This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/26/us/politics/trump-mueller-fired-special-counsel.html

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
Did the President Order Mueller to Be Fired? ‘Fake News,’ Trump Says Senate Democrats Seek to Protect Mueller From Being Fired
(about 4 hours later)
WASHINGTON — President Trump on Friday denied that he had ordered the firing of Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel in the Russia probe, and called reports of the June incident “fake news.” WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats said on Friday that they would seek to ensure that continuing budget negotiations included legislation to protect Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel in the Russia investigation, from being fired by President Trump.
The New York Times reported Thursday evening that Mr. Trump ordered Donald F. McGahn II, his top White House lawyer, to dismiss Mr. Mueller just weeks after Mr. Mueller took over the Russia investigation. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the top Democrat in the Senate, said an article in The New York Times detailing an effort by Mr. Trump to fire Mr. Mueller in June demonstrated the urgency for Congress to act.
The president relented after Mr. McGahn refused to ask the Justice Department to fire Mr. Mueller and threatened to quit. “The most important thing Congress can do right now is to ensure that Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation continues uninterrupted and unimpeded,” Mr. Schumer said. “No one — whether it be administration officials, Republicans or the president himself — should get in the way and undermine the investigation.”
Mr. Trump responded to The Times report during a trip to Davos, Switzerland, where he is attending the World Economic Forum, a gathering of world leaders and global business executives. The move by the Democratic leadership escalates previous efforts by lawmakers in both parties to stave off a possible constitutional crisis should Mr. Trump try to shut down the Russia investigation by getting rid of Mr. Mueller. Over the summer, amid reports that Mr. Trump was considering that possibility, members of the parties introduced legislation to prevent that from happening.
Upon arrival at the Congress Center in Davos, Mr. Trump was greeted by a scrum of the forum’s participants snapping cellphone photos and by a large group of reporters asking why he had ordered Mr. Mueller’s firing. The legislation went nowhere as the president, his lawyers and his top aides denied that he was not — and never had been — considering firing Mr. Mueller. But bipartisan outrage has been rekindled by the news that Mr. Trump ordered the dismissal of Mr. Mueller, backtracking only after Donald F. McGahn II, the White House counsel, said he would resign rather than carry out the order.
“Fake news, folks,” Mr. Trump replied. “Fake news. Typical New York Times fake story.” The latest Democratic efforts would require cooperation from Republicans, who control the Senate and the House, as both parties negotiate over must-pass legislation to fund the government. The deadline for passing the spending plan is Feb. 8.
The Times report was based on four people who were told of the matter. On Thursday, Ty Cobb, who manages the White House relationship with Mr. Mueller’s office, declined to comment. Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia, said on Friday that Congress should now pass the legislation to protect the special counsel, urging his Republican and Democratic colleagues to work out any differences in approach to make it happen.
Some Democrats were outraged to learn the president had ordered the firing of Mr. Mueller last year, even if he eventually backed off. Mr. Warner, speaking on CNN, said that he could not think of any reason “why you wouldn’t want to pass that legislation if you respect the rule of law.”
“I’ve said it before, and I am saying it again: firing the special counsel is a red line that the president cannot cross,” Senator Mark Warner, of Virginia, said on Thursday. Mr. Warner is the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is one of the congressional panels investigating the Trump campaign’s possible ties with Russia. “Our oath of office was to the Constitution,” he said. “Quite honestly, history is going to judge how we act here.”
“Any attempt to remove the special counsel, pardon key witnesses, or otherwise interfere in the investigation would be a gross abuse of power, and all members of Congress, from both parties, have a responsibility to our Constitution and to our country to make that clear immediately,” he said. In August, Senator Thom Tillis, Republican of North Carolina, proposed legislation that would, among other things, require a court hearing if Mr. Mueller were fired. If the firing were found to be improper, the judges could reinstate him.
Some lawmakers were so concerned over the summer that Mr. Trump might move to fire Mr. Mueller that they introduced bills to shore up the special counsel’s job and protect it from political interference. “Special Counsel Mueller is a career professional respected by both sides of the aisle for good reason,” Mr. Tillis’s office said in a statement on Friday. “He should be able to do his job without elected officials trying to score cheap political points for their own partisan gain.”
One measure, co-sponsored by Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, would require a judge’s review to ensure a special counsel is fired for cause and not for political reasons. Democratic aides said they hoped Republicans would join their call to include such protections for the special counsel in budget negotiations. They said lawmakers would be working during the next several days to merge the best parts of previous legislation that sought to do so.
Another proposal, introduced by Senator Thom Tillis, a Republican from North Carolina, would require a Senate-confirmed official at the Justice Department to discipline or fire a special counsel. That measure was introduced at a time when Mr. Trump had privately and publicly disparaged his attorney general, Jeff Sessions. Some feared Mr. Trump would fire top officials at the Justice Department until someone carried out his orders to fire the special counsel. One measure, sponsored in part by Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, would require a judge’s review to ensure a special counsel is fired for cause and not for political reasons.
“This remarkable report makes scarily clear that we need this protection right away for the special counsel,” Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut, said Friday. “It’s necessary now to send a signal to the president that political interference and firing the special counsel simply is totally unacceptable, and there’s bipartisan unanimity that it would be unconscionable and unacceptable.” The proposal introduced by Mr. Tillis would also require a Senate-confirmed official at the Justice Department to discipline or fire a special counsel. That measure was introduced in the summer, when Mr. Trump had privately and publicly disparaged his attorney general, Jeff Sessions. Some feared Mr. Trump would fire top officials at the Justice Department until someone carried out his orders to fire the special counsel.
Mr. Blumenthal said that some Republican senators have told him they support such protections. He did not name them. “This remarkable report makes scarily clear that we need this protection right away for the special counsel,” Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, said on Friday. “It’s necessary now to send a signal to the president that political interference and firing the special counsel simply is totally unacceptable, and there’s bipartisan unanimity that it would be unconscionable and unacceptable.”
Even as some Republicans have tried to discredit the Russia inquiry, some senior Republicans have previously said that they would not support the firing of Mr. Mueller. Mr. Blumenthal said that some Republican senators have told him that they support such protections. He did not name them.
A spokesman for House Speaker Paul D. Ryan, of Wisconsin, said on Friday that the speaker’s position has not changed since Mr. Ryan said in June that Mr. Mueller should be left alone to do his job. Even as some Republicans have tried to discredit the Russia inquiry, some senior members of the party have said that they would not support the firing of Mr. Mueller.
And a spokesman for Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, said Mr. Cornyn still thinks it would be a “mistake” to fire the special counsel. A spokesman for Speaker Paul D. Ryan, of Wisconsin, said on Friday that Mr. Ryan’s position had not changed since he said in June that Mr. Mueller should be left alone to do his job.
The June incident could emerge as an important part of Mr. Mueller’s probe, part of which is looking into whether Mr. Trump or anyone in the White House or associated with his campaign obstructed justice by trying to impede investigators looking into the possibility of campaign-related collusion with Russia. And a spokesman for Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, said that Mr. Cornyn still believed that it would be a “mistake” to fire the special counsel.
Mr. Trump’s order to fire Mr. Mueller came in the month after the president did fire the F.B.I. director James B. Comey, later citing the Russia probe as the reason for his decision. At the time, Mr. Comey was in charge of the F.B.I.’s investigation into collusion with Russia during the election. The firing of Mr. Comey in May directly led to Mr. Mueller’s appointment. Representative Tom Cole, Republican of Oklahoma, reiterated Friday that Republicans in the House would oppose any attempt by Mr. Trump to fire Mr. Mueller.
Mr. Trump’s denial of the June incident echoes repeated statements by the president and other White House officials that Mr. Trump had never considered firing the special prosecutor. “It would just be a political firestorm, and you would just be presumed guilty whether you are or not,” said Mr. Cole, who had hired Mr. McGahn to be his counsel when he was the chairman of the National Republican Campaign Committee. “It’s easier to rebut the outcome than deal with suspicions about why you fired somebody. It would be taken as a confession of guilt. And every analogy would be Nixon and the Saturday Night Massacre.”
Mr. Trump denied on Friday that he had ordered Mr. Mueller’s firing and called reports of the episode “fake news.” His comments came during a trip to Davos, Switzerland, where he was attending the World Economic Forum, a gathering of world leaders and global business executives.
The Times report was based on four people who were told of the matter. On Thursday, Ty Cobb, who manages the White House’s relationship with Mr. Mueller’s office, declined to comment.
The June episode could emerge as an important part of Mr. Mueller’s inquiry, part of which is looking into whether Mr. Trump or anyone in the White House or associated with his campaign obstructed justice by trying to impede investigators examining the possibility of campaign-related collusion with Russia.
Mr. Trump’s order to fire Mr. Mueller came a month after the president dismissed the F.B.I. director James B. Comey, later citing the Russia inquiry as the reason for the decision. At the time, Mr. Comey oversaw the F.B.I.’s investigation into collusion with Russia during the election. The firing of Mr. Comey in May directly led to Mr. Mueller’s appointment.
Mr. Trump’s denial of the June episode echoes repeated statements by the president and other White House officials that he had never considered firing the special prosecutor.
“I haven’t given it any thought,” Mr. Trump told reporters in August. “Well, I’ve been reading about it from you people. You say, oh, I’m going to dismiss him. No, I’m not dismissing anybody.”“I haven’t given it any thought,” Mr. Trump told reporters in August. “Well, I’ve been reading about it from you people. You say, oh, I’m going to dismiss him. No, I’m not dismissing anybody.”
John Dowd, the president’s personal lawyer, said that same month that firing Mr. Mueller has “never been on the table, never.” John Dowd, the president’s personal lawyer, said that same month that firing Mr. Mueller had “never been on the table, never.”
But four people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be identified discussing a continuing investigation, said Mr. Trump ordered the firing, citing what he believed were three reasons that Mr. Mueller has a conflict of interest that should prevent him from leading the Russia investigation.But four people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be identified discussing a continuing investigation, said Mr. Trump ordered the firing, citing what he believed were three reasons that Mr. Mueller has a conflict of interest that should prevent him from leading the Russia investigation.
Those included claims about a disputed payment of fees by Mr. Mueller at Trump National Golf Club in Sterling, Va.; the fact that Mr. Mueller worked at the same law firm that represented the president’s son-in-law; and Mr. Mueller’s interview with the president to be F.B.I. director before he was appointed to be the special counsel.Those included claims about a disputed payment of fees by Mr. Mueller at Trump National Golf Club in Sterling, Va.; the fact that Mr. Mueller worked at the same law firm that represented the president’s son-in-law; and Mr. Mueller’s interview with the president to be F.B.I. director before he was appointed to be the special counsel.