Hope Hicks’ latest obstruction just gave the Democrats a major weapon: 'We will destroy them in court'

Hope Hicks’ latest obstruction just gave the Democrats a major weapon: 'We will destroy them in court'
Donald Trump and staff on Air Force One. White House photo

Hope Hicks didn’t provide much information for Democrats in her testimony before the House Judiciary Committee — but she may have cracked the stone wall the White House has built around former staffers.


President Donald Trump’s former communications director — and perhaps his most trusted aide outside his family — claimed blanket immunity throughout her closed-door testimony, but Hicks still gave Democrats something in their legal battle against the White House, argued Margaret Carlson for The Daily Beast.

“Perhaps surprisingly, there’s no controlling legal authority defining the breadth of what aides can testify to,” Carlson wrote. “With all its limitations — in private, surrounded by lawyers, with a dry transcript to come days later — Hicks’ appearance gave Democrats, with no time to waste, a promising case to take to court to challenge the White House’s definition of immunity.”

Hicks refused to answer even the most basic questions about her service in the White House, which ended early last year, and House Democrats could use that to challenge her claims to immunity.

“Even under the broadest interpretation, immunity doesn’t extend to where you sit at work,” Carlson wrote. “(House Judiciary chairman Jerry) Nadler predicted after Hicks left, ‘We will destroy them in court.'”

“Perhaps surprisingly, there’s no controlling legal authority defining the breadth of what aides can testify to,” Carlson wrote. “With all its limitations — in private, surrounded by lawyers, with a dry transcript to come days later — Hicks’ appearance gave Democrats, with no time to waste, a promising case to take to court to challenge the White House’s definition of immunity.”

Hicks refused to answer even the most basic questions about her service in the White House, which ended early last year, and House Democrats could use that to challenge her claims to immunity.

“Even under the broadest interpretation, immunity doesn’t extend to where you sit at work,” Carlson wrote. “(House Judiciary chairman Jerry) Nadler predicted after Hicks left, ‘We will destroy them in court.'”

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. AlterNet’s journalists work tirelessly to counter the traditional corporate media narrative. We’re here seven days a week, 365 days a year. And we’re proud to say that we’ve been bringing you the real, unfiltered news for 20 years—longer than any other progressive news site on the Internet.

It’s through the generosity of our supporters that we’re able to share with you all the underreported news you need to know. Independent journalism is increasingly imperiled; ads alone can’t pay our bills. AlterNet counts on readers like you to support our coverage. Did you enjoy content from David Cay Johnston, Common Dreams, Raw Story and Robert Reich? Opinion from Salon and Jim Hightower? Analysis by The Conversation? Then join the hundreds of readers who have supported AlterNet this year.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure AlterNet remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to AlterNet, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

Close
alternet logo

Tough Times

Demand honest news. Help support AlterNet and our mission to keep you informed during this crisis.