Trump’s lawyers argue he cannot obstruct probe
WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump’s lawyers have told the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 elections that their client could not have obstructed the probe as he has complete constitutional control over federal investigations as the nation’s chief law enforcement officer.
Trump “could neither constitutionally nor legally constitute obstruction because that would amount to him obstructing himself, and that”, Trump’s lawyers John Dowd and Jay Sekulow argued in a 20-page secret memo hand-delivered to the office of special counsel Robert Muller in January.
They added that Trump could “order the termination of an investigation by the justice department or FBI at any time and for any reason”.
The note — a copy of which published by The New York Times — was written in response to Mueller’s request to interview Trump. Muller wants to ascertain through the interview if there was criminal intent behind the apparent attempt by Trump to obstruct the investigation of his associates’ contacts with Russians.
If Trump refuses to agree to an interview voluntarily, the special counsel could force him to do so through a subpoena, which would be a first for a president. That, experts and commentators have said, will be challenged and the case could go up to the Supreme Court and, thus, drag for months.
But despite arguing that Trump cannot obstruct a federal investigation, his lawyers have quietly continued to negotiate with Mueller over the terms and conditions of an interview. This is something Trump has said he is willing to do against the advice of his legal team, who fear he might implicate himself.
Dowd and Sekulow detailed 16 topics that are being considered by Mueller as obstruction, including the firings of former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey.
The lawyers argued that Trump should be interviewed only if Mueller can establish that the information sought cannot be obtained from any other source.