Intel Chief Defends White House, DOJ Involvement in Handling Whistleblower Complaint
Acting director of national intelligence Joseph Maguire said the president's involvement in the underlying issue required him to see if executive privilege covered the whistleblower complaint.
September 26, 2019 at 03:14 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
When acting director of national intelligence Joseph Maguire started his new job, the inspector general of the intelligence community was already in possession of a whistleblower complaint that would set Democrats on the path to launching a formal impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump.
Just six weeks into his new role, Maguire made his debut before the House Intelligence Committee, defending not only his handling of that whistleblower complaint but the whistleblower themselves.
During the nearly three-hour hearing, Maguire made it clear he believed he had no choice but to consult with White House attorneys and the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, despite White House lawyers being implicated in the complaint, which he described as "unprecedented."
Labeling it a "unique situation," Maguire said the president's involvement invoked other concerns that typically wouldn't be present in handling such a complaint, like whether claims of executive privilege could be made over parts of the report.
"I thought it would be prudent to ensure that it met the statute before I sent it forward," he said.
But Democrats on the committee questioned why Maguire went to the bodies directly mentioned in the complaint for guidance on how to handle the matter.
"So you went to the subject of the complaint for advice first on whether you should provide the complaint to Congress?" Schiff asked.
Maguire disputed that characterization. Maguire said he asked the White House about whether the conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky fell under the scope of executive privilege and that no one directed him at any point to not provide the complaint to Congress.
He also maintained he did not ignore a subpoena from the House Intelligence Committee to hand over the complaint, putting distance between himself and other current or former administration officials who have defied subpoenas.
Democrats repeatedly said Maguire "withheld" the report from them by not sharing it within seven days as required by federal whistleblower law, after Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson deemed it an "urgent" matter. Some members suggested that, had Atkinson not notified them of the complaint, they would have never learned of it in the first place.
But Maguire disputed that characterization, saying he simply "delayed" providing Congress with the report in order to resolve the issues covered by executive privilege. He said the OLC opinion meant he did not have to comply with the time restrictions included in the statute.
And he said the complaint wasn't "being swept under the rug" because it was referred to the Justice Department. DOJ spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said in a statement Tuesday that the potential campaign finance violations were referred to the agency, but that no charges were being pursued.
A declassified, partially redacted version of the whistleblower complaint was released just ahead of Thursday's hearing. It alleged that Trump asked Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden, and that several White House officials tried to cover it up.
A memo documenting the call was released by the White House on Wednesday. Trump's actions pushed Speaker Nancy Pelosi to declare that the House is formally pursuing an impeachment inquiry.
In a series of final questions to Maguire, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff aimed to get what the House failed to get from former special counsel Robert Mueller—an explicit statement that Congress is now the best body to move forward in investigating allegations of wrongdoing by the president.
Mueller laid out several instances of potential obstruction of justice in his final report but did not make a charging decision. Attorney General William Barr said he determined the matter should be referred to DOJ and declined to pursue it further, angering Democrats who argued it should be taken up by Congress instead.
When Schiff asked Maguire if he believed the committee should take up the investigation, the intelligence chief replied, "The horse is already out of the barn."
Maguire said lawmakers have "all the information" they need, and the investigatory burden now falls on their shoulders.
Schiff signalled that the committee may call in others cited in the whistleblower complaint. And he called on others who were firsthand witnesses to the events described by the whistleblower to come forward.
"I would just say to those several others that have knowledge of these events, I hope that they too would show the same kind of courage" as the whistleblower, Schiff said.
Read more:
White House Lawyers Worked to Obscure Memo of Trump's Ukraine Call, Whistleblower Claims
Roberts, Like Rehnquist Before Him, Would Preside Over a Trump Impeachment Trial
'Do Us a Favor': Trump Wanted Barr, Giuliani to Help Ukraine Investigate Biden
2 Key Lawyers in Whistleblower Saga Have Lauded Oversight. Now, They Are Divided
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
© 2025 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 AllLitigators of the Week: A Knockout Blow to Latest FCC Net Neutrality Rules After ‘Loper Bright’
An ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Litigators of the Week: A Win for Homeless Veterans On the VA's West LA Campus
'The Most Peculiar Federal Court in the Country' Comes to Berkeley Law
Trending Stories
- 1Pogo Stick Maker Wants Financing Company to Pay $20M After Bailing Out Client
- 2Goldman Sachs Secures Dismissal of Celebrity Manager's Lawsuit Over Failed Deal
- 3Trump Moves to Withdraw Applications to Halt Now-Completed Sentencing
- 4Trump's RTO Mandate May Have Some Gov't Lawyers Polishing Their Resumes
- 5A Judge Is Raising Questions About Docket Rotation
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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