dowd we have a pretty good sense of it. john dowd yesterday said, i ll use his words rather than i mean, mcgahn was a strong witness for president. i don t need to know much more about that. white house counsel don mcgahn has extraordinary access to the commander in chief and he has been witness to key moments in this presidency. he was there when comey was fired. he heard trump s constant criticism of attorney general jeff sessions following his recusal from the russia investigation. and reportedly threatened to quit when donald trump asked him to fire robert mueller and then told him to lie about donald trump asking him to fire robert mueller when the new york times found out. in a statement that did nothing to tamp down speculation mcgahn s attorney said this. president trump through counsel declined to assert any privilege over mr. mcgahn s testimony. so mr. mcgahn answered the special counsel team s questions folsomly and honestly as any person interviewed by federal investiga
acting more clear with brennan? is it just a war of words, or does it have to do with his being a witness? one thing i think about it is it s unlawful as the day is long without resource to 1513. it s just a flat out violation of due process and the first amendment. it is no different, no different under the constitution than if he yanks a security clearance because he is a muslim and he doesn t like muslims. the reasons matter. this half-baked view that the trump team has tried to propound that you will not look into a president s motives is dead wrong, really not accepted by anyone. if he does it for that reason, it is unconstitutional. in addition, if it s deeply connected to the probe, and comey would be a stronger example than brennan, you have an interesting theory to run under 1513 or 1512. what about bruce ohr? he is a current doj employee. he is tweeting about him
sequentially undermine his credibility for months. this is what rudy giuliani had to say to clarify his truth isn t truth comment. he says, my statement was not meant as a pontification on moral theology but bun referring to the situation where two people make precisely contradictory statements, the classic he said, she said puzzle. sometimes further inquiry can reveal the truth. other times it doesn t. what is he talking about? of course, james comey has testified on capitol hill that the president urged him to let flynn go, let the mothatter of flynn go, his former national security advisor, in a private conversation with comey. president trump, according to giuliani, is going to dispute that. of course, the president hasn t necessarily done that publicly. one more point, katy. giuliani also over the weekend said to chuck that that meeting at trump tower with don jr., that infamous meeting was held in order to get dirt on hillary clinton. so he acknowledged that. then he went on to s
against somebody who is a witness. i don t know that brennan qualifies as a witness. he is more of an investigator. keep that if mind if the president follows through with his threats to pull james comey s clearance. clearly, comey will be a crucial witness here. it is a federal crime, 15, 31, for providing truthful information to law enforcement. here is the statute. section 1531 e. whoever knowingly with the intent to retaliate takes any action harmful to any person including interference with employment or livelihood of any person any truthful information relating to the commission or possible commission of any federal offense shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years or both. so what do you think of that? so, you know, it s an interesting theory. we have spoken about it. the difficult factual question for someone bringing it is, is this the reason why trump was
he said/she said with comey and trump, i.e., you can t have one set of facts because all you have is the said and the said and he said. do they believe that calling james comey a leaker is going to be enough to overcome the credibility problem that the president himself has. after all, the washington post has been cataloging this now since he took office. he has over 4,000 false, misleading claims since he has just been president. that s like over six and a half or seven and a half times a day. well, the president and his legal team are digging in on this point, katy, and they are increasingly, as ken was talking about, taking aim not only at special counsel robert mueller but also at james comey. they have been trying to s