The Democrat-led House Judiciary Committee sued a key witness in the Trump-Russia investigation Wednesday, asking a federal judge to force former White House counsel Don McGahn to testify as they explore possible impeachment proceedings against President Trump.
Rep. Jerry Nadler, a Democrat from New York, the committee chairman and longtime Trump foe, has pushed for an impeachment investigation for months even as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California has shown serious hesitance about the strategy, and today’s lawsuit could represent the most significant step in that direction yet. McGahn has refused to comply with a subpoena issued by Nadler’s committee earlier this year and declined to testify in front of the committee.
McGahn, who served following President Trump’s inauguration through his resignation in October 2018, is mentioned 71 times in special counsel Robert Mueller’s 448-page report. Mueller’s investigation concluded the Russians had interfered “in sweeping and systematic fashion” during the 2016 presidential election, but it did not establish any criminal conspiracy between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign. Mueller did lay out 10 possible instances of obstruction of justice but didn’t reach a conclusion on obstruction. Attorney General William Barr and then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein concluded justice had not been obstructed.
In the lawsuit, Democrats claimed Mueller’s report, his press conference, and his congressional testimony showed Trump “repeatedly used his official power to attempt to thwart the Special Counsel’s investigation” into Russian election interference “including into whether any individuals associated with his own presidential campaign coordinated with the Russian government.”
The Democrat-led committee said it is “now determining whether to recommend articles of impeachment against the President based on the obstructive conduct described by the Special Counsel.” Because of an Office of Legal Counsel opinion stating a sitting president cannot be indicted, Mueller had essentially handed the responsibility for holding Trump accountable over to the legislative branch, the suit argues.
But Democrats said they can’t do this without hearing from McGahn, whom they described as a “crucial witness” and “the most important witness, other than the President, to the key events” they are looking into. McGahn has thus far defied the congressional subpoena at the direction of President Trump, who has said McGahn is “absolutely immune” from testifying.
McGahn met with Mueller’s team at least five times and described Trump allegedly asking him to direct Rosenstein to fire the special counsel. McGahn says he threatened to resign rather than do so. Trump disputes this account, claiming he never tried to fire Mueller and saying McGahn wasn’t telling the truth about that incident, but was rather just trying to make himself “look like a good lawyer.”
The Trump administration contends, “Congress may not constitutionally compel the President’s senior advisers to testify about their official duties.” Trump has said “we’re fighting all the subpoenas,” “I don’t want people testifying,” and “No Do-Overs!”
Democrats wrote to the court that the claim of absolute immunity has “no basis in law” and “no grounding in the Constitution,” and thus they were looking to the court to help “enforce the McGahn subpoena in its entirety.” Specifically, Democrats asked the judge to issue an injunction forcing McGahn to appear in front of the committee quickly to answer their questions about the special counsel investigation and other matters.
