Panel Looks at 2 Ways to Get Facts in Inquiry

With the House poised to launch an impeachment inquiry this week, members of the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday began mulling two alternative approaches to fact-gathering in the months ahead--parading high-profile witnesses like Monica S. Lewinsky and Betty Currie before Watergate-style hearings or employing a more subdued, closed-door approach.

Chief GOP investigator David Schippers suggested Tuesday that he would seek to determine whether President Clinton and former White House intern Lewinsky engaged in a broad criminal conspiracy with others--apparently including Currie, Clinton’s secretary, and presidential advisor Vernon E. Jordan Jr.--to keep their sexual relationship quiet.

“The ‘others’ could be zero or there could be 50 people involved in a conspiracy to obstruct justice,” said Schippers, emphasizing his uncertainty.

Investigating the alleged conspiracy--one of 15 impeachment counts outlined by Schippers on Monday--would require boring in on witnesses’ accounts of how Clinton’s gifts to Lewinsky were quietly rounded up late last year, and how a job was lined up for her in New York City.

The House will vote Thursday on whether to go forward with an inquiry, with the only uncertainty being how many Democrats decide to support the investigation. After that, however, it will be up to the 37 members of the Judiciary Committee to hash out procedural details.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.) has indicated that it may not be necessary to hear testimony from those who spent so many days before the grand jury.

But other committee members predict Lewinsky eventually will raise her right hand before them and pledge to tell the truth.

“You cannot have impeachment hearings where the star witness is not called and cross-examined,” said Rep. Martin T. Meehan (D-Mass.), a former prosecutor who sits on the Judiciary Committee. “You have to have Monica Lewinsky testify. You have to have her mother testify. You have to hear from Betty Currie and Vernon Jordan.”

Some Lawmakers Fear Circus Atmosphere

But calling such witnesses in a public hearing is not risk-free. Some lawmakers fear that tough questioning of witnesses like Lewinsky and Currie could degenerate into an embarrassing circus in which the mostly male committee would struggle to avoid too much talk of sex.

“I don’t know how you avoid questioning Monica Lewinsky about body parts,” said Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose).

That is why, Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Mission Hills) said at Monday’s hearing that members should first determine whether Starr’s charges would be impeachable before launching their inquiry.

“I can’t believe that anyone in this body wants to go through an evidentiary, fact-finding process on something that has been developed over eight or nine months, to bring in Monica Lewinsky and Linda Tripp and go through the process all over again,” Berman said.

What about calling independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr to present his case in person?

Republicans are unlikely to summon Starr because Democrats, whose lead attorney is Abbe Lowell, have already made clear that they intend to focus much of their attention on Starr’s prosecutorial tactics--from his deputies’ aggressive questioning of Lewinsky in a hotel room when the case first broke to Starr’s connections to the Paula Corbin Jones sexual harassment case.

“There’s a lot of Ken Starr material out there,” said Rep. John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, the committee’s ranking Democrat. “You’ll be hearing his name come up.”

On Oct. 22, the Judiciary panel’s subcommittee on the Constitution will hold a public hearing to examine the history and constitutional standards for impeachment--but subcommittee Chairman Charles T. Canady (R-Fla.) does not expect bipartisan agreement on that question.

“We should not expect some magic answer to come forward as a result of the hearing process,” he said.

Those close to the impeachment process predict many weeks of legal research and closed-door depositions, as well as old-fashioned detective work. Investigators will focus on contradictory testimony, such as the differing accounts from Lewinsky and Currie on who initiated the handing over to Currie of Lewinsky’s gifts from Clinton.

Another key difference, Democrats point out while criticizing the inquiry, centers on who touched whom where in the sexual encounters outside the Oval Office.

“There is a difference in opinion between the principals in this matter,” said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles). “We don’t know who’s lying and who’s not lying.”

There are some facts, however, upon which lawmakers will likely agree, such as information corroborated by numerous witnesses and uncontested by the White House.

“If I were drawing up the game plan behind the scenes . . . I would want to find out what areas are not in contention,” said Rep. James E. Rogan (R-Glendale), a former prosecutor who sits on the Judiciary panel. “I would try to narrow the issues as much as possible.”

At a news conference Tuesday, Schippers--a registered Democrat who was hired by Hyde for the Clinton investigation--said an inquiry would not amount to a rereading of the Starr report. “If I have to review the Starr report again, I’m going back to Chicago,” he quipped.

But Schippers refused to outline which names he might put on his witness list.

Of Lewinsky, he said, “Perhaps we might talk to her.”

As for the idea of questioning Clinton, Schippers said, “It has never entered my mind.”

Starr May Offer Other Matters

Republicans say Starr may submit to Congress other possible grounds for impeachment stemming from his long-running investigations of the Whitewater land deal, travel office firings and other matters.

In addition, Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.), who has headed an investigation of Democratic fund-raising abuses, plans to present the Judiciary Committee with an interim report on his committee’s findings. He will distribute the report on Thursday, just as the full House votes on whether to proceed with the impeachment inquiry.

The report--which outlines $1.7 million in suspect donations that the Democratic Party has yet to return--will condemn the White House for repeated attempts to delay and impede the investigation, according to officials who have reviewed it.

Asked whether the information amounts to impeachable offenses committed by the president, Burton said that will be up to the Judiciary Committee to decide.

Live audio coverage of the House impeachment vote on Thursday will be available on The Times’ Web site: https://www.latimes.com/scandal