Experts warn Trump is 'literally re-litigating Watergate' after DOJ argues court was wrong to hand over grand jury material in Nixon impeachment inquiry

Experts warn Trump is 'literally re-litigating Watergate' after DOJ argues court was wrong to hand over grand jury material in Nixon impeachment inquiry
Richard Nixon via Mark Reinstein, Shutterstock

Lawyers for the Trump Justice Department stunned a federal judge Tuesday by arguing courts in 1974 were wrong to approve the release of Watergate documents to Congress during the impeachment inquiry into President Richard Nixon.


According to Politico's Darren Samuelsohn, Justice Department attorney Elizabeth Shapiro said during a hearing that if the Watergate case came before the court today, there would be a "different result."

"Wow, okay," responded U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell. "The department is taking an extraordinary position in this case."

The exchange came during arguments on the House Judiciary Committee's subpoena for the grand jury evidence behind former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into possible collusion between President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and Russia.

Observers on social media echoed Judge Howell's stunned reaction to the Justice Department's argument.

"You know you're on the wrong side of history—and the law—when you're arguing that Nixon turned over too many documents," tweeted Chris Yu, fellow at the Miller Center.

Others piled on:

Politico reported that attorneys for the Justice Department said House Democrats "should be denied access to the Mueller grand jury materials, arguing that a congressional impeachment proceeding doesn't meet the criteria to release them."

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a statement following Tuesday's hearing that he is "confident" in Democrats' case.

"We are gratified at the seriousness with which the court addressed our petition for grand jury information relating to the House impeachment inquiry," said Nadler. "We remain confident in our case and look forward to the resolution of this matter."

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.