The Very Talented Mr. McGahn
The White House counsel has taken a page out of his boss's playbook: It's all about me.
January 30, 2018 at 02:02 PM
5 minute read
I hate to admit mistakes, but I was so wrong about Don McGahn.
Remember when I wrote him that nice letter, urging him to quit his job as the White House counsel last spring? I did so because I thought that he was doing an awful, awful job counseling the president and serving the office of the presidency. I also told him that he was heedlessly flushing his career down the toilet in the process.
Boy, was I wrong! No, I'm not talking about my criticism of McGahn's performance as White House counsel. I'm talking about the part in which I suggested that McGahn wasn't protective enough of his career.
It turns out this guy is a brilliant careerist! Sure, the nation and the presidency might go to hell, but McGahn is going to come out of the quagmire smelling like a rose.
I mean, did you catch the recent coverage about his reported role in stopping President Donald Trump from firing special prosecutor Bob Mueller? Recently, The New York Times broke the story that last summer McGahn objected so vehemently to Trump's plan to ax Mueller that he threatened to bolt. As a result, McGahn scored some rather positive headlines, such as: “Trump Wanted to Fire Mueller. The Top White House Lawyer Said No.” Overnight, it seems, McGahn has emerged as the brave knight who stood up to Trump—the voice of conscience in a sea of sycophants.
Oh, please.
I'll grant that McGahn did the right thing, but does anyone believe that he acted out of a deep allegiance to the rule of law?
There's certainly little in his tenure to suggest such a conviction. Remember, McGahn has been a consistent henchman for Trump from day one: McGahn ignored warnings about Michael Flynn's lies about his foreign contacts, including one by acting Attorney General Sally Yates; played a central role in Trump's firing of FBI chief James Comey; and pressured Jeff Session not to recuse himself from the Russian investigations. I won't even go into McGahn's role in facilitating/ignoring countless questionable ethical lapses during this administration.
So how is it that McGahn has been rechristened his own man—particularly when his act of defiance took place back in June?
People are skeptical about the timing of the revelation. Walter Shaub, former director of the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, tweeted:
Before you canonize McGahn remember he pressured Sessions not to recuse. I bet his objection was not that firing Mueller was wrong but that it was dangerous. Also, this is not the 1st leak to paint McGahn in a good light at Trump's expense. If I were Trump I'd wonder about McGahn
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) January 26, 2018
I'm of the school that McGahn is behind the leak about what happened in June. My bet is that McGahn is setting the stage to return to Big Law. (Remember, McGahn made close to $2.5 million at Jones Day.) Not only does he want to disinfect himself from this administration's taints, he wants to distinguish himself from the pack, capitalize on his experience as a friend of big business and even emerge as the savior of the day.
I think McGahn has been cool and calculating all along. His fingerprints are all over the Trump administration (in addition to the list above, he's been very instrumental in filling the judiciary with super conservative judges), but he does it with a deft, invisible hand.
He stands in sharp contrast to Trump's other key lawyers, who often seem ridiculously rude, boastful and clumsy. Never did he make a fool of himself like Marc Kasowitz, (who sent a stranger, who urged him to quit, threatening emails, laced with obscenities: “You are fucking with me now Let's see who you are Watch your back , bitch”). Nor was he brazenly careless like Ty Cobb, (whose rantings about the inner workings of the White House—”I think he's like a McGahn spy”—were overheard by a reporter at a Washington, D.C., steak house).
And I certainly can't imagine that McGahn would stoop to do the kind of errands that Michael Cohen did, like dispatching $130,000 to porn star Stormy Daniels so that she wouldn't spill the beans about her alleged affair with Trump. (I know, Cohen is Trump's personal lawyer while McGahn is a government lawyer. But does anyone believe that Trump has any problems crossing those lines?)
Which is to say that while McGahn might be a Trump tool, he's selective about how's he's used. Clever fellow.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250