Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

U.S. President Donald Trump talks with journalists in the Oval Office on December 22, 2017 in Washington, DC.

U.S. President Donald Trump talks with journalists in the Oval Office on December 22, 2017 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Lawyer Immediately Claws Back Trump's Offer to Answer Mueller Questions "Under Oath"

President says he would "love" to be interviewed by Special Counsel in coming weeks, but lawyers forced to quickly clarify

Jon Queally

Letting slip exactly the kind of unscripted and potentially reckless utterance a legal team might fear, President Donald Trump told reporters late Wednesday that he would "love to" be interviewed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team and would so "under oath"—an offer his lawyer later appeared to pull back when he said Trump was "speaking hurriedly" and only meant that he would submit to an interview, but not necessarily under sworn oath or to the grand jury Mueller has convened.

"I would love to do it, and I would like to do it as soon as possible," Trump said from the White House. "I would do it under oath, absolutely."

With reports this week indicating Mueller's team is now in serious talks with the president's lawyers about setting a date to answer questions, Trump on Wednesday denied to reporters that he or his campaign team did anything wrong. "There's been no collusion whatsoever," he said. "There's no obstruction whatsoever, and I'm looking forward to [the interview]."

Here's an extended portion of his remarks:

During the exchange, Trump asks reporters whether or not Hillary Clinton testified under oath, though it's not clear exactly what testimony of his 2016 campaign rival he's referring to. However, according to the New York Times' Maggie Habberman—the reporter who asked him about taking an oath—it was also unclear whether or not the president understands the possible stakes when he talks to Mueller:

According to the Washington Post:

Trump's remarks took White House officials by surprise and came as his lawyers were negotiating with Mueller's team on a potential interview. The president's lawyers have repeatedly encouraged him not to post tweets or make comments about the investigation without their knowledge, saying such comments could damage him.

The president's statements suggest that he sees an obstruction-of-justice investigation as an unfair attack on attempts by him or others to mount a defense. It is not a crime for the subject of a criminal probe to assert their innocence or provide additional information to exonerate themselves. However, if a person takes steps to impede or stop such an investigation, that can amount to obstruction of justice.

Of course, given that Trump is a documented serial liar, there was immediate reaction about what it would and wouldn't mean for the president to say he would testify under oath:

Soon after Trump's comments on Wednesday went public, his attorney Ty Cobb told the Times the president was speaking hurriedly and only intended to say he was willing to meet.

"He's ready to meet with them, but he'll be guided by the advice of his personal counsel," Mr. Cobb said.

Writing for New York Magazine, columnist Jonathan Chait explained why Cobb and other members of Trump's legal team might be concerned.

"The reason Trump's lawyers have been hesitant to let him talk to Mueller, except under tightly controlled circumstances," writes Chait, "is that he lies like crazy when he can be easily caught, and also occasionally blurts out admissions he shouldn't make. His extemporaneous offer is good evidence of why the Trump legal team wants to keep him away from Mueller."


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.

'Who Voted for This?': Campaigners Disrupt Truss Speech Over Fracking Ban 'U-Turn'

"Nobody voted for fracking, nobody voted to cut benefits, nobody voted to trash nature, nobody voted to scrap workers' rights," said one Greenpeace organizer.

Julia Conley ·


Khanna Tells Biden to Cut Off Weapons to Saudis as OPEC Agrees to Slash Oil Supply

"President Biden should make it clear that we will stop supplying the Saudis with weapons and air parts if they fleece the American people and strengthen Putin by making drastic production cuts."

Jake Johnson ·


'Absolutely Shameful': Michigan Judge Drops Flint Water Crisis Charges Against 7 Officials

"This means there are currently no criminal charges over 8 years later," lamented one journalist.

Jake Johnson ·


Trump Turns to SCOTUS Over Mar-a-Lago Docs, But 'It Won't Stop DOJ'

"This is a very specific and narrow request by Trump the merits of which turn on a technical jurisdictional question, but which runs into fatal procedural obstacles long before that," said one analyst. "It's not laughable, but only because it's small."

Jessica Corbett ·


Despite Calls for Diplomacy to End War, US Confirms More Weapons Headed to Ukraine

"Are there still negotiation possibilities?" asked Noam Chomsky. "There's only one way to find out. That's to try. If you refuse to try, of course, there's no option, no possibilities."

Brett Wilkins ·

Common Dreams Logo