Lewinsky Gets Full Immunity

Ending a six-month stalemate, Monica S. Lewinsky secured surprisingly wide immunity from prosecution Tuesday to become the key witness in independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr’s sex-and-perjury investigation of President Clinton.

Starr’s grant of transactional immunity--total protection against any prosecution stemming from his six-month investigation--was announced by attorneys for the 25-year-old former White House intern a day after she had auditioned for Starr’s prosecutors in a secret meeting in New York.

True to the nature of the year’s most salacious news story, scores of reporters and photographers--joined by gawking tourists--began clogging the sidewalk outside the downtown office of Lewinsky’s attorneys minutes after news of some kind of deal was leaked to the media.

Lewinsky soon arrived by cab and was led by hand through the clot of cameras and microphones and into the building by her spokeswoman, Judy Smith.

In announcing one of the investigation’s most significant and long-awaited developments, lawyers Plato Cacheris and Jacob A. Stein told a teeming media throng only that Lewinsky will provide “full and truthful testimony” under the agreement. They declined to answer questions.

If the deal was a victory for Starr, it was a limited one.

Sources familiar with the case said the Brentwood woman has agreed to testify that she had a sexual relationship with the president, contrary to sworn statements both of them furnished in January to attorneys for Paula Corbin Jones in her sexual harassment lawsuit against Clinton.

But Lewinsky has repeated to prosecutors what she has insisted upon from the beginning, that neither the president nor anyone associated with him instructed her to lie, these sources said.

That could leave a gap in the case Starr has been attempting to build. Suborning perjury and obstruction of justice are particularly serious offenses, and more likely to prompt impeachment proceedings against the president.

A government source said it was premature to conclude that Starr had ultimately settled for what he could have obtained from Lewinsky earlier in the investigation. He contended that Lewinsky and her lawyers are not aware of all the evidence Starr has obtained from documents and numerous grand jury witnesses, including Clinton’s personal secretary and several Secret Service employees.

“She doesn’t know how her information will be woven into other evidence,” this source said.

Lewinsky’s mother, Marcia Lewis, also has been granted the same level of protection from prosecution, her lawyer, Billy Martin, announced. The mother has been asked by prosecutors about frequent telephone conversations she had with her daughter regarding her relationship with the president.

Lewis could be a useful corroborating witness to testify about these mother-daughter conversations, a subject Martin strongly objected to when Lewis was summoned before grand jurors earlier this year.

In addition, the wide immunity would protect Lewis from prosecution for comments she allegedly made to her daughter encouraging a plan for Lewinsky’s onetime friend Linda Tripp to feign an injury to avoid giving a sworn statement in the Jones lawsuit.

Smith, Lewinsky’s spokeswoman, said in a statement that “her family is pleased the attorneys were able to reach an agreement with the independent counsel. They are relieved their daughter is out of harm’s way.”

White House Says It Sees No Threat

Although news of the agreement was viewed as a setback to Clinton, White House officials worked diligently to put the most optimistic face on it.

“We think the president will be fine,” said a senior official. White House Press Secretary Mike McCurry told reporters that he saw no threat from Lewinsky’s cooperation with Starr because he believes the president’s denials of a sexual relationship are the truth.

Lewinsky’s “lawyer said that she’s going to give complete and truthful testimony, and if she does, that should present no problem to the president, obviously,” McCurry said. “I think he’s pleased that things will work out for her.”

Clinton’s strongest public statement on the matter came on Jan. 26, when he sought to defuse the crisis that threatened to envelop his presidency. “I want to say one thing to the American people,” Clinton said at a White House event, First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton at his side.

“I’m not going to say this again,” he said forcefully, eyes glinting and right index finger thrusting forward. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time. Never. These allegations are false.”

However, Clinton’s assurance that he would provide more information about the matter has gone unfulfilled.

The president spoke with his lawyer, David E. Kendall, earlier in the day, McCurry said. Kendall and Starr are negotiating the terms under which Clinton could provide sworn testimony to the grand jury.

“I think he’s eager to see it resolved,” McCurry said of the president. “As you know, we’re eager to see that Mr. Starr and Mr. Kendall make whatever conclusion of their discussions they make.”

Starr originally held out granting immunity to Lewinsky in hopes that he could persuade her to testify that she had been told to lie, as she had suggested to Tripp, her onetime colleague at the Pentagon, in secretly recorded phone conversations. This would have provided Starr with the basis for an obstruction-of-justice case against the president, some legal experts said.

But in recent days, when Starr found the president apparently willing to provide testimony to the grand jury, he broke the weeks-long impasse in Lewinsky’s immunity negotiations to create a legal dilemma for Clinton based only on allegations of illicit sex, the sources said.

Along the lines of this prosecution strategy, if the president in his testimony adheres to his civil case deposition and his public statements that he had no sexual relationship with Lewinsky, he runs the risk of being accused of perjury before the grand jury. But if he changes his account and acknowledges sexual contact, he admits his past sworn statement was perjurious and his public denials a lie.

Congress Would Act, Legal Experts Believe

In any event, most legal scholars believe Starr would not seek to indict an incumbent president, but for constitutional reasons would refer any evidence of criminality to Congress to begin impeachment proceedings.

If Starr changes his goal from using Lewinsky to help prove obstruction of justice to focusing on proving that the president lied about a sexual relationship, he could lose some support in the court of public opinion.

In a Washington Post/ABC poll earlier this month, a clear majority of respondents said that even if Clinton had an affair with Lewinsky and lied about it under oath, he should not be impeached. The picture would be different, however, if Clinton had obstructed justice by encouraging Lewinsky to lie. In that case, 45% said he should be impeached while 48% said he should not.

While Clinton’s advisors attempted to project a calm exterior, it was clear that the nerves of some were on edge in the wake of the disclosure of Lewinsky’s deal.

One senior advisor took heart from suggestions that Starr may have given up pursuing obstruction-of-justice charges.

“If it’s what it sounds like, Starr finally capitulated,” the official said. He added that if the president testifies, he will repeat what he said under oath in the Jones lawsuit.

Tripp, meanwhile, completed her seventh day of testimony to the grand jury, and at least two Secret Service witnesses also were called. Agency employees began appearing before the grand jury two weeks ago after Supreme Court Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist turned aside a legal challenge from the administration.

Testimony Truthful, Tripp Maintains

Outside the courthouse Tuesday, Tripp said through her spokesman, Phillip Coughter, that her “testimony has been and will continue to be truthful and complete.”

She added that “it appears that Ms. Lewinsky is prepared to tell at least a portion of the truth. I encourage her and all other witnesses not only to tell the truth but to tell the whole truth.”

The reference to “a portion” refers to her tape recordings of phone talks with Lewinsky in which the younger woman suggested she had been encouraged to lie about her relationship with the president.

Tripp and other Secret Service employees are scheduled to continue their testimony today. It was not known when Lewinsky would appear before the grand jury, which also meets on Thursday.

Lewinsky’s attorneys wanted an immunity deal because of the sworn affidavit she signed in January in which she denied having a sexual relationship with Clinton. If Lewinsky were to change her story, which now she has signaled she will do, that could make her subject to charges of perjury.

Without the total immunity she now enjoys, Starr also could seek to indict Lewinsky on obstruction-of-justice charges related to the so-called “talking points” she allegedly presented to Tripp. This document suggested that Tripp deny knowing about a separate sexual contact allegation involving the president and a onetime campaign aide, Kathleen Willey.

Until Tuesday, Starr also could have indicted Lewinsky based on any other evidence he had received.

Times staff writer Erin Trodden contributed to this story.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Investigation Timeline

Jan. 12, 1998: Linda Tripp provides Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr’s office with taped conversations between her and former White House intern Monica S. Lewinsky.

Jan. 26: During a White House news conference, Clinton states, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman. ... I never told anybody to lie.”

Jan. 27: Starr opens a grand jury inquiry into Ms. Lewinsky’s allegations.

March 15: Former Clinton aide Kathleen Willey says President Clinton made unwelcome sexual advances in 1993.

March 21: Clinton invokes executive privilege in an effort to limit grand jury questioning of aides Bruce Lindsey and Sidney D. Blumenthal.

April 1: In Arkansas, U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright dismisses Paula Corbin Jones’ sexual harassment suit against Clinton.

May 4: In Washington, U.S. District Judge Norma Holloway Johnson denies the executive privilege claim.

May 22: Judge Johnson rules that Secret Service agents can be compelled to testify before a grand jury.

June 2: Lewinsky replaces her attorney, William Ginsburg, with two Washington lawyers, Jacob Stein and Plato Cacheris.

July 7: A federal appeals court rules that Secret Service employees must tell the grand jury what they observed while guarding the president.

July 17: After Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist refuses to block the order compelling the Secret Service to testify, the agents report to the grand jury.

July 27: A federal appeals court rules that Lindsey’s testimony is not shielded by attorney-client privilege. Ms. Lewinsky talks with prosecutors.

July 28: Ms. Lewinsky is given immunity from prosecution in exchange for her agreement to testify.