Washington (Reuters)-United States Court of Appeals Magistrate judge on Friday a skeptical appearance on the broad legal argument of President Donald Trump sought to prevent a former White House lawyer from Testiting to the parliament as part of the attempt to argue against Trump, but also seemed wary of entering the hot political battle.
Photo: White House Attorney Don McGahn listened to the Supreme Court nominated Brett Kavanaugh as he testified before the United States Senate Justice Commission on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., USA, Jan. 27, 9 2018. Saul Loeb/Pool via REUTERS/Photo file
Judge Thomas Griffith asked the difficult questions of judicial counsel who argued on behalf of the administration and attorneys for the Democratic leader of the Judicial Committee of Representatives that the White House subpoenas attorney Don McGahn, and may be the key vote in deciding the case.
The case was heard by a three-judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Griffith asks whether the tribunal should decide the case at all, in part because the testimony of McGahn is not the key to two arguments against Trump’s approval to be approved by the home on Dec. 18.
Griffith, a Republican appointed, and Magistrate Judge Judith Rogers, a appointed democratic, asked the government’s arguments that the missing home panel stood legal to enforce his subpoena and the president’s senior advisors were “completely immune” from being forced…