Death of American Virtue - Ken Gormley [225]
The notes confirm that there was a brief discussion of the concept of OIC’s and DOJ’s working together on the investigation. Vernon Jordan, because he held no position in the executive branch, was probably not a “covered person” under the independent counsel law, so DOJ was free to handle the matter itself. One idea the prosecutors kicked around was having Reno’s people collaborate with Starr’s people. If the DOJ lawyers determined that President Clinton was involved, the whole case could be kicked over to OIC. This hybrid plan, however, was quickly junked because Michael Isikoff and Newsweek were breathing down OIC’s neck. Holder’s notes indicate: “Case will be shut down within 36 hours. Somebody has to work the case.”
Holder and his colleagues did express concern that Ken Starr’s office had already wired Linda Tripp without seeking the attorney general’s permission. “We thought,” recalled Holder, “that maybe they had acted a little precipitously in that they were getting into areas where it wasn’t clear they had the jurisdiction to act yet.” The fact, however, was that OIC “had done it.” The question now was: How should the AG’s office play the cards dealt to them?
Holder’s notes confirm that Starr’s office essentially communicated Linda Tripp’s version of the story. For instance, OIC told its Justice Department brethren that Vernon Jordan “picked [Lewinsky] up in a limousine” and instructed her, “you can’t answer questions truthfully, [you] should lie.” In return, Jordan would “get her a job in private sector.” Based on this quid pro quo, the notes recorded, “she signed a false declaration.” (This recitation of events, it turned out, was not supported by the facts, but the Starr prosecutors had hitched their wagon to Linda Tripp’s account.)
Jackie Bennett next blurted out that his office “had no contact with [Jones’s] attorneys.” Holder later recalled that this comment “seemed a little odd.” Why would OIC’s lawyers even mention the Paula Jones case? That disclaimer passed like a bad stomach cramp. Bennett took the opportunity to return to the issue of Starr’s office needing to move quickly. Holder wrote: “Concerned about Tripp. Don’t want her to sign anything that would impeach her credibility.” OIC also reemphasized the Jordan link: “Jordan, Hubbell under investigation. Hush money from Jordan. This is similar.”
Bennett next veered to a new startling topic, stating that the tape recordings made by Linda Tripp might be “violation of the law in Maryland.” This could be problematic, Bennett noted, because these tapes would be necessary for OIC to make its case. Holder paused momentarily, wondering if this meeting could get any worse.
In fact, it might have. One topic that did not come up, at least according to Holder’s notes, was President Clinton’s pending deposition in the Jones case. Even though that deposition was scheduled to take place in a matter of days, Jackie Bennett steered clear of the topic, either intentionally or through an unplanned omission.
Some members of the attorney general’s team later concluded that Starr’s prosecutors had hornswoggled them. The feeling grew widespread within DOJ that Jackie Bennett and his band of OIC people had intentionally shaded the facts to seduce the Justice Department into granting OIC permission to expand into the Lewinsky case. It was particularly infuriating to DOJ lawyers that Starr’s office was soon telling the world that OIC had no choice but to expand into the controversial Clinton-Lewinsky investigations because Attorney General Reno had “requested” that it do so, intimating that Starr had accepted the job with great reluctance. This was not true, in the attorney general’s team’s view. Eric Holder later held up his notes and said firmly, “No, they were advocating—I left that meeting with the impression and the understanding that that’s what they wanted to do. They wanted to expand their jurisdiction, or have