DOJ Attempt to Block Trump Deposition Fails Again

FBI agent Peter Strzok during testimony before Congress in Washington on July 12, 2018. Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times

The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) latest appeal to block former President Donald Trump from being deposed in a lawsuit against the agency was rejected (pdf) when the D.C. Appeals Court ruled, as a lower court did in July, that the former president could testify.

Former FBI agent Peter Strzok sued the agency, alleging wrongful termination, and former FBI personnel Lisa Page is suing the agency, alleging invasion of privacy. The two were spotlighted in the “Russiagate” scandal, where the agency investigated ties between the former president and Russia in the 2016 elections and ultimately could not bring charges. Text messages between Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page were publicized, revealing their bias against the then-presidential candidate.

Mr. Strzok had led the investigation into President Trump, and the DOJ later concluded that the bias revealed “cast a cloud“ over the investigation. Ms. Page had resigned, but alleged in her lawsuits that the invasion of privacy stemming from the publicized text messages made her a target of ”frequent attacks by the President of the United States, as well as his allies and supporters.”

The district appeals court found that the “extraordinary circumstances” required to have a high-level official testify were met in this case and that the DOJ did not properly show an argument that the lower court’s decision to allow it constituted a “clear abuse of discretion,” as they claimed.

DOJ: No Need for President’s Testimony

The DOJ has argued multiple times that there is no need for President Trump to testify.

Earlier this year, the department made the argument that FBI Director Christopher Wray’s deposition would suffice to provide any evidence President Trump would have been called to provide in his testimony. U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, had allowed a stay on deposing President Trump in the meantime.

Then, in June, following a request from Mr. Strzok’s team and opposition from the DOJ, Judge Jackson ruled that President Trump could be deposed, given the “limited nature” of the deposition and the fact that the former president, who is now campaigning for the 2024 presidency, seemed to have time in his schedule “to be able to accommodate other civil litigation that he has initiated.”

The DOJ argued that there was no evidence Mr. Strzok’s firing had to do with President Trump. The FBI had stated, when Mr. Strzok was terminated, that the agent was “subject to the standard FBI review and disciplinary process” prior to the decision.

“Only the most extraordinary of circumstances would justify allowing a plaintiff to depose a former high-level official about actions he took in the course of his official duties. This case falls far short of that standard,” the department argued in appellate court after Judge Jackson upheld her ruling to allow the deposition of President Trump.

They argued that former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, and Mr. Wray, have already testified, rendering the deposition unnecessary.

“Strzok hardly needs to confirm whether the President expressed the same views in meetings in the Oval Office that he expressed publicly,” the department argued.

In Mr. Kelly’s testimony, which was released in July, he had said he did not know of President Trump ordering an investigation into Mr. Strzok or Ms. Page, but that the president did want to see them investigated.

Aitan Goelman, attorney for Mr. Strzok, suggested the DOJ’s multiple efforts to block the deposition were telling. “The lengths to which the government has gone to prevent this deposition is striking and suggests that their true concern is what Mr. Trump will say,” he said in a statement to CNN.