‘We Did Not Have a Conversation Involving . . . Lewinsky’

These are excerpts from the testimony of presidential confidant Vernon E. Jordan Jr.

Question: Now, we looked earlier at a call between you and Ambassador [Bill] Richardson. I believe, in November. And then I know you indicated to us--both last time we met and earlier today--that you recall meeting with him in early January.

Jordan: That’s right.

*

Q: Do you have any recollection, in looking back at this time frame--let’s say shortly before Christmas--of any topics or anything that you were discussing with Ambassador Richardson?

A: What I am certain of is that we did not have a conversation involving Monica Lewinsky.

*

Q: OK. Let me ask you about that then. Now, I believe you testified last time that you recognized that once you knew Monica Lewinsky was a witness in the Paula Jones case, it put a somewhat different spin on the fact that you were trying to assist her in getting a job. It was something that you didn’t know about when you took on the task of trying to get her a job, correct?

A: And nor did it stop me from trying to help her.

*

Q: Is that something that you would have liked to have known about, though, in going about getting her the job?

A: I would not have made a different judgment because she had become a witness in the case.

*

Q: Now, you also knew that Ambassador Richardson was someone who had been asked to try to get Monica Lewinsky a job, correct?

A: I did. Right.

*

Q: And you knew this at the time when you learned that Ms. Lewinsky was a witness in the Paula Jones case, correct?

A: Right.

*

Q: Then do you know whether or not Ambassador Richardson learned that Ms. Lewinsky was a witness in the Paula Jones case?

A: I don’t know the answer to that. As I’ve said to you before, here today and prior to, I did not have a conversation with Ambassador Richardson about Monica Lewinsky.

*

Q: And my question is: Why wouldn’t you, if . . .

A: And my question to you is: Why would I?

*

Q: May I finish my question, sir? My question to you, sir, is: Once you knew that Ambassador Richardson was also attempting to get Monica Lewinsky a job, and you knew that Monica Lewinsky had been subpoenaed in the Paula Jones case, why would you not inform Ambassador Richardson of the fact that she was a witness in the Paula Jones case?

A: . . . I had no duty to do that. It never occurred to me to do that. I never, as I’ve said to you before, had a conversation with him about Monica Lewinsky because I had no need to have a conversation with him. . . .

*

Q: . . . You were involved a few years back with helping Webster Hubbell get a job, correct?

A: That is true.

*

Q: And as a result, there came a time, after you had helped Mr. Hubbell in this job search effort, where he pleaded guilty to a crime, correct?

A: That’s correct.

*

Q: And as a result of your involvement--namely, as a result of the fact that you had assisted Mr. Hubbell in getting in touch with Revlon, where he was thereafter employed--you were questioned to some extent by investigators about whether or not your assisting him in getting the job was at all tied into his status as a possible witness against, among others, the president of the United States, correct?

A: And the answer to that was no.

*

Q: Well, the answer is you were questioned about it, correct?

A: I was questioned about it.

*

Q: . . . Is it your testimony, sir, that in light of that experience, that the fact that you were helping Monica get a job and then you later learned that she was witness in a case involving the president, that that later addition of information--that she was a witness in a case against the president--had no bearing whatsoever on your attitude of how you perceived your being involved in helping her get a job?

A: Yeah. The Webb Hubbell circumstance and the Monica Lewinsky circumstance are not comparable, No. 1. No. 2, make whatever judgment you want to make about my effort to help my friend Webb Hubbell, it had absolutely nothing to do with a conversation that I may have had with Ambassador Richardson, who was ambassador to the United Nations.

*

Q: . . . My question, sir, is: After having gone through what you were put through in the Webb Hubbell situation, is it your testimony, sir, that the fact that making calls to, among others, Revlon to help Monica Lewinsky get a job, you later learned that she was a witness in a case against the president; that that additional fact had absolutely no bearing on how you viewed and felt about your being involved trying to get her a job?

A: Zero.

‘I Asked Her a Question’

Jordan: And she said, “The president is a friend of mine and I really have great admiration for the president.” And I thought quite honestly that I was listening to a bobby-soxer who was mesmerized by Frank Sinatra, who was quite taken with this man because of his position, because of who he was, because he was tall and he was handsome and because he was president. That was clear to me. And she expressed an admiration, a fondness for the president. And it was clear to me that a new element had been discovered here by me and I felt it incumbent upon myself to satisfy myself as to what had taken place. And I asked her a question and she said no.

Q: And as best you can recall, what exactly would have been the question you would have asked?

A: Have you had sexual relationships with the president?

*

Q: And when you said sexual relationships, and without your needing to be graphic, what did you mean when you said that . . .

A: My view of it was sexual intercourse. Period. . . .

*

Q: And is it your testimony today that knowing that the allegation in the Paula Jones case was about oral sex, not sexual intercourse, that your definition of a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky was confined to sexual intercourse?

A: I don’t even know how to respond to that because it’s not a very clear question, to me. I’m prepared to answer anything you want me to answer.

*

Q: I’d like you to answer that.

A: But I don’t really understand the question.

*

Q: Let me ask it again. . . .

Q: Is it your testimony, sir, that knowing that the allegations in the Paula Jones case were about oral sex and connecting that to this subpoena in front of you, that when you asked Monica Lewinsky whether she had a sexual relationship with the president, did you--

A: . . . Let me interrupt you to say that to you, unequivocally, indubitably so that you will understand it. The concept of oral sex never entered my mind when I asked her the question. . . .