I. There is substantial and credible information that President Clinton lied under oath as a defendant in Jones v. Clinton regarding his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

(1) He denied that he had a "sexual relationship" with Monica Lewinsky.

(2) He denied that he had a "sexual affair" with Monica Lewinsky.

(3) He denied that he had "sexual relations" with Monica Lewinsky.

(4) He denied that he engaged in or caused contact with the genitalia of "any person" with an intent to arouse or gratify (oral sex performed on him by Ms. Lewinsky).

(5) He denied that he made contact with Monica Lewinsky's breasts or genitalia with an intent to arouse or gratify.

On May 6, 1994, former Arkansas state employee Paula Corbin Jones filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against President Clinton claiming that he had sexually harassed her on May 8, 1991, by requesting her to perform oral sex on him in a suite at the Excelsior Hotel in Little Rock. Throughout the pretrial discovery process in Jones v. Clinton, United States District Judge Susan Webber Wright ruled, over the President's objections, that Ms. Jones's lawyers could seek various categories of information, including information about women who had worked as government employees under Governor or President Clinton and allegedly had sexual activity with him. Judge Wright's rulings followed the prevailing law in sexual harassment cases: The defendant's sexual relationships with others in the workplace, including consensual relationships, are a standard subject of inquiry during the discovery process. Judge Wright recognized the commonplace nature of her discovery rulings and stated that she was following a "meticulous standard of materiality" in allowing such questioning.

At a hearing on January 12, 1998, Judge Wright required Ms. Jones to list potential trial witnesses. Ms. Jones's list included several "Jane Does."⁽¹⁾ Ms. Jones's attorneys said they intended to call a Jane Doe named Monica Lewinsky as a witness to support Ms. Jones's claims. Under Ms. Jones's legal theory, women who had sexual relationships with the President received job benefits because of the sexual relationship, but women who resisted the President's sexual advances were denied such benefits.⁽²⁾

On January 17, 1998, Ms. Jones's lawyers deposed President Clinton under oath with Judge Wright present and presiding over the deposition. Federal law requires a witness testifying under oath to provide truthful answers. The intentional failure to provide truthful answers is a crime punishable by imprisonment

and fine.⁽³⁾ At the outset of his deposition, the President took an oath administered by Judge Wright: "Do you swear or affirm . . . that the testimony you are about to give in the matter before the court is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?" The President replied: "I do."⁽⁴⁾ At the beginning of their questioning, Ms. Jones's attorneys asked the President: "And your testimony is subject to the penalty of perjury; do you understand that, sir?" The President responded, "I do."⁽⁵⁾

Based on the witness list received in December 1997 (which included Ms. Lewinsky) and the January 12, 1998, hearing, the President and his attorneys were aware that Ms. Jones's attorneys likely would question the President at his deposition about Ms. Lewinsky and the other "Jane Does." In fact, the attorneys for Ms. Jones did ask numerous questions about "Jane Does," including Ms. Lewinsky.

There is substantial and credible information that President Clinton lied under oath in answering those questions.

A. Evidence that President Clinton Lied Under Oath During the Civil Case

1. President Clinton's Statements Under Oath About Monica Lewinsky

During pretrial discovery, Paula Jones's attorneys served the President with written interrogatories.⁽⁶⁾ One stated in relevant part:

Please state the name, address, and telephone number of each and every [federal employee] with whom you had sexual relations when you [were] . . . President of the United States.⁽⁷⁾

The interrogatory did not define the term "sexual relations." Judge Wright ordered the President to answer the interrogatory, and on December 23, 1997, under penalty of perjury, President Clinton answered "None."⁽⁸⁾

At the January 17, 1998, deposition of the President, Ms. Jones's attorneys asked the President specific questions about possible sexual activity with Monica Lewinsky. The attorneys used various terms in their questions, including "sexual affair," "sexual relationship," and "sexual relations." The terms "sexual affair" and "sexual relationship" were not specially defined by Ms. Jones's attorneys. The term "sexual relations" was defined:

For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in "sexual relations" when the person knowingly engages in or causes . . . contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person. . . . "Contact" means intentional touching, either directly or through clothing.⁽⁹⁾

President Clinton answered a series of questions about Ms. Lewinsky, including:

Q: Did you have an extramarital sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky?

WJC: No.

Q: If she told someone that she had a sexual affair with you beginning in November of 1995, would that be a lie?

WJC: It's certainly not the truth. It would not be the truth.

Q: I think I used the term "sexual affair." And so the record is completely clear, have you ever had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, as that term is defined in Deposition Exhibit 1, as modified by the Court?

Mr. Bennett:⁽¹⁰⁾

I object because I don't know that he can remember --

Judge Wright:

Well, it's real short. He can -- I will permit the question and you may show the witness definition number one.

WJC: I have never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. I've never had an affair with her.⁽¹¹⁾

President Clinton reiterated his denial under questioning by his own attorney:

Q: In paragraph eight of [Ms. Lewinsky's] affidavit, she says this, "I have never had a sexual relationship with the President, he did not propose that we have a sexual relationship, he did not offer me employment or other benefits in exchange for a sexual relationship, he did not deny me employment or other benefits for rejecting a sexual relationship." Is that a true and accurate statement as far as you know it?

WJC: That is absolutely true.⁽¹²⁾

2. Monica Lewinsky's Testimony

Monica Lewinsky testified under oath before the grand jury that, beginning in November 1995, when she was a 22-year-old White House intern, she had a lengthy relationship with the President that included substantial sexual activity. She testified in detail about the times, dates, and nature of ten sexual encounters that involved some form of genital contact. As explained in the Narrative section of this Referral, White House records corroborate Ms. Lewinsky's testimony in that the President was in the Oval Office area during the encounters. The records of White House entry and exit are incomplete for employees, but they do show her presence in the White House on eight of those occasions.⁽¹³⁾

The ten incidents are recounted here because they are necessary to assess whether the President lied under oath, both in his civil deposition, where he denied any sexual relationship at all, and in his grand jury testimony, where he acknowledged an "inappropriate intimate contact" but denied any sexual contact with Ms. Lewinsky's breasts or genitalia. When reading the following descriptions, the President's denials under oath should be kept in mind.

Unfortunately, the nature of the President's denials requires that the contrary evidence be set forth in detail. If the President, in his grand jury appearance, had admitted the sexual activity recounted by Ms. Lewinsky and conceded that he had lied under oath in his civil deposition, these particular descriptions would be superfluous. Indeed, we refrained from questioning Ms. Lewinsky under oath about particular details until after the President's August 17 testimony made that questioning necessary. But in view of (i) the President's denials, (ii) his continued contention that his civil deposition testimony was legally accurate under the terms and definitions employed, and (iii) his refusal to answer related questions, the detail is critical. The detail provides credibility and corroboration to Ms. Lewinsky's testimony. It also demonstrates with clarity that the Pres ident lied under oath both in his civil deposition and to the federal grand jury.⁽¹⁴⁾ There is substantial and credible information that the President's lies about his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky were abundant and calculating.

(i) Wednesday, November 15, 1995

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she had her first sexual contact with the President on the evening of Wednesday, November 15, 1995, while she was an intern at the White House. Two times that evening, the President invited Ms. Lewinsky to meet him near the Oval Office.⁽¹⁵⁾ On the first occasion, the President took Ms. Lewinsky back into the Oval Office study, and they kissed.⁽¹⁶⁾ On the second, she performed oral sex on the President in the hallway outside the Oval Office study.⁽¹⁷⁾ During this encounter, the President directly touched and kissed Ms. Lewinsky's bare breasts.⁽¹⁸⁾ In addition, the President put his hand down Ms. Lewinsky's pants and directly stimulated her genitalia (acts clearly within the definition of "sexual relations" used at the Jones deposition).⁽¹⁹⁾

(ii) Friday, November 17, 1995

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she met with the President again two days later, on Friday, November 17, 1995.⁽²⁰⁾ During that encounter, Ms. Lewinsky stated, she performed oral sex on the President in the private bathroom outside the Oval Office study.⁽²¹⁾ The President initiated the oral sex by unzipping his pants and exposing his genitals. Ms. Lewinsky understood the President's actions to be a sign that he wanted her to perform oral sex on him.⁽²²⁾ During this encounter, the President also fondled Ms. Lewinsky's bare breasts with his hands and kissed her breasts.⁽²³⁾

(iii) Sunday, December 31, 1995

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she met with the President on New Year's Eve, Sunday, December 31, 1995, after the President invited her to the Oval Office.⁽²⁴⁾ Once there, the President lifted Ms. Lewinsky's sweater, fondled her bare breasts with his hands, and kissed her breasts. She stated that she performed oral sex on the President in the hallway outside the Oval Office study.⁽²⁵⁾

(iv) Sunday, January 7, 1996

Monica Lewinsky testified that she performed oral sex on the President in the bathroom outside the Oval Office study during the late afternoon on Sunday, January 7, 1996.⁽²⁶⁾ The President arranged this encounter by calling Ms. Lewinsky at home and inviting her to visit.⁽²⁷⁾ On that occasion, the President and Ms. Lewinsky went into the bathroom, where he fondled her bare breasts with his hands and mouth. During this encounter, the President stated that he wanted to perform oral sex on Ms. Lewinsky, but she stopped him for a physical reason.⁽²⁸⁾

(v) Sunday, January 21, 1996

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she and the President had a sexual encounter on the afternoon of Sunday, January 21, 1996, after he invited her to the Oval Office.⁽²⁹⁾ The President lifted Ms. Lewinsky's top and fondled her bare breasts.⁽³⁰⁾ The President unzipped his pants and exposed his genitals, and she performed oral sex on him in the hallway outside the Oval Office study.⁽³¹⁾

(vi) Sunday, February 4, 1996

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she and the President had sexual contact in the Oval Office study and in the adjacent hallway on the afternoon of Sunday, February 4, 1996.⁽³²⁾ That day, the President had called Ms. Lewinsky.⁽³³⁾ During their encounter, the President partially removed Ms. Lewinsky's dress and bra and touched her bare breasts with his mouth and hands. He also directly touched her genitalia.⁽³⁴⁾ Ms. Lewinsky performed oral sex on the President.⁽³⁵⁾

(vii) Sunday, March 31, 1996

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she and the President had sexual contact in the hallway outside the Oval Office study during the late afternoon of Sunday, March 31, 1996.⁽³⁶⁾ The President arranged this encounter by calling Ms. Lewinsky and inviting her to the Oval Office. During this encounter, Ms. Lewinsky did not perform oral sex on the President. The President fondled Ms. Lewinsky's bare breasts with his hands and mouth and fondled her genitalia directly by pulling her underwear out of the way. In addition, the President inserted a cigar into Ms. Lewinsky's vagina.⁽³⁷⁾

(viii) Sunday, April 7, 1996

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she and the President had sexual contact on Easter Sunday, April 7, 1996, in the hallway outside the Oval Office study and in the study itself.⁽³⁸⁾ On that occasion, the President touched Ms. Lewinsky's breasts, both through her clothing and directly. After the President unzipped his pants, Ms. Lewinsky also performed oral sex on him.⁽³⁹⁾

This was their last in-person sexual encounter for over nine months.

(ix) Friday, February 28, 1997

Ms. Lewinsky testified that her next sexual encounter with the President occurred on Friday, February 28, 1997, in the early evening.⁽⁴⁰⁾ The President initiated this encounter by having his secretary Betty Currie call Ms. Lewinsky to invite her to the White House for a radio address. After the address, Ms. Lewinsky and the President kissed by the bathroom. The President unbuttoned her dress and fondled her breasts, first with her bra on and then directly. He touched her genitalia through her clothes, but not directly, on this occasion. Ms. Lewinsky performed oral sex on him.⁽⁴¹⁾ On this day, Ms. Lewinsky was wearing a blue dress that forensic tests have conclusively shown was stained with the President's semen.⁽⁴²⁾

(x) Saturday, March 29, 1997

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she and the President had sexual contact on the afternoon of March 29, 1997, in the Oval Office study.⁽⁴³⁾ On that occasion, the President unbuttoned Ms. Lewinsky's blouse and touched her breasts through her bra, but not directly. He also put his hands inside Ms. Lewinsky's pants and stimulated her genitalia.⁽⁴⁴⁾ Ms. Lewinsky performed oral sex on him, and they also had brief, direct genital-to-genital contact.⁽⁴⁵⁾

(xi) Two Subsequent Meetings

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she met with President Clinton in the Oval Office study on the morning of Saturday, August 16, 1997. They kissed, and Ms. Lewinsky touched the President's genitals through his clothing, but he rebuffed her efforts to perform oral sex. No other sexual acts occurred during this encounter.⁽⁴⁶⁾

On Sunday, December 28, 1997, three weeks before the President's civil deposition in the Jones case, the President and Ms. Lewinsky met in the Oval Office. In addition to discussing a number of issues that are analyzed below, they engaged in "passionate" kissing -- she said, "I don't call it a brief kiss." No other sexual contact occurred.⁽⁴⁷⁾

3. Phone Sex

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she and the President engaged in "phone sex" approximately fifteen times. The President initiated each phone sex encounter by telephoning Ms. Lewinsky.⁽⁴⁸⁾

4. Physical Evidence

Ms. Lewinsky produced to OIC investigators a dress she wore during the encounter on February 28, 1997, which she believed might be stained with the President's semen. At the request of the OIC, the FBI Laboratory examined the dress and found semen stains.⁽⁴⁹⁾ At that point, the OIC requested a DNA sample from the President. On August 3, 1998, two weeks before the President's grand jury testimony, a White House physician drew blood from the President in the presence of a senior OIC attorney and a FBI special agent.⁽⁵⁰⁾ Through the most sensitive DNA testing, RFLP testing, the FBI Laboratory determined conclusively that the semen on Ms. Lewinsky's dress was, in fact, the President's.⁽⁵¹⁾ The chance that the semen is not the President's is one in 7.87 trillion.⁽⁵²⁾

5. Testimony of Ms. Lewinsky's Friends, Family Members, and Counselors

During her relationship with the President, Monica Lewinsky spoke contemporaneously to several friends, family members, and counselors about the relationship. Their testimony corroborates many of the details of the sexual activity provided by Ms. Lewinsky to the OIC.

(i) Catherine Allday Davis

Catherine Allday Davis, a college friend of Monica Lewinsky's,⁽⁵³⁾ testified that Ms. Lewinsky told her in late 1995 or early 1996 about Ms. Lewinsky's sexual relationship with the President.⁽⁵⁴⁾ According to Ms. Davis, Ms. Lewinsky told her that the relationship included mutual kissing and hugging, as well as oral sex performed by Ms. Lewinsky on the President. She also stated that the President touched Monica "on her breasts and on her vagina."⁽⁵⁵⁾ Ms. Davis also described the cigar incident discussed above.⁽⁵⁶⁾ Ms. Davis added that Monica said that she had "phone sex" with the President five to ten times in 1996 or 1997.⁽⁵⁷⁾

(ii) Neysa Erbland

Neysa Erbland, a high school friend of Ms. Lewinsky's,⁽⁵⁸⁾ testified that Ms. Lewinsky told her in 1995 that she was having an affair with President Clinton.⁽⁵⁹⁾ According to Ms. Erbland, Ms. Lewinsky said that the sexual relationship began when Ms. Lewinsky was an intern.⁽⁶⁰⁾ Ms. Lewinsky told Ms. Erbland that the sexual contact included oral sex, kissing, and fondling.⁽⁶¹⁾ On occasion, as Ms. Erbland described it, the President put his face in Ms. Lewinsky's bare chest.⁽⁶²⁾ Ms. Erbland also said that Ms. Lewinsky described the cigar incident discussed above.⁽⁶³⁾ Ms. Erbland also understood from Ms. Lewinsky that she and the President engaged in phone sex, normally after midnight.⁽⁶⁴⁾

(iii) Natalie Rose Ungvari

Ms. Lewinsky told another high school friend, Natalie Rose Ungvari,⁽⁶⁵⁾ of her sexual relationship with the President. Ms. Lewinsky first informed Ms. Ungvari of the sexual relationship on November 23, 1995. Ms. Ungvari specifically remembers the date because it was her birthday.⁽⁶⁶⁾ Ms. Ungvari recalled that Ms. Lewinsky said that she performed oral sex on the President and that he fondled her breasts.⁽⁶⁷⁾ Ms. Lewinsky told Ms. Ungvari that the President sometimes telephoned Ms. Lewinsky late at night and would ask her to engage in phone sex.⁽⁶⁸⁾

(iv) Ashley Raines

Ashley Raines, a friend of Ms. Lewinsky who worked in the White House Office of Policy Development Operations,⁽⁶⁹⁾ testified that Ms. Lewinsky described the sexual relationship with the President. Ms. Raines testified that Ms. Lewinsky told her that the relationship began around the time of the government furlough in late 1995.⁽⁷⁰⁾ Ms. Raines understood that the President and Ms. Lewinsky engaged in kissing and oral sex, usually in the President's study.⁽⁷¹⁾ Ms. Lewinsky also told Ms. Raines that she and the President had engaged in phone sex on several occasions.⁽⁷²⁾

(v) Andrew Bleiler

In late 1995, Monica Lewinsky told Andrew Bleiler, a former boyfriend, that she was having an affair with a high official at the White House.⁽⁷³⁾ According to Mr. Bleiler, Ms. Lewinsky said that the relationship did not include sexual intercourse, but did include oral sex. She also told Mr. Bleiler about the cigar incident discussed above, and sexual activity in which the man touched Ms. Lewinsky's genitals and caused her to have an orgasm.⁽⁷⁴⁾

(vi) Dr. Irene Kassorla

Dr. Irene Kassorla counseled Ms. Lewinsky from 1992 through 1997.⁽⁷⁵⁾ Ms. Lewinsky told her of the sexual relationship with the President. Ms. Lewinsky said she performed oral sex on the President in a room adjacent to the Oval Office, that the President touched Ms. Lewinsky causing her to have orgasms, and that they engaged in fondling and touching of one another.⁽⁷⁶⁾ The President was in charge of scheduling their sexual encounters and "became Lewinsky's life."⁽⁷⁷⁾

(vii) Linda Tripp

When she worked at the Pentagon, Ms. Lewinsky told a co-worker, Linda Tripp, that she had a sexual relationship with President Clinton.⁽⁷⁸⁾ Ms. Tripp stated that Ms. Lewinsky first told her about the relationship in September or October 1996. Ms. Lewinsky told Ms. Tripp that the first sexual encounter with the President had occurred on November 15, 1995, when Ms. Lewinsky performed oral sex on him. Ms. Lewinsky told Ms. Tripp that, during the course of this sexual relationship, she performed oral sex on the President, the President fondled Ms. Lewinsky's breasts, the President touched Ms. Lewinsky's genitalia, and they engaged in phone sex.⁽⁷⁹⁾

(viii) Debra Finerman

Ms. Lewinsky's aunt, Debra Finerman, testified that Monica told her about her sexual relationship with President Clinton.⁽⁸⁰⁾ Ms. Finerman testified that Ms. Lewinsky described a particular sexual encounter with the President.⁽⁸¹⁾ Ms. Finerman otherwise did not ask and was not told the specifics of the sexual activity between the President and Ms. Lewinsky.⁽⁸²⁾

(ix) Dale Young

Dale Young, a family friend, testified that Ms. Lewinsky told her that she had engaged in oral sex with President Clinton.⁽⁸³⁾

(x) Kathleen Estep

Kathleen Estep, a counselor for Ms. Lewinsky,⁽⁸⁴⁾ met with Ms. Lewinsky on three occasions in November 1996.⁽⁸⁵⁾ Based on her limited interaction with Ms. Lewinsky, Ms. Estep stated that she considered Ms. Lewinsky to be credible.⁽⁸⁶⁾ During their second session, Ms. Lewinsky told Ms. Estep about her sexual relationship with President Clinton.⁽⁸⁷⁾ Ms. Lewinsky told Ms. Estep that the physical part of the relationship involved kissing, Ms. Lewinsky performing oral sex on the President, and the President fondling her breasts.⁽⁸⁸⁾

6. Summary

The detailed testimony of Ms. Lewinsky, her corroborating prior consistent statements to her friends, family members, and counselors, and the evidence of the President's semen on Ms. Lewinsky's dress establish that Ms. Lewinsky and the President engaged in substantial sexual activity between November 15, 1995, and December 28, 1997.⁽⁸⁹⁾

The President, however, testified under oath in the civil case -- both in his deposition and in a written answer to an interrogatory -- that he did not have a "sexual relationship" or a "sexual affair" or "sexual relations" with Ms. Lewinsky. In addition, he denied engaging in activity covered by a more specific definition of "sexual relations" used at the deposition.⁽⁹⁰⁾

In his civil case, the President made five different false statements related to the sexual relationship. For four of the five statements, the President asserts a semantic defense: The President argues that the terms used in the Jones deposition to cover sexual activity did not cover the sexual activity in which he engaged with Ms. Lewinsky. For his other false statements, the President's response is factual -- namely, he disputes Ms. Lewinsky's account that he ever touched her breasts or genitalia during sexual activity.⁽⁹¹⁾

The President's denials -- semantic and factual -- do not withstand scrutiny.

First, in his civil deposition, the President denied a "sexual affair" with Ms. Lewinsky (the term was not defined). The President's response to lying under oath on this point rests on his definition of "sexual affair" -- namely, that it requires sexual intercourse, no matter how extensive the sexual activities might otherwise be. According to the President, a man could regularly engage in oral sex and fondling of breasts and genitals with a woman and yet not have a "sexual affair" with her.

Second, in his civil deposition, the President also denied a "sexual relationship" with Ms. Lewinsky (the term was not defined). The President's response to lying under oath on this point similarly rests on his definition of "sexual relationship" -- namely, that it requires sexual intercourse. Once again, under the President's theory, a man could regularly engage in oral sex and fondling of breasts and genitals with a woman, yet not have a "sexual relationship" with her.

The President's claim as to his interpretation of "sexual relationship" is belied by the fact that the President's own lawyer -- earlier at that same deposition -- equated the term "sexual relationship" with "sex of any kind in any manner, shape or form." The President's lawyer offered that interpretation when requesting Judge Wright to limit the questioning to prevent further inquiries with respect to Monica Lewinsky. As the videotape of the deposition reveals, the President was present and apparently looking in the direction of his attorney when his attorney offered that statement.⁽⁹²⁾ The President gave no indication that he disagreed with his attorney's straightforward interpretation that the term "sexual relationship" means "sex of any kind in any manner, shape, or form." Nor did the President thereafter take any steps to correct the attorney's statement.

Third, in an answer to an interrogatory submitted before his deposition, the President denied having "sexual relations" with Ms. Lewinsky (the term was not defined). Yet again, the President's apparent rejoinder to lying under oath on this point rests on his definition of "sexual relations" -- that it, too, requires sexual intercourse. According to President Clinton, oral sex does not constitute sexual relations.

Fourth, in his civil deposition, the President denied committing any acts that fell within the specific definition of "sexual relations" that was in effect for purposes of that deposition. Under that specific definition, sexual relations occurs "when the person knowingly engages in or causes contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person."⁽⁹³⁾ Thus, the President denied engaging in or causing contact with the genitalia, breasts, or anus of "any person" with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of "any person."

Concerning oral sex, the President's sole answer to the charge that he lied under oath at the deposition focused on his interpretation of "any person" in the definition. Ms. Lewinsky testified that she performed oral sex on the President on nine occasions. The President said that by receiving oral sex, he would not "engage in" or "cause"⁽⁹⁴⁾ contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of "any person" because "any person" really means "any other person." The President further testified before the grand jury: "[I]f the deponent is the person who has oral sex performed on him, then the contact is with -- not with anything on that list, but with the lips of another person."⁽⁹⁵⁾

The President's linguistic parsing is unreasonable. Under the President's interpretation (which he says he followed at his deposition), in an oral sex encounter, one person is engaged in sexual relations, but the other person is not engaged in sexual relations.⁽⁹⁶⁾

Even assuming that the definitional language can be manipulated to exclude the deponent's receipt of oral sex, the President is still left with the difficulty that reasonable persons would not have understood it that way. And in context, the President's semantics become even weaker: The Jones suit rested on the allegation that the President sought to have Ms. Jones perform oral sex on him. Yet the President now claims that the expansive definition devised for deposition questioning should be interpreted to exclude that very act.

Fifth, by denying at his civil deposition that he had engaged in any acts falling within the specific definition of "sexual relations," the President denied engaging in or causing contact with the breasts or genitalia of Ms. Lewinsky with an intent to arouse or gratify one's sexual desire. In contrast to his explanations of the four preceding false statements under oath, the President's defense to lying under oath in this instance is purely factual.

As discussed above, Ms. Lewinsky testified credibly that the President touched and kissed her bare breasts on nine occasions, and that he stimulated her genitals on four occasions.⁽⁹⁷⁾ She also testified about a cigar incident, which is discussed above. In addition, a deleted computer file from Ms. Lewinsky's home computer contained an apparent draft letter to the President that explicitly referred to an incident in which the President's "mouth [was] on [her] breast" and implicitly referred to direct contact with her genitalia.⁽⁹⁸⁾ This draft letter further corroborates Ms. Lewinsky's testimony.

Ms. Lewinsky's prior consistent statements to various friends, family members, and counselors -- made when the relationship was ongoing -- likewise corroborate her testimony on the nature of the President's touching of her body. Ms. Lewinsky had no apparent motive to lie to her friends, family members, and counselors. Ms. Lewinsky especially had no reason to lie to Dr. Kassorla and Ms. Estep, to whom she related the facts in the course of a professional relationship. And Ms. Lewinsky's statements to some that she did not have intercourse with the President, even though she wanted to do so, enhances the credibility of her statements. Moreover, the precise nature of the sexual activity only became relevant after the President interposed his semantic defense regarding oral sex on August 17, 1998.

By contrast, the President's testimony strains credulity. His apparent "hands-off" scenario -- in which he would have received oral sex on nine occasions from Ms. Lewinsky but never made direct contact with Ms. Lewinsky's breasts or genitalia -- is not credible. The President's claim seems to be that he maintained a hands-off policy in ongoing sexual encounters with Ms. Lewinsky, which coincidentally happened to permit him to truthfully deny "sexual relations" with her at a deposition occurring a few years in the future. As Ms. Lewinsky noted, it suggests some kind of "service contract -- that all I did was perform oral sex on him and that that's all this relationship was."⁽⁹⁹⁾

The President also had strong personal, political, and legal motives to lie in the Jones deposition: He did not want to admit that he had committed extramarital sex acts with a young intern in the Oval Office area of the White House. Such an admission could support Ms. Jones's theory of liability and would embarrass him. Indeed, the President admitted that during the relationship he did what he could to keep the relationship secret, including "misleading" members of his family and Cabinet.⁽¹⁰⁰⁾ The President testified, moreover, that he "hoped that this relationship would never become public."⁽¹⁰¹⁾

At the time of his civil deposition, the President also could have presumed that he could lie under oath without risk because -- as he knew -- Ms. Lewinsky had already filed a false affidavit denying a sexual relationship with the President. Indeed, they had an understanding that each would lie under oath (explained more fully in Ground VI below). So the President might have expected that he could lie without consequence on the belief that no one could ever successfully challenge his denial of a sexual relationship with her.

In sum, based on all of the evidence and considering the President's various responses, there is substantial and credible information that the President lied under oath in his civil deposition and his interrogatory answer in denying a sexual relationship, a sexual affair, or sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky.⁽¹⁰²⁾

II. There is substantial and credible information that President Clinton lied under oath to the grand jury about his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

A. Background

In January 1998, upon application of the Attorney General, the Special Division of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit expanded the OIC's jurisdiction to investigate, among other matters, whether Monica Lewinsky and the President obstructed justice in the Jones case. The criminal investigation was triggered by specific and credible evidence that Monica Lewinsky denied her relationship with President Clinton in a false affidavit in the Jones case, that she had spoken to the President and Vernon Jordan about her testimony, and that she may have been influenced to lie by the President through the assistance of Vernon Jordan and others in finding her a job. After the President, in his January 17 deposition, denied any sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky and otherwise minimized his overall relationship with her, the President's testimony became an additional subject of the OIC investigation.

The threshold factual question was whether the President and Monica Lewinsky in fact had a sexual relationship. If they did, the President would have committed perjury in his civil deposition and interrogatory answer: The President, as noted in Ground I above, had denied a sexual affair, sexual relationship, or sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, including any direct contact with her breasts or genitalia. The answer to the preliminary factual question also could alter the interpretation of several possibly obstructionist acts by the President -- the employment assistance for Ms. Lewinsky, the concealment of gifts he had given to Ms. Lewinsky, the discussion between the President and Ms. Lewinsky of her testimony or affidavit, the President's post-deposition communications with Betty Currie, and the President's emphatic denials of a relationship to his aides who later testified before the grand jury.

During the investigation, the OIC gathered a substantial body of information that established that the President and Monica Lewinsky did, in fact, have a sexual relationship. That information is outlined in Ground I above. In particular, the information includes: (i) the detailed and credible testimony of Ms. Lewinsky regarding the 10 sexual encounters; (ii) the President's semen stain on Ms. Lewinsky's dress; and (iii) the testimony of friends, family members, and counselors to whom she made near-contemporaneous statements about the relationship. All of this evidence pointed to a single conclusion -- that she and the President did have a sexual relationship.

B. The President's Grand Jury Testimony

The President was largely aware of that extensive body of evidence before he testified to the grand jury on August 17, 1998. Not only did the President know that Ms. Lewinsky had reached an immunity agreement with this Office in exchange for her truthful testimony, but the President knew from public reports and his own knowledge that his semen might be on one of Ms. Lewinsky's dresses. The OIC had asked him for a blood sample on August 3, 1998 (two weeks before his grand jury testimony) and assured his counsel that there was a substantial predicate for the request, which reasonably implied that there was semen on the dress.

As a result, the President had three apparent choices in his testimony to the grand jury. First, the President could adhere to his previous testimony in his civil case, as well as in his public statements, and deny any sexual relationship. But he knew (or at least, had reason to know) that the contrary evidence was overwhelming, particularly if his semen were in fact on Ms. Lewinsky's dress. Second, the President could admit a sexual relationship, which would cause him also to simultaneously admit that he lied under oath in the Jones case. Third, the President could invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination.

Confronting those three options, the President attempted to avoid them altogether. The President admitted to an "inappropriate intimate" relationship, but he maintained that he had not committed perjury in the Jones case when he denied having a sexual relationship, sexual affair, or sexual relations with her.⁽¹⁰³⁾ The President contended that he had believed his various statements in the Jones case to be legally accurate.⁽¹⁰⁴⁾ He also testified that the inappropriate relationship began not in November 1995 when Ms. Lewinsky was an intern, as Ms. Lewinsky and other witnesses have testified, but in 1996.

During his grand jury testimony, the President was asked whether Monica Lewinsky performed oral sex on him and, if so, whether he had committed perjury in his civil deposition by denying a sexual relationship, sexual affair, or sexual relations with her. The President refused to say whether he had oral sex. Instead, the President said (i) that the undefined terms "sexual affair," "sexual relationship," and "sexual relations" necessarily require sexual intercourse, (ii) that he had not engaged in intercourse with Ms. Lewinsky, and (iii) that he therefore had not committed perjury in denying a sexual relationship, sexual affair, or sexual relations.⁽¹⁰⁵⁾

A more specific definition of "sexual relations" had also been used at the civil deposition. As to that definition, the President said to the grand jury that he does not and did not believe oral sex was covered.

Q: [I]s oral sex performed on you within that definition as you understood it, the definition in the Jones --

A: As I understood it, it was not; no.⁽¹⁰⁶⁾

The President thus contended that he had not committed perjury on that question in the Jones deposition -- even assuming that Monica Lewinsky performed oral sex on him.

There still was the question of his contact with Ms. Lewinsky's breasts and genitalia, which the President conceded would fall within the Jones definition of sexual relations. The President denied that he had engaged in such activity and said, in effect, that Monica Lewinsky was lying:

Q: The question is, if Monica Lewinsky says that while you were in the Oval Office area you touched her breasts would she by lying?

A: That is not my recollection. My recollection is that I did not have sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky and I'm staying on my former statement about that. . . . My, my statement is that I did not have sexual relations as defined by that.

Q: If she says that you kissed her breasts, would she be lying?

A: I'm going to revert to my former statement [that is, the prepared statement denying "sexual relations"].

Q: Okay. If Monica Lewinsky says that while you were in the Oval Office area you touched her genitalia, would she be lying? And that calls for a yes, no, or reverting to your former statement.

A: I will revert to my former statement on that.⁽¹⁰⁷⁾

The President elaborated that he considered kissing or touching breasts or genitalia during sexual activity to be covered by the Jones definition, but he denied that he had ever engaged in such conduct with Ms. Lewinsky:

Q: So touching, in your view then and now -- the person being deposed touching or kissing the breast of another person would fall within the definition?

A: That's correct, sir.

Q: And you testified that you didn't have sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky in the Jones deposition, under that definition, correct?

A: That's correct, sir.

Q: If the person being deposed touched the genitalia of another person, would that be -- and with the intent to arouse the sexual desire, arouse or gratify, as defined in definition (1), would that be, under your understanding then and now --

A: Yes, sir.

Q: -- sexual relations.

A: Yes, sir.

Q: Yes it would?

A: Yes it would. If you had a direct contact with any of these places in the body, if you had direct contact with intent to arouse or gratify, that would fall within the definition.

Q: So you didn't do any of those three things --

A: You --

Q: -- with Monica Lewinsky.

A: You are free to infer that my testimony is that I did not have sexual relations, as I understood this term to be defined.

Q: Including touching her breast, kissing her breast, touching her genitalia?

A: That's correct.⁽¹⁰⁸⁾

C. Summary

In the foregoing testimony to the grand jury, the President lied under oath three times.

1. The President testified that he believed oral sex was not covered by any of the terms and definitions for sexual activity used at the Jones deposition. That testimony is not credible: At the Jones deposition, the President could not have believed that he was telling "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" in denying a sexual relationship, sexual relations, or a sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky.

2. In all events, even putting aside his definitional defense, the President made a second false statement to the grand jury. The President's grand jury testimony contradicts Ms. Lewinsky's grand jury testimony on the question whether the President touched Ms. Lewinsky's breasts or genitalia during their sexual activity. There can be no contention that one of them has a lack of memory or is mistaken. On this issue, either Monica Lewinsky lied to the grand jury, or President Clinton lied to the grand jury. Under any rational view of the evidence, the President lied to the grand jury.

First, Ms. Lewinsky's testimony about these encounters is detailed and specific. She described with precision nine incidents of sexual activity in which the President touched and kissed her breasts and four incidents involving contacts with her genitalia.

Second, Ms. Lewinsky has stated repeatedly that she does not want to hurt the President by her testimony.⁽¹⁰⁹⁾ Thus, if she had exaggerated in her many prior statements, she presumably would have said as much, rather than adhering to those statements. She has confirmed those details, however, even though it clearly has been painful for her to testify to the details of her relationship with the President.

Third, the testimony of many of her friends, family members, and counselors corroborate her testimony in important detail. Many testified that Ms. Lewinsky had told them that the President had touched her breasts and genitalia during sexual activity. These statements were made well before the President's grand jury testimony rendered these precise details important. Ms. Lewinsky had no motive to lie to these individuals (and obviously not to counselors). Indeed, she pointed out to many of them that she was upset that sexual intercourse had not occurred, an unlikely admission if she were exaggerating the sexual aspects of their relationship.

Fourth, a computer file obtained from Ms. Lewinsky's home computer contained a draft letter that referred in one place to their sexual relationship. The draft explicitly refers to "watching your mouth on my breast" and implicitly refers to direct contact with Ms. Lewinsky's genitalia.⁽¹¹⁰⁾ This draft letter further corroborates Ms. Lewinsky's testimony and indicates that the President's grand jury testimony is false.

Fifth, as noted above, the President's "hands-off" scenario -- in which he would have received oral sex on nine occasions from Ms. Lewinsky but never made direct contact with Ms. Lewinsky's breasts or genitalia -- is implausible. As Ms. Lewinsky herself testified, it suggests that she and the President had some kind of "service contract -- that all I did was perform oral sex on him and that that's all this relationship was."⁽¹¹¹⁾ But as the above descriptions and the Narrative explain, the nature of the relationship, including the sexual relationship, was far more than that.

Sixth, in the grand jury, the President had a motive to lie by denying he had fondled Ms. Lewinsky in intimate ways. The President clearly sought to deny any acts that would show that he committed perjury in his civil case (implying that the President understood how seriously the public and the courts would view perjury in a civil case). To do that, the President had to deny touching Ms. Lewinsky's breasts or genitalia -- no matter how implausible his testimony to that effect might be.

Seventh, the President refused to answer specific questions before the grand jury about what activity he did engage in (as opposed to what activity he did not engage in) -- even though at the Jones deposition only seven months before, his attorney stated that he was willing to answer specific questions when there was a sufficient factual predicate.⁽¹¹²⁾ The President's failure in the grand jury to answer specific follow-up questions suggests that he could not supply responses in a consistent or credible manner.

3. Finally, the President made a third false statement to the grand jury about his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky. He contended that the intimate contact did not begin until 1996. Ms. Lewinsky has testified that it began November 15, 1995, during the government shutdown -- testimony corroborated by statements she made to friends at the time.⁽¹¹³⁾ A White House photograph of the evening shows the President and Ms. Lewinsky eating pizza.⁽¹¹⁴⁾ White House records show that Ms. Lewinsky did not depart the White House until 12:18 a.m. and show that the President was in the Oval Office area until 12:35 a.m.⁽¹¹⁵⁾

Ms. Lewinsky was still an intern when she says the President began receiving oral sex from her, whereas she was a full-time employee by the time that the President admits they began an "inappropriate intimate" relationship. The motive for the President to make a false statement about the date on which the sexual relationship started appears to have been that the President was unwilling to admit sexual activity with a young 22-year-old White House intern in the Oval Office area. Indeed, Ms. Lewinsky testified that, at that first encounter, the President tugged at her intern pass. He said that "this" may be a problem; Ms. Lewinsky interpreted that statement to reflect his awareness that there would be a problem with her obtaining access to the West Wing.⁽¹¹⁶⁾

For all these reasons, there is substantial and credible information that the President lied to the grand jury about his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky.⁽¹¹⁷⁾

III. There is substantial and credible information that President Clinton lied under oath during his civil deposition when he stated that he could not recall being alone with Monica Lewinsky and when he minimized the number of gifts they had exchanged.

The President testified to the grand jury and stated to the Nation on August 17 that his testimony in his civil deposition had been "legally accurate." Even apart from his answers about the sexual relationship, the President's deposition testimony was inaccurate on several other points.

During President Clinton's deposition in the Jones case, Ms. Jones's attorneys asked the President many detailed questions about the nature of his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky, apart from whether the relationship was sexual. The questions included: (i) whether the President had been alone with Ms. Lewinsky in the White House and, if so, how many times; and (ii) whether he and Ms. Lewinsky exchanged gifts.⁽¹¹⁸⁾ Both issues were important in determining the nature of the relationship.⁽¹¹⁹⁾

There is substantial and credible information that the President lied under oath about those subjects.

A. There is substantial and credible information that President Clinton lied under oath when he testified that he could not specifically recall instances in which he was alone with Monica Lewinsky.

1. The President's Civil Deposition Testimony

President Clinton was asked at his deposition whether he had ever been alone with Ms. Lewinsky. He testified as follows:

Q: . . . At any time were you and Monica Lewinsky together alone in the Oval Office?

[videotape shows approximately five-second pause before answer]

WJC: I don't recall, but as I said, when she worked at the legislative affairs office, they always had somebody there on the weekends. I typically worked some on the weekends. Sometimes they'd bring me things on the weekends. 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. I don't have any specific recollections of what the issues were, what was going on, but when the Congress is there, we're working all the time, and typically I would do some work on one of the days of the weekends in the afternoon.

Q: So I understand, your testimony is that it was possible, then, that you were alone with her, but you have no specific recollection of that ever happening?

WJC: Yes, that's correct. It's possible that she, in, while she was working there, brought something to me and that at the time she brought it to me, she was the only person there. That's possible.⁽¹²⁰⁾

The President also was asked whether he had ever been alone with Ms. Lewinsky in the hallway that runs from the Oval Office, past the study, to the dining room and kitchen area.⁽¹²¹⁾

Q: At any time were you and Monica Lewinsky alone in the hallway between the Oval Office and this kitchen area?

WJC: I don't believe so, unless we were walking back to the back dining room with the pizza.⁽¹²²⁾ I just, I don't remember. I don't believe we were alone in the hallway, no.⁽¹²³⁾

The President was then asked about any times he may have been alone in any room with Ms. Lewinsky:

Q: At any time have you and Monica Lewinsky ever been alone together in any room of the White House?

WJC: I think I testified to that earlier. I think that there is a, it is -- I have no specific recollection, but it seems to me that she was on duty on a couple of occasions working for the legislative affairs office and brought me some things to sign, something on the weekend. That's -- I have a general memory of that.⁽¹²⁴⁾

2. Evidence That Contradicts the President's Testimony

In the seven months preceding the President's grand jury testimony on August 17, the OIC gathered substantial and credible information that the President lied under oath in his deposition statements about being alone with Monica Lewinsky.

First, Monica Lewinsky testified before the grand jury that she was alone with the President on numerous occasions⁽¹²⁵⁾ and in numerous areas, including the Oval Office,⁽¹²⁶⁾ Nancy Hernreich's office,⁽¹²⁷⁾ the President's private study,⁽¹²⁸⁾ the private bathroom across from the study,⁽¹²⁹⁾ and the hallway that leads from the Oval Office to the private dining room.⁽¹³⁰⁾ Ms. Lewinsky confirmed that she and the President were alone during sexual activity.⁽¹³¹⁾

Second, Betty Currie testified that President Clinton and Ms. Lewinsky were alone together in the Oval Office area a number of times.⁽¹³²⁾ She specifically remembered three occasions when the President and Ms. Lewinsky were alone together: February 28, 1997,⁽¹³³⁾ early December 1997,⁽¹³⁴⁾ and December 28, 1997.⁽¹³⁵⁾

Third, six current or former members of the Secret Service testified that the President and Ms. Lewinsky were alone in the Oval Office area -- Robert Ferguson,⁽¹³⁶⁾ Lewis Fox,⁽¹³⁷⁾ William Bordley,⁽¹³⁸⁾ Nelson Garabito,⁽¹³⁹⁾ Gary Byrne,⁽¹⁴⁰⁾ and John Muskett.⁽¹⁴¹⁾

Fourth, White House steward Glen Maes testified that on some weekend day after Christmas 1997,⁽¹⁴²⁾ the President came out of the Oval Office, saw Ms. Lewinsky with a gift, and escorted her into the Oval Office. Mr. Maes testified that the President and Ms. Lewinsky were alone together for approximately eight minutes, and then Ms. Lewinsky left.⁽¹⁴³⁾

3. The President's Grand Jury Testimony

On August 17, 1998, the President testified to the grand jury and began his testimony by reading a statement admitting that he had been alone with Ms. Lewinsky:

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.⁽¹⁴⁴⁾

The President acknowledged being alone with Ms. Lewinsky on multiple occasions, although he could not pinpoint the precise number.⁽¹⁴⁵⁾ Perhaps most important, the President admitted that he was alone with Ms. Lewinsky on December 28, 1997,⁽¹⁴⁶⁾ less than three weeks before his deposition in the Jones case. Indeed, he acknowledged that he would have to have been an "exhibitionist" for him not to have been alone with Ms. Lewinsky when they were having sexual encounters.⁽¹⁴⁷⁾

4. Summary

Substantial and credible information demonstrates that the President made three false statements under oath in his civil deposition regarding whether he had been alone with Ms. Lewinsky.

First, the President lied when he said "I don't recall" in response to the question whether he had ever been alone with Ms. Lewinsky. The President admitted to the grand jury that he had been alone with Ms. Lewinsky. It is not credible that he actually had no memory of this fact six months earlier, particularly given that they were obviously alone when engaging in sexual activity.

Second, when asked whether he had been alone with Ms. Lewinsky in the hallway in the Oval Office, the President answered, "I don't believe so, unless we were walking back to the back dining room with the pizza."⁽¹⁴⁸⁾ That statement, too, was false: Most of the sexual encounters between the President and Ms. Lewinsky occurred in that hallway (and on other occasions, they walked through the hallway to the dining room or study), and it is not credible that the President would have forgotten this fact.

Third, the President suggested at his civil deposition that he had no specific recollection of being alone with Ms. Lewinsky in the Oval Office, but had a general recollection that Ms. Lewinsky may have brought him "papers to sign" on certain occasions when she worked at the Legislative Affairs Office.⁽¹⁴⁹⁾ This statement was false. Ms. Lewinsky did not bring him papers for official purposes. To the contrary, "bringing papers" was one of the sham "cover stories" that the President and Ms. Lewinsky had originally crafted to conceal their sexual relationship.⁽¹⁵⁰⁾ The fact that the President resorted to a previously designed cover story when testifying under oath at the Jones deposition confirms that he made these false denials in a calculated manner with the intent and knowledge that they were false.

The President had an obvious motive to lie in this respect. He knew that it would appear odd for a President to have been alone with a female intern or low-level staffer on so many occasions. Such an admission might persuade Judge Wright to deny any motion by Ms. Lewinsky to quash her deposition subpoena. It also might prompt Ms. Jones's attorneys to oppose efforts by Ms. Lewinsky not to be deposed and to ask specific questions of Ms. Lewinsky about the times she was alone with the President. It also might raise questions publicly if and when the President's deposition became public; at least parts of the deposition were likely to become public at trial, if not at the summary judgment stage.

Because lying about their sexual relationship was insufficient to avoid raising further questions, the President also lied about being alone with Ms. Lewinsky -- or at least feigned lack of memory as to specific occurrences.⁽¹⁵¹⁾

B. There is substantial and credible information that the President lied under oath in his civil deposition about gifts he exchanged with Monica Lewinsky.

During his civil deposition, the President also was asked several questions about gifts he and Monica Lewinsky had exchanged. The evidence demonstrates that he answered the questions falsely. As with the questions about being alone, truthful answers to these questions would have raised questions about the nature of the relationship. Such answers also would have been inconsistent with the understanding of the President and Ms. Lewinsky that, in response to her subpoena, Ms. Lewinsky would not produce all of the gifts she had received from the President (an issue discussed more fully in Ground V).

1. The President's Civil Deposition Testimony About His Gifts to Monica Lewinsky

During the President's deposition in the Jones case, Ms. Jones's attorneys asked several questions about whether he had given gifts to Monica Lewinsky.

Q: Well, have you ever given any gifts to Monica Lewinsky?

WJC: I don't recall. Do you know what they were?

Q: A hat pin?

WJC: I don't, I don't remember. But I certainly, I could have.

Q: A book about Walt Whitman?

WJC: I give -- let me just say, I give people a lot of gifts, and when people are around I give a lot of things I have at the White House away, so I could have given her a gift, but I don't remember a specific gift.

Q: Do you remember giving her a gold broach?

WJC: No.⁽¹⁵²⁾

2. Evidence that Contradicts the President's Civil Deposition Testimony

(i) Just three weeks before the President's deposition, on December 28, 1997, President Clinton gave Ms. Lewinsky a number of gifts, the largest number he had ever given her.⁽¹⁵³⁾ They included a large Rockettes blanket, a pin of the New York skyline, a marble-like bear's head from Vancouver, a pair of sunglasses, a small box of cherry chocolates, a canvas bag from the Black Dog, and a stuffed animal wearing a T-shirt from the Black Dog.⁽¹⁵⁴⁾ Ms. Lewinsky produced the Rockettes blanket, the bear's head, the Black Dog canvas bag, the Black Dog stuffed animal, and the sunglasses to the OIC on July 29, 1998.⁽¹⁵⁵⁾

(ii) The evidence also demonstrates that the President gave Ms. Lewinsky a hat pin as a belated Christmas gift on February 28, 1997.⁽¹⁵⁶⁾ The President and Ms. Lewinsky discussed the hatpin on December 28, 1997, after Ms. Lewinsky received a subpoena calling for her to produce all gifts from the President, including any hat pins.⁽¹⁵⁷⁾ In her meeting with the President on December 28, 1997, according to Ms. Lewinsky, "I mentioned that I had been concerned about the hat pin being on the subpoena and he said that that had sort of concerned him also and asked me if I had told anyone that he had given me this hat pin and I said no."⁽¹⁵⁸⁾ The President's secretary Betty Currie also testified that she had previously discussed the hat pin with the President.⁽¹⁵⁹⁾

(iii) Ms. Lewinsky testified that the President gave her additional gifts over the course of their relationship, such as a brooch,⁽¹⁶⁰⁾ the book Leaves of Grass by Walt Whitman,⁽¹⁶¹⁾ an Annie Lennox compact disk,⁽¹⁶²⁾ and a cigar.⁽¹⁶³⁾

3. President's Civil Deposition Testimony About Gifts from Monica Lewinsky to the President

When asked at his civil deposition in the Jones case whether Monica Lewinsky had ever given him gifts, President Clinton testified as follows:

Q: Has Monica Lewinsky ever given you any gifts?

WJC: Once or twice. I think she's given me a book or two.

Q: Did she give you a silver cigar box?

WJC: No.

Q: Did she give you a tie?

WJC: Yes, she has given me a tie before. I believe that's right. Now, as I said, let me remind you, normally when I get these ties, I get ties, you know, together, and then they're given to me later, but I believe that she has given me a tie.⁽¹⁶⁴⁾

4. Evidence that Contradicts the President's Testimony

(i) Monica Lewinsky's Testimony

The evidence reveals that Ms. Lewinsky gave the President approximately 38 gifts; she says she almost always brought a gift or two when she visited.⁽¹⁶⁵⁾

a. Ms. Lewinsky testified before the grand jury that she gave the President six neckties.⁽¹⁶⁶⁾

b. Ms. Lewinsky testified that she gave the President a pair of sunglasses on approximately October 22, 1997.⁽¹⁶⁷⁾ The President's attorney, David E. Kendall, stated in a letter on March 16, 1998: "We believe that Ms. Lewinsky might have given the President a few additional items, such as ties and a pair of sunglasses, but we have not been able to locate these items."⁽¹⁶⁸⁾

c. On November 13, 1997, Ms. Lewinsky gave the President an antique paperweight that depicted the White House.⁽¹⁶⁹⁾ Ms. Lewinsky testified that on December 6, 1997, and possibly again on December 28, 1997, she saw this paperweight in the dining room, where the President keeps many items of political memorabilia.⁽¹⁷⁰⁾ The President turned over the paperweight to the OIC in response to a second subpoena calling for it.⁽¹⁷¹⁾

d. Ms. Lewinsky gave the President at least seven books:

The Presidents of the United States, on January 4, 1998;⁽¹⁷²⁾

• Our Patriotic President: His Life in Pictures, Anecdotes, Sayings, Principles and Biography,⁽¹⁷³⁾ on December 6, 1997;⁽¹⁷⁴⁾
  
  

• an antique book on Peter the Great, on August 16, 1997;⁽¹⁷⁵⁾

The Notebook, on August 16, 1997;⁽¹⁷⁶⁾

• Oy Vey, in early 1997;⁽¹⁷⁷⁾

• a small golf book, in early 1997;⁽¹⁷⁸⁾ and
  
  

her personal copy of Vox, a novel about phone sex, on March 29, 1997.⁽¹⁷⁹⁾

e. Ms. Lewinsky gave the President an antique cigar holder, on December 6, 1997.⁽¹⁸⁰⁾

f. Ms. Lewinsky testified that she gave the President a number of additional gifts.⁽¹⁸¹⁾

5. Grand Jury Testimony of the President and Ms. Currie

When he testified to the grand jury, President Clinton acknowledged giving Monica Lewinsky several gifts, stating that "it was a right thing to do to give her gifts back."⁽¹⁸²⁾ He acknowledged giving her gifts on December 28, 1997,⁽¹⁸³⁾ just three weeks before the civil deposition.

During the criminal investigation, the President has produced seven gifts that Ms. Lewinsky gave him. He testified to the grand jury that Ms. Lewinsky had given him "a tie, a coffee cup, a number of other things I had."⁽¹⁸⁴⁾ In addition, the President acknowledged that "there were some things that had been in my possession that I no longer had, I believe."⁽¹⁸⁵⁾

Betty Currie testified that Ms. Lewinsky sent a number of packages for the President -- six or eight, she estimated.⁽¹⁸⁶⁾ Ms. Lewinsky also sometimes dropped parcels off or had family members do so.⁽¹⁸⁷⁾ When the packages came to the White House, Ms. Currie would leave the packages from Ms. Lewinsky in the President's box outside the Oval Office, and "[h]e would pick [them] up."⁽¹⁸⁸⁾ To the best of her knowledge, such parcels always reached the President: "The President got everything anyone sent him."⁽¹⁸⁹⁾ Ms. Currie testified that to her knowledge, no one delivered packages or something as many times as Ms. Lewinsky did.⁽¹⁹⁰⁾

6. Summary

The President stated in his civil deposition that he could not recall whether he had ever given any gifts to Ms. Lewinsky;⁽¹⁹¹⁾ that he could not remember whether he had given her a hat pin although "certainly, I could have"; and that he had received a gift from Ms. Lewinsky only "once or twice."⁽¹⁹²⁾ In fact, the evidence demonstrates that they exchanged numerous gifts of various kinds at many points over a lengthy period of time. Indeed, on December 28, only three weeks before the deposition, they had discussed the hat pin. Also on December 28, the President had given Ms. Lewinsky a number of gifts, more than he had ever given her before.

A truthful answer to the questions about gifts at the Jones deposition would have raised further questions about the President's relationship with Monica Lewinsky. The number itself would raise questions about the relationship and prompt further questions about specific gifts; some of the specific gifts (such as Vox and Leaves of Grass) would raise questions whether the relationship was sexual and whether the President had lied in denying that their relationship was sexual. Ms. Lewinsky explained the point: Had they admitted the gifts, it would "at least prompt [the Jones attorneys] to want to question me about what kind of friendship I had with the President and they would want to speculate and they'd leak it and my name would be trashed and he [the President] would be in trouble."⁽¹⁹³⁾

A truthful answer about the gifts to Ms. Lewinsky also would have raised the question of where they were. Ms. Lewinsky had been subpoenaed for gifts, as the President knew. The President knew also from his conversation with Ms. Lewinsky on December 28, 1997 (an issue discussed more fully in Ground V) that Ms. Lewinsky would not produce all of the gifts she had received from the President.

For those reasons, the President had a clear motive when testifying under oath to lie about the gifts.

IV. There is substantial and credible information that the President lied under oath during his civil deposition concerning conversations he had with Monica Lewinsky about her involvement in the Jones case.

President Clinton was asked during his civil deposition whether he had discussed with Ms. Lewinsky the possibility of her testifying in the Jones case. He also was asked whether he knew that she had been subpoenaed at the time he last had spoken to her.

There is substantial and credible information that the President lied under oath in answering these questions. A false statement about these conversations was necessary in order to avoid raising questions whether the President had tampered with a prospective witness in the civil lawsuit against him.

A. Conversations with Ms. Lewinsky Regarding the Possibility of Her Testifying in the Jones Case

1. President Clinton's Testimony in His Deposition

In the President's civil deposition, he was asked about any discussions he might have had with Monica Lewinsky about the Jones case:

Q: Have you ever talked to Monica Lewinsky about the possibility that she might be asked to testify in this lawsuit?

[videotape indicates an approximately 14-second pause before answer]

WJC: I'm not sure, and let me tell you why I'm not sure. It seems to me the, the, the -- I want to be as accurate as I can here. Seems to me the last time she was there to see Betty before Christmas we were joking about how you-all [Ms. Jones's attorneys], with the help of the Rutherford Institute, were going to call every woman I'd ever talked to . . . and ask them that, and so I said you [Ms. Lewinsky] would qualify, or something like that. I don't, I don't think we ever had more of a conversation than that about it, but I might have mentioned something to her about it, because when I saw how long the witness list was, or I heard about it, before I saw, but actually by the time I saw it her name was on it, but I think that was after all this had happened. I might have said something like that, so I don't want to say for sure I didn't, because I might have said something like that.

* * * *

Q: What, if anything, did Monica Lewinsky say in response?

WJC: Nothing that I remember. Whatever she said, I don't remember. Probably just some predictable thing.⁽¹⁹⁴⁾

2. Evidence that Contradicts the President's Civil Deposition Testimony

(i) Ms. Lewinsky's Testimony

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she spoke three times to President Clinton about the prospect of testifying in the Jones lawsuit -- once (December 17, 1997) after she was on the witness list and twice more (December 28, 1997, and January 5, 1998) after she had been subpoenaed.

a. December 17, 1997, Call. Ms. Lewinsky testified that President Clinton called her at about 2:00 a.m. on December 17, 1997. First, he told her that Ms. Currie's brother had died; then he told Ms. Lewinsky that she was on the witness list in the Jones case. According to Ms. Lewinsky, "[h]e told me that it didn't necessarily mean that I would be subpoenaed, but that that was a possibility, and if I were to be subpoenaed, that I should contact Betty and let Betty know that I had received the subpoena."⁽¹⁹⁵⁾ Ms. Lewinsky said that the President told her that she might be able to sign an affidavit to avoid being deposed.⁽¹⁹⁶⁾ According to Ms. Lewinsky, the President also told her, "You know, you can always say you were coming to see Betty or that you were bringing me letters."⁽¹⁹⁷⁾ Ms. Lewinsky took that statement to be a reminder of the false "cover stories" that they had used earlier in the relationship.⁽¹⁹⁸⁾

b. December 28, 1997, Visit. Ms. Lewinsky was subpoenaed on December 19. At her request, Vernon Jordan told the President that Ms. Lewinsky had been subpoenaed.⁽¹⁹⁹⁾ She then met with President Clinton nine days later on December 28, less than three weeks before the President was deposed.

According to Ms. Lewinsky, she and the President discussed the Jones lawsuit and how the Jones lawyers might have learned about her. Ms. Lewinsky said they also discussed the subpoena's requirement that she produce gifts she had received from the President, including specifically a "hat pin."⁽²⁰⁰⁾

Because of their mutual concern about the subpoena, Ms. Lewinsky testified that she asked the President if she should put the gifts away somewhere.⁽²⁰¹⁾ The President responded "I don't know" or "Hmm" or "Let me think about it."⁽²⁰²⁾ Later that day, according to Ms. Lewinsky, Ms. Currie called to pick up the gifts, which she then stored under her bed in her home in Virginia.⁽²⁰³⁾ (This issue will be discussed more fully in Ground V below.)

c. January 5, 1998, Call. Ms. Lewinsky also testified that she spoke to the President by telephone on January 5, 1998, and they continued to discuss her role in the Jones case. Ms. Lewinsky expressed concern that, if she were deposed, she might have a difficult time explaining the circumstances of her transfer from the White House to the Pentagon. According to Ms. Lewinsky, the President suggested that she answer by explaining that people in the White House Legislative Affairs office had helped her get the Pentagon job -- which Ms. Lewinsky understood to be a misleading answer because she in fact had been transferred as a result of her being around the Oval Office too much.⁽²⁰⁴⁾

(ii) The President's Grand Jury Testimony

When the President testified to the grand jury, the President admitted that Ms. Lewinsky visited him on December 28, 1997,⁽²⁰⁵⁾ and that during that visit, they discussed her involvement in the Jones case:

WJC: . . . I remember a conversation about the possibility of her testifying. I believe it must have occurred on the 28th.

She mentioned to me that she did not want to testify. So, that's how it came up. Not in the context of, I heard you have a subpoena, let's talk about it.

She raised the issue with me in the context of her desire to avoid testifying, which I certainly understood; not only because there were some embarrassing facts about our relationship that were inappropriate, but also because a whole lot of innocent people were being traumatized and dragged through the mud by these Jones lawyers with their dragnet strategy. . . .⁽²⁰⁶⁾

* * * *

Q: . . . Do you agree that she was upset about being subpoenaed?

WJC: Oh, yes, sir, she was upset. She -- well, she-- we -- she didn't -- we didn't talk about a subpoena. But she was upset. She said, I don't want to testify; I know nothing about this; I certainly know nothing about sexual harassment; why do they want me to testify. And I explained to her why they were doing this, and why all these women were on these lists, people that they knew good and well had nothing to do with any sexual harassment.⁽²⁰⁷⁾

3. Summary

There is substantial and credible information that President Clinton lied under oath in his civil deposition in answering "I'm not sure" when asked whether he had talked to Ms. Lewinsky about the prospect of her testifying. In fact, he had talked to Ms. Lewinsky about it on three occasions in the month preceding his civil deposition, as Ms. Lewinsky's testimony makes clear.

The President's motive to lie in his civil deposition on this point is evident. Had he admitted talking to Ms. Lewinsky about the possibility that she might be asked to testify, that would have raised the specter of witness tampering. Such an admission likely would have led Ms. Jones's attorneys to inquire further into that subject with both the President and Ms. Lewinsky. Furthermore, had the President admitted talking to Ms. Lewinsky about her testifying, that conversation would have attracted public inquiry into the conversation and the general relationship between the President and Ms. Lewinsky.

B. There is substantial and credible information that President Clinton lied under oath in his civil deposition when he denied knowing that Ms. Lewinsky had received her subpoena at the time he had last talked to her.

1. Evidence

In his civil deposition, President Clinton testified that the last time he had spoken to Ms. Lewinsky was in December 1997 (the month before the deposition), "[p]robably sometime before Christmas."⁽²⁰⁸⁾ The President was asked:

Q: Did [Ms. Lewinsky] tell you she had been served with a subpoena in this case?

WJC: No. I don't know if she had been.⁽²⁰⁹⁾

Vernon Jordan testified that he had told the President about the subpoena on December 19, 1997, after he had talked to Ms. Lewinsky. Ms. Lewinsky confirmed that Mr. Jordan had told her on December 22, 1997, that he (Mr. Jordan) had told the President of her subpoena.⁽²¹⁰⁾

When he testified to the grand jury, the President stated that in his conversation with Ms. Lewinsky on December 28, 1997, "my recollection is I knew by then, of course, that she had gotten a subpoena. And I knew that she was, therefore, . . . slated to testify."⁽²¹¹⁾

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she and the President had two conversations after she was subpoenaed: the December 28, 1997, meeting and a January 5, 1998, phone conversation.⁽²¹²⁾

2. Summary

There is substantial and credible information that the President lied under oath in his civil deposition by answering "I don't know if she had been" subpoenaed when describing his last conversation with Ms. Lewinsky. In fact, he knew that she had been subpoenaed. Given that the conversation with Ms. Lewinsky occurred in the few weeks immediately before the President's civil deposition, he could not have forgotten the conversation. As a result, there is no plausible conclusion except that the President intentionally lied in this answer.

During the civil deposition, the President also falsely dated his last conversation with Ms. Lewinsky as "probably sometime before Christmas," which implied that it might have been before the December 19 subpoena. Because Ms. Lewinsky had been subpoenaed on December 19, that false statement about the date of the conversation was a corollary to his other false statement (that he did not know she had been subpoenaed at the time of their last conversation).

The President's motive to lie in his civil deposition on the subpoena issue is evident. Had he admitted talking to Ms. Lewinsky after her subpoena, that would have raised the specter of witness tampering, which could have triggered legal and public scrutiny of the President.

V. There is substantial and credible information that President Clinton endeavored to obstruct justice by engaging in a pattern of activity to conceal evidence regarding his relationship with Monica Lewinsky from the judicial process in the Jones case. The pattern included:

(i) concealment of gifts that the President had given Ms. Lewinsky and that were subpoenaed from Ms. Lewinsky in the Jones case; and

(ii) concealment of a note sent by Ms. Lewinsky to the President on January 5, 1998.

From the beginning, President Clinton and Monica Lewinsky hoped and expected that their relationship would remain secret. They took active steps, when necessary, to conceal the relationship. The President testified that "I hoped that this relationship would never become public."⁽²¹³⁾

Once the discovery process in the Jones case became an issue (particularly after the Supreme Court's unanimous decision on May 27, 1997, that ordered the case to go forward), their continuing efforts to conceal the relationship took on added legal significance. The risks to the President of disclosure of the relationship dramatically increased.

An effort to obstruct justice by withholding the truth from the legal process -- whether by lying under oath, concealing documents, or improperly influencing a witness's testimony -- is a federal crime.⁽²¹⁴⁾ There is substantial and credible information that President Clinton engaged in such efforts to prevent the truth of his relationship with Monica Lewinsky from being revealed in the Jones case.

A. Concealment of Gifts

1. Evidence Regarding Gifts

Ms. Lewinsky testified that in the early morning of December 17, at roughly 2:00 or 2:30 a.m., she received a call from the President.⁽²¹⁵⁾ Among other subjects, the President mentioned that he had Christmas presents for her.⁽²¹⁶⁾

On December 19, 1997, Monica Lewinsky was served with a subpoena in connection with the Jones v. Clinton litigation. The subpoena required her to testify at a deposition on January 23, 1998.⁽²¹⁷⁾ The subpoena also required Ms. Lewinsky to produce "each and every gift including, but not limited to, any and all dresses, accessories, and jewelry, and/or hat pins given to you by, or on behalf of, Defendant Clinton."⁽²¹⁸⁾ After being served with the subpoena, Ms. Lewinsky became concerned because the list of gifts included the hat pin, which "screamed out at me because that was the first gift that the President had given me."⁽²¹⁹⁾

Later that same day, December 19, 1997, Ms. Lewinsky met with Vernon Jordan and told him of her concern about the gifts, including the hat pin.⁽²²⁰⁾ During that meeting, Ms. Lewinsky asked Mr. Jordan to inform the President that she had been subpoenaed.⁽²²¹⁾ Mr. Jordan acknowledged that Ms. Lewinsky "was concerned about the subpoena and I think for her the subpoena ipso facto meant trouble."⁽²²²⁾

Shortly after Christmas, Ms. Lewinsky called Ms. Currie and said that the President had mentioned that he had presents for her.⁽²²³⁾ Ms. Currie called back and told her to come to the White House at 8:30 a.m. on Sunday, December 28, 1997.⁽²²⁴⁾ On December 28, Ms. Lewinsky and the President met in the Oval Office. According to her testimony, Ms. Lewinsky "mentioned that [she] had been concerned about the hat pin being on the subpoena and he said that that had sort of concerned him also and asked [her] if [she] had told anyone that he had given [her] this hat pin and [she] said no."⁽²²⁵⁾ According to Ms. Lewinsky, she and the President discussed the possibility of moving some of the gifts out of her possession:

[A]t some point I said to him, "Well, you know, should I -- maybe I should put the gifts away outside my house somewhere or give them to someone, maybe Betty." And he sort of said -- I think he responded, "I don't know" or "Let me think about that." And [we] left that topic.⁽²²⁶⁾

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she was never under the impression from anything the President said that she should turn over to Ms. Jones's attorneys all the gifts that he had given her.⁽²²⁷⁾

On the 28th, the President also gave Ms. Lewinsky several Christmas gifts. When asked why the President gave her more gifts on December 28 when he understood she was under an obligation to produce gifts in response to the subpoena, Ms. Lewinsky stated:

You know, I can't answer what [the President] was thinking, but to me, it was -- there was never a question in my mind and I -- from everything he said to me, I never questioned him, that we were never going to do anything but keep this private, so that meant deny it and that meant do -- take whatever appropriate steps needed to be taken, you know, for that to happen . . . . So by turning over all these gifts, it would at least prompt [the Jones attorneys] to want to question me about what kind of friendship I had with the President and they would want to speculate and they'd leak it and my name would be trashed and he [the President] would be in trouble.⁽²²⁸⁾

Ms. Lewinsky testified that a few hours after their meeting on December 28, 1997, Ms. Currie called her.⁽²²⁹⁾ According to Ms. Lewinsky, Ms. Currie said: "'I understand you have something to give me.' Or, 'The President said you have something to give me' -- [Something] [a]long those lines."⁽²³⁰⁾ In her February 1 handwritten statement to the OIC, which Ms. Lewinsky has testified was truthful, she stated: "Ms. Currie called Ms. L later that afternoon a[nd] said that the Pres. had told her [that] Ms. L wanted her to hold onto something for her. Ms. L boxed up most of the gifts she had received and gave them to Ms. Currie."⁽²³¹⁾

Ms. Lewinsky testified that she understood that Ms. Currie was referring to gifts from the President when she mentioned "something for me."⁽²³²⁾ Ms. Lewinsky testified that she was not surprised to receive the call, given her earlier discussion with the President.⁽²³³⁾

Ms. Currie testified that Ms. Lewinsky, not Ms. Currie, placed the call and raised the subject of transferring the gifts. In Ms. Currie's account, Ms. Lewinsky said that she (Ms. Lewinsky) was uncomfortable retaining the gifts herself because "people were asking questions about the stuff she had gotten."⁽²³⁴⁾ Ms. Currie also testified that she did not remember the President telling her that Ms. Lewinsky wanted her to hold some items, and she did not remember later telling the President that she was holding the gifts for Ms. Lewinsky.⁽²³⁵⁾ When asked if a contrary statement by Ms. Lewinsky -- indicating that Ms. Currie had in fact spoken to the President about the gift transfer -- would be false, Ms. Currie replied: "Then she may remember better than I. I don't remember."⁽²³⁶⁾

According to both Ms. Currie and Ms. Lewinsky, Ms. Currie drove to Ms. Lewinsky's home later on December 28 for only the second time in her life.⁽²³⁷⁾ Ms. Lewinsky gave her a sealed box that contained several gifts Ms. Lewinsky had received from the President, including the hat pin and one of the gifts he had given her that very morning.⁽²³⁸⁾ Ms. Lewinsky wrote "Please do not throw away" on the box.⁽²³⁹⁾ Ms. Currie then took the box and placed it in her home under her bed. Ms. Currie understood that the box contained gifts from the President, although she did not know the specific contents.⁽²⁴⁰⁾ Ms. Lewinsky said that Ms. Currie did not seem at all confused when Ms. Lewinsky handed over the box of gifts⁽²⁴¹⁾ and never asked about the contents.⁽²⁴²⁾

When Ms. Currie later produced the box to the OIC in response to a subpoena, the box contained a hat pin, two brooches, an inscribed official copy of the 1996 State of the Union Address, a photograph of the President in the Oval Office, an inscribed photograph of the President and Ms. Lewinsky, a sun dress, two t-shirts, and a baseball cap with a Black Dog logo.⁽²⁴³⁾

2. The President's Grand Jury Testimony

President Clinton testified that he had spoken to Ms. Lewinsky about gifts he had given her, but said the conversation may have occurred before she received the subpoena on December 19. He testified:

I did have a conversation with Ms. Lewinsky at some time about gifts, the gifts I'd given her. I do not know whether it occurred on the 28th, or whether it occurred earlier. I do not know whether it occurred in person or whether it occurred on the telephone. I have searched my memory for this, because I know it's an important issue. . . . The reason I'm not sure it happened on the 28th is that my recollection is that Ms. Lewinsky said something to me like, what if they ask me about the gifts you've given me. That's the memory I have. That's why I question whether it happened on the 28th, because she had a subpoena with her, request for production. And I told her that if they asked her for gifts, she'd have to give them whatever she had, that that's what the law was.⁽²⁴⁴⁾

The President denied that he had asked Betty Currie to pick up a box of gifts from Ms. Lewinsky:

Q: After you gave her the gifts on December 28th [1997], did you speak with your secretary, Ms. Currie, and ask her to pick up a box of gifts that were some compilation of gifts that Ms. Lewinsky would have --

WJC: No, sir, I didn't do that.

Q: -- to give to Ms. Currie?

WJC: I did not do that.⁽²⁴⁵⁾

* * * *

Q: [D]id you ever have a conversation with Betty Currie about gifts, or picking something up from Monica Lewinsky?

WJC: I don't believe I did, sir. No.

Q: You never told her anything to this effect, that Monica has something to give you?

WJC: No, sir.⁽²⁴⁶⁾

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.⁽²⁴⁷⁾

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."⁽²⁴⁸⁾ 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.⁽²⁴⁹⁾

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."⁽²⁵⁰⁾ 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."⁽²⁵¹⁾

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."⁽²⁵²⁾

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).⁽²⁵³⁾ 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.⁽²⁵⁴⁾ She was not looking for someone else to take them.⁽²⁵⁵⁾

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.⁽²⁵⁶⁾ 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."⁽²⁵⁷⁾

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."⁽²⁵⁸⁾ 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."⁽²⁵⁹⁾ 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.⁽²⁶⁰⁾)

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.

There is substantial and credible information, therefore, that the President endeavored to obstruct justice by participating in the concealment of subpoenaed evidence.

B. January 5, 1998, Note to the President

1. Evidence Regarding the January 5, 1998 Note

On December 16, 1997, the President was served by Ms. Jones's attorneys with a request for production of documents, including documents relating to "Monica Lewisky" [sic]. The request placed upon the President a continuing obligation to preserve and produce responsive documents. Notes and letters from Ms. Lewinsky were responsive and relevant.

On January 4, 1998, Ms. Lewinsky left a book for the President with Ms. Currie.⁽²⁶¹⁾ Ms. Lewinsky had enclosed in the book a romantic note that she had written, inspired by a recent viewing of the movie Titanic.⁽²⁶²⁾ In the note, Ms. Lewinsky told the President that she wanted to have sexual intercourse with him, at least once.⁽²⁶³⁾

On January 5, in the course of discussing her affidavit and possible testimony in a phone conversation with the President, Ms. Lewinsky says she told the President, "I shouldn't have written some of those things in the note."⁽²⁶⁴⁾ According to Ms. Lewinsky, the President said that he agreed and that she should not write those kinds of things on paper.⁽²⁶⁵⁾

On January 15, President Clinton served responses to Ms. Jones's second set of document requests, which again asked for documents that related to "Monica Lewisky." The President stated that he had "no documents" responsive to this request.⁽²⁶⁶⁾

2. President Clinton's Testimony

The President remembered the book Ms. Lewinsky had given him about the Presidents and testified that he "did like it a lot."⁽²⁶⁷⁾ President Clinton testified that he did not recall a romantic note enclosed in the book or when he had received it.⁽²⁶⁸⁾

3. Summary on January 5, 1998, Note

The request for production of documents that the President received from Ms. Jones's attorneys called for all documents reflecting communications between him and Ms. Lewinsky. The note given to him by Ms. Lewinsky on January 5, 1998, fell within that category and would have been revealing about the relationship. Indeed, had the note been produced, the President might have been foreclosed from denying a sexual relationship at his deposition. Based on Ms. Lewinsky's testimony, there is substantial and credible information that the President concealed or destroyed this note at a time when such documents were called for by the request for production of documents.⁽²⁶⁹⁾

VI. There is substantial and credible information that

(i) President Clinton and Ms. Lewinsky had an understanding that they would lie under oath in the Jones case about their relationship; and

(ii) President Clinton endeavored to obstruct justice by suggesting that Ms. Lewinsky file an affidavit so that she would not be deposed, she would not contradict his testimony, and he could attempt to avoid questions about Ms. Lewinsky at his deposition.

Based on their conversations and their past practice, both the President and Ms. Lewinsky understood that they would lie under oath in the Jones case about their sexual relationship, as part of a scheme to obstruct justice in the Jones case. In pursuing this effort:

the President suggested that Monica Lewinsky file an affidavit, which he knew would be false;

the President had an interest in Ms. Lewinsky's false affidavit because it would "lock in" her testimony, allowing the President to deny the sexual relationship under oath without fear of contradiction;

Ms. Lewinsky signed and, on January 16, sent to the Court the false affidavit denying a sexual relationship with the President as part of a motion to quash her deposition subpoena;

the President's attorney used the affidavit to object to questions about Ms. Lewinsky at his January 17 deposition; and

when that failed, the President also lied under oath about the relationship with Ms. Lewinsky at his civil deposition, including by the use of "cover stories" that he and Ms. Lewinsky had devised.

A. Evidence Regarding Affidavit and Use of Affidavit

Monica Lewinsky testified that President Clinton called her at around 2:00 or 2:30 a.m. on December 17, 1997,⁽²⁷⁰⁾ and told her that her name was on the Jones case witness list.⁽²⁷¹⁾ As noted in her February 1 handwritten statement: "When asked what to do if she was subpoenaed, the Pres. suggested she could sign an affidavit . . . ."⁽²⁷²⁾ Ms. Lewinsky said she is "100% sure" that the President suggested that she might want to sign an affidavit.⁽²⁷³⁾

Ms. Lewinsky understood the President's advice to mean that she might be able to execute an affidavit that would not disclose the true nature of their relationship. In order "to prevent me from being deposed," she said she would need an affidavit that "could range from anywhere between maybe just somehow mentioning, you know, innocuous things or going as far as maybe having to deny any kind of relationship."⁽²⁷⁴⁾

Ms. Lewinsky has stated that the President never explicitly told her to lie. Instead, as she explained, they both understood from their conversations that they would continue their pattern of covering up and lying about the relationship. In that regard, the President never said they must now tell the truth under oath; to the contrary, as Ms. Lewinsky stated:

[I]t wasn't as if the President called me and said, "You know, Monica, you're on the witness list, this is going to be really hard for us, we're going to have to tell the truth and be humiliated in front of the entire world about what we've done," which I would have fought him on probably. That was different. And by him not calling me and saying that, you know, I knew what that meant.⁽²⁷⁵⁾

Ms. Jones's lawyers served Ms. Lewinsky with a subpoena on December 19, 1997. Ms. Lewinsky contacted Vernon Jordan, who in turn put her in contact with attorney Frank Carter.⁽²⁷⁶⁾ Based on the information that Ms. Lewinsky provided, Mr. Carter prepared an affidavit which stated: "I have never had a sexual relationship with the President."⁽²⁷⁷⁾

After Mr. Carter drafted the affidavit, Ms. Lewinsky spoke to the President by phone on January 5th.⁽²⁷⁸⁾ She asked the President if he wanted to see the draft affidavit. According to Ms. Lewinsk