Robert Mueller Testimony before House Judiciary Committee

"[Y]ou were talking about incidents... "in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels"... to exert undo influence over your investigations, is that right?"

"Now, am I correct that on page 7 of Volume 2... "The President became aware that his own conduct was being investigated in an obstruction of justice inquiry. At that point, the President engaged in a second phase of conduct, involving public attacks on the investigation, non-public efforts to control it, and efforts in both public and private to encourage witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation"... So President Trump's efforts to exert undo influence over your investigation intensified after the President became aware that he personally was being investigated?"

"Now, is it correct that if you concluded that the President committed the crime of obstruction, you could not publicly state that in your report, or here today?"

"But... under Department of Justice policy, the President could be prosecuted for obstruction of justice crimes after he leaves office, correct?"

"Did the President refuse a request to be interviewed by you and your team?"

"And is it true that you tried for more than a year to secure an interview with the President?"

"And is it true that you and your team advised the President's lawyer that... "an interview with the President is vital to our investigation"..?"

"And is it true that you also... "stated that it is in the interest of the presidency and the public for an interview to take place"..?"

"But the President still refused to sit for an interview by you or your team?"

"And did you also ask him to provide written answers to questions on the 10 possible episodes of obstruction of justice crimes involving him?"

"Did he provide any answers to a single question about whether he engaged in obstruction of justice crimes?"

"Having reviewed your work, I believe anyone else who would engage in the conduct described in your report would have been criminally prosecuted. Your work is vitally important to this committee and the American people because no one is above the law."

"[T]he investigation of Russia's attack that started your investigation is why evidence of possible obstruction is serious. To what extent did the Russian government interfere in the 2016 Presidential election?"

"You've also described in your report that the then Trump campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, shared with a Russian operative, Kilimnik, the campaign strategy for winning Democratic votes in Midwestern states, and internal polling data of the campaign. Isn't that correct?"

"Months before that meeting, Manafort had caused internal data to be shared with Kilimnik, and the sharing continued for a some period of time after their August meeting. Isn't that correct?"

"[Y]our investigation found that Manafort briefed Kilimnik on the state of the Trump campaign and Manafort's plan to win the election, and that briefing encompassed the campaign's messaging, its internal polling data. It also included discussion of battleground states, which Manafort identified as Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Minnesota. Isn't that correct?"

"Did your investigation determine who requested the polling data to be shared with Kilimnik? ...We ...don't have the redacted version. That's maybe another reason why we should get that for Volume 1. Based on your investigation, how could the Russian government have used this campaign polling data to further its sweeping and systematic interference in the 2016 Presidential election?"

"[T]he Trump campaign wasn't exactly reluctant to take Russian help. You wrote it expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, isn't that correct?"

"From your testimony and the report, I think the American people have learned several things. First, the Russians wanted Trump to win. Second, the Russians went on a sweeping cyber influence campaign. The Russians hacked the DNC and they got the Democratic game plan for the election. Russian [sic, Trump's] campaign chairman met with Russian agents and repeatedly gave them internal data, polling, and messaging in the battleground states. So while the Russians were buying ads and creating propaganda to influence the outcome of the election, they were armed with inside information that they had stolen through hacking from the DNC, and that they had been given by the Trump campaign chairman, Mr. Manafort. My colleagues will probe the efforts undertaken to keep this information from becoming public, but I think it's important for the American people to understand the gravity of the underlying problem that your report uncovered."

"On page 12 of Volume 2... "We determined that there was sufficient factual and legal basis to further investigate potential obstruction of justice issues involving the President" is that correct?"

"Your report also describes at least 10 separate instances of possible obstruction of justice that were investigated by you and your team, is that correct?"

"[T]he table of contents serves as a very good guide of some of the acts of that obstruction of justice that you investigated. ...On page 157 of Volume 2, you describe those acts. And they range from the President's effort to curtail the special counsel's investigation, the President's further efforts to have the attorney general take over the investigation, the President orders Don McGahn to deny that the President tried to fire the special counsel, and many others, is that correct?"

"I direct you now to... "The President's pattern of conduct as a whole sheds light on the nature of the President's acts and the inferences that can be drawn about his intent." Does that mean you have to investigate all of his conduct to ascertain true motive?"

"For each of those 10 potential instances of obstruction of justice, you analyzed three elements of the crime of obstruction of justice: an obstructive act, a nexus between the act and official proceeding, and corrupt intent, is that correct?"

"You wrote on page 178, Volume 2 in your report about corrupt intent, "Actions by the President to end a criminal investigation into his own conduct to protect against personal embarrassment or legal liability would constitute a core example of corruptly motivated conduct," is that correct?"

"Do you recall, and I think it's at page 78 of volume 2, the President told Sessions, "You were supposed to protect me. You were supposed to protect me," or words to that effect?"

"And is the attorney general supposed to be the attorney general of the United States of America, or the consigliere for the President?"

"On page 113... the President believed that an un-recused attorney general would play a protective role and conceal the President from the ongoing investigation. ...It's clear, from your report and the evidence, that the President wanted former Attorney General Sessions to violate the Justice Department ethics rules by taking over your investigation and improperly interfering with it, to protect himself and his campaign."

"Your investigation found that President Trump directed White House Counsel to fire you. Isn't that correct?"

"And the President claimed that he wanted to fire you because you had supposed conflicts of interest, isn't that correct?"

"Now, you had no conflicts of interest that required your removal, isn't that a fact?"

"Don McGahn advised the President that the asserted conflicts were, in his words, "silly and not real conflicts" ...page 85 of Volume 2 speaks to that. ...DOJ ethics officials confirmed that you had no conflicts that would prevent you from serving as special counsel, isn't that correct?"

"But despite Don McGahn and the Department of Justice guidance, around May 23, 2017, the President... "Prodded McGahn to complain to Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein about these supposed conflicts of interest," correct?"

"And McGahn declined to call Rosenstein... telling the President that... knocking out Mueller would be another fact used to claim obstruction of justice, isn't that correct?"

"Volume 2, page 81... and 82... after the President was warned about obstructing justice... on Tuesday, June 13, 2017, the President dictated a press statement, stating he had... "no intention of firing" you, correct?"

"But the following day, June 14, the media reported for the first time that you were investigating the President for obstructing of justice, correct?"

"[A]fter learning for the first time that he was under investigation, the very next day, the President... "issued a series of tweets acknowledging the existence of the obstruction investigation, and criticizing it." Isn't that correct?"

"[T]wo days later... page 85, Volume 2... "on Saturday, June 17, 2017, the President called McGahn at home to have the special counsel removed." ...On page 85 ..."On the first call, McGahn recalled that the President said something like... 'You've got to do this. You've got to call Rod.' " Correct?"

"At Volume 2, page 85... [McGahn] "...didn't want to have a role in trying to fire the attorney general.""

"I'd like to get back to your findings covering June of 2017. ...page 90 of Volume 2 ..."news of the obstruction investigation prompted the President to call McGahn and seek to have the Special Counsel removed" ...you wrote about multiple calls ...[R]egarding the second call ..."McGahn recalled that the President was more direct, saying something like [page 86, Vol II] 'Call Rod, tell Rod that Mueller has conflicts and can't be... the Special Counsel'. McGahn recalled the President telling him, 'Mueller has to go' and 'Call me back when you do it.' " ...And in the report ..."McGahn understood the President to be saying that the Special Counsel had to be removed." ...[A]lso ...on page 86 ..."McGahn considered the President's request to be an inflection point, and he wanted to hit the brakes, and he felt trapped, and McGahn decided he had to resign." ..."he then drove to the office to pack his belongings and submit his resignation letter""

"And before he resigned, however, he called the President's Chief of Staff, Reince Priebus, and he called the President's senior advisor, Steve Bannon. ...page 87 ..."Preibus recalled that McGahn said that the President asked him to do crazy [expletive]." In other words, crazy stuff. The White House Counsel thought that the President's request was completely out of bounds. He said the President asked him to do something crazy, it was wrong, and he was prepared to resign over it. Now these are extraordinarily troubling events, but you found White House Counsel McGahn to be a credible witness, isn't that correct?"

"[W]hy did the President of the United States want you fired?"

"[O]n page 89... Volume 2... "substantial evidence indicates that the President's... attempts to remove the Special Counsel were linked to the Special Counsel's oversight of investigations that involve the President's conduct, and most immediately to reports that the President was being investigated for potential obstruction of justice"... Director Mueller, you found evidence... that the President wanted to fire you, because you were investigating him for obstruction of justice. Isn't that correct?"

"[T]hat shouldn't happen in America. No President should be able to escape investigation by abusing his power, but that's what you testified to in your report. The President ordered you fired. The White House Counsel knew it was wrong. The President knew it was wrong. In your report, it says there's also evidence the President knew he should not have made those calls to McGahn. But the President did it anyway. ...Anyone else who blatantly interfered with a criminal investigation, like yours, would be arrested and indicted on charges of obstruction of justice. Director Mueller, you determined that you were barred from indicting a sitting President. ...That is exactly why this committee must hold the President accountable."

"[W]e are focusing on five obstruction episodes today. I would like to ask you about the second... page 113 of Volume 2... "The President Orders McGahn to Deny that the President Tried to Fire the Special Counsel"... On January 25th, 2018, The New York Times reported that, quote, "The President had ordered McGahn to have the Department of Justice fire you." Is that correct?"

"And that story related to the events you already testified about here today. The President's calls to McGahn to have you removed. Correct?"

"[I]n May 2017, the acting Attorney General asked me to serve as special counsel. I undertook that role because I believed that it was of paramount interest to the nation to determine whether a foreign adversary had interfered in the Presidential election. ...My staff and I carried out this assignment with [the] critical objective in mind: to work quietly, thoroughly, and with integrity so that the public would have full confidence in the outcome."