Can You Help?

This website is in imminent danger of being shut down. It has been online since 1995, but the personal circumstances of the owner, Malcolm Farnsworth, are such that economies have to be made. Server costs and suchlike have become prohibitive. At the urging of people online, I have agreed to see if Patreon provides a solution. More information is available at the Patreon website. If you are able to contribute even $1.00/month to keep the site running, please click the Patreon button below.


Become a Patron!


Correspondence and Agreed Order in the Settlement of Clinton’s Case

This is the text of correspondence exchanged yesterday in which President Clinton reached a settlement with the independent counsel, Robert Ray.

These are the letters exchanged between David E. Kendall, a lawyer for President Clinton, and Robert W. Ray, the independent counsel, in which they agreed to a settlement. Also included is the order that the Circuit Court of Pulaski County, Ark., issued yesterday, suspending for five years the president’s right to practice law in Arkansas. [Read more…]


Clinton Impeachment Trial: Statement By Clinton Attorney David Kendall

This is the statement by David Kendall at the Senate impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton.

Kendall was the President’s attorney.

Statement by President Clinton’s Attorney David Kendall.

REHNQUIST: The Senate will convene as a court of impeachment. The chaplain will offer a prayer.

OGILVIE: Dear God, you know what we need before we ask you. But in the asking, our minds and hearts are prepared to receive your answer.

In this impeachment trial, we’ve learned again that really listening over a prolonged period of time is hard work. Often it’s difficult to hear what is said because of differing convictions. Dissonance causes discordant static. Sometimes our preconceptions about what we think will be said keep us from hearing what is actually said. [Read more…]


Clinton Impeachment: The President’s Lawyers

Five lawyers are to bear most of the burden of President Clinton’s defense: Charles F.C. Ruff, Gregory B. Craig, Cheryl D. Mills, David E. Kendall and Dale Bumpers.

Ruff handled the opening on Tuesday. On Wednesday, special White House counsel Craig will discuss the allegation that the president committed perjury before independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr’s grand jury last August. Deputy White House counsel Mills will rebut obstruction of justice charges related to the hiding of presidential gifts in the Paula Jones case and the alleged witness tampering of his secretary Betty Currie. And Kendall, the private attorney who has represented Clinton through most of the 4½-year Starr investigation starting with Whitewater, will handle the remaining obstruction allegations. Former Arkansas Senator Bumpers will then deliver closing remarks on Thursday. [Read more…]


Kenneth Starr’s Testimony Before The House Judiciary Committee – 5/7

This is the fifth of seven pages with the full text of Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr’s testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7

Kenneth Starr testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

President Clinton’s Attorney David Kendall’s Cross Examination of Kenneth Starr Before the House Judiciary Committee.

HYDE: The committee will come to order.

The chair now recognizes the president’s counsel, Mr. Kendall, to examine the witness for 30 minutes, should he choose to do so. [Read more…]


White House Response To Starr Report

This is the White House’s response to the Starr Report.

The response was issued by the President’s lawyer, David Kendall.

It follows a preliminary rebuttal issued on September 11: Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

White House Response to the Starr Report.

INITIAL RESPONSE TO REFERRAL OF OFFICE OF INDEPENDENT COUNSEL

David E. Kendall
Nicole K. Seligman
Emmet T. Flood
Max Stier
Glen Donath

Alicia L. Marti
WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY
725 12th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005

Charles F.C. Ruff
Cheryl Mills
Lanny A. Breuer
OFFICE OF THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL
The White House
Washington, DC 20005

September 12, 1998

On May 31, 1998, the spokesman for Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr declared that the Office’s Monica Lewinsky investigation “is not about sex. This case is about perjury, subornation of perjury, witness tampering, obstruction of justice. That is what this case is about.” 1

Now that the 450-page Referral to the United States House of Representatives Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code =A7 595(c) (the ‘Referral’) is public, it is plain that ‘sex’ is precisely what this four-and-a-half year investigation has boiled down to. The Referral is so loaded with irrelevant and unnecessary graphic and salacious allegations that only one conclusion is possible: its principal purpose is to damage the President. [Read more…]


Clinton’s Response To The Starr Report – 3/3

This is the third of three sections of President Bill Clinton’s response to the Starr Report.

The response was issued by the President’s lawyer, David Kendall.

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

President Clinton’s response to the Starr Report.

1. Bronston and Literal Truth.

In United States v. Bronston, 409 U.S. 352 (1973), the leading case on the law of perjury, the United States Supreme Court addressed whether a witness may be convicted of perjury for an answer, under oath, that is literally true but not responsive to the question asked and arguably misleading by negative implication. Id. at 352. The Court directly answered the question no. It made absolutely clear that a literally truthful answer cannot constitute perjury, no matter how much the witness intended by his answer to mislead. [Read more…]


Clinton’s Response To The Starr Report – 2/3

This is the second of three sections of President Bill Clinton’s response to the Starr Report.

The response was issued by the President’s lawyer, David Kendall.

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

President Clinton’s response to the Starr Report.

PRELIMINARY MEMORANDUM CONCERNING REFERRAL OF OFFICE OF INDEPENDENT COUNSEL

This document is intended to be a preliminary response to the Referral submitted by the Office of Independent Counsel to The Congress. Because we were denied the opportunity to review the content, nature or specifics of the allegations made against the President by the Office of Independent Counsel (OIC), we do not pretend to offer a point-by-point refutation of those allegations, or a comprehensive defense of the President. [Read more…]