Trump’s lawyers, in confidential memo, argue to head off subpoena
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s lawyers have for months quietly waged a campaign to keep the special counsel from trying to force him to answer questions in the investigation into whether he obstructed justice, asserting that he cannot be compelled to testify and arguing in a confidential letter that he could not possibly have committed obstruction because he has unfettered authority over all federal investigations.
In a brash assertion of presidential power, the 20-page letter — sent to the special counsel, Robert Mueller, and obtained by The New York Times — contends the president cannot illegally obstruct any aspect of the investigation into Russia’s election meddling because the Constitution empowers him to, “if he wished, terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon.”
Trump’s lawyers fear that if he answers questions, either voluntarily or in front of a grand jury, he risks exposing himself to accusations of lying to investigators, a potential crime or impeachable offense.
Trump’s broad interpretation of executive authority is novel and is likely to be tested if a court battle ensues over whether he could be ordered to answer questions.
Hand-delivered to the special counsel’s office in January and written by two of the president’s lawyers at the time, John M. Dowd and Jay A. Sekulow, the letter offers a rare glimpse into one side of the high-stakes negotiations over a presidential interview.
Though it is written as a defense of the president, the letter recalls the tangled drama of early 2017 as the new administration dealt with the Russia investigation. It also serves as a reminder that in weighing an obstruction case, Mueller is reviewing actions and conversations involving senior White House officials, including the president, the vice president and the White House counsel.
Mueller has told the president’s lawyers he needs to talk to their client to determine whether he had criminal intent to obstruct the investigation into his associates’ possible links to Russia’s election interference. If Trump refuses to be questioned, Mueller will have to weigh their arguments while deciding whether to press ahead with a historic grand jury subpoena.
Mueller had raised the prospect of subpoenaing Trump to Dowd in March. Emmet T. Flood, the White House lawyer for the special counsel investigation, is preparing for that possibility, according to the president’s lead lawyer in the case, Rudy Giuliani.
The attempt to dissuade Mueller from seeking a grand jury subpoena is one of two fronts on which Trump’s lawyers are fighting. In recent weeks, they have also begun a publicrelations campaign to discredit the investigation and in part to pre-empt a potentially damaging special counsel report that could prompt impeachment proceedings.
On both fronts, they have attacked the credibility of a key witness in the inquiry, the fired FBI director James B. Comey; complained about what they see as investigative failures; and contested the interpretation of significant facts.
Trump’s defense is a wide-ranging interpretation of presidential power. In saying he has the authority to end a law enforcement inquiry or pardon people, his lawyers ambiguously left open the possibility that they were referring only to the investigation into his former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, which he is accused of pressuring the FBI to drop — or perhaps the one Mueller is pursuing into Trump himself as well.
Dowd and Sekulow outlined 16 areas they said the special counsel was scrutinizing as part of the obstruction investigation, including the firings of Comey and of Flynn, and the president’s reaction to Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ recusal from the Russia investigation.
Trump’s lawyers argued the president holds a special position in the government and is busy running the country, making it difficult for him to prepare and sit for an interview. They said that because of those demands on Trump’s time, the special counsel’s office should have to clear a higher bar to get him to talk. Mueller, the president’s attorneys argued, needs to prove the president is the only person who can give him the information he seeks and that he has exhausted all other avenues for getting it.