Clinton Says He’ll ‘Never’ Resign

President Clinton vigorously denied Friday that he tried to get his personal secretary to provide misleading testimony about Monica S. Lewinsky’s visits to the Oval Office, and he accused his foes of orchestrating “unlawful” news leaks from a grand jury investigation.

At a news conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Clinton gave a defiant answer to a question about whether he would consider resigning rather than endure the pain of ongoing investigations: “Never.”

In a sign of the administration’s increasing anger, Clinton’s personal attorney publicly denounced independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr for “a deluge of illegal leaks . . . of false and misleading information” that violate “the fundamental rules of fairness.”

Clinton’s attorney, David E. Kendall, said he would seek criminal charges against any personnel in Starr’s office who may have illegally leaked secret grand jury information.

For his part, Starr announced that he would start an internal review to determine if confidential information has been compromised.

“If there was an act of unprofessional activity, I’m confident we will find it out,” he said. “I don’t know if there was. I take it very seriously.”

He also took umbrage at Kendall’s comments, accusing him of engaging in smear tactics.

At the White House, the Clinton-Blair event provided an extraordinary spectacle as the president, flanked by his loyal British ally, fielded a barrage of questions from the press corps of each nation about the president’s predicament.

Although appearing tired, Clinton stayed calm, repeatedly maintaining that the “rules” of the investigation prevented him from saying more, even as others violated them.

From the start, Clinton seemed eager to respond to a report first published in the New York Times that suggested he sought to influence the grand jury testimony of his personal secretary, Betty Currie. At issue is whether Clinton attempted to influence Currie’s recollections of Oval Office visits by Lewinsky, the former White House intern at the center of the White House controversy.

Clinton Discusses Leak Involving Secretary

Clinton reportedly met with Currie, who sits right outside the Oval Office, on Jan. 18, the day after he gave a deposition in the Paula Corbin Jones sexual-harassment lawsuit. Clinton denied at that time having a sexual affair with Lewinsky.

Although the first question at Friday’s news conference was about his relationship with Lewinsky, Clinton seemed eager to talk about the leak involving Currie.

“Let me first of all say, once again, I never asked anybody to do anything but tell the truth,” he declared.

Clinton repeatedly cited “rules” that prohibit him from answering certain questions, such as the query about the nature of his relationship with Lewinsky.

Several legal experts said the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (Section 6E) prohibit grand jurors and attorneys for the government from disclosing matters occurring before a grand jury. But witnesses are allowed to talk about their own testimony, and others who figure in the grand jury’s investigation, including Clinton, presumably would be allowed to talk about himself and his actions as they relate to the investigation, they said.

Clinton’s Lawyer Issues Stinging Criticisms

“He’s picking up on federal rule 6(E), the rule of grand jury secrecy,” said a veteran Washington attorney who asked not to be identified. “But there’s no basis for it that I can see.”

Kendall cited the same rule in his criticism of Starr, saying that “the leaking of the past few weeks is intolerably unfair.” He promised to go to the U.S. District Court in Washington on Monday seeking contempt sanctions against the independent counsel’s office.

“These leaks make a mockery of the traditional rules of grand jury secrecy,” Kendall said, speaking to reporters outside the Williams and Connolly law office building where he works. He refused to take questions.

“They often appear to be a cynical attempt to pressure and manipulate witnesses, deceive the public and smear persons involved in this investigation,” he said.

In unusually combative language, Kendall asserted that Starr’s office “is obviously out of control.”

Kendall sent a 15-page letter to Starr listing dozens of media reports quoting unidentified sources with insider knowledge of Starr’s investigation into the Clinton-Lewinsky relationship.

Kendall told Starr in the letter that Starr has paid only “lip service to your legal and ethical obligations” in the grand jury investigation.

Starr responded that the complaint was nothing more than “an orchestrated plan” to derail his investigation.

“Fiercely aggressive representation, including through media grandstanding, cannot be an excuse for smearing a lawyer through reckless accusations,” Starr said in his own letter sent to Kendall.

Earlier in the day in Little Rock, Ark., where Starr was tending to legal matters in an unrelated Whitewater prosecution, he said he was “very concerned” about suggestions of leaks from his office. “I do not have an explanation” for the situation, he added.

Starr vowed to “absolutely” launch an internal review to determine if leaks are emanating from his staff of lawyers and investigators.

Starr also responded to suggestions by the Clinton team, which has orchestrated its own counterattack in recent days, that Starr is part of a right-wing conspiracy to destroy the president. Unlike the White House, Starr said, “we do not have a public information office.”

“We deal with facts. We don’t deal with spin,” he said. “We just want facts so we can assess those facts. We deal with merits. We don’t engage in name-calling.”

In other developments, Rep. John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, complained about leaks in a 19-page letter to Atty. Gen. Janet Reno. Conyers listed another series of media reports quoting unidentified sources and asked Reno to “initiate a formal inquiry” into who was divulging secret grand jury information.

Conyers said that an internal review by Starr would not be enough to get to the bottom of the problem.

“I do not believe his review of these serious and possibly illegal acts would represent the type of independent investigation that is demanded by the law or the American people,” he said.

Reno’s chief spokesman, Bert Brandenburg, said: “Like any letter from a member of Congress, the department will review it.”

If she followed past practice, Reno would refer it to the Office of Professional Responsibility, the internal watchdog that has examined complaints of misconduct against previous independent counsels.

Former OPR chief Michael E. Shaheen Jr. responded to a request for an investigation of Starr’s fitness a year ago. But he concluded that the complaint--which was based in part on Starr’s support for Republicans and conservative causes--did not meet the extreme circumstances that would be needed for an attorney general to remove an independent counsel.

President Says He Will ‘Never’ Resign

Shaheen noted that the law provides that an independent counsel may be removed by the attorney general “only for good cause, physical or mental disability . . . or any other condition that substantially impairs the performance of such independent counsel’s duties.”

It was not immediately clear how a federal judge would react to Kendall’s complaint about news leaks. The judge could dismiss the complaint, hold a hearing, or ask the special division that appoints and oversees independent counsels to make a decision.

Clinton, at his news conference with Blair, was asked directly if he would consider resigning to stop the onslaught of questions into his personal life.

“At what point do you consider that it’s just not worth it and do you consider resigning?” asked the reporter, prompting a burst of nervous laughter in the elegant East Room of the White House.

“Never,” Clinton said forcefully. “I’m going to keep showing up for work. I’m going to do what I was hired to do.”

Of the American people, he said, “I care very much about them. I care about ordinary people whose voices aren’t often heard here.”

Asked whether he endorsed the view of First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton that his troubles are attributable to a conspiracy of right-wing enemies, Clinton prompted another burst of laughter by saying his wife is “very smart” and “hardly ever wrong about anything.” He chose not to elaborate.

The question that gave him the most pause came near the end, when a correspondent asked if Clinton had anything he’d like to say to Lewinsky.

“That’s good,” he said, smiling at his questioner. “That’s good.” After mulling it over for a second, he continued: “But at this minute, I am going to stick with my position of not commenting.”

*

Times staff writer Robert L. Jackson contributed to this report.