Death of American Virtue - Ken Gormley [500]
shift radically in style and clarity: The first page is grammatically and organizationally the cleanest. The second page switches from second to first person. The third page is a mishmash and is the least polished in style. Although Monica Lewinsky, through her autobiographer, later insisted that she prepared two different versions—one for Tripp herself and one for Tripp to give her lawyer—this still fails to explain the puzzling (and obvious) difference in writing styles (cf. Morton, Monica’s Story, 173, 256).
Linda Tripp promptly handed: Schmidt and Weisskopf, Truth at Any Cost, 37; Toobin, A Vast Conspiracy, 199.
“I’m probably not a good person to answer”: Monica Lewinsky, interview by author.
“Absolutely was not”: Linda Tripp, interview by author.
Eric Holder was bedeviled: Jackie Bennett, interview by author.
He had admired: Eric Holder, interview by author.
“Late afternoon”: Jackie Bennett’s side of phone conversation with Eric Holder, 15 Jan. 1998, attached to Robert J. Bittman to David P. Schippers and Abbe D. Lowell, Committee on the Judiciary, 18 Nov. 1998.
The two men finally agreed: Jackie Bennett, interview by author.
“I know what you guys have”: Isikoff, Uncovering Clinton, 297.
“sort of threatening”: Jackie Bennett, interview by author.
The journalist slapped his cards: Ibid.
“So if there’s some reason”: Michael Isikoff, quoted by Jackie Bennett, interview by author.
“basis for starting”: Isikoff, Uncovering Clinton, 298–300.
“We have unhappily come”: Stephen Bates to OIC File, “DOJ meeting 1–15–98,” 22 Apr. 1998.
“I mean, I was”: Eric Holder, interview by author.
“Isikoff is on to”: Notes, undated, attached to L. Anthony Sutin, Acting Assistant Attorney General, to Honorable John Conyers, Jr., Committee on the Judiciary, 16 Nov. 1998; Eric Holder, interview by author.
One idea the prosecutors kicked: Eric Holder, interview by author.
“picked [Lewinsky] up”: Eric Holder, interview by author; Eric Holder notes, OIC meeting, 15 Jan. 1998.
“had no contact”: Eric Holder, interview by author.
OIC also reemphasized: Ibid. Notes of the meeting indicate OIC’s assessment of Jordan: “Jordan’s involvement in obstruction not clear on tape but supposed to be in prior conversations.” Linda Tripp would forever insist that Monica Lewinsky had explicitly told her that Jordan was a knowing participant in the plan to cover up the affair with Clinton, and that she (Tripp) had simply flubbed up by failing to turn on her Radio Shack recording device to capture that conversation on tape.
“violation of the law”: Eric Holder, interview by author.
One topic that did not come: Ibid. Holder later stated that he surely would have included this crucial fact in his notes if the topic had come up. See also Summary of Meeting with IC on 15 Jan. 1998, attached to L. Anthony Sutin to Honorable John Conyers, Jr., Committee on the Judiciary, 16 Nov. 1998; Isikoff, Uncovering Clinton, 300.
“No, they were advocating”: Eric Holder, interview by author.
Other DOJ lawyers: Not only was Eric Holder clear in his recollection on this point, but others concurred. For instance, Kevin Ohlson (interview by author) said, “They were very much the advocates for gaining jurisdiction over this issue.” Although Jackie Bennett would later say, “We weren’t lobbying for it,” and would point to portions of the notes of the meeting indicating that OIC was open to someone else’s handling of the case, that was not the dominant thrust of the meeting. Indeed, Bennett himself said that “this is something we’re invested in” and that he believed Starr’s office was entitled to expand into it (Jackie Bennett, interview by author). Moreover, the letter Starr sent to Janet Reno that night clearly indicated that OIC believed it had a right and duty to handle the case, and even spelled out proposed language by which the attorney general could formally expand OIC’s jurisdiction to eliminate any issue about its ability to proceed. See Kenneth W. Starr to Janet