Clinton may have asked secretary to lie

Quoting lawyers familiar with both Currie's account of events and Clinton's Jan. 17 deposition in Paula Jones' sexual harassment suit against him, The New York Times reported in today's editions that the secretary told prosecutors that Clinton and Lewinsky had been alone together.

Two weeks ago, Currie also turned over to Starr's investigators gifts from Clinton to Lewinsky that she had retrieved from the former intern - including a hat pin, a brooch and a dress, the Times quoted the lawyers as saying.

It quoted Currie's attorney, Lawrence Wechsler, as saying any implication or suggestion that ''Mrs. Currie was aware of any legal or ethical impropriety by anyone ... is entirely inaccurate.'' Currie was questioned by Starr's investigators before a federal grant jury last week.

The White House press office issued a statment suggesting that the Times story was based on false leaks.

''Over the last few weeks, the White House has been subjected to a series of false leaks designed to mislead both reporters and the American public,'' the White House statement said. ''We have no interest in responding to the latest false leak.''

Lewinsky's attorney said yesterday he has a letter from prosecutors confirming a deal to grant her immunity, and he accused them of trying to pressure her ''into statements that are not true.''

In a dramatic statement last night, attorney William Ginsburg flatly disputed Starr's remarks earlier in the day that his office could not grant Lewinsky immunity because his investigators had not been given a face-to-face interview with her.

''His continued insistence that he cannot have a face-to-face talk with Ms. Lewinsky has no basis in fact,'' Ginsburg said in a written statement. He would not elaborate on it.

''Judge Starr has made an agreement to grant Monica Lewinsky complete immunity and sent Ms. Lewinsky a letter confirming the grant of immunity,'' Ginsburg's statement said. ''Under that agreement, Judge Starr has the right to meet face to face with Ms. Lewinsky at any time and for as long as he wishes to meet.''

Ginsburg flatly disputed Starr's remarks earlier in the day that his office could not grant Lewinsky immunity because his investigators had not been given a face-to-face interview with her.

''His continued insistence that he cannot have a face-to-face talk with Ms. Lewinsky has no basis in fact,'' Ginsburg said in a written statement. He would not elaborate on it.

''Judge Starr has made an agreement to grant Monica Lewinsky complete immunity and sent Ms. Lewinsky a letter confirming the grant of immunity,'' Ginsburg's statement said. ''Under that agreement, Judge Starr has the right to meet face to face with Ms. Lewinsky at any time and for as long as he wishes to meet.''

Ginsburg accused Starr of making comments suggesting there was no immunity deal as part of an ''orchestrated campaign to pressure Lewinsky into statements that are not true.''

Deborah Gershman, Starr's spokesperson, said last night that his office had no immediate comment.

Since the middle of last month, Starr has been investigating a secretly taped assertion of Lewinsky that she had an 18-month affair with Clinton, beginning while she was a 21-year-old White House intern. Both Clinton and Lewinsky last month denied having a sexual relationship in an affadavit and deposition in Paula Jones' sexual harassment suit against the president, according to sources.

Meanwhile, Linda Tripp, a former White House aide and later a Pentagon colleague of Lewinsky, has given Jones' attorneys an affidavitt saying Lewinsky told her the affair with Clinton began Nov. 15, 1995.

The Washington Post printed Tripp's Jan. 21 affidavit in its editions today. Tripp secretly recorded her conversations with Lewinsky about the alleged affair and turned them over to Starr on Jan. 12.

Ginsburg's statement came at the conclusion of a day in which there was great confusion over the status of the negotiations for Lewinsky's cooperation in the investigation of an alleged presidential affair and cover-up.

Sources reported Wednesday that Starr had rejected an immunity offer signed by Ginsburg on Monday night and that Ginsburg's defense team believed Starr had reneged on the deal.

Starr said yesterday his investigators wanted to talk to Lewinsky face-to-face and look her ''in the eye'' before making an immunity deal.

The public acknowledgement of a letter discussing an agreement for immunity is an important development. However whether or not that letter would prove binding in convincing a court to grant Lewinsky immunity for her testimony may be a matter of interpretations. Prosecutors traditionally don't consider a grant of immunity official until they have applied to a court for it. A defense attorney may view the letter, however, as a formal deal to do so.

President Clinton, meanwhile, left open the possibility that some of his aides could be instructed not to answer certain questions from prosecutors about an alleged presidential affair and cover-up, under the doctrine of executive privilege.

Prosecutors in Washington questioned White House deputy chief of staff John Podesta before a federal grand jury.

''Nothing in my testimony contradicted the strong denials the president gave to these accusations,'' Podesta said afterward. He said he answered all questions and would return for more questioning.

In Arkansas, Starr held a rare news conference to signal that his probe was moving forward, with or without Lewinsky's cooperation. He later issued a statement insisting on an interview with Lewinsky before deciding whether to grant her immunity.

''We want all the truth,'' he said. ''We want it completely, accurately.''

''We have made very significant progress,'' Starr said while surrounded by several of his deputies on the steps of the federal courthouse in Little Rock, where he attended a hearing on an unrelated Whitewater criminal case. he truth,'' Clinton addresses executive privilege

And Starr's team declined to limit the scope of questioning of White House witnesses to address presidential lawyers' concerns about executive privilege.

02-06-98