KENDALL: And questions have been addressed to you
today about the credibility of various witnesses, including Miss Lewinsky. It's true, is it not, that you were not present when Miss Lewinsky
testified before the grand jury?
STARR: That is true.
KENDALL: And you were not present at her
deposition?
STARR: Yes, I was not present.
KENDALL: You were not present on any
occasion when she was interviewed by FBI agents, were you?
STARR: That is correct, I was not.
KENDALL: And
you've never really exchanged words with Ms. Lewinsky, have you?
STARR: That's correct. She -- the answer
is yes. I have not had occasion to meet her otherwise to look her in the eye
myself.
KENDALL: The
same is true for her mother, Marcia Lewis,
is it not?
STARR: Yes, that is true as well. That is true.
KENDALL: The
same is true for Betty Currie?
STARR: Yes.
KENDALL: The
same is true for Vernon Jordan?
STARR: Well, oh, in connection, I happen to know Mr. Jordan but, yes,
in connection...
KENDALL: (off--microphone) this case though, were you present during
his grand jury testimony?
STARR: No, I was not.
KENDALL: And were you present at any interview of him?
STARR: No, I was not.
KENDALL: Would
the same be true for Mr. Podesta?
STARR: The answer is the same with respect to Mr. Podesta, yes.
KENDALL: And
indeed, Mr. Starr, there are 115 individual grand jury transcripts, which
your office submitted to the House and, with the
exception of the deposition of the President of the United States, you were present at none of those grand jury proceedings, were you?
STARR: That is correct.
KENDALL: Likewise, there were 19 depositions
submitted and you were -- at least the reporter doesn't show you being present on any of
those. Is that correct?
STARR: I think that's right. There were -- and I need to reflect on
some of the Secret Service matters -- but I think you're correct. I was not
actually present for any depositions themselves, including the Secret Service
officers.
KENDALL: And there were 134 FBI form 302
interviews submitted. You're not shown to be present at any of those. Is that correct?
STARR: That's correct. I would ordinarily not be present for
interview of a witness.
KENDALL: Mr. Starr, I bring this out not to cast
aspersions or question your use of time, but you are here as -- and I believe you have
already said this -- you are not a fact
witness. Is that correct?
STARR: Yes, in terms -- well, I can testify to a number of facts in the
investigation.
KENDALL: In your testimony today, you
indicated you had exonerated the president with regard to the travel office, if I heard you correctly. Is that correct?
STARR: Yes, what I indicated was we had no information that related to his
involvement, although I also made it clear that that investigation is
continuing, and we hope to announce decisions or actions very soon.
KENDALL: The travel office firings which you are investigating
occurred in 1993, is that correct?
STARR: Yes, the firings were in 1993.
KENDALL: Also, if I heard you correctly
this morning, you indicated you had exonerated the president with respect to the FBI files matter which had arisen in 1996. Is that correct?
STARR: Yes, that jurisdiction did come to us in 1996 from the attorney
general. And yes, we have found, as I indicated, no evidence
of any wrongdoing by anyone who is relevant to -- I believe
at least, in my assessment, I can't speak for the committee -- that would be relevant to
the committee's assessment of our referral.
KENDALL: Mr. Starr, when did you come to those conclusions?
STARR: With respect to the travel office, I would frankly have to
search my recollection to see exactly where we were and when we were there.
As I indicated with respect to the travel office, we have, in fact, had to put part off
the travel office investigation -- and I'm now talking about the travel office -- I'll
come to the FBI files --
we had, in fact, had to put part of the travel office investigation on hold, as it were,
because of issuing over privileged litigation, which we did not prevail in the Supreme
Court.
And there are other matters that we are presently examining, and which
I can't talk about -- talk about here.
KENDALL: But were the two exonerations you
announced today -- did you come to those conclusions before or after Nov. 1, 1998?
STARR: Before Nov. 1 of this year? Well, I would say that we have not had information
that would guide us to the view that we should be concerned about the president in respect
of those two matters, and that's why, of course, there's no mention of
either of those matters in the referral.
But both matters were, in fact, continuing and no final prosecutorial decisions had been
made with respect to either the travel office matter or now to address the FBI files
matter.
With respect to that there is, as I have indicated, an unresolved question with respect to
one individual.
KENDALL: And today was the first time you
have announced that in respect to these two matters, is it not, Mr. Starr?
STARR: Yes, it's the first time that we have
viewed it as appropriate to speak to issues that are still, David, under investigation.
We are still investigating both matters, and I hope I've made that point
clear. Both investigations have very live, active elements to
them, and we will make those decisions promptly.
But I felt it was my duty to inform this committee of the state
of the record with respect to the president of the United States because the committee has
been asking me -- 'Do you have any other information that is relevant?'
KENDALL: Let me return to a question asked
by Congressman Wexler this afternoon about a witness called Julie
Hiatt Steele. Have your investigators investigated
the adoption of her 8-year-old child she adopted from a Romanian orphanage?
STARR: Mr. Kendall, my investigators work very hard and diligently to find
relevant evidence.
I believe that the questions, and I have conducted no specific investigation, and you just spent a good deal of time establishing that I don't go with
my FBI agents on every single interview.
KENDALL: Mr. Starr, I don't think it's unfair to try to find out the fact because there has been
considerable publicity about Miss Steele's claim that that is, in fact, what your
investigators have been doing. I was simply asking to clarify the record.
STARR: Well, in respect to some
of her claims, some of her claims, and I am going to say this, even though there
is an active part of our investigation under way, utterly without merit
and utterly without foundation, utterly without factual foundation.
KENDALL: Is this one of those claims?
STARR: No, I did not say that Mr. Kendall. ...
Mr. Kendall, if there is an issue with respect to the treatment of the witness, let's take
it to court and have the court resolve it in an orderly way just
as the Supreme Court of the United States said that this particular
individual is entitled to an orderly disposition of her claims.
KENDALL: In your testimony this morning,
Mr. Starr, you said, 'We go to
court and not on the talk-show circuit. We're officers
of the court who live in the world of law. We have presented our cases in court.' Now, Mr. Charles Bakaly, your press spokesman and public relations
adviser has been on, by my count, 10 talk-shows and is on "Nightline" tonight. I
would be happy to read them to you. This is from late April, but does that sound about
right, that he has been on 11 talk-shows?
STARR: That probably sounds about right, but I would have to do the
count.
Not only do we have the right, we have the duty, to engage
in a proper public information function because this is the public's business. We must do
so in order at times to combat misinformation that is being spread about including,
frequently, by lawyers who claim that their clients have been grossly mistreated, which is
what criminal defense lawyers are paid to do.
KENDALL: Mr. Starr, I take it there would be no disagreement that you, as a United
States prosecutor, are under a legal objection to protect the secrecy
of the grand jury process.
STARR: Yes. There is no dispute whatsoever.
KENDALL: No dispute. Indeed, if you turn to tab 17 of the materials,
you wrote me a letter on February 6, 1998. And if I could direct your attention to the
second paragraph of that letter. I had complained about leaks of grand jury information. You had replied, "From the beginning, I have made the prohibition of
leaks a principal priority of the office. It is a firing offense as well as one that leads
to criminal prosecution." Then you say also
that you reminded the staff that leaks are utterly intolerable. Am I reading that
correctly?
STARR: Yes, you are reading it correctly.
KENDALL: And
has anybody been fired from your office, Mr. Starr, for leaking?
STARR: No, because I don't believe anyone has leaked grand jury
information, Mr. Kendall.
KENDALL: On the day this story broke in the press, which was
Wednesday, January 21, you issued a press release -- do you recall that press release?
STARR: Could you say that again? On January...
KENDALL: On January the 21st -- the day "The Washington
Post" story ran, you issued a press release about your information policy
KENDALL: In your testimony this morning, you
described the litigation that your office has been involved in. At page 36, you said
you've faced an extraordinary number of legal disputes on issues of privilege,
jurisdiction, substantive criminal law and the like. Do you see that? It's at the top of
your testimony. ... You did not mention leak litigation in that list, I observe.
STARR: Yes, that's correct.
KENDALL: In fact, we have litigated on a number of occasions
producing, by my count, at least five district court opinions, which have all been
unsealed and in the binder, and one court of appeals decision on this matter, have we not?
STARR: Yes, and in fact, with respect to that -- and we did, Mr.
Kendall, and I think you will agree -- that we prevailed in the court of appeals with
respect to the issue that you're talking about.
The D.C. circuit unanimously concluded that the procedures that you had
urged were entirely inappropriate, improper, unauthorized by law, and that there had to be
an orderly process that was protective of very vital interests. That was a unanimous
opinion by the D.C. circuit overturning a process that you had urged upon the district
court in your effort to find out as much information inside the prosecutor's office as you
possibly could.
I hadn't even thought of that as one of the 17, but
you're absolutely right. That is part of our litigation record. And we are now in the
process, as you well know, of additional litigation.
KENDALL: I take
it you would agree with Chief Judge Johnson that enforcing rule 6(e), which enforces grand
jury secrecy, is of the utmost integrity to the grand jury process?
STARR: Yes, Chief Judge Johnson has made it abundantly clear -- and I
agree with that -- the values of confidentiality of matters occurring before the grand
jury is very important.
KENDALL: And she has also ruled, has she
not, that due to the serious and repetitive prima facie violations of rule 6(e), a
thorough investigation is necessary, and is now being conducted? Just let me direct your
attention to ... and that's her opinion which was just unsealed.
KENDALL: In fact, Judge
Johnson had before her 24 submissions from us as to what might be leaks from the
independent counsel's office. Did she not?
STARR: And we are in the process of litigating
those, David, as you know.
KENDALL: And how many did she find there
was prima facie reason to believe that your office had committed these leaks?
STARR: And I think you know the answer to that. Under the
hair-trigger, Barry-standard where almost anything will satisfy.
KENDALL: I think the answer to my question was
all 24.
And are you saying that the journalists invented sources
like "prosecutors painted a different picture"; "sources in Starr's office
tell us"; "sources near Starr"; "prosecutors suggest"?
Does the media make up those quotes, Mr. Starr?
STARR: I am not here to accuse the media of
anything. I am here to say that fairness
requires us to be able to litigate this matter, which, as you well know, is under seal,
and to litigate that in an orderly way, and then to come to a judgment as to the
significance of that.
KENDALL: Mr. Starr, in fact, there has been no case remotely similar to this in terms of the
massive leaking from the prosecutor's office, and I think we noted that.
STARR: I totally disagree with that. That's an accusation, and it's
an unfair accusation. I completely reject it. .
KENDALL: May I direct your attention now to
the exhibit that we have displayed up there? ... It's your press release on the first day
of the Lewinsky story breaking. It's a press release on the letterhead of the independent
counsel's office. We secured it from your office through a Freedom of Information Act
request. It's under your name. It says -- "Independent
Counsel Kenneth W. Starr issued the following statement today from his office in
Washington, D.C." And then it says: "Because of confidentiality requirements, we
are unable to comment on any aspect of our work." Is that what you announced to the
world on Jan. 21?
STARR: Yes,
and I must say, I think that this is inconsistent with the duty of a prosecutor to provide
appropriate and lawful public information. I think it is the duty of the prosecutor
to combat the dissemination of misinformation as long as the
prosecutor can do that without violating his or her obligations under rule 6(e). And
that's the position, David, as you know, of the Justice
Department.
KENDALL: But did you issue any press
release admitting that you were talking about aspects of your
investigation?
STARR: No, in terms of being able to provide a public
information function, it depends upon how broadly one wants to read a particular document.
This is not a legal document. It's a
statement of policy.
And ordinarily, in contrast to what most prosecutors do, we try to
treat all individuals -- those, for example, charged with crime -- with complete fairness. We do not go out and hold press conferences and the like.
That is our methodology and our approach. But we follow Justice Department policy. And I frankly think that this comment is an over broad statement because
it's incompatible with DOJ policy.
KENDALL: It is your comment, though,
Mr. Starr. It's what you wanted the world to think you were doing in the Lewinsky investigation. Is that not
a fact? It is your press release.
STARR: Well, except I think it is still you're talking about a press
release.
You're not talking about a filing in court
and the like.
Continued in Part II
Kendall questions Starr, Part II
KENDALL: Did Professor Dash give you any advice as to what should be
on background or what on the record?
STARR: We discussed with Sam a variety of issues. I would have to
search my recollection with respect to any specific observations that Sam gave us with
respect to this.
KENDALL: You yourself executed an affidavit in the leaks of the
investigation, did you not?
STARR: David, this matter is in litigation. And Mr. Chairman, as a matter
of fairness, I have to be careful about what I say because he may tell me that it's
not under -- it's just not right to be in litigation under seal before the district court and to be
cross-examined by the president's attorney with respect to that matter which seems to have
no germaneness whatever (off--microphone).
KENDALL: Mr. Starr, I was going to ask you about an
affidavit, a
sworn declaration which you yourself executed which is not under seal in -- in the leaks
proceeding.
But I will move on if this -- if this -- if this is not something that you want to respond
to?
STARR: Well, David, I just think if you're talking about the leaks
litigation, that's the point. It is in litigation.
Why don't we allow that litigation to go forward instead of individuals, members
of Congress who talk about fairness, jumping to the conclusion that there's been a violation when there has
been no adjudication of anything beyond the existence under
the law of this circuit of a prima facie case.
KENDALL: You mentioned the experience of Miss Lewinsky at the Ritz-Carlton
on Friday, Jan. 16, 1998.
KENDALL: One of the reasons your agents held Ms. Lewinsky was that
they....
STARR: I have to interrupt. That premise is false.
KENDALL: I was not meaning to be offensive.
STARR: That is false and you know it to be false.
KENDALL: I'll rephrase the question.
STARR: She was not held.
KENDALL: One
of the purposes was to get Ms. Lewinsky to wear a recording device and surreptitiously
record Mr. Jordan or the president. Was it not?
STARR: It was not.
And I know that there is testimony and that this was referred to, but let me explain. She
was asked and given the opportunity, which she turned down, to be a cooperating witness.
And we explained to her -- we did not invent this.
This is all traditional prosecutorial
activity and techniques.
And we said one of the things that a
cooperating witness can do is to assist us in consensual
monitoring.
KENDALL: You may have read the Time magazine essay -- excuse me --
I'm sorry, by Messrs. Ginsburg and Speights which they state the following:
"The government didn't just want our client to tell her story. They wanted her wired.
They wanted her to record telephone calls with the president of the United States, Vernon
Jordan and others at their will." You're familiar with Mr. Ginsburg's charge?
STARR: Mr. Ginsburg is wrong. And he must know that he is wrong. He was wrong then, and it is a calumny
to repeat that now. Mr. Ginsburg was not known for his consistency of articulating
positions.
Nor was -- nor was he known for his consistency in dealing with facts. I would say that he
was rather fast and loose with the facts. And if you are going to
rely in this proceeding on a Time magazine essay by Bill Ginsburg, then I think the standards
are not quite as lofty as I thought they would be this evening.
KENDALL: Now, you categorically
denied wanting to have Ms. Lewinsky wear a wire or secretly tape record the president
or Mr. Jordan when the charge was made in the Time article, did you not? You categorically
denied that.
STARR: Are you saying at the time of this Time article?
KENDALL: At the time of that Time article, you denied Mr. Ginsburg's charge, did you not?
STARR: I believe that we did, but I am just not recalling specifically...
KENDALL: You certainly denied it ... You say, this is false, this
office never asked Ms. Lewinsky to agree to wire herself for a conversation with Mr.
Jordan or the president. You cite no source at all, nor could you, as we
had no such plans. Have I read correctly your letter?
STARR: Yes, you have.
At some point, Mr. Starr is asked to refer
to FBI reports of that day, & other records, indicating Ms. Lewinsky was asked to tape
calls or be wired while conversing with Jordan, Currie &/or the President.
KENDALL: All right now. When you wrote the letter,
did you review... You were not present at the Ritz Carlton were you?
STARR: No, I was not.
KENDALL: It was in the grand jury that the events of Friday, January the 16th, were
presented through the testimony of Ms. Lewinsky, was it not? Was that her second
appearance?
STARR: Yes, I believe that's right.
KENDALL: The grand jurors -- you're prosecutors had no more questions, and
the grand jurors themselves began to inquire about the events that day. One of them said
at page 1143, "We want to know about that day, we really want
to know about that day." And this illicited then, from Ms. Lewinsky, who was under
oath, a tearful description of what had happened to her. She asked Mr. Emmick to leave the
room, did she not?
STARR: That's my recollection of the transcript, yes.
KENDALL: And, in fact, she said that she
was told on Friday, Jan. 16 by your agents that she'd have to place calls or wear a wire
to see -- to call Betty, and Mr. Jordan, and possibly the president.
"Question: And did you tell them you didn't want to do that? Yes."
Was that Ms. Lewinsky's testimony?
STARR: Yes, that is her testimony.
KENDALL: I think the point
was made earlier, but the affidavit that Ms. Lewinsky filed had not been mailed by her
attorney until the end of the day Friday, January the 16th, had it?
STARR: I believe that's right in terms of the timing, that --but I would have
to reconstruct that in terms of the actual timing of the mailing. I'm sorry,
I would have to double-check that.
KENDALL: Mr. Starr, you've repeatedly said
that the attorney general asked you to take on this matter -- the Lewinsky...
STARR: Well, that's your characterization. I have said that
we collaborated with the Justice Department, and the attorney general came to her
decision. We brought it to her attention.
We did say that we thought that the steps we'd taken had been within our jurisdiction, but
we were concerned about whether any additional step could be taken properly within our
jurisdiction, and that's how the discussions began.
