Law, Facts Prove Case Against Clinton, Prosecutors Contend

House prosecutors turned the second day of arguments in the Senate impeachment trial into a legal seminar Friday, asserting that “a merger of the law and the facts” proves that President Clinton committed perjury and obstruction of justice in attempting to conceal his affair with Monica S. Lewinsky.

The presentations by five House Republicans built on the prosecution team’s lengthy recitation of the well-known facts of the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal and set the stage for today’s argument that the president’s actions rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors” and justify his removal from office.

Even while describing their case against the nation’s 42nd president as tight as a “Swiss watch,” the prosecutors pointed out contradictions in the evidence that they said can be resolved only by live witness testimony before the Senate.

The president’s voice rang out across the hushed chamber again and again as large-screen television sets gave senators videotaped looks at the chief executive struggling with questions about his sexual affair with Lewinsky.

Lewinsky’s words also took center stage as prosecutors read repeatedly from her testimony before independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr’s grand jury to buttress their case.

The silence from the Senate was broken in the late afternoon when Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who has criticized the Republicans’ case as a “pile of dung,” rose to object to the repeated reference by one prosecutor, Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.), to the senators as “jurors.”

Harkin’s point highlighted a disagreement between Republican and Democratic senators about their role, which is likely to grow as they move toward deliberations in the case.

Whereas Republican senators generally portray themselves as jurors who must convict--and thereby remove--Clinton if they determine that he broke the law, Democrats stress their larger duty is to run the trial and resolve the case in a way that is best for the country.

“Mr. Chief Justice, it may seem a small point but I think a very important point,” Harkin said. “I think the Founders meant for the Senate to be something other than a jury.”

As Harkin went on, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) objected to Harkin’s speech, effectively breaking the somber mood of the trial and replacing it with the more typically combative tone of the Senate.

Rehnquist, in his first ruling of the trial, agreed with Harkin’s point and instructed Barr to “refrain from referring to senators as jurors.”

Sexual Details Handled Delicately

In an interview later, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.) jabbed at Harkin for his mid-trial interruption.

Agreeing that senators are not truly jurors, Hyde said that Harkin himself proves the point. “A juror would never take an oath of impartiality and then call the case a pile of dung.”

As senators listened to the second-ever impeachment trial of a United States president, the team of House prosecutors delved delicately into the sexual details of the politically charged case as it traced the president’s efforts to conceal his affair.

“In her sworn testimony, Ms. Lewinsky described nine incidents in which the president touched and kissed her breasts and four incidents involving contacts with her genitalia,” said Rep. Bill McCollum (R-Fla.), one of the 13 House managers presenting the case.

“On these matters, Lewinsky’s testimony was corroborated by the sworn testimony of at least six friends and counselors to whom she related these incidents contemporaneously.”

Clinton Journeys to Wall Street

Offering no comment on the proceedings, Clinton flew from Washington to New York to speak at a Wall Street program organized by the Rev. Jesse Jackson on investing in poor urban and rural communities.

Aboard Air Force One, White House Press Secretary Joe Lockhart characterized the proceedings as a rehash of old, unsubstantiated charges.

“Everything they presented has been presented before. There’s nothing new,” Lockhart told reporters. “All charges and allegations remain assertions that are unsubstantiated. The obsessive desire to call witnesses demonstrates an admission of a fundamental weakness in the case. They don’t believe their case is strong enough.”

Later, speaking with reporters in New York, Lockhart said that the White House continues to oppose calling witnesses because “the time to bring this effort to a close is soon.”

At the same time, with the likelihood of witness testimony growing, Lockhart said that Clinton’s lawyers would benefit by subjecting the witnesses to cross-examination for the first time.

Preparing for a vigorous White House defense, scheduled to begin on Tuesday, House prosecutors sought to rebut the arguments of Clinton’s lawyers even before they delivered them.

“The president’s lawyers will almost certainly try to weave a spell of complexity over the facts of this case,” Barr said in his summary of the law and facts.

“They will nit-pick the time of a call, or parse a specific word or phrase of testimony, much as the president has done,” he said. “We urge you, the distinguished jurors in this case, not to be fooled. Use your common sense, your reason, your varied and successful career experiences.”

Prosecutor Hammers Away at Cover-Up

In his presentation, Rep. George W. Gekas (R-Pa.) told the Senate that Clinton continuously orchestrated his cover-up of the Lewinsky scandal.

“He reached out through employees and friends to ensure that Paula [Corbin] Jones’ lawyers would develop no evidence to support her sexual harassment claim. In the case of witnesses, the president suborned perjury and tampered with witnesses, such as Betty Currie and Monica Lewinsky.”

He maintained that Clinton’s first objective was to silence Lewinsky in the Jones sexual harassment case. “When this tactic failed, he lied,” Gekas said.

Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio), another House manager, insisted that Clinton all along had the “intent” to commit perjury and obstruct justice, a key element in proving the case.

“It is the conduct of someone who lied, knew he had lied and needed others to modify their stories accordingly,” Chabot said.

The congressman added: “The record establishes that the president repeatedly lied, he repeatedly deceived, he repeatedly feigned forgetfulness.”

Among the perjurious statements McCollum cited was Clinton’s characterization of his initial relationship with Lewinsky as a friendship.

“The evidence indicates that he lied,” McCollum said. “As Ms. Lewinsky testified, her relationship with the president began with flirting, including Ms. Lewinsky showing the president her underwear, and just a couple of hours later they were kissing and engaging in intimacies.”

At day’s end, White House lawyer Gregory Craig criticized the House prosecutors for referring repeatedly to Clinton’s deposition in the Jones case. The House approved an article of impeachment alleging perjury in the grand jury but rejected a similar allegation that Clinton lied in the deposition.

“They do not have the case on the facts, the law, the Constitution or the voluminous record,” Craig said.

Managers Forced to Walk Fine Line

Throughout their presentation, the prosecutors walked a fine line. On the one hand, they argued that the evidence clearly showed Clinton had violated the law and ought to be impeached. At the same time, however, they sought to demonstrate that there is enough confusion in the grand jury testimony to require further testimony to nail down the truth.

Barr, for one, stressed the strength of the evidence.

“It is not a problem of fitting a round peg into a square hole,” he said. “Quite the contrary. We have a case here in which the fit between fact and law is as precise as the finely tuned mechanism of a Swiss watch.”

McCollum acknowledged that some points might not be all that clear in senators’ minds.

“If you have serious doubts about the truthfulness of the testimony of Monica Lewinsky, Vernon Jordan, Betty Currie and other key witnesses, then let us bring them before you to testify in person,” he said. “Invite the president to come. Judge everybody’s credibility for yourself.”

It was clear that the next battle, one to be decided at month’s end, would center on whether that additional testimony is required.

Even a Democrat opposed to the appearance of witnesses said that the House managers’ presentation would increase the pressure for testimony from Lewinsky and others.

“The only thing that’s happened is the intensity on the witness issue has ratcheted up,” said Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who said he remains hopeful that senators could decide the case based on the written record before them. “The bar is very, very high for calling any witness.”

Sen. Robert F. Bennett (R-Utah) said that he will vote for depositions of witnesses, adding “we may well decide we don’t have to hear them later.”

As they prepared to wind up their presentation today with closing remarks by Hyde, prosecutors knew that the White House would be likely to interpret the facts in a vastly different way.

“In a couple of days, the president’s lawyers are going to come before you and try to get you to focus on 10 or 15 or 20 or 30 or possibly 100 specific little details . . . “ McCollum said. “But never lose sight of the totality of this scheme to lie and obstruct justice.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Center Stage in the Senate

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist sits at center stage in the Senate trial, surrounded by law clerks and other assistants. On the Senate floor, the first tables are taken by the two legal teams. Here’s the seating chart:

Assistant to the Chief Justice

Secretary for the Minority

Sergeant at Arms

Chief Justice Rehnquist

Journal Clerk

Parliamentarian

Legislative clerk

Asst. Secretary

Law clerk for the Chief Justice

Secretary for the Majority

Prosecution

The 13 House managers prosecuting President Clinton are all white, male, Republican lawyers. Their average age is 52.

Defense

The Clinton defense team includes four White House lawyers and two private attorneys. Two of the six are women, and one of those is an African American.

What They Do

Chief Justice

Rehnquist is running the trial as in a criminal case and is ruling on all motions and questions on evidence. He can be reversed by a majority vote of the Senate.

*

Assistant and Law Clerk for the Chief Justice

Members of Rehnquist’s staff from the Supreme Court.

*

Secretary of the Senate

Records the proceedings in cases of impeachment.

*

Journal Clerk

Records the minutes of the daily proceedings.

*

Parliamentarian

Attends all sessions and advises the presiding officers on parliamentary procedures.

*

Legislative clerk

Reads aloud bills, resolutions and other material. Calls the roll for quorums and recorded votes.

*

Sergeant at Arms

Will read the “pain of imprisonment” proclamation at the beginning of each session.

*

Researched by JULIA FRANCO / Los Angeles Times

Times staff writers Edwin Chen and Art Pine contributed to this story.

The ceremonial atmosphere of the impeachment trial’s opening day has given way to the serious realities of the situation, says Times Washington correspondent Edwin Chen. Hear his audio reporter’s notebook on The Times’ Web site:

https://www.latimes.com/impeach

* JOURNAL EDITOR FIRED: AMA fires journal editor for publishing a study on students’ views of oral sex. A16