Forum

The Bates Student - January 23, 1998

 
 

Senior analyzes latest allegations against the President
Former White House intern explains ins and outs of claim, implications

By DAVID LIEBER
Staff Writer

The news hit late Tuesday night- President Clinton allegedly had a sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky, a White House intern, and may have obstructed justice by suborning perjury from Ms. Lewinsky.

The allegations surfaced as a result of tape recordings obtained by Newsweek correspondent Michael Isikoff from Linda Tripp, a former White House aide who reportedly possesses over twenty hours of taped conversations with Ms. Lewinsky. On the tapes, Ms. Lewinsky allegedly discusses in graphic detail the nature of her sexual relationship with the President, and suggests that the President and his close friend Vernon Jordan persuaded her to deny the allegations.

After recording the conversations with Ms. Lewinsky, Ms. Tripp voluntarily brought the tapes to Whitewater Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr. Starr brought the tapes to Attorney General Janet Reno for expedited consideration last week. Reno and a special three-judge panel that oversees the independent counsel agreed to the enlargement of Mr. Starr's mandate so that he could investigate the allegations contained on the tapes.

What distinguishes the Monica Lewinsky case from previous sexual liaisons President Clinton allegedly had with Gennifer Flowers and Paula Jones is the possibility that the President may have committed a crime. The issue here is not whether the President had sex with an intern, but whether he obstructed justice by persuading Ms. Lewinsky to lie about their relationship in a deposition she was to give in the Paula Jones case.

I was fortunate enough to work in the White House as an intern last summer; I also received (by dumb luck and nothing else) the most coveted piece of intern regalia during my time at the White House: the security clearance which enabled me to travel freely throughout the West Wing of the White House, where the Oval Office is located. Only a small percentage of the 250 interns who work in the White House are permitted access to the West Wing for security purposes.

Monica Lewinsky worked in the Chief of Staff's office, located fifty feet away from the Oval Office where the President works. Interns who have access to the West Wing are frequently requested to deliver correspondence to the Oval Office Operations Office, immediately adjacent to the Oval Office itself. Ms. Lewinsky undoubtedly had the opportunity to meet and even develop a working relationship with the President because of her close proximity to the Oval office.

West Wing interns are also sometimes required to stay beyond midnight to assist in the preparation of an important upcoming event. Commentators have pointed out that President Clinton would have a difficult time explaining why Monica Lewinsky was in the White House past midnight if Secret Service logs could substantiate her presence. I remember several times this summer, however, when I left the White House late at night to grab something to eat and then returned. It is important to note that it would not be unusual for Secret Service logs to confirm that interns were at the White House past midnight because many of them have legitimate reasons for being there.

What would be unusual, however, is for interns to be present in the executive mansion past midnight. If the Secret Service can place Monica Lewinsky in the executive mansion at any point, the President would be in the uncomfortable position of explaining why this one intern was given access to the private residence. White House phone logs could also prove whether any correspondence between the President and Ms. Lewinsky took place following her period of employment at the White House. The tapes which Whitewater Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr possesses reportedly include messages on Ms. Lewinsky's answering machine from President Clinton. While none of these potentialities would definitively prove that President Clinton had a sexual affair or obstructed justice, they would at least cast some light on whether these allegations merit further scrutiny.

The response from the White House has been mealy-mouthed and ambiguous. When PBS anchor Jim Lehrer asked President Clinton whether he had a sexual relationship with Ms. Lewinsky, the President answered that "There is no sexual relationship." The President expressed little emotion in his response, but what truly befuddled me was his use of the present tense. The President did not deny that a sexual relationship had occurred in the past, but rather asserted that he was not currently engaged in a sexual relationship with Ms. Lewinsky.

The only emphatic denial of any sexual relationship between the President and Ms. Lewinsky came on Thursday from Vernon Jordan. In his statement, Mr. Jordan remarked that he made an attempt to secure employment for Ms. Lewinsky. How Ms. Lewinsky came to the attention of the President's best friend is a question that cries out for an answer. Mr. Jordan may be magnanimous, but why did he find the case of Monica Lewinsky so compelling (my supervisor at the White House happened to be Vernon Jordan's niece, but that did not win me any special treatment from him) ? And why were concerted efforts made from within the White House to secure employment for an intern who some White House staffers believe lacked maturity? These questions (along with a score of others) remain unanswered.

F. Scott Fitzgerald remarked in The Great Gatsby that we ought to reserve judgement as a matter of infinite hope. But the specter of impeachment is slowly emerging on the horizon of Pennsylvania Avenue... and a cancer may be growing on this Presidency.


Back To Index
© 1998 The Bates Student. All Rights Reserved.
Last Modified: 2/7/98
Questions? Comments? Mail us.