Judge rejects Trump’s bid to withhold records as capitol riot investigation continues

Trump “does not acknowledge the deference owed to the incumbent president’s judgment. His position that he may override the express will of the executive branch appears to be premised on the notion that his executive power ‘exists in perpetuity,'” the judge wrote. “But presidents are not kings, and plaintiff is not president.”

A US judge has ruled a congressional committee investigating the Capitol riot can access some of ex-President Donald Trump’s White House records.
Trump wanted to invoke executive privilege, under which presidential documents can be kept secret.
The inquiry by the congressional committee is trying to find out if Trump had prior knowledge of the capitol riot.
Trump supporters stormed the Capitol building on 6 January as Congress was certifying President Joe Biden’s election victory after Trump refused to acknowledge losing the election last year, claiming – without evidence – that it had been rigged.

The inquiry is being conducted by a committee set up by the House of Representatives which is dominated by President Biden’s Democrats.


The panel wants to get hold of phone records, visitor logs and other White House documents that could shed some light on the events leading up to the attack on Congress.
The committee has issued summons to several Trump aides to testify before the lawmakers and Trump argues his White House communications were protected and as such should not be released.

US District Judge Tanya Chutkan ruled that the National Archives, the federal agency that holds the records, should comply with the panel’s request.

Trump “does not acknowledge the deference owed to the incumbent president’s judgment. His position that he may override the express will of the executive branch appears to be premised on the notion that his executive power ‘exists in perpetuity,'” the judge wrote. “But presidents are not kings, and plaintiff is not president.”

Taylor Budowich, a spokesman for Mr Trump, said the case was likely to be appealed.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s