Starr Pressuring Ex-Intern to Give Details on Clinton

WASHINGTON —  Independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr has begun to build a full-scale criminal case against former White House intern Monica S. Lewinsky in a move aimed at forcing her to reveal in detail the nature of her relationship with President Clinton or risk going to prison, according to sources familiar with the investigation.

Focusing on written “talking points” Lewinsky gave her friend and confidant Linda Tripp, Starr’s team is preparing to charge Lewinsky with encouraging Tripp--who, like her, had been subpoenaed as a witness in the Paula Corbin Jones sexual-harassment case against Clinton--to lie under oath.

Lewinsky gave a sworn statement in the same lawsuit, denying she had a sexual relationship with the president. She allegedly sought to have Tripp support that account. Lewinsky’s denial appears to be at odds with about 20 hours of conversations secretly recorded by Tripp, in which Lewinsky reportedly lays out intimate details of a purported affair with Clinton.

There were also these developments in what is becoming the most dangerous controversy to beset Clinton’s presidency:

* After two days of conspicuous silence on the part of senior officials, members of the Cabinet spoke out publicly Friday in defense of the beleaguered chief executive. The statements of support followed a White House meeting in which Press Secretary Mike McCurry said Clinton urged his department heads to “stay focused on the work that you are doing. . . . and let’s all hang in there.”

“I believe the allegations are completely untrue,” Secretary of State Madeleine Albright told reporters. “I’ll second that. Definitely,” Commerce Secretary Bill Daley said. “Third it,” added Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala.

* A source who has listened to portions of Tripp’s tape-recordings said Lewinsky can be heard saying Clinton made frequent telephone calls to her home late at night and engaged in explicit sex talk, and that she was devastated emotionally when she concluded he was becoming involved with several other women.

* The White House searched for a viable damage-control strategy as media demands rose for a full accounting from Clinton. Faced with wide-ranging subpoenas for documents and other records and continuing uncertainty about exactly what the facts might prove to be, aides sought to project a positive, cooperative image without going beyond Clinton’s carefully worded denial of a “sexual relationship.”

“He did no wrong, he says, but there are numerous allegations that require a thoroughly sophisticated and complete review,” McCurry said Friday in a breakfast meeting with reporters.

Public Statement Apparently Rejected

Aides considered but apparently rejected having Clinton hold a press conference or make a public statement, possibly before his State of the Union address to Congress on Tuesday.

* U.N. Ambassador Bill Richardson joined the ranks of administration officials subpoenaed by Starr’s investigators for records relating to Lewinsky. The subpoenas covered both the U.N. mission in New York and Richardson’s office in Washington, a spokesman said.

Richardson offered Lewinsky a junior-level job at the mission in New York after she left the White House and a subsequent job at the Pentagon. Rebecca Cooper, Richardson’s chief of staff in Washington, said neither Clinton nor his close friend Vernon E. Jordan Jr., who helped Lewinsky seek other jobs, played a role in the U.N. offer, which Lewinsky eventually declined.

Lewinsky was an intern at the White House from the summer of 1995 until that December, when she moved into a paid staff position in the White House Office of Legislative Affairs. In April 1996, she was shifted to a public-affairs position in the Pentagon at the behest of First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton’s top aide. She left the Pentagon position last December.

Based in part on the taped phone conversations between Lewinsky and Tripp, Starr’s investigators believe the 24-year-old from Beverly Hills had a sexual relationship with Clinton and that he had a role in encouraging Lewinsky to lie about their liaisons when she gave a sworn statement in the Jones case.

Jones Case Set Off Intern Controversy

The Jones case became the triggering device for the present controversy when Jones’ lawyers began compelling other women to give sworn statements about their encounters with Clinton. Jones’ lawyers hope to show a pattern of conduct that would lend credibility to the former Arkansas state employee’s claim that Clinton propositioned her while he was governor.

Since both Clinton and Lewinsky have denied having a sexual affair in sworn statements, both could face charges of perjury or obstruction of justice if their assertions prove false.

The possibility of being charged with such clear-cut crimes is considered much more threatening to Clinton and his presidency than the murky real estate dealings known as Whitewater or the ethical and technical issues raised by the campaign-finance scandal.

Based in part on the taped telephone conversations between Lewinsky and Tripp, Starr’s investigators contend the two did have a sexual relationship and that the president had a role in encouraging her to lie about their liaisons.

Lewinsky’s lawyer, William Ginsburg of Los Angeles, remained in Washington on Friday, granting a series of interviews. He told The Times he still holds out hope that a deal for immunity can be struck with Starr.

Ginsburg portrayed his client as a frightened and mentally battered pawn in a titanic struggle between Clinton and Starr. And, in an interview on Cable News Network, he criticized the conduct of Starr’s investigators during a period of several hours last Friday when they confronted Lewinsky for the first time.

“She never was being detained or under arrest,” Ginsburg said of the episode at the Ritz-Carlton hotel in suburban Washington. “But I think there was enough intimidation by the process, including the presence of FBI agents and U.S. attorneys, as well as words said to her about the imminence of prosecution, that she felt it was necessary to stay and not dare to leave because of the potential threat.

“I certainly feel that she was not only being squeezed in that instance, particularly without an attorney present, but since then they have threatened to involve her parents in the investigation and to bring them in under subpoena and talk to them. And that must be frightening to a 24-year-old.”

Apparently nettled by the criticism, Starr took the unusual step of issuing a statement of rebuttal Friday night, saying: “Media statements by one of her attorneys alleging that she was mistreated are wholly erroneous.”

Starr’s statement said Lewinsky consented to meet with several FBI agents and government attorneys, was repeatedly told she was free to leave and did leave to make several calls from a pay telephone before the arrival of her mother, Marcia Lewis.

Discussions between Starr’s office and Ginsburg came to a halt Monday after Ginsburg demanded that Lewinsky be given immunity from prosecution.

Sources said that Starr would not consider immunity for Lewinsky unless she first provided a description of what information she had to offer--something Ginsburg refused to provide.

If Starr granted immunity up front, he would risk losing whatever leverage he has to encourage Lewinsky to name other people whom investigators suspect drafted the so-called “talking points” that encouraged Tripp to deny that Clinton was participating in extramarital affairs.

Questioned Friday about his client’s sworn statement denying a sexual relationship with Clinton, Ginsburg was careful to reiterate that his client “stands on the affidavit--for now.”

With this and other comments over the last few days, Ginsburg has appeared to leave open the possibility that Lewinsky might recant what she said in the affidavit.

Jordan Helped Secure Lawyer

Lewinsky signed the affidavit nearly three weeks ago, before Ginsburg, a longtime family friend, began representing her. Lewinsky was introduced to her first lawyer, Francis D. Carter of Washington, by Jordan. Carter withdrew as Lewinsky’s lawyer on Monday.

Jordan also had helped line up a job for Lewinsky in New York. Jordan said Thursday that he acted only to help Lewinsky as he has with others. At no point, Jordan said, did he encourage Lewinsky to testify falsely regarding whatever relationship she has had with the president.

The first step for Lewinsky to reverse course, if she decides to do that, would be for her to describe to Starr her version of events in a legal document called a proffer. In it, a prospective witness or defendant provides a summary of what she is willing to say under oath in exchange for immunity from prosecution related to any crimes disclosed by that testimony.

The proffer would have to be sufficiently detailed so that prosecutors could assess whether the information would be admissible as evidence.

When talks between Lewinsky and Starr’s staff broke down, Ginsburg had refused to submit a proffer, holding out for a sweeping grant of immunity.

“She is at the vortex of a storm involving probably the three most powerful men in the United States: the president, Vernon Jordan and [Starr],” Ginsburg said.

Complicating the already delicate negotiations between Ginsburg and Starr is the lawsuit brought by Jones--the former Arkansas employee who alleges that Clinton exposed himself to her and demanded oral sex in a Little Rock, Ark., hotel room in 1991.

Lewinsky had been scheduled to be deposed by Jones’ attorneys on Friday, but on Thursday night, at Ginsburg’s request, a federal judge in Arkansas postponed the session indefinitely.

The postponement of Lewinsky’s deposition had the related effect of easing the pressure on her and Ginsburg as they ponder whether she will cooperate with Starr and become a prospective witness whose testimony could damage Clinton.

Meanwhile, the decisions of Starr’s staff are coming after 3 1/2 years of sparring with Clinton and the president’s resourceful lineup of lawyers within and outside the White House.

It is this experience that leads some who have dealt with the long-pending Whitewater investigation to question the extent of coordination between Clinton’s attorneys and lawyers who represent other witnesses or defendants.

*

Times staff writers Ronald J. Ostrow, Elizabeth Shogren and Jonathan Peterson contributed to this story.