Believed ultimately they would prevail if this were to go all the way to the supreme court. president trump is tweeting about this, andrea. let me read you what he had to say. the d.c. wolves and fake news media are reading far too much into people being forced by courts to testify before congress. i am fighting for future presidents and the office of the president. other than that i would actually like people to testify. now, that argument, andrea, could potentially undercut the broader legal argument which is that the white house would like to say some of these top officials are immune from testifying. now, everyone s raising the question, what will this mean for other former and current officials like performer national security adviser john bolton, will he be called to testify given this ruling by that federal judge? well, bolton s attorney is signaling they don t think he will, essentially saying that in the mcgahn case, the house judiciary committee emphasized to the district cou
Bolton was going to testify. if he had wanted to testify, he would have shown up like his deputies like fiona hill did and testified. the house has withdrawn its subpoena to charles kupperman, they ve never subpoenaed john bolton. i think the bottom line, the house in its impeachment inquiry is going to go forward without testimony from john bolton which is what i think he knew all along when he filed this case in the beginning. he and his lawyers would have known that the act of filing this case would take so long, either in the district court or because the justice department if they lost would appeal it to the d.c. court as they re doing in the mcgahn case, that this would stretch out months, into next year, and john bolton s testimony would be long after the house and senate had finished dealing with impeachment. i think he s getting exactly what he wanted all along. and john bolton is a yale lawyer in addition to being the former national security adviser. kristen, you re going
Mitchell in washington. apologies for our technical difficulties. but today, president trump is slamming a federal judge s decision that former white house counsel don mcgahn must obey a house subpoena even as the administration filed a notice of appeal and continues to block other top officials from testifying or delivering documents to capitol hill. joining me now, nbc white house correspondent kristen welker, new york times chief white house correspondent peter baker, msnbc justice and security analyst matt miller is here with me. kristen, talk about the white house s reaction to the decision last night from a federal judge on the don mcgahn case which stemmed from a case last spring involving the mueller probe, not the impeachment probe. reporter: that s right, andrea, the justice department has already filed an appeal, that was expected. kellyanne conway, top adviser at the white house, said she
Between security aid and investigations of democrats in 2016. he tried to take that back but that makes him a key witness, and somebody the president would like to keep on board as well. you re right, the president has institutional interests whether aides get called to testify, every president feels compelled to protect the power of the office. but this is also a president trying to protect himself on the edge of an impeachment. and matt miller, one issue that very clearly is correct in what the bolton team is saying is that this mcgahn ruling does not affect them or any others. they re going to appeal it, from the white house s perspective, they have their own case coming forward. obviously judges look to what other judges have decided but this is not a case that necessarily applies at all. that s right, they were not a party to this case, this case involved just don mcgahn. that said, i think it was always a bit of a fantasy that john
You would think not but they have represented in the don mcgahn hearing they want to call him as a witness. we re going to get a ruling on mcgahn on monday, the court said. after they hold hearings or decide not to, the house judiciary committee drafts and recommends articles of impeachment to the full house for a vote. then we are into constitutional territory. of course, constitution tells us the house shall have the sole power of impeachment. and that treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors constitutes an impeachable offense. each one. exactly. separately. and they can vote some yes and some no. that actually happened in the bill clinton case. now, in the house it requires a majority. how does that look right now? there s 223 democrats. they can lose 15 democratic votes and still pass these articles of kpeechlimpeachment.