Kavanaugh Wanted Ken Starr to Ask Bill Clinton These Wildly Lewd Questions

A newly released 1998 memo shows the Supreme Court nominee’s fluency in the language of oral sex.

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh on Capitol Hill in July.Tom Williams/ZUMA

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Before Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh became a federal appellate judge, he spent his early legal career working in Washington as a lawyer for Ken Starr, the independent counsel appointed to investigate President Bill Clinton’s convoluted Arkansas real estate deal known as Whitewater. The investigation steadily grew in scope, eventually focusing on the president’s relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Kavanaugh was deeply involved in that angle of the investigation, particularly in delving into precisely what sexual activities Clinton and Lewinsky engaged in within the confines of the Oval Office. A 1998 memo released on Monday as part of a Freedom of Information Act request from the nonprofit group Fix the Court shows just how much specific, intimate detail Kavanaugh sought to elicit from Clinton about his extramarital affair.

In the memo to Starr, Kavanaugh revealed significant hostility towards Clinton regarding his behavior with Lewinsky and recommended that Starr play hardball when he eventually interviewed Clinton. Kavanaugh wrote:

After reflecting this evening, I am strongly opposed to giving the President any “break” in the questioning regarding the details of the Lewinsky relationship — unless before his questioning on Monday, he either (i) resigns or (ii) confesses perjury and issues a public apology to you. I  have tried hard to bend over backwards and to be fair to him and to think of all reasonable defenses to his pattern of behavior. In the end, I am convinced that there really are none. The idea of going easy on him at the questioning is thus abhorrent to me…

He should be forced to account for all of that and to defend his actions. [Emphasis in original.] It may not be our job to impose sanctions on him, but it is our job to make his pattern of revolting behavior clear — piece by painful piece — on Monday. I am mindful of the need for respect for the Office of the President. But in my view, given what we know, the interests of the Office of the President would be best served by our gathering the full facts regarding the actions of this President so that the Congress can decide whether the interests of the Presidency would be best served by having a new President. More to the point: Aren’t we failing to fulfill our duty to the American people if we willingly “conspire” with the President in an effort to conceal the true nature of his acts?

Apparently Kavanaugh believed it was their duty to inform Congress about all the specifics of Clinton and Lewinsky’s act, including phone sex, masturbation, and various types of orgasms. Here are some of the questions he urged Starr to ask Clinton:

If Monica Lewinsky says that you inserted a cigar into her vagina while you were in the Oval Office area, would she be lying?

If Monica Lewinsky says that you had phone sex with her on approximately 15 occasions, would she be lying?

If Monica Lewinsky says that on several occasions in the Oval Office area, you used your fingers to stimulate her vagina and bring her to orgasm, would she be lying?

If Monica Lewinsky says that she gave you oral sex on nine occasions in the Oval Office area, would she be lying?

If Monica Lewinsky says that you ejaculated into her mouth on two occasions in the Oval Office area, would she be lying?

If Monica Lewinsky says that on several occasions you had her give her oral sex, made her stop, and then ejaculated into the sink in the bathroom off the Oval Office, would she be lying?

If Monica Lewinsky says that you masturbated into a trashcan in your secretary’s office, would she by lying?

This sort of prurient, self-righteous focus on sex over perjury and other legal issues that were at the heart of the independent counsel’s investigation is exactly why the Starr report ultimately came under harsh fire from critics for missing the forest for the trees. Kavanaugh’s central role in the Lewinsky debacle calls into question his political judgement, if not his legal judgment, and it’s likely to become the main focus of his confirmation hearing next month.

IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE SCREWED WITHOUT TRUMP:

"It's that we're screwed with or without him if we can't show the public that what we do matters for the long term," writes Mother Jones CEO Monika Bauerlein as she kicks off our drive to raise $350,000 in donations from readers by July 17.

This is a big one for us. It's our first time asking for an outpouring of support since screams of FAKE NEWS and so much of what Trump stood for made everything we do so visceral. Like most newsrooms, we face incredibly hard budget realities, and it's unnerving needing to raise big money when traffic is down.

So, as we ask you to consider supporting our team's journalism, we thought we'd slow down and check in about where Mother Jones is and where we're going after the chaotic last several years. This comparatively slow moment is also an urgent one for Mother Jones: You can read more in "Slow News Is Good News," and if you're able to, please support our team's hard-hitting journalism and help us reach our big $350,000 goal with a donation today.

payment methods

IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE SCREWED WITHOUT TRUMP:

"It's that we're screwed with or without him if we can't show the public that what we do matters for the long term," writes Mother Jones CEO Monika Bauerlein as she kicks off our drive to raise $350,000 in donations from readers by July 17.

This is a big one for us. So, as we ask you to consider supporting our team's journalism, we thought we'd slow down and check in about where Mother Jones is and where we're going after the chaotic last several years. This comparatively slow moment is also an urgent one for Mother Jones: You can read more in "Slow News Is Good News," and if you're able to, please support our team's hard-hitting journalism and help us reach our big $350,000 goal with a donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate