Death of American Virtue - Ken Gormley [224]
Bennett pleaded with the reporter: Couldn’t he “keep a lid” on the story for a couple of days? Isikoff was used to games of “blink.” His foot jiggled with nervous energy. “As a matter of journalistic ethics,” he said, he would have to “elicit a quote from somebody on behalf of the president.” Very soon.
Bennett sank back into his chair, beginning to feel outraged. Isikoff knew an alarming number of accurate details. All fingers pointed to Linda Tripp as the snitch. Bennett’s problem, however, was much more immediate than a loose-lipped informant. “We just were utterly unprepared for the notion that Newsweek was in the middle of this,” Bennett would recall. Bennett told Isikoff, “You’ve got us over the barrel.” Perhaps they could reach some accommodation. Wasn’t there some way to hold off the story, temporarily, so that they didn’t tip off individuals involved in ongoing criminal conduct?
The journalist tapped his pen against his head: He might be willing to wait until four o’clock Friday afternoon. The magazine hit the newsstands on Monday morning. Advance copies were transmitted to the national media on Sunday. He could wait that long—perhaps—before contacting the “interested parties.” Bennett, in return, would have to promise to give him key information, including OIC’s “basis for starting this investigation in the first place.” That way, Bennett would keep the lid on his explosive case and Isikoff would be guaranteed an exclusive story.
Each man, as he shook hands to consummate the deal, felt as if he had just struck a bargain with the devil.
AT 6:15 P.M., Jackie Bennett and a group of OIC prosecutors—joined by Josh Hochberg, on special assignment from the Justice Department—arrived at the deputy attorney general’s office. Given the supersensitive nature of the meeting and the roving eye of the Washington press corps who patrolled the halls of DOJ, Bennett had insisted that they limit the group to a small number of the most trusted, highest-ranking lawyers. With its high ceiling and ornate decor, the deputy attorney general’s office had been the site of many important meetings over the years. Although Eric Holder was braced for the worst, he was totally unprepared for what he actually heard. Bennett began, according to notes of the gathering, by stating: “We have unhappily come across a very sensitive matter.”
According to verbatim notes maintained by OIC lawyer Stephen Bates, who served as scrivener for the meeting, Bennett delivered a blunt summary: “We were called Monday evening by Linda Tripp, a witness in a number of matters that we have investigated.” He went on: “She told us that a friend and former colleague of hers, a witness in Jones, has been contacting Tripp and urging her to commit perjury. The efforts seem to go back to the President and a close associate of his, Vernon Jordan. The friend’s name is Monica Lewinsky.”
Holder clutched the side of the table. He would later say, reliving that moment, “I mean, I was shocked.” Holder had gone into the meeting “prepared to hear something very serious.” But this news made his head spin. “This was not what I expected to hear,” he said later, “you know, the intern and all that stuff.”
In the modern, suspicion-laden world of Washington, government lawyers rarely committed anything to paper for fear it might come back to haunt them in a congressional hearing or in some vicious legal battle. At this gathering, however, Holder slid out a tablet of paper and began writing. His handwritten notes of that meeting, which escaped translation even during the massive congressional dragnet leading up to President Clinton’s impeachment trial, provide a sharp picture of the information exchanged between OIC and the attorney general’s lawyers.
The first words scribbled onto the lined pages were “Isikoff is on to this, getting info from Tripp’s friends, far along.” Holder next recorded that OIC was affirmatively seeking permission to move forward on this case. “They want to continue to investigate—want jurisdictional call from us,” either determining that the investigation