I’m still shaking my head in disbelief at Rudy Giuliani’s idea that if Robert Mueller and his team agreed to wrap up the “obstruction” investigation by September 1, Trump would sit for an interview.
I covered this development in my prior post, Rudy’s terrible, horrible, no good idea about Trump sitting for a Mueller interview to speed things up. …
If Trump refuses an interview, Mueller’s only choice would be to subpoena Trump to testify before the grand jury. I think Trump would win a Supreme Court battle over such a subpoena unless Mueller could show a compelling need for information that only is in the possession of Trump and only could be obtained via live testimony.
Ted Olson explains why this is the likely outcome in a column at The Weekly Standard:
Can special counsel Robert Mueller require President Trump to testify before a grand jury? It would be unprecedented, and his effort to do so could lead to a major constitutional confrontation. …
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.