A politico legal analyst said that one reason Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney joined the lawsuit asking whether Congress or the White House reigns supreme on subpoenas is a pre-emptive strike against litigation.
Former Director of National Intelligence John Bolton is also dodging his subpoena. However, it was his deputy, Charles Kupperman, who filed the initial suit to ask the courts which branch to listen to. Mulvaney joined the lawsuit last week, but Kupperman announced that he didn’t want Mulvaney to participate because he isn’t exactly trustworthy.
According to the Washington Post, some close to Bolton and Kupperman said that both men “were flabbergasted” that Mulvaney wanted to join the lawsuit “because they and others on the national security team considered Mulvaney a critical player in the effort to get the Ukrainian government to pursue investigations into Trump’s political opponents.”
During an MSNBC panel discussion Monday, Politico’s Josh Gerstein explained that it is a crime to refuse to comply with a Congressional subpoena. But President Donald Trump has demanded that no one complies with the Congressional subpoenas.
“Now, it’s a crime that Mulvaney would never be prosecuted under this administration, but you can’t rule out the possibility that in 14 months we might have a new Justice Department, a new attorney general and maybe he could face some liability there,” said Gerstein. “So, by going to court on the same day he was supposed to testify, putting in this intervention request, he probably has eliminated the possibility that he would be facing any criminal sanction. And you know, Katy, just within the last 20 minutes we’ve had both the house’s lawyers and Kupperman’s lawyers weigh in. Both of them have said they don’t want Mick Mulvaney in this lawsuit. So that’s a pretty interesting development.”
You can see the full discussion below:
Britain’s Prince Harry and Meghan to give up royal titles — ‘the hardest #Megxit possible’
Britain's Prince Harry and his wife Meghan will give up their royal titles and public funding as part of a settlement with the Queen to start a new life away from the British monarchy.
The historic announcement from Buckingham Palace on Saturday follows more than a week of intense private talks aimed at managing the fallout of the globetrotting couple's shock resignation from front-line royal duties.
It means Queen Elizabeth II's grandson Harry and his American TV actress wife Meghan will stop using the titles "royal highness" -- the same fate that befell his late mother Princess Diana after her divorce from Prince Charles in 1996.
GOP senator tells home-state press that impeachment trial must be ‘viewed as fair’: report
Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) spoke to local reporters on Saturday about her role in the upcoming Donald Trump impeachment trial.
Murkowski explained she would likely vote with Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) on an initial vote on whether to allow witnesses. However, she left the door open to voting for witnesses after House impeachment managers make their opening case.
"I don't know what more we need until I have been given the base case," she said. "We will have that opportunity to say 'yes' or 'no' ... and if we say 'yes,' the floor is open."
Overall, Murkowski said it was important for the trial to been viewed as fair.
White House press secretary urged to do her job: ‘We don’t pay you to be a Twitter troll’
White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham was blasted on Saturday over the confusion resulting from her refusal to hold daily press briefings.
CNN senior media reporter Oliver Darcy was alarmed that Grisham's assistant, Hogan Gidley, was forcing reporters to refer to his remarks as coming from a "sources close to the President's legal team."
Darcy noted that Trump had repeatedly questioned the veracity of unnamed sources, making it problematic for Gidley to demand to be quoted as such.
Grisham responded to the criticism and asked Darcy to "stop with the righteous indignation.