Mueller suggested in March he could subpoena Trump

WASHINGTON — In a tense meeting in early March with the special counsel, President Donald Trump’s attorneys insisted he has no obligation to talk with federal investigators probing Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential campaign.

But special counsel Robert Mueller responded that he has another option if Trump declines: He could obtain a subpoena for the president to appear before a grand jury, according to four people familiar with the encounter.

Mueller’s warning, the first time he is known to have mentioned a possible subpoena to Trump’s legal team, spurred a sharp retort from John Dowd, then the president’s lead lawyer.

“This isn’t some game,” Dowd said, according to two people with knowledge of his comments. “You are screwing with the work of the president of the United States.”

The flare-up set in motion weeks of turmoil among Trump’s attorneys as they debated how to deal with the special counsel’s request for an interview, a dispute that ultimately led to Dowd’s resignation.

In the wake of the testy March 5 meeting, Mueller’s team agreed to provide the president’s attorneys with more specific information about the subjects that prosecutors wished to discuss with the president. With those details in hand, Trump attorney Jay Sekulow compiled a list of 49 questions that the team believed the president would be asked, according to three of the four people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The New York Times first reported the existence of the list.

The questions focus on events during the Trump campaign, transition and presidency that have long been known to be under scrutiny, including the president’s reasons for firing then-FBI Director James Comey and the pressure Trump put on Attorney General Jeff Sessions to resign.

Now, Trump’s newly reconfigured legal team is pondering how to address the special counsel’s queries, all while assessing the potential evidence of obstruction that Mueller might present and contending with a client who has grown increasingly opposed to sitting down with the special counsel.

Without a resolution of the issue of an interview, the standoff could turn into a historic confrontation before the U.S. Supreme Court over a presidential subpoena.

Trump’s remade legal team is now led by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who told The Washington Post on Tuesday that he views Mueller as the utmost professional but is still reviewing documents and considering conditions he might set before deciding whether to recommend that Trump agree to an interview.

For his part, Trump fumed when he saw the breadth of the questions that emerged out of the talks with Mueller’s team, according to two White House officials.

The president and several advisers now plan to point to the list as evidence that Mueller has strayed beyond his mandate and is overreaching, they said.

“He wants to hammer that,” according to a person who spoke to the president Monday.

Judges have generally held that the president is not above the law and can be subjected to normal legal processes, but the issue of a presidential subpoena for testimony has not been tested in court. Special Prosecutor Kenneth Starr subpoenaed President Bill Clinton for grand jury testimony in 1998 but withdrew it after Clinton agreed to testify voluntarily. Clinton was interviewed at the White House, appearing before the grand jury via video.