Renato Mariotti
@renato_mariotti
THREAD: What will be the practical effect of efforts by Trump's lawyers to limit his interview with Mueller?
1/ Today the @WSJ reported that Trump's lawyers are considering using a 1997 case to argue that Mueller's interview of Trump should be delayed, limited, or avoided.
2/ The bottom line is that the case holds that executive privilege protects communications regarding their decision-making process or official actions unless that information contains "important evidence" that can't be found elsewhere.
3/ Trump's team could use this court case as leverage to try to get Mueller and his team to agree to limit the interview of Trump. At the very minimum, they could go to court to fight about the extent of executive privilege, which would delay the interview.
4/ That might not be in Trump's political interest, because delay could make the story of his interview remain in the news longer than it would otherwise. On the other hand, any limits imposed on Mueller's interview would help Trump.
5/ If there were no political considerations involved at all, a good lawyer would almost certainly recommend that Trump take the Fifth, which would allow him to forego an interview entirely.
6/ This is much less effective, because many of the questions Mueller would ask Trump would likely be considered "important evidence" by a court. It's hard to see how Trump's thought process isn't important since Mueller must prove "corrupt intent" as part of an obstruction case.
7/ So this won't prevent Mueller from asking the most important questions. But, in any negotiation, both sides try to get as much leverage as possible. Trump's team has less leverage than Mueller in this particular negotiation, and this is one way for them to get some.
8/ How Trump's lawyers negotiate with Mueller will suggest how concerned they are about his potential liability. If they aggressively try to limit and delay his testimony, that suggests high concern.
9/ If they just use this as leverage to push for minor concessions, it suggests a lower level concern, which could be based on the advice that Trump had received from McGahn and others before firing Comey. It's something for us to watch for in the weeks to come. /end