by Peter Baker
Im the only friend the presidents got up here, Hyde responded. He shouldnt be making trouble for me.
Still, while Hyde was convinced that sympathizers of the president wanted to dirty up Republicans like him, he accepted that the White House had no involvement. He could see how the story would come out independently, given the bitterness still felt by Snodgrass. But that did not persuade everyone else in the House Republican caucus, and suspicion of the White House only deepened.
The next day, Asa Hutchinson got a call from a CBS News reporter with an ominous warning. Im next target, Hutchinson scratched down on a notepad.
While the drama with Salon was unfolding, Clinton confronted the press for the first time since the Starr report was released. As had become almost routine during the scandal, he chose to do so while flanked by a prestigious foreign leader, a circumstance his aides knew would tend to make questions about a sex scandal look petty in comparison to issues of geopolitics. In this case, Clinton had the good fortune to be paired with visiting Czech president Vaclav Havel, the legendary playwright who had led his country to freedom from Communist oppression in the Velvet Revolution of 1989. Clinton enjoyed the reflected limelight and Havels bewilderment at Washingtons obsession with such trivialities.
I dont like to speak about things which I dont understand, the Czech president responded when asked about the Lewinsky case. Standing nearby listening intently was Havels own second wife, a striking blond nearly two decades his junior.
Coached ahead of time by a worried staff, Clinton remained calm and contrite, refusing to let any of the questions bait him into expressing the pique his aides and friends saw regularly. The president had been particularly upset to learn over the weekend that Chelsea had read the Starr report on the Internet, but he kept that to himself in front of the reporters. The right thing for all people concerned is not to get mired in all the details here but . . . for me to focus on what I did, to acknowledge it, to atone for it, and then to work on my familywhere I still have a lot of work to do, difficult workand to lead this country, he said. Asked if he would resign, he responded with striking passivity, saying merely that voters want me to go on and do my job and thats what I intend to do. Likewise, he offered no objection to the release of his grand jury videotape, dismissing the question as not of so much concern to me.
But Clintons solicitous tone was belied by a partisan audience. The news conference had been staged in the Dean Acheson auditorium at the State Department, and several dozen employees from the building had been allowed to attend, seated behind reporters in the back of the room. Whenever Clinton addressed the allegations, the administration workers applaudedsending exactly the wrong impression. The State workers were making it sound like a pep rally rather than an apology from the president. Mike McCurry, the custodian of Clintons public image, smoldered with frustration.
Amid all the focus on contrition, one person Clinton still adamantly refused to apologize to was Paula Jones, whose lawsuit had brought on all this trouble in the first place. But now for the first time in their four-year legal struggle, the former state clerk was signaling to the White House that she would be willing to forgo an apology in exchange for money. Although her suit had been thrown out by a federal judge, she had asked an appeals court to reinstate it. With Clinton politically vulnerable, her lawyers chose this moment to propose new settlement negotiations. In a letter to Clinton attorney Bob Bennett, they offered to drop the appeal for $1 millionand no admission or apology. The president agreed to mull it over.
***
Several hours after Clintons news conference with Havel, the Democratic lawyers on the House Judiciary Committee found themselves with an unexpected problem. They were meeting with their Republican counterparts one last time that evening to hammer out what should be withheld from the remaining evidence sent by Starr before it would be released. The dilemma: the Republicans were agreeing to everything.
Under the rules set by the House when it voted to put the Starr report on the Internet the week before, the rest of the evidence submitted by the independent counsel in those eighteen cardboard boxes would automatically become available to the public by September 28 except those parts redacted by the committee before then. Republican and Democratic lawyers had labored late into the night to find all the Social Security numbers, telephone numbers, addresses, personnel records, and other identifying information about witnesses buried in the evidence books and to identify sensitive areas of testimony, such as sexual details or personal information about Lewinskys weight problems. But as the two sides came to agreement on dozens of proposed redactions, Julian Epstein, the Democratic chief counsel, began to worry. They had to have differences. They had to have split votes. The whole premise governing the Democratic strategy was to paint the Republicans as unfair, to make a case that they were being partisan. After the public backlash against the salacious material in the Starr report, Epstein particularly wanted to have some disagreements so that the Democrats could say the Republicans were only interested in putting out smutnever mind that most Democrats voted along with the GOP majority to release the original Starr report, all equally ignorant of what it might contain.
With harmony threatening to break out, Epstein pulled aside the lawyers handling the negotiations for the Democrats. They needed to find more proposed redactions, he told them, items that were guaranteed to goad the Republicans into rejecting them. The Democratic lawyers made another effort and finally came up with some that the other side would surely object to. They would insist on holding back testimony about Clinton stimulating Lewinsky sexually with a cigar and other such material. The Republicans would not agree, because it seemed to go to the question of whether Clinton had lied to the grand jury when he claimed he never touched her in an erotic way. For Epstein, it was perfect. The Republicans would have to vote along party lines to put out more sexual detail.
When the committee gathered for a closed-door executive session the next day, Thursday, September 17, the plan fell neatly into place. Faced with a series of Democratic motions designed to lure them into the trap, the Republican majority behaved exactly as Epstein had anticipated and rejected eleven redactions or proposals to delay the release of the supplementary material or to give the White House an advance look. That gave the Democrats all they needed to parade out to the cameras and complain that they were being railroaded, as liberal congressman Barney Frank of Massachusetts proceeded to do during the first available break.
Theres no bipartisanship, Frank huffed to reporters waiting outside the closed doors. Theyre just deciding what they want to do and doing it.
Republicans grew increasingly agitated at the Democratic spinning. Sam Stratman, Hydes longtime press secretary, found Jim Jordan in the hallways and angrily confronted him. Jordan had been hired by Gephardt to handle media relations for the committee Democrats after working for the Senates campaign finance investigation in 1997.
Ive heard about you, the six-foot-six Stratman ripped into Jordan, towering over the much shorter man. If you cant win on the merits, youre here to blow up the process. Its not going to happen.
Look around you, Jordan replied. Its already happened.
During their lunch break, a group of Republican committee members wandered over to the Members Dining Room, including Asa Hutchinson, Lindsey O. Graham of South Carolina, James E. Rogan of California, Steve Buyer of Indiana, and Mary Bono of California. The discussion soon turned to Clintons sky-high job-approval ratings. Hutchinson asked Bono, the only female Republican on the committee, why the presidents support among women was still so strong.
Bono replied with a reference to Lewinskys testimony about her encounters with Clinton. The first thing that popped into my mind, said Bono, is how many women have four orgasms within thirty minutes?
The fight over redactions spilled over into a second, unscheduled day of closed meetings on Friday, September 18, before the committee finally agreed to release the following Monday more than three thousand pages
of documents as well as the videotape of Clintons grand jury testimony. Republicans were still steaming over how the Democrats had manufactured a partisan battle. In the end, the two sides had agreed on 155 items to be blacked out of the evidence books, but those were submitted to the committee in a single motion for unanimous consent, while the actual disagreements on 24 other items that Epstein and his team had found were subjected to separate roll call votes. Thus, the Democrats were able to say that every roll call vote had fallen along party lines, even though the parties had actually concurred on 87 percent of the redactions. The Republicans grumbled: they had been outspun.
Republicans had one more thing to worry about from the days events. During the closed-door debate, Graham had made a cryptic reference that worried his colleagues still stung by the Salon article on Hyde earlier in the week. Im a sinner too and Ill probably be confessing my sins before this is over, Graham said. Hutchinson went up to him afterward to ask him what he was talking about. Simple, said Graham. Im single, Im not gay, and therefore everything I do is a sin.
As successful as they were in provoking confrontations with Republicans, Julian Epstein and Abbe Lowell were proving equally capable of picking fights with each other. Epstein, accustomed to a virtually free hand in running the committee, was not about to cede control to Lowell, who had been forced upon him by Gephardt and knew nothing about Capitol Hill. Lowell believed he should be given authority to run the investigation as he saw fit.
The uneasy relationship flared up over an issue as arcane as access to the secret-evidence vault. Lowell had groused about Republican restrictions, so Epstein went to Tom Mooney, his Republican counterpart with whom he got along well, and negotiated an agreement that would allow material to be brought in or removed from the room if either of the two men approved it. Lowell was incensed that such a deal was brokered without him, convinced that it undermined him. Epstein cared about working with Mooney. Lowell thought Mooney was manipulating Epstein and called in a fit of pique.
What the fuck are you doing? Lowell demanded when he reached Epstein. You mean if I want to take a pencil in there, Im going to have to get your written permission?
What are you worried about, Abbe? Ill just delegate you the authority, Epstein said. Abbe, I could give a fuck what you bring in and out. Just dont embarrass us.
Among the Democratic congressmen on the verge of deserting Clinton was Jim Moran of Virginia, a former boxer and stockbroker who had been vocally critical of the president since the August 17 grand jury appearance. Moran had supported Paul Tsongas during the 1992 Democratic nomination contest because he had been told about Clintons profligate philandering by a staff member at the Democratic Governors Association, who described the then-governor from Arkansas as trolling for young women at conferences. After the election, Moran believed Clinton had put that behind him and, even when the Lewinsky story broke, gave him the benefit of the doubt. By coincidence, Moran had been at the White House just three nights after the Lewinsky story broke, part of a small group invited for dinner and a movie, a preview screening of The Apostle, with stars Robert Duvall and Farrah Fawcett among the guests. Everyone was buzzing about the allegations until the president walked in, when a hush fell over the roomall except one woman, who clearly did not realize who had just arrived because she could be overheard saying, I would. Wouldnt you?
Moran left that night convinced that Clinton had not had sex with Lewinsky and the congressman said so publicly. That made him all the angrier when Clinton reversed himself seven months later. The fact is that he lied to the American people as he did in the court. I think that that is a major problem that is going to undoubtedly necessitate impeachment proceedings, Moran said in a television interview on Monday, September 7. By that Friday, he was talking about resignation. He should certainly consider any option that would put an end to this and enable the Congress and the country to recover from one of the saddest episodes in American history.
Clinton was distressed. Whys Moran doing this to me? the president asked his friend Terry McAuliffe. At a party at the home of White House political director Craig Smith, McAuliffe confronted Moran and demanded to know the same thing. We cant let Republicans take back everything we won, McAuliffe told him. You cant play into their hands. The conversation grew so angry that other guests backed away.
Hillary Clinton was upset as well. When she ran across a top Moran adviser, Mame Reilly, at an evening awards banquet, the first lady pressed the same question. Why is Jim doing what hes doing?
He feels really bad about the way the president has treated you, Reilly told her.
Doesnt he know what hes doing is hurting the country? And hurting me?
I think youre the only one who could get him to stop, Reilly answered and offered to have Moran call her.
Reilly called Moran that night, and the next morning, Friday, September 18, he called the White House. Mame tells me you want to talk to me, youre concerned about what Ive been saying, Moran told the first lady. Hillary, Im going to be frank with you. Your husband has disappointed me. Hes a philanderer and hes shown himself to be a liar. As much as I respect his ability and commitment to public service, Im just terribly disappointed. And Im offended at what hes done to you, not to mention all the people who supported him. . . . If you were my sister, I think Id just grab him, pull him behind the house, and break his nose.
Hillary sounded touched. Oh, Jim, I love you emotional, Irish Catholictype guys. If I had had a big brother like you, maybe my life would have turned out very different. But he should realize that she was still behind Bill. Im the field general of this operation. I believe in my husband. I believe in what he has accomplished and what hell be able to accomplish once this is all over. He is my best friend. And I still believe in him.
Moran noticed that she did not say she believed the president, but that she believed in him. In any case, she went on to frame the debate and point the finger again at Clintons enemies. Much of this is coming from right-wing elements that have been opposed to my husband for what hes been trying to do all his life. And I dont want them to win. And you shouldnt want them to win either. And I think its important for the country that they not win.
After fifteen minutes or so, Moran hung up, impressed by the first ladys poise. He still thought her husband was a lout, but he respected her request to tone it down. From now on, he would stop speaking out so much.
Now that the grand jury videotape was about to be broadcast to the world, the highest-ranking officials at the White House resolved finally to find out what was actually on it. Only three of the presidents advisers had been allowed in the room at the time of the testimony in AugustDavid Kendall, Nicole Seligman, and Chuck Ruffand they had been characteristically closemouthed afterward. In the hours and days following the session, the presidents political advisers tried in vain to learn what Clinton had been asked, how he had answered, and whether there were any particularly dramatic moments or big surprises. But the lawyers refused to tell them, trying to set another leak trap for Starrs officeif only the three of them in the room knew for sure what had actually happened, they reasoned, any disclosures in the newspapers would have to have come from the prosecutors, in violation of grand jury secrecy rules.
Now the time had come to force the issue. On Saturday, September 19, just forty-eight hours before the tape would air, Seligman was invited over to the White House to brief political aides such as Mike McCurry, Doug Sosnik, and Joe Lockhart. She brought her notes from the interviewthe only record the Clinton team had, since they were not given their own copy of the videotape or transcriptand read through them for the political aides in Ruffs office.
What were the highlights? the aides asked. What were the contentious moments? The gossip mill suggested Clinton had flown into a blind rage.
He was feisty, Seligman said, even angry at times. But it was controlled, directed anger. Contrary to the rumors, he did not get up and storm out. He did not shout or scream or carry on. He did get indignant and q
uarrel with the prosecutors from time to time, accusing them of asking trick questions and colluding through Linda Tripp with the Paula Jones team in their bogus lawsuit. Overall, he stuck to the script and came across as a human being pained by what he had done and embarrassed to be put into this situation by vengeful prosecutors.
The political aides realized this could work to their benefit and a strategy quickly fell in place. In the two days they had left, they would play the expectations game as if they were on the campaign trail. In hotly contested primary elections, a candidates strategists often publicly overstate how well they think their opponent will do, while underestimating their own chances; that way, when election night returns prove better than forecasted, their candidate appears stronger than assumed and their rival weaker. In this case, Clinton aides reasoned, if viewers were told to expect an out-of-control president but instead saw what Seligman described, it could rebound against the Republicans. Doug Sosnik spoke with several reporters around town that weekend to stoke expectations. I dont know, I havent seen it, but they set the bar, and if he didnt do that, they havent met the test, Sosnik would tell them. David Kendall was dispatched that same Saturday to give a preview briefing to the New York Times on condition that he not be identified as the source. The next days story reported that on the tape Clintons moments of remorse are mixed with flashes of fury at the prosecutors. The Clinton team may not have created the initial expectations of presidential outbursts, but it encouraged them for its own purposes.
In a basement recording studio in the Rayburn Building the next morning, Monday, September 21, a technician for Fox News loaded a videotape released by the Judiciary Committee into a pool transmission that would feed more than a half dozen television networks. At 9:25 A.M., the presidents testimony went out unedited for millions of Americans to watch and judge for themselves, in living rooms, office suites, and even on the massive jumbosized screen in Times Square. What they saw was not the explosive confrontation they had been promised, but instead a sometimes methodical, sometimes monotonous four-hour-and-twelve-minute question-and-answer session punctuated by occasional bursts of glaring, finger-wagging pique by Clinton. Normally, any sign of emotion by a president in public is magnified in the media hotboxa glint of irritation at a news conference can be analyzed for days as a sign of deep-seated angerand the moments of indignation shown by Clinton during his testimony were strikingly unusual for a politician who had long since learned to contain his volcanic temper in the public eye. But the public had been told to expect more. Instead, it saw a man under fire who mostly remained calm, so that the flashes of fury came across as understandable exasperation.
