Starr Builds Case Against Ex-Intern to Get Full Story

By DAVID WILLMAN and RICHARD T. COOPER

Jan. 24, 1998 12 AM PT

TIMES STAFF WRITERS

WASHINGTON — Independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr has begun to build a full-scale criminal case against former White House intern Monica S. Lewinsky, in a move aimed at forcing her to reveal in detail the nature of her relationship with President Clinton or risk going to prison, according to people familiar with the investigation.

Focusing on written “talking points” Lewinsky gave her friend and confidant Linda Tripp, Starr’s team is preparing to charge Lewinsky with encouraging Tripp--who, like her, was a witness in the Paula Corbin Jones sexual-harassment case against Clinton--to lie under oath.

Lewinsky gave a sworn statement in the same lawsuit, denying she had a sexual relationship with the president. She allegedly sought to have Tripp support that account. Lewinsky’s denial is contradicted, however, by about 20 hours of conversations secretly recorded by Tripp, in which Lewinsky reportedly lays out intimate details of a purported affair with Clinton.

There were also these developments in what is becoming the most dangerous controversy to beset Clinton:

* After two days of conspicuous silence on the part of senior officials, members of the Cabinet spoke out publicly Friday in defense of the beleaguered chief executive. The statements of support followed a White House meeting in which Press Secretary Mike McCurry said Clinton urged his department heads to “stay focused on the work that you are doing. . . . and let’s all hang in there.”

“I believe the allegations are completely untrue,” Secretary of State Madeleine Albright told reporters. “I’ll second that. Definitely,” Commerce Secretary Bill Daley said. “Third it,” added Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala.

Vice President Al Gore had expressed faith in Clinton on Thursday in brief remarks before a speech.

* A source who has listened to portions of Tripp’s tape-recordings said Lewinsky can be heard saying Clinton made frequent late-night telephone calls to her home, engaged in telephone sex with her and eventually left her emotionally devastated when he became involved with several other women.

* The White House searched for a viable damage-control strategy as media demands rose for a full accounting from Clinton. Faced with wide-ranging subpoenas for documents and other records and continuing uncertainty about exactly what the facts might prove to be, aides sought to project a positive, cooperative image without going beyond Clinton’s carefully worded denial of a “sexual relationship.”

“He did no wrong, he says, but there are numerous allegations that require a thoroughly sophisticated and complete review,” McCurry said Friday in a breakfast meeting with reporters.

“I think the attitude here is the president wants to, you know, speak to the American people on these questions and he wants to get it done. But we want to get it done right, and get it done correctly,” he said later, at the regular White House afternoon briefing.

Public Statement Apparently Rejected

Aides considered but apparently rejected having Clinton hold a press conference or make a public statement, possibly before his State of the Union address to Congress on Tuesday.

* U.N. Ambassador Bill Richardson joined the ranks of administration officials subpoenaed by Starr’s investigators for records relating to Lewinsky. The subpoenas covered both the U.N. mission in New York and Richardson’s office in Washington, a spokesman said.

Richardson offered Lewinsky a junior-level job at the mission in New York after she left the White House and a subsequent job at the Pentagon. Rebecca Cooper, Richardson’s chief of staff in Washington, said neither Clinton nor his close friend Vernon E. Jordan Jr., who helped Lewinsky seek other jobs, played a role in the U.N. offer, which Lewinsky eventually declined.

Cooper said the mission liked hiring former White House workers because they had already gone through the necessary background checks and could begin work quickly. “The selection process was very typical for a political appointee, which this was,” said Cooper, who along with Richardson interviewed Lewinsky in Washington.

Lewinsky was an intern at the White House from the summer of 1995 until that December, when she moved into a paid staff position in the White House Office of Legislative Affairs. In April 1996, she was shifted to a public-affairs position in the Pentagon at the behest of First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton’s top aide. She left the Pentagon position on Dec. 26.

Based in part on the taped phone conversations between Lewinsky and Tripp, Starr’s investigators believe the 24-year-old former resident of Beverly Hills had a sexual relationship with Clinton and that he had a role in encouraging Lewinsky to lie about their liaisons when she gave a sworn statement in the Jones case.

The Jones case became the triggering device for the present controversy when Jones’ lawyers began compelling other women to give sworn statements about their relationships with Clinton. Jones’ lawyers hope to show a pattern of conduct that would lend credibility to the former Arkansas state employee’s claim that Clinton propositioned her while he was governor.

Both Issue Denials of Affair

Since both Clinton and Lewinsky have denied having a sexual affair in sworn statements, both could face charges of perjury or obstruction of justice if their assertions should prove false.

The possibility of being charged with such clear-cut crimes is considered much more threatening to Clinton and his presidency than the murky real estate dealings known as Whitewater or the ethical and technical issues raised by the campaign finance scandal.

Lewinsky’s lawyer, William Ginsburg of Los Angeles, remained in Washington on Friday, granting interviews. He told The Times he still holds out hope that a deal can be struck with Starr.

“If they call me,” he said, “I will call them.”

Ginsburg portrayed his client as a frightened and mentally battered pawn in a titanic struggle between Clinton and Starr. And, in an interview on Cable News Network, he criticized the conduct of Starr’s investigators during a period of several hours last Friday when they confronted Lewinsky for the first time.

“She never was being detained or under arrest,” Ginsburg said of the episode at the Ritz-Carlton hotel in suburban Washington. “But I think there was enough intimidation by the process, including the presence of FBI agents and U.S. attorneys, as well as words said to her about the imminence of prosecution, that she felt it was necessary to stay and not dare to leave because of the potential threat.

“I certainly feel that she was not only being squeezed in that instance, particularly without an attorney present, but since then they have threatened to involve her parents in the investigation and to bring them in under subpoena and talk to them. And that must be frightening to a 24-year-old.”

Apparently nettled by the criticism, Starr took the unusual step of issuing a statement of rebuttal Friday night, saying: “Media statements by one of her attorneys alleging that she was mistreated are wholly erroneous.”

Starr’s statement said Lewinsky consented to meet with several FBI agents and government attorneys, was repeatedly told she was free to leave and did leave to make several calls from a pay telephone before the arrival of her mother, Marcia Lewis.

Discussions between Starr’s office and Ginsburg came to a halt Monday after Ginsburg demanded that Lewinsky be given immunity without her first providing a formal description of what facts she could testify to.

Sources said that Starr would not consider immunity for Lewinsky without first having the ability to assess what information she has to offer.

If Starr granted immunity up front, he would risk losing whatever leverage he has to encourage Lewinsky to name other people whom investigators suspect drafted the “talking points.”

Questioned Friday about his client’s sworn statement denying a sexual relationship with Clinton, Ginsburg was careful to reiterate that his client “stands on the affidavit--for now.”

With this and other carefully constructed comments over the last few days, Ginsburg has appeared to leave open the possibility that Lewinsky might recant what she said in the affidavit.

Lewinsky signed the affidavit nearly three weeks ago, before Ginsburg, a longtime family friend, began representing her. Lewinsky was introduced to her first lawyer, Francis D. Carter of Washington, by Jordan. Carter withdrew as Lewinsky’s lawyer on Monday, for reasons that he has declined to describe.

Jordan also had helped line up a job for Lewinsky in New York. Jordan said this week that he acted only to help Lewinsky as he has with others. At no point, Jordan said, did he encourage Lewinsky to testify falsely regarding whatever relationship she has had with the president.

The first step for Lewinsky to reverse course, if she decides to do that, would be for her to describe to Starr her version of events in a legal document called a proffer. In it, a prospective witness or defendant provides a summary of what she is willing to say under oath in exchange for immunity from prosecution related to any crimes disclosed by that testimony.

The proffer would have to be sufficiently detailed so that prosecutors could assess whether the information would be admissible as evidence.

When talks between Lewinsky and Starr’s staff broke down, Ginsburg had refused to submit a proffer, holding out for a sweeping grant of immunity.

“She is at the vortex of a storm involving probably the three most powerful men in the United States: the president; Jordan; and [Starr],” Ginsburg said.

Complicating the already delicate negotiations between Ginsburg and Starr is the lawsuit brought by Jones--the former Arkansas employee who alleges that Clinton exposed himself to her and demanded oral sex in a Little Rock, Ark., hotel room in 1991.

Lewinsky had been scheduled to be questioned under oath by Jones’ attorneys on Friday, but on Thursday night, at Ginsburg’s request, a federal judge in Arkansas postponed the session indefinitely.

Times staff writers Ronald J. Ostrow, Elizabeth Shogren and Jonathan Peterson contributed to this story.