Some quick thoughts on the McGahn settlement:
1) McGahn testifying behind closed doors doesn’t move the needle much, because it will merely provide us with another transcript that we can read, similar to the Mueller Report.
1/
1) McGahn testifying behind closed doors doesn’t move the needle much, because it will merely provide us with another transcript that we can read, similar to the Mueller Report.
1/
2) Since Trump is no longer in office, McGahn’s testimony is mostly (if not only) relevant to a potential criminal prosecution for obstruction of justice. So there isn’t much to be gained by having him testify, particularly behind closed doors.
2/
2/
3) There is a lot for Congress to lose, however, if the appeals court were to issue a bad ruling that undermined congressional subpoena authority. A lot more downside for Congress in a bad opinion (for it) than upside in his public testimony.
3/
3/
4) The net result, though, is that another President is free to stonewall and obstruct Congress for the duration of his time in office to avoid accountability. Very little has changed.
END
END
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
