Fear: Trump in the White House(58)
“The president has authorized me to tell you he will cooperate,” Dowd said. His words to me were, “Tell Bob I respect him. I’ll cooperate.”
Mueller seemed relieved.
“What do you need?” Dowd asked him. “We’ll get it to you. But let’s get this investigation done.” The president’s position is that he has nothing to hide. He is not happy with the investigation to say the least but we want to avoid a protracted battle. “But we’d like you to reciprocate. And that is, engage.”
“John,” Mueller said as he stood, “the best cases are ones where we can fully engage.”
“The reason we’re cooperating is to get this damn thing over with,” Dowd said. “We’re not going to assert any privileges. This is over the objection of Don McGahn, but the president wants to do it. He wants you to see everything, talk to everyone.”
Ty Cobb had come up with a way to maintain, but get around, an executive privilege claim on testimony or documents. He had told Mueller, “Bob, we’re going to give it to you. We’re not waiving the privilege. After you see it, and at the end if you feel like you’ve got to use it, let us know and we’ll get you the waiver. As to the balance that’s in your archives, you’ve got to return them with the privilege.”
Mueller seemed thrilled that he would see all the documents. Let’s just do that verbally, said Mueller and Quarles. We don’t want to create a lot of paper.
Dowd said that was fine. No written record.
“John,” Mueller said, “you know me. I don’t let any grass grow under me.” Dowd, a veteran of special investigations, knew they could go on endlessly. The length of these investigations often became the abuse. Mueller said, “Jim will be the lead for me, he’ll be the deputy, but you guys can call me anytime and I’ll see you.”
“Great,” said Dowd, “same here. You guys need something, call me. And we’ll get it for you or we’ll answer whatever question or help get witnesses.”
* * *
The case that was being built, as reported in The New York Times and The Washington Post, had to be examined seriously. On alleged collusion the questions included Trump’s 2013 trip to Moscow, what he might have known about efforts by his former campaign manager Paul Manafort and his longtime attorney Michael Cohen to do business in Russia during the campaign, and what Trump might have known about other aides, such as Roger Stone’s alleged role in Hillary Clinton’s hacked emails.
In a celebrated July 27 news conference during the 2016 campaign, Trump had invited Russia to publish the emails that Clinton’s lawyer had deleted because he had determined they were not relevant to the FBI investigation.
“Russia, if you’re listening,” candidate Trump said, “I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
He later tweeted, “If Russia or any other country or person has Hillary Clinton’s 30,000 illegally deleted emails, perhaps they should share them with the FBI!” The next day he said, “Of course I’m being sarcastic.”
Dowd thought that the declaration and request to Russia, sarcastic or not, hardly suggested hidden subterfuge to work with Russia that seemed to be the focus of the Mueller investigation.
The major problem might be allegations of obstructing justice by urging Comey to drop the Flynn investigation, and then firing Comey. But Dowd believed that the president’s Article II constitutional authority clearly encompassed firing an FBI director.
How Mueller might look at this would turn on the evidence of Trump’s conduct. The key would be fathoming Trump’s intent. Was there a “corrupt” motive, as required by the statute, in his actions to impede justice?
In most cases that is a high bar and generally prosecutors need evidence such as urging others to lie to investigators, destroying documents or ordering the payment of money for illegal actions, such as buying the silence of witnesses as Nixon had in Watergate.
The thousands of hours of secret Nixon tape recordings provided an unusual clarity about the obstruction of justice or cover-up in Watergate.
Dowd had found no Trump tapes or witnesses unfavorable to Trump other than Comey.
At the same time, he had been a prosecutor. He knew the culture. Prosecutors like to make cases, especially high-profile ones.
* * *
Inside the White House, it was obvious Mueller’s Russian investigation was getting to Trump. Those who spent the most time in the West Wing and Oval Office found it was consuming too much of his emotional energy. It was a real distraction. Trump had a hard time compartmentalizing. Entire days were consumed by his frustration with Mueller, Jeff Sessions and Rod Rosenstein.
Even during meetings on policy issues that were Trump obsessions, like Chinese tariffs, he would bring up the Mueller investigation. Often it was about what he had seen on TV. “How is this playing?” he asked. “What do you think I should do to push back?”
The staff in the meetings who were not on the legal team did not want to offer ideas.
Trump rarely missed a chance to declare that it was unfair and a “witch hunt.”
It was driving him crazy, Porter saw. It would ebb and flow, but there were times when Trump became consumed by it, and would become distracted from the job and the business of being president. He felt it was unfair, and he had done nothing wrong. There were people investigating him who seemed to have unlimited powers.