In a tense meeting in March, Special Counsel Robert Mueller told President Donald Trump's legal team that he could resort to issuing a subpoena if the president refuses to speak to federal prosecutors. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
May 02, 2018
The release of a list of more than four dozen topics that Special Counsel Robert Mueller may question President Donald Trump about was the result of a testy meeting between the special counsel and the president's lawyers, where Mueller reportedly floated the possibility of issuing a subpoena to Trump.
According to the Washington Post and four sources with knowledge of the discussion, Mueller brought up the option of a subpoena on March 5, after John Dowd--who has since resigned from Trump's legal team--and Jay Sekulow said Trump had no obligation to speak to federal prosecutors.
After Dowd angrily told Mueller that he was "screwing with the work of the president of the United States," the special counsel's team agreed to provide a list of the subjects the investigators wanted to speak to the president about.
The questions Trump can expect from a meeting with Mueller focus on his relationship with and decision to fire former FBI Director James Comey, his attacks on Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his statements about the Justice Department's supposed obligation to "protect" the president, and his campaign's contacts and coordination with Russia, among other matters.
The president has shown increasing reluctance regarding a meeting with federal prosecutors, repeatedly denouncing the Mueller investigation as a "witch hunt"--leading some lawmakers to call for a subpoena.
\u201cA subpoena to Pres. Trump seems increasingly necessary and unavoidable. So does a law protecting the Special Counsel. The coming crucible demands courage - especially from Republicans controlling Congress. https://t.co/8GAguPLq2M\u201d— Richard Blumenthal (@Richard Blumenthal) 1525267573
A presidential subpoena could result in a Supreme Court case, if Trump's legal team argues that executive privilege protects him from having to answer questions about his private dealings and that the Mueller probe is affecting his ability to serve as president.
But former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti says Trump's case would likely appear weak before the nation's top justices.
\u201c10/ If Trump fights the subpoena, I expect he will ultimately lose. In the Nixon and Clinton cases, the Supreme Court ultimately found that the president was not above the law. As the Court noted, presidents since Monroe have responded to questions in judicial proceedings.\u201d— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti) 1525227526
And as prosecutor Joyce Vance explained to MSNBC's Rachel Maddow on Tuesday night, if Mueller raised the issue of a subpoena with Trump's legal team, it's likely he had already done so with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein at the Justice Department.
"Prosecutors," Vance said, "never threaten to take an action they can't take."
\u201cIf Mueller raised the issue of issuing a subpoena to Donald Trump, he would have already talked about doing so with Rod Rosenstein. -@JoyceWhiteVance \n"Prosecutors never threaten to take an action they can't take."\u201d— Maddow Blog (@Maddow Blog) 1525225180
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
The release of a list of more than four dozen topics that Special Counsel Robert Mueller may question President Donald Trump about was the result of a testy meeting between the special counsel and the president's lawyers, where Mueller reportedly floated the possibility of issuing a subpoena to Trump.
According to the Washington Post and four sources with knowledge of the discussion, Mueller brought up the option of a subpoena on March 5, after John Dowd--who has since resigned from Trump's legal team--and Jay Sekulow said Trump had no obligation to speak to federal prosecutors.
After Dowd angrily told Mueller that he was "screwing with the work of the president of the United States," the special counsel's team agreed to provide a list of the subjects the investigators wanted to speak to the president about.
The questions Trump can expect from a meeting with Mueller focus on his relationship with and decision to fire former FBI Director James Comey, his attacks on Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his statements about the Justice Department's supposed obligation to "protect" the president, and his campaign's contacts and coordination with Russia, among other matters.
The president has shown increasing reluctance regarding a meeting with federal prosecutors, repeatedly denouncing the Mueller investigation as a "witch hunt"--leading some lawmakers to call for a subpoena.
\u201cA subpoena to Pres. Trump seems increasingly necessary and unavoidable. So does a law protecting the Special Counsel. The coming crucible demands courage - especially from Republicans controlling Congress. https://t.co/8GAguPLq2M\u201d— Richard Blumenthal (@Richard Blumenthal) 1525267573
A presidential subpoena could result in a Supreme Court case, if Trump's legal team argues that executive privilege protects him from having to answer questions about his private dealings and that the Mueller probe is affecting his ability to serve as president.
But former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti says Trump's case would likely appear weak before the nation's top justices.
\u201c10/ If Trump fights the subpoena, I expect he will ultimately lose. In the Nixon and Clinton cases, the Supreme Court ultimately found that the president was not above the law. As the Court noted, presidents since Monroe have responded to questions in judicial proceedings.\u201d— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti) 1525227526
And as prosecutor Joyce Vance explained to MSNBC's Rachel Maddow on Tuesday night, if Mueller raised the issue of a subpoena with Trump's legal team, it's likely he had already done so with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein at the Justice Department.
"Prosecutors," Vance said, "never threaten to take an action they can't take."
\u201cIf Mueller raised the issue of issuing a subpoena to Donald Trump, he would have already talked about doing so with Rod Rosenstein. -@JoyceWhiteVance \n"Prosecutors never threaten to take an action they can't take."\u201d— Maddow Blog (@Maddow Blog) 1525225180
The release of a list of more than four dozen topics that Special Counsel Robert Mueller may question President Donald Trump about was the result of a testy meeting between the special counsel and the president's lawyers, where Mueller reportedly floated the possibility of issuing a subpoena to Trump.
According to the Washington Post and four sources with knowledge of the discussion, Mueller brought up the option of a subpoena on March 5, after John Dowd--who has since resigned from Trump's legal team--and Jay Sekulow said Trump had no obligation to speak to federal prosecutors.
After Dowd angrily told Mueller that he was "screwing with the work of the president of the United States," the special counsel's team agreed to provide a list of the subjects the investigators wanted to speak to the president about.
The questions Trump can expect from a meeting with Mueller focus on his relationship with and decision to fire former FBI Director James Comey, his attacks on Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his statements about the Justice Department's supposed obligation to "protect" the president, and his campaign's contacts and coordination with Russia, among other matters.
The president has shown increasing reluctance regarding a meeting with federal prosecutors, repeatedly denouncing the Mueller investigation as a "witch hunt"--leading some lawmakers to call for a subpoena.
\u201cA subpoena to Pres. Trump seems increasingly necessary and unavoidable. So does a law protecting the Special Counsel. The coming crucible demands courage - especially from Republicans controlling Congress. https://t.co/8GAguPLq2M\u201d— Richard Blumenthal (@Richard Blumenthal) 1525267573
A presidential subpoena could result in a Supreme Court case, if Trump's legal team argues that executive privilege protects him from having to answer questions about his private dealings and that the Mueller probe is affecting his ability to serve as president.
But former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti says Trump's case would likely appear weak before the nation's top justices.
\u201c10/ If Trump fights the subpoena, I expect he will ultimately lose. In the Nixon and Clinton cases, the Supreme Court ultimately found that the president was not above the law. As the Court noted, presidents since Monroe have responded to questions in judicial proceedings.\u201d— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti) 1525227526
And as prosecutor Joyce Vance explained to MSNBC's Rachel Maddow on Tuesday night, if Mueller raised the issue of a subpoena with Trump's legal team, it's likely he had already done so with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein at the Justice Department.
"Prosecutors," Vance said, "never threaten to take an action they can't take."
\u201cIf Mueller raised the issue of issuing a subpoena to Donald Trump, he would have already talked about doing so with Rod Rosenstein. -@JoyceWhiteVance \n"Prosecutors never threaten to take an action they can't take."\u201d— Maddow Blog (@Maddow Blog) 1525225180
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.