Graham: ‘I don’t care’ what happened between Trump and McGahn

Sen. Lindsey Graham on Sunday said he doesn’t care if President Donald Trump told then-White House counsel Don McGahn to fire special counsel Robert Mueller — the Mueller investigation is over.

“It’s all theater — it doesn’t matter,” the South Carolina Republican told “Face the Nation” host Margaret Brennan. “I don’t care what he said to Don McGahn — it’s what he did. The president never obstructed.”

“It doesn’t matter to you that the president is changing a version of events and some would say lying?” Brennan asked.

In a redacted version of Mueller’s report, McGahn is reported to have said he refused to fire Mueller when ordered to do so by Trump. The president has denied he told anyone to fire McGahn, tweeting that if he had wanted to fire Mueller, he could have done it himself.

“If you’re going to look at every president who pops off at his staff, asks them to do something that is maybe crazy, then we won’t have any presidents,” Graham said, claiming he had “fought hard as hell” to make sure Mueller was able to carry out his investigation unobstructed.

Graham, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he won’t call Mueller or McGahn to testify now.

“I don’t know how clear I can be, Margaret: It’s over for me,” Graham said, calling obstruction of justice “absurd.”

William Barr Explains Finding of No Obstruction on Mueller Probe

Attorney general appears before a Senate panel after letter indicates dispute over characterizing special counsel probe

Mr. Barr said at the Wednesday hearing he was surprised that Mr. Mueller wouldn’t reach a conclusion about obstruction, and he said he conveyed that message to the special counsel in a March 5 briefing. Among other reasons, Mr. Mueller cited a longstanding Justice Department policy against indicting a sitting president. Mr. Barr said he pressed Mr. Mueller for more about his reasoning.

“If he felt he shouldn’t go down a path of making a traditional prosecutive decision then he shouldn’t have investigated,” Mr. Barr said. “That was the time to pull up.”

.. “Fairness concerns counseled against potentially reaching” a judgment that Mr. Trump committed crimes “when no charges can be brought,” Mr. Mueller wrote in the report. Mr. Barr subsequently determined that the evidence Mr. Mueller’s investigation developed was insufficient to establish a crime Mr. Barr said in a March 24 summary of the Mueller findings that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein concluded the evidence gathered wasn’t enough to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense.

Opening statements by the chairman and ranking member of the panel reflected the deep partisan divide that has shaped how Mr. Mueller’s report—and Mr. Barr’s characterization of it—has been received.

South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham, who chairs the panel, and California Democrat Dianne Feinstein focused on vastly different points in their statements.

Mr. Graham said that the president couldn’t have obstructed justice if there was no underlying crime committed by Mr. Trump’s campaign associates. Mr. Mueller’s probe didn’t establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian government.

Attempted obstruction of justice of a crime that never occurred seems to be the new standard around here, to me it doesn’t make any sense,” Mr. Graham said.

Under the law, obstruction doesn’t require a successful effort. Nor does a prosecutor need to prove there was an underlying crime that a suspect was covering up.

Ms. Feinstein took an opposite tack. “Contrary to the declarations of the total and complete exoneration,” the report contained “substantial evidence of misconduct,” Ms. Feinstein said, referring to descriptions in the report that showed how the Trump campaign had welcomed, encouraged, and expected to benefit from Russia’s interference and how Mr. Trump tried to limit or influence the investigation.

In his report, Mr. Mueller cited in part Justice Department guidance as a reason he didn’t pursue obstruction charges.

A centerpiece of the hearing was the letter sent by Mr. Mueller to the attorney general on March 27. The letter, released Wednesday morning, showed that Mr. Mueller twice encouraged Mr. Barr to quickly release a fuller account of his team’s Russia investigation and expressed concerns that Mr. Barr’s early portrayals had failed to capture the nature and context of his team’s work and findings.

“There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation,” Mr. Mueller wrote. “This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of investigation.”

But Mr. Barr testified Wednesday that, while he asked Mr. Mueller to make redactions in order to hasten the report’s release, he found when he received it on March 22 that it still contained grand jury material that couldn’t be made public. He said he knew it would take weeks to make the edits.

At least two prominent members of Congress have called on the attorney general to resign, and Democrats on the Senate panel are already accusing Mr. Barr of ignoring Mr. Mueller’s letter in an effort to protect Mr. Trump.

After Mr. Mueller sent the letter, he told Mr. Barr in a phone call that nothing in Mr. Barr’s summary was inaccurate or misleading but expressed frustration over the lack of context and resulting news coverage of the case, according to a person familiar with their discussion. Mr. Mueller urged Mr. Barr to release more information.

In his opening remarks, Mr. Graham devoted much of his time to quoting from emails exchanged between an FBI agent and a Justice Department lawyer criticizing Mr. Trump during the 2016 campaign.

Graham challenges Kushner’s bid to downplay Russia interference

“You look at what Russia did, you know, buying some Facebook ads to try to sow dissent . . . and it’s a terrible thing,” Kushner said last week. “But I think the investigations, and all of the speculation that’s happened for the last two years, has had a much harsher impact on our democracy than a couple of Facebook ads.”

Graham said Sunday that although “I like Jared a lot,” he’s “leaving out a big detail” — namely that the Russians hacked the emails of the Democratic presidential nominee’s campaign manager and the Democratic National Committee.

“Can you imagine what we would be saying if the Russians or the Iranians hacked into the presidential team of the Republican Party?” Graham asked. “So, no — this is a big deal. It’s not just a few Facebook ads. They were very successful in pitting one American against the other during the 2016 campaign.”

Graham also argued that “an attack on one party should be an attack on all” and said he has spoken to Trump about imposing more sanctions on Moscow.

“They’re coming at us again, and I’d like to stop them, and one way to stop them is to make them pay a price,” Graham said, later adding: “The Russians are up to it again. . . .  Everything we’ve done with the Russians is not working. We need more sanctions, not less.”

Trump, however, demonstrates a continued unwillingness to accept that Russia interfered in the 2016 election, even questioning his own intelligence community’s findings about Russian hacking. Multiple news outlets have reported that Trump believes such an assertion undercuts his victory.

Graham’s words, however, are unlikely to satisfy Democrats, given his insistence that there is nothing to litigate following Mueller’s report at a time when House Democrats say they will use the document as a road map for their own investigations.

One of 10 instances of possible obstruction cited in the Mueller report, which is more than 400 pages long, involved Trump allegedly calling then-White House counsel Donald McGahn and telling him to fire Mueller. House Democrats have subpoenaed McGahn, but Graham said he has no plans to do the same in the Senate.

“I don’t care what he said to Don McGahn; it’s what he did. And the president never obstructed,” Graham said. “If you’re going to look at every president who pops off at a staffer and, you know, asks them to do something that’s maybe crazy, you wouldn’t have any presidents.”

Notably, however, Mueller argued in his report that he did not feel he had the authority to determine whether Trump had obstructed justice. The special counsel seemed to defer to Congress on the matter, citing Justice Department guidelines barring a president from being charged with a crime.