In wake of State of Union address, Clinton's lawyers prepare for second day of presentation            Full Coverage Search Clinton in Crisis The Trial Trial Guide Evidence Guide Transcripts Video Discuss the Trial The Starr Report and Rebuttals Video Index Documents Starr Investigation Jones v. Clinton Whitewater Jones v. Clinton Whitewater Updated January 20, 1999 9:31 a.m. ET WASHINGTON (Court TV) — On the tails of President Clinton's State of the Union plea for bipartisanship, White House lawyers plan to challenge House prosecutors' charges of perjury and obstruction of justice in the second day of their defense at Clinton's impeachment trial. White House officials said special counsel Gregory Craig would open Wednesday's trial session by attacking prosecutors' allegations that Clinton lied at least four times in his Aug. 17 testimony before Kenneth Starr's grand jury. In that testimony, the president contended that he did not lie during his deposition a in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case when he denied an affair with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky. After Craig's presentation, White House Deputy Counsel Cheryl Mills is scheduled to argue against the obstruction charge. She will maintain that Clinton did not ask his secretary, Betty Currie, to retrieve presidential gifts from Lewinsky after they had been subpoenaed in December 1997 by Jones' lawyers. The presentations by Craig and Mills follow Tuesday's openings by Clinton attorney Charles Ruff, who provided an overview of the case as well as the first of what will likely be several refutations of the House's perjury and obstruction charges to be presented during the White House's defense. He also criticized the legal grounds for the impeachment articles. Matching the House prosecutors' penchant for detailed chronologies illustrated by large placards, Ruff produced his own chart as he outlined the chronology of Jordan's assistance to Lewinsky. Ruff said Jordan had been meeting with Lewinsky and placing calls on her behalf before a judge ordered that Lewinsky could be called in the Paula Jones case. He also attacked the prosecutors' allegation that Clinton must have told Betty Currie to conceal gifts he had given to Lewinsky because, Ruff insisted, no evidence revealed so far proves the charge. Ruff accused the House team of a "prosecutorial...fudge" on key evidence as he told senators, "We will defend the president on the facts and on the law and on the constitutional principles that must guide your deliberations." But reaction to Ruff's openings were predictably partisan. House Republicans said Ruff's presentation showed the need for witnesses; Democrats claimed it illustrated the opposite. Democrats made a special point of praising Ruff's rebuttal to prosecutors' contention that a job search for Ms. Lewinsky was an attempt to keep her from revealing her affair with Clinton to Jones' lawyers. Prosecutors had left an impression that the order in the Jones case which opened the door to Lewinsky's testimony triggered the Lewinsky-Jordan meeting the morning of Dec. 11, 1997, Democrats said. "A lot of people didn't know the order came late at night when Vernon Jordan was on an airplane," said Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa. "He really poked some holes as big as a barn door in the prosecution's case." Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., added that Ruff's presentation showed that House prosecutors' gave misleading information in their case. "It is a very serious problem for the House of Representatives, which presented this fact erroneously," said Levin. "They made a representation that is a serious error." Republicans mostly downplayed Ruff's presentation, offering few comments. House manager Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said it was "hard to buy" denials that Clinton obstructed justice. House manager Charles Canady, R-Fla., said of Ruff's did the best job he could with "an inherently weak case." Sen. Orrin Hatch, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Ruff's openings illustrated the need for witnesses at the impeachment trial. "The arguments showed there are conflicts in testimony that witnesses might resolve," said Hatch, R-Utah. said. He also speculated that most of those who might be called could be helpful to Clinton's case. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., opposed calling of any witnesses and noted that key figures in the case have been interviewed numerous times already. "They said the same thing each time," he told NBC. "Why are we going through this again?" An invitation to the president to testify was still under discussion. At a meeting of Senate Republicans on Tuesday, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said he thought Clinton could be compelled to testify under Senate rules and court decisions. But impeachment manager Asa Hutchinson, R-Ark., said he didn't believe prosecutors "should press the Senate" for witnesses at this point, even though the prosecution team believes they are crucial to the House case. Nonetheless, Hutchinson said he "would welcome the opportunity for the president to testify" and claimed Lewinsky, Jordan, Mrs. Currie and others would "help resolve conflicts that have been raised by Mr. Ruff." Court TV's Catherine Heins and The Associated Press contributed to this report.