Democrats Sue to Force Ex-White House Counsel’s Testimony

(Bloomberg) -- House Democrats asked a judge to order former White House counsel Don McGahn to appear before the Judiciary Committee, making good on their threat to pursue his testimony and any evidence he has that President Donald Trump obstructed Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The Democrats noted that McGahn was a key witness in Mueller’s probe into whether Trump’s campaign collaborated with Russia to tilt the race in the president’s favor and if Trump interfered with the probe.

“The Judiciary Committee is now determining whether to recommend articles of impeachment against the president based on the obstructive conduct described by the special counsel,” the committee said in the complaint, filed in Washington federal court Wednesday. “But it cannot fulfill this most solemn constitutional responsibility without hearing testimony from a crucial witness to these events: former White House Counsel Donald F. McGahn II.”

Committee aides have likened McGahn to Richard Nixon’s White House counsel, John Dean, whose congressional testimony proved devastating to his presidency.

The complaint describes him as the most important witness -- other than Trump -- to the committee’s investigation.

The White House has ordered McGahn, who resigned in October, not to testify or honor a congressional subpoena, though he spent about 24 hours talking to Mueller’s investigators and his name appears hundreds of times in Mueller’s 448-page report.

McGahn’s attorney, William Burck, defended his client’s conduct and dampened expectations McGahn would provide damaging testimony.

“People should not forget that Don McGahn is a lawyer and has an ethical obligation to protect client confidences,” Burck said in an emailed statement. “Don does not believe he witnessed any violation of law.”

Trump instructed the now-former White House counsel to cooperate with Mueller’s probe but also told him to not testify before Congress unless the White House and the committee reached an accommodation, Burck said. Absent a court order, McGahn will follow those instructions, he said.

The White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Document Production

The committee had reached an agreement with the White House to review documents it had also subpoenaed McGahn to produce, according to aides to the panel. But that has now been called into question by Representative Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Judiciary Committee Republican.

“Democrats’ decision to unilaterally end the accommodations process and file a lawsuit serves only to shut off this committee’s access to White House and DOJ documents,” he said in a statement. “Their insistence on having Don McGahn testify publicly before the cameras further proves they are only interested in the fight and public spectacle of an investigation, but not actually in obtaining any real information.”

The committee had reached an agreement with the White House to review documents it had also subpoenaed McGahn to produce, according to aides to the panel.

The Democrats’ demand for McGahn’s testimony comes after the Judiciary Committee sued to force the release of grand jury information from the 22-month probe, taking its first formal steps toward what could become a move to impeach the president.

Mueller’s report described McGahn as “a credible witness with no motive to lie or exaggerate given the positions he held in the White House.” The report said Trump told McGahn in June 2017 that “Mueller has to go” and instructed him to tell then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to have the special counsel removed. The White House counsel responded by threatening to resign in protest, though he did not do so.

Mueller’s report makes clear that McGahn witnessed multiple serious acts of potential obstruction of justice by the president -- “including demanding that McGahn himself have the special counsel removed and then create a false record to conceal the president’s obstructive conduct,” the Democrats said in the complaint. “McGahn is uniquely positioned to explain those events, bring additional misconduct to light, and provide evidence regarding the president’s intent.”

The full House voted to hold McGahn in civil contempt on June 11.

The case is: Committee of the Judiciary of the U.S. House of Representatives v. McGahn, 19-cv-2379, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).

To contact the reporters on this story: Andrew Harris in Washington at aharris16@bloomberg.net;Billy House in Washington at bhouse5@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: David Glovin at dglovin@bloomberg.net, Joe Schneider, Peter Blumberg

©2019 Bloomberg L.P.