Don McGahn (Photo: Gage Skidmore/Flickr)
In light of the news that President Donald Trump pressured former White House Counsel Don McGahn to say publicly that the president did not obstruct justice, former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti broke down the implications of the news.
Specifically, Mariotti said in a lengthy Twitter thread, the episode suggests Trump knew McGahn is one of the most important witnesses in any potential obstruction of justice-related impeachment proceeding, and wanted him to head off his own utility to House Democrats — and that the whole situation underscores why Democrats are so keen to get McGahn's testimony and interviews with special counsel Robert Mueller:
THREAD: Why should we make of the news that the White House asked former White House Counsel Don McGahn to declare… https://t.co/6zIDpOZ8SX— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557529177.0
1/ The White House asked former White House Counsel Don McGahn to publicly declare that Trump did not obstruct just… https://t.co/QWmArK5FoG— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557529177.0
@nytimes 2/ McGahn refused to make a public statement, but it's unknown what his belief is. Technically speaking, i… https://t.co/L1s9GfoZEw— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557529401.0
@nytimes 3/ That said, McGahn would almost certainly be the most important witness against Trump in any obstruction… https://t.co/S8U1x1GeWe— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557529504.0
@nytimes 4/ According to the @nytimes, Trump's attorneys apparently were told by McGahn's attorney months ago that… https://t.co/TgY3PtwNeO— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557529594.0
@nytimes 5/ Mueller likely did not do so because it is not legally relevant whether a witness, like McGahn, believe… https://t.co/rzrQjBdQ9Q— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557529653.0
@nytimes 6/ That said, McGahn was central to the strongest potential obstruction count -- Trump's orders to fire Mu… https://t.co/qCVrUCHbzZ— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557529745.0
@nytimes @thedailybeast 7/ So it is obvious why the White House wants McGahn to make a public statement. It would u… https://t.co/VPsrlHYvdx— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557529812.0
@nytimes @thedailybeast 8/ It's interesting that McGahn has thus far refused to do so. Because he was a Republican… https://t.co/ZpxIZfGusF— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557529930.0
@nytimes @thedailybeast 9/ This could mean McGahn is trying to be careful to appear as neutral as possible regardin… https://t.co/rvESYQkT3X— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557530072.0
@nytimes @thedailybeast 10/ At the very least, it shows a distance between him and the White House, perhaps widened… https://t.co/Z9pUQ725gv— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557530190.0
@nytimes @thedailybeast 11/ This underscores why House Democrats are pushing to get the materials underlying Muelle… https://t.co/Ryxql98WBV— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557530254.0
@nytimes @thedailybeast 12/ As I discussed in my recent column (linked above in #8), Democrats would be "flying bli… https://t.co/2g6WZ2X8AO— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557530315.0
@nytimes @thedailybeast 13/ They can't expect McGahn to volunteer information or go beyond his prior statements eit… https://t.co/55XVFQAhQu— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti)1557530430.0
