYER: No. CLERK: Mr. Buyer votes no. Mr. Bryant. BRYANT: No. CLERK: Mr. Bryant votes no. Mr. Chabot. CHABOT: No. CLERK: Mr. Chabot votes no. Mr. Barr. BARR: No. CLERK: Mr. Barr votes no. Mr. Jenkins. JENKINS: No. CLERK: Mr. Jenkins votes no. Mr. Hutchinson. HUTCHINSON: No. CLERK: Mr. Hutchinson votes no. Mr. Pease. PEASE: No. CLERK: Mr. Pease votes no. Mr. Cannon. Mr. Rogan. ROGAN: No. CLERK: Mr. Rogan votes no. Mr. Graham. GRAHAM: No. CLERK: Mr. Graham votes no. Ms. Bono. BONO: No. CLERK: Ms. Bono votes no. Mr. Conyers. CONYERS: Aye. CLERK: Mr. Conyers votes aye. Mr. Frank. FRANK: Aye. CLERK: Mr. Frank votes aye. Mr. Schumer. SCHUMER: Aye. CLERK: Mr. Schumer votes aye. CLERK: Mr. Berman. Mr. Boucher. Mr. Nadler. NADLER: Aye. CLERK: Mr. Nadler votes aye. Mr. Scott. SCOTT: Aye. CLERK: Mr. Scott votes aye. Mr. Watt. WATT: Aye. CLERK: Mr. Watt votes aye. Ms. Lofgren. LOFGREN: Aye. CLERK: Ms. Lofgren votes aye. Ms. Jackson Lee. JACKSON LEE: Aye. CLERK: Ms. Jackson Lee votes aye. Ms. Waters. Mr. Meehan. MEEHAN: Aye. CLERK: Mr. Meehan votes aye. Mr. Delahunt. DELAHUNT: Aye. CLERK: Mr. Delahunt votes aye. Mr. Wexler. Mr. Rothman. ROTHMAN: Aye. CLERK: Mr. Rothman votes aye. Mr. Barrett. BARRETT: Aye. CLERK: Mr. Barrett votes aye. CLERK: Mr. Hyde. HYDE: No. CLERK: Mr. Hyde votes no. HYDE: Mr. Canady. CANADY: No. CLERK: Mr. Canady votes no. HYDE: Mr. Berman. HYDE: Mr. Berman votes aye. CLERK: Mr. Berman votes aye. HYDE: Mr. Cannon. CLERK: Mr. Cannon is not recorded, Mr. Chairman. CANNON: No. CLERK: Mr. Cannon votes no. Mr. Chairman, there are 13 ayes and 21 nos. HYDE: And the motion is not agreed to. We will now proceed as we had scheduled by introducing David P. Schippers, the chief investigative counsel for the majority, who will make a presentation which I assume will take some time as did Mr. Lowell's this morning. Before Mr. Schippers begins, I would like to notify those members of the committee who care to listen that over the noon hour we called the White House counsel, Mr. Ruff, to invite him back if he wanted to, and he declined to come back with thanks. And that was done in conjunction with Mr. Epstein as well as our staff. So Mr. Schippers. SCHIPPERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On October 5th, 1998, I came before this committee to advice you of the results of our analysis. (UNKNOWN): Mr. Chairman, could the witness move the microphone in front of him so we can hear him on... SCHIPPERS: That a little better? (UNKNOWN): Thank you, sir. SCHIPPERS: I came before you to advise you of the results of our analysis and review of the referral from the Office of the Independent Counsel. We concluded at that time that there existed substantial and credible evidence of several separate events directly involving the president that could constitute grounds for impeachment. At that time, I specifically limited my review and report to evidence of possible felonies. In addition, I asserted that the report and analysis was merely a litany of crimes that might have been committed. SCOTT: Mr. Chairman. HYDE: For what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? SCOTT: Do we have copies of his statement? HYDE: I have no idea. Have you got a blue book down there? Everyone else has one. SCHIPPERS: Copies are being made, Mr. Chairman, as we speak. HYDE: Copies are being made? SCHIPPERS: As we speak. HYDE: All right. Fine. You'll get a copy as soon as it's ready. Please proceed. SCHIPPERS: On October 7th, the House of Representatives passed Resolution 581 calling for an inquiry to determine whether the House should exercise its constitutional duty to impeach William Jefferson Clinton. Thereafter, this committee heard testimony from several experts and other witnesses, including the independent counsel himself, Kenneth Starr. Since that time, my staff and I, as requested, have conducted ongoing investigations and inquiries. We have received and reviewed additional information and evidence from the independent counsel and have developed additional information from diverse other sources. Unfortunately, because of the extremely strict time limits placed upon us, a number of very promising leads had to be abandoned. We just ran out of time. In addition, other allegations of possible serious wrongdoing cannot be presented publicly at this time by virtue of circumstances totally beyond our control. For example, we uncovered more incidents involving probable direct and deliberate obstructions of justice, witness tampering, perjury and abuse of power. We were, however, informed both by the Department of Justice and by the Office of the Independent Counsel that to bring forth publicly that evidence at this time would seriously compromise pending criminal investigations. Most of those investigations I understand, are nearing completion. We have accordingly bowed to their suggestion. If I may digress very briefly from my prepared text, I want to tell you the members of the committee that I have been privileged to work with some of the finest human beings that I have ever met in my life. The staff of the committee and my personal staff that's worked with me constitute some of the finest lawyers, the best investigators, and just generally good people. They have worked until midnight, 1, 2 o'clock in the morning. They have worked through the weekends. They have done whatever had to be done. I owe them everything that you're going to hear today, and I really believe that they are entitled to the gratitude of this committee and the gratitude of the people of the United States. Now, I will go on. Before I proceed -- before I proceed, allow me to assert my profound and unqualified respect for the office of president of the United States. It represents to the American people, and actually to the entire world, the strength, the philosophy, and most of all, the honor and integrity that makes us a great nation and an example for developing peoples. Because all eyes are focused upon that high office, the character and credibility of any temporary occupant is vital to the domestic and vital -- and foreign welfare of the citizens. Consequently, serious breaches of integrity and duty of necessity adversely influence the reputation of the entire United States. When I appeared in this committee room a little over two months ago, it was merely to analyze the referral and to report to you. Today, after our investigation, I have come to a point that frankly I prayed I would never reach. It is my sorrowful duty now to accuse President William Jefferson Clinton of obstruction of justice, false and deliberately misleading statements under oath, witness tampering, abuse of power, and false statements to and obstruction of the Congress of the United States in the course of this very impeachment inquiry. These are what Mr. Lowell referred to as the insignificant offenses of President Clinton. Whether these charges are high crimes or misdemeanors, and whether the president should be impeached or not is not for me to say or even to give an opinion. That's your decision. I'm merely going to set forth the evidence in the testimony so that you can judge. As I stated earlier, this is not about sex or private conduct. It is about multiple obstructions of justice, perjury, false and misleading statements, witness tampering, abuses of power -- all committed or orchestrated by the president of the United States. Before we get into the president's lies and obstructions, it's important to place the events in their proper context. We have acknowledged all along that if this were only about sex, then you would not be engaged in this debate. But the manner in which the Lewinsky relationship arose and continued is important. It is illustrative of the character of the president and the decisions that he made. Monica Lewinsky, a 22-year-old intern, was working at the White House during the government shutdown in 1995. Prior to their first intimate encounter she had never even spoken to the president. Sometime on November 15th, 1995, Ms. Lewinsky made an improper gesture to the president. What did he do in response? Did the president immediately confront her or report her to her supervisors, as you would expect? Did he make it clear that such conduct would not be tolerated in the White House? No. That would have been an appropriate reaction, but it's not the one the president chose. Instead, the president of the United States invited this unknown young intern into a private area off the Oval Office where he kissed her. He then invited her back later, and when she returned, the two engaged in the first of many acts of inappropriate conduct. Thereafter, the two concocted a cover story. If Ms. Lewinsky was seen, she was just bringing papers to the president. That story was totally false. The only papers she brought were personal messages having nothing to do with her duties or those of the president. After Ms. Lewinsky moved from the White House to the Pentagon, her frequent visits to the president were disguised as visits to Betty Currie. Now, those cover stories are important because they play a vital role in the later perjuries and obstructions. Over the term of their relationship, the following significant matters occurred. Monica Lewinsky and the president were alone on at least 21 occasions. They had at least 11 personal sexual encounters, excluding phone sex -- three in 1995, five in 1996, and at least three in 1997. They had at least 55 telephone conversations, some of which, at least 17, involved phone sex. The president gave Ms. Lewinsky 24 presents and Ms. Lewinsky gave the president 40 presents. Now these are the essential facts which formed the backdrop for all of the events that followed. During the fall of 1997, things were relatively quiet. Monica Lewinsky was working at the Pentagon and looking for a high-paying job in New York. The president's attempt to stall the Paula Jones case was still pending in the Supreme Court, and nobody seemed to care one way or another what the outcome would be. Then in the first week of December 1997, things began to unravel. Now, I do not intend to discuss the sexual details of the president's encounters with Ms. Lewinsky. However, I do not want to give this committee the impression that those encounters are irrelevant. In fact, they are highly relevant because the president repeatedly lied about that sexual relationship in his deposition before the grand jury and in his responses to this committee's questions. He has consistently maintained that Ms. Lewinsky performed acts on him while he never touched her in a sexual manner. This characterization not only directly contradicts Ms. Lewinsky's testimony, it also contradicts the sworn grand jury testimony of three of her friends and the statements by two professional counselors with whom she contemporaneously shared the details of that relationship. While his treatment of Ms. Lewinsky may be offensive, it is much more offensive for the president to expect this committee to believe that in 1996 and 1997 his intimate contact with her was so narrowly tailored that it conveniently escaped his strained interpretation of a definition of sexual relations, which he did not even conceive until 1998. WIRES.ADVISORY.PRIORITY A few words of caution, if I may. The evidence and testimony must be viewed as a whole. It cannot be compartmentalized. Please do not be cajoled into considering each event in isolation and then treating it separately. That is a tactic employed by defense lawyers in every conspiracy trial that I have ever seen. Remember, events and words that may seem innocent or even exculpatory in a vacuum may well take on a sinister or even criminal connotation when observed in the context of the whole plot. For example, every one agrees that Monica Lewinsky testified: "No one ever told me to lie; no one ever promised me a job." When considered along, as it has been consistently, this would seem exculpatory. In the context of the other evidence, we see that this is again technically parsing words to give a misleading inference. Of course, no one said Monica go in there and lie. They didn't have to. Monica knew what was expected of her. Similarly, nobody promised her a job. But once she signed that false affidavit she got one, didn't she? Likewise, please don't permit the obfuscation and legalistic pyrotechnics of the president's defenders to distract you from the real issue here. A friend of mine flew bombers over Europe in the Second World War. And yes, I'm old enough to have friends who flew bombers in the Second World War. He once told me that the planes would carry packages of led-based tin foil strips. And when the planes flew into the perimeter of the enemy's radar coverage, the crews would release that tin foil. It was intended to confuse and distract the radar operators from the real target. Now the treatment of Monica Lewinsky received from the independent counsel, the motives of some of the witnesses, and those who helped finance Paula Jones' case -- that's tin foil. The real issues are whether the president of the United States testified falsely under oath, whether he engaged in a continuing plot to obstruct justice, to hide evidence, to tamper with witnesses and to abuse the power of his office in furtherance of that plot. The ultimate issue is whether the president's course of conduct is such as to affect adversely the office of the presidency by bringing scandal and disrespect upon it, and also, upon the administration of justice, and whether he has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as president and subversive to the rule of law and to constitutional government. Finally, the truth is not decided by the number of scholars with different opinions, the outcome of polls, or by the shifting winds of public opinion. Moreover, you often possess more information than is generally available -- excuse me -- generally available to the public. As representatives of the citizens, you must honestly and thoroughly examine all the evidence, apply the applicable constitutional precepts and vote your conscience -- independently and without fear or favor. As Andrew Jackson said, "One man with courage makes a majority." The offense that formed the basis of these charges actually began in late 1995. They reached a critical stage in the winter of 1997 and the first month of 1998. And the final act in this sorted drama took place on August 17th, 1998, when the president of the United States appeared before a federal grand jury, raised his right hand to God and swore to tell the truth. Did he? We shall see. This committee has been asked by the president's counsel to keep an open heart and mind, and to focus on the record. I completely agree. So in the words of Al Smith, a good Democrat, "Let's look at the record." On Friday, December 5, 1997, Monica Lewinsky asked Betty Currie if the president could see her the next day, Saturday. But Ms. Currie said that the president was scheduled to meet with his lawyers all day. Later that Friday, Ms. Lewinsky spoke briefly to the president at a Christmas party. That evening, Paula Jones' attorneys faxed a list of potential witnesses to the president's attorney. The list included the name of Monica Lewinsky. However, Ms. Lewinsky did not find out that her name was on the list until the president told her 10 days later, on December 17th. That delay is significant. After a conversation with Ms. Currie and after seeing the president at the Christmas party, Ms. Lewinsky drafted a letter to the president terminating their relationship. The next morning, Saturday, December 6th, Ms. Lewinsky went to the White House to deliver that letter and some gifts for the president. She intended to deliver them to Ms. Currie. When she arrived at the White House, Ms. Lewinsky spoke to several Secret Service officers. And one of them told her that the president was not, as she thought, with his lawyers, but rather he was meeting with Eleanor Mondale. Ms. Lewinsky left in a huff, called Mrs. Currie from a pay phone, angrily exchanged words with her and went home. After that phone call, after that phone call, Ms. Currie told the Secret Service watch commander that the president was so upset about the disclosure of his meeting with Ms. Mondale that he wanted somebody fired. At 12:05 p.m., records demonstrate that Ms. Currie paged Bruce Lindsey with a message, "Call Betty, ASAP." Around that same time according to Ms. Lewinsky, while she was back at her apartment, she and the president spoke on the telephone. And the president was very angry. He told Ms. Lewinsky that no one had ever treated him as poorly as she had. The president acknowledged to the grand jury that he was upset about Ms. Lewinsky's behavior and considered it inappropriate. Nevertheless, in a sudden change of mode, he invited her to visit him at the White House that afternoon. Monica arrived at the White House for the second time that day and was cleared to enter at about 12:52 p.m. Although in her words, the president had been very angry with her during her recent telephone conversation, he was sweet and very affectionate during this visit. He also told her that he would talk to Vernon Jordan about getting her a job. The president also suddenly changed his attitude toward the Secret Service. Ms. Currie informed some officers that if they kept quiet about the Lewinsky incident, there would be no disciplinary action sought. According to the Secret Service watch commander again, Captain Jeffrey Purdee (ph), the president personally told him -- quote -- "I hope you use your discretion, or I hope I can count on your discretion." Deputy Chief Charles O'Malley (ph), Captain Purdee's (ph) supervisor testified that he knew of no other time in his 14 years of service at the White House where the president raised a performance issue with a member of the Secret Service uniformed division. After his conversation with the president, Captain Purdee (ph) told a number of officers that they should not discuss the Lewinsky incident. When the president was before the grand jury and questioned about his statement to the Secret Service regarding this incident, the president testified: "I don't remember. I don't remember what I said, and I don't remember to whom I said it." When confronted with Captain Purdee's testimony, the president again testified: "I don't remember anything I said to him in that regard. I have no recollection of that whatever." President Clinton testified before the grand jury that he learned that Ms. Lewinsky was on the Jones witness list that evening -- that is Saturday, December 6th -- during a meeting that took place with his lawyers. He stood by his answer in the response to our request, or your request, No. 16, and the meeting occurred about 5:00 p.m. So, that was true. It was after Ms. Lewinsky had left the White House. According to Bruce Lindsey, at the meeting, Bob Bennett had a copy of the Jones witness list that had been faxed to him the previous night. However, during his deposition, the president testified that he heard about the witness list before he saw it. In other words, if the president testified truthfully during the course of his deposition, then he knew about the witness list before the 5:00 p.m. meeting. It's valid to infer that hearing Ms. Lewinsky's name on the witness list prompted the president's sudden and otherwise unexplained change from very angry to very affectionate. It's also reasonable to infer that it prompted him to give the unique instruction to a Secret Service watch commander to use discretion regarding Ms. Lewinsky's visit to the White House, which the watch commander interpreted as instructions to keep the matter under wraps. Now, to go back a little, Monica Lewinsky had been looking for a good-paying and high-profile job in New York since the previous July. She wasn't having much success despite the president's promise to help. In early November, Betty Currie arranged a meeting with Vernon Jordan, who was supposed to help. On November 5th, Monica met for 20 minutes with Mr. Jordan. No action followed. No job interviews were arranged. And there were no further contacts with Mr. Jordan. It was obvious that he made no effort to find a job for Ms. Lewinsky. Indeed, it was so unimportant to him that he actually had no recollection of an earlier November meeting and he testified that finding a job for Ms. Lewinsky was really not a priority. Nothing happened throughout the month of November, because Mr. Jordan was either gone or would not return Monica's calls. During the December 6th meeting with the president, she mentioned that she had not been able to get in touch with Mr. Jordan and that it didn't seem that he'd done anything to help her. The president responded by saying: Oh, I'll take care of that; I'll get on it; or something to that effect. There was obviously still no urgency to help Monica. Mr. Jordan met the president the next day, December 7th, but the meeting had nothing to do with Ms. Lewinsky. The first activity calculated to help Monica actually procure employment took place on December 11th. Mr. Jordan met with Ms. Lewinsky and gave her a list of contact names. The two also discussed the president. By the way, that meeting Mr. Jordan remembered. Vernon Jordan immediately placed calls to two prospective employers. Later in the afternoon, he even called the president to give him a report of his job search efforts. Clearly, Mr. Jordan and the president were now very interested in helping Monica find a good job in New York. But why the sudden interest? Why the total change in focus? Nobody but Betty Currie really cared about helping Ms. Lewinsky throughout November. Even after the president learned that her name was on the prospective witness list, it didn't really escalate into any great urgency. Did something happen to remove the job search from a low to a high priority on that day? Excuse me. Oh, yes, something happened. On the morning of December 11th, 1997, Judge Susan Webber Wright ordered that Paula Jones was entitled to information regarding any state or federal employee with whom the president had sexual relations or proposed or sought to have sexual relation. To keep Monica on the team was now of critical importance. Remember, they already knew that she was on the witness list, although nobody had bothered to tell her yet. That was remedied on December 17th, 1997, between 2:00 and 2:00 in the morning. Monica Lewinsky's phone rang unexpectedly in the wee hours of that morning, and it was the president of the United States. The president said that he wanted to tell Ms. Lewinsky two things: one, that Betty Currie's brother had been killed in a car accident; and second, he said that -- quote -- "He had some more bad news" -- close quote -- that he had seen the witness list for the Paula Jones case and her name was on it. The president told Ms. Lewinsky that seeing her name on the list broke his heart. I imagine it did. He then told her that if she were to be subpoenaed, she should contact Betty and let Betty know that she'd received a subpoena. Ms. Lewinsky asked what she should do if she were subpoenaed. The president responded: "Well, maybe you can sign an affidavit." Now both parties knew that the affidavit would need to be false and misleading in order to accomplish the desired result. Then the president had a very pointed suggestion for Monica Lewinsky -- a suggestion that left little room for compromise. No, he did not say "Go in and lie." What he did say is "You know, you can always say you were coming to see Betty or that you were bringing me papers." Now in order the understand the significance of this statement, it's necessary to remember the cover stories that the president and Lewinsky had previously structured in order to deceive those who protected and worked with the president. Ms. Lewinsky, as you'll recall, testified that she could carry papers, and when she visited the president, when she saw him, she would say, "Oh, gee, here are your letters; wink, wink, wink." And he would answer, "OK, that's good." After Miss Lewinsky left the White House employment, she would return to the Oval Office under the guise of visiting Betty Currie, not the president, who was the real person she was visiting. Moreover, Monica promised him that she would always deny that sexual relationship and would always protect him, and the president would respond, "That's good," or similar language of encouragement. So when the president called Monica at 2 a.m. on December 17th to tell her she was on the witness list, he made sure to remind her of those prior cover stories. Miss Lewinsky testified that when the president brought up the misleading story, she understood that the two would continue their preexisting pattern of deception. It became clear that the president had no intention of making his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky public. And he would use lies, deceit and deception to ensure that the truth would never be known. It is interesting to note that, when the president was asked by the grand jury whether he remembered calling Monica Lewinsky at 2 a.m., he said, "No, sir, I don't, but it's quite possible that happened." And when he was asked whether he encouraged Monica Lewinsky to continue the cover stories of coming to see Betty or bringing the letters, he answered, "I don't remember exactly what I told her that night." That was the answer to a direct question. "I don't remember exactly what I told her that night." Six days earlier he had become aware that Paula Jones' lawyers were now able to inquire about other women. Monica could file a false affidavit, but it might not work. It was absolutely essential that both parties told the same story. The president knew that he would lie if asked about Miss Lewinsky, and he wanted to make certain that she would lie also. Why else would the president of the United States call a 24-year-old woman at 2 o'clock in the morning? But the president had an additional problem. It was not enough that he and Miss Lewinsky simply denied the relationship. You see, the evidence was beginning to accumulate, and it was the evidence that was driving the president to reevaluate his defense. By this time the evidence was establishing, through records and through eyewitness accounts, that the president and Monica Lewinsky were indeed spending a significant amount of time together in the Oval Office complex. It was no longer expedient simply to refer to Miss Lewinsky as a groupie, a stalker, a clutch or a homewrecker, as the White House first attempted to do. The unassailable facts were forcing the president to acknowledge the relationship. But at this point, he still had the opportunity to establish a nonsexual explanation for their meetings. You see, he still had that opportunity because his DNA hadn't yet turned up on Monica Lewinsky's blue dress. Therefore, the president needed Monica Lewinsky to go along with the cover story in order to provide an innocent, intimate-free explanation for their frequent meetings. And that innocent explanation came in the form of documents delivered and friendly chats with Monica -- with Betty Currie. It's also interesting to note that, when the president was deposed on January 17th, 1998, he used the exact same cover stories that had been utilized by Miss Lewinsky. In doing so, he stayed consistent with any future Lewinsky testimony, while still maintaining his defense in the Jones' case. In the president's deposition, he was asked if he was ever alone with Monica Lewinsky. He responded, and this is a quote, "I don't recall. She -- it seems to me she brought things to me once or twice on the weekends. In that case -- whatever time she would be in there, drop it off, exchange a few words and go -- she was there." Close quote. Additionally, you will notice that whenever questions were posed regarding Miss Lewinsky's frequent visits to the Oval Office, the president never hesitated to bring Betty Currie's name into his answers. Quote, "And my recollection is that, on a couple of a occasions after a pizza party meeting, she was there -- (there being in the Oval Office) -- but my secretary, Betty Currie was there with her." "Question: When was the last time you spoke with Monica Lewinsky?" Remember, this is January 17. "Answer: I am trying to remember. Sometime before Christmas she came by to see Betty -- some time before Christmas -- and she was there talking to her, and I stuck my head out and said hello to her." Now I am going to ask you, please, to pay attention to the screens up here. And I would like to you listen to the president's deceptions for yourself. Back | Next |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MORE STORIES:Thursday, December 10, 1998
Poll: Most Americans think Clinton committed perjury Judiciary lawyers debate Clinton's conduct Gingrich warns House to be ready to be called into session Democrats respond to proposed articles of impeachment Businessman who offered Jones $1 million is arrested Election commission rejects penalties for Clinton, Dole Analysis: Hearings lack Watergate drama LaHood selected to run House impeachment debate Second videotape of Clinton about to debut Pentagon report: Hughes helped China improve rockets Republican John Ensign concedes loss in Nevada Senate race
Closing arguments by Lowell Closing arguments by Schippers |