Trump sends answers to Mueller
Step is a milestone in a monthslong negotiation between president’s attorneys and Mueller’s team.
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s attorneys on Tuesday submitted his written answers to a series of questions from special counsel Robert Mueller about Trump’s knowledge of the Russian government’s efforts to assist his 2016 White House bid.
The inquiries only include a portion of the questions that Mueller has sought to pose to Trump for nearly a year, when he first requested an interview with president. The topics cover activities during the campaign and do not delve into questions about whether Trump has sought to obstruct the probe into Russian interference.
One of Trump’s attorneys said the answers will not provide any great surprises.
“What I can tell you is they’re complete and detailed,” said Rudy Giuliani. “But there’s nothing there I haven’t read in a newspaper.” The step is a milestone in a monthslong negotiation between Trump’s attorneys and Mueller’s team over whether and when the president would sit for an interview.
The answers represent the first time Trump has given his own version of events to the special counsel’s team in the 11 months ago since Mueller first asked for a sit-down interview with the president.
Mueller was appointed in May 2017 to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Since then, he had indicted or won guilty pleas from four former Trump campaign advisers and charged 12 Russian military officers with hacking Democratic emails that were later released and proved damaging to Democratic challenger Hillary Clinton.
The answers cover roughly a dozen questions in five topics about Trump’s campaign and seek to learn Trump’s knowledge about his various campaign advisers’ contacts with Russians. They include asking him about his son Donald Trump Jr.’s meeting with a Russian lawyer to obtain dirt about Clinton.
Trump’s lawyers have so far refused to answer any questions about Trump’s time as president-elect or as president, arguing Mueller is not legally entitled to demand the president’s answers about his decisionmaking as executive-in-chief.
Trump initially had expressed eagerness to sit down for an interview with Mueller in January of this year, saying he wanted to put to bed false claims that his campaign colluded with the Russian government so he could win the White House.
But his lawyers were skeptical that Trump could avoid saying something false or mistaken during an interview, and feared Mueller could accuse him of perjury.
“The President today answered written questions submitted by The Special Counsel’s Office,” Trump attorney Jay Sekulow said in a statement. “The questions presented dealt with issues regarding the Russia-related topics of the inquiry. The President responded in writing.”
Giuliani said Trump’s answers represent yet another part of the White House’s “unprecedented cooperation” with the Mueller probe.
“It has been our position from the outset that much of what has been asked raised serious constitutional issues and was beyond the scope of a legitimate inquiry. This remains our position today. The President has nonetheless provided unprecedented cooperation. The Special Counsel has been provided with more than 30 witnesses, 1.4 million pages of material, and now the President’s written responses to questions. It is time to bring this inquiry to a conclusion.”
Mueller could theoretically still look to subpoena the president if he feels the answers are not satisfactory. But Justice Department leaders, including acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker — who now oversees the investigation and has spoken pejoratively of it in the past — would have to sign off on such a move, and it’s far from clear that they would. It’s also not clear that Mueller’s team would prevail if a subpoena fight reaches the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has never ruled on whether a president can be subpoenaed to testify in a criminal case. President Bill Clinton was subpoenaed to appear before the Whitewater grand jury, though investigators withdrew the subpoena once he agreed to appear voluntarily.
Other cases involving Presidents Richard Nixon and Clinton have presented similar issues for the justices that could be instructive now.
In 1974, for instance, the Supreme Court ruled that Nixon could be ordered to turn over subpoenaed audio recordings, a decision that hastened his resignation from office.
The court in 1998 said Clinton could be questioned under oath in a sexual harassment lawsuit brought by Paula Jones.