New York Times Reveals Trump Ordered McGahn to Fire Mueller; Trump Subsequently Demands McGahn Deny Story and Create False Record

The New York Times reported on January 25, 2018, that President Donald Trump had ordered White House Counsel Don McGahn in June 2017 to direct Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to remove Special Counsel Robert Mueller, and that McGahn had refused and threatened to resign rather than carry out what he viewed as a potentially catastrophic and legally problematic directive. The revelation, later confirmed in extensive detail in the Mueller Report, exposed Trump’s direct attempt to terminate the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible coordination with his campaign. More significantly, the Mueller Report documented that after the Times story broke, Trump pressured McGahn to publicly deny the account and to create a false written record contradicting the truthful reporting—conduct that Mueller’s team identified as among the most serious episodes of potential obstruction of justice.

June 2017: The Order to Fire Mueller

According to the Mueller Report’s Volume II, on June 17, 2017—just three days after The Washington Post reported that Mueller was investigating Trump himself for obstruction of justice—the President called McGahn at home on a Saturday and directed him to call Rosenstein to have Mueller removed. Trump told McGahn that Mueller had “conflicts of interest” that disqualified him from serving as Special Counsel, including that Mueller had previously worked for a law firm that represented Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, had a dispute over golf club membership fees at a Trump property, and had interviewed but not been selected to return as FBI Director.

McGahn recalled Trump saying something to the effect of “Mueller has to go” and “Call me back when you do it.” McGahn understood this as a direct order to have Mueller fired. Rather than comply, McGahn decided he would resign, viewing the request as reminiscent of the Saturday Night Massacre during Watergate when President Nixon fired Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox. McGahn told his chief of staff to pack his office, believing that resignation was the only appropriate response. He also spoke with White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and White House Counsel Office attorney Ann Donaldson about the directive and his intent to resign rather than participate in what he considered a legally and ethically inappropriate action.

McGahn did not call Rosenstein and did not carry out Trump’s order. The President did not follow up immediately, and the matter appeared to subside—until the press reported on it seven months later.

January 2018: The Cover-Up Attempt

When the New York Times published its bombshell report on January 25, 2018, revealing Trump’s June 2017 directive to fire Mueller and McGahn’s refusal, Trump immediately sought to discredit and deny the story. According to the Mueller Report, Trump called McGahn and pressured him to issue a public statement denying that Trump had ordered him to fire Mueller. McGahn refused, telling the President that the Times story was accurate and that he would not issue a false statement.

In the following weeks and months, Trump made repeated attempts to get McGahn to contradict the reporting. The Mueller Report documented that Trump asked McGahn to write a letter “for our records” stating that the President never directed him to fire Mueller. Trump suggested that McGahn could say he raised “conflicts of interest” but did not order Mueller’s removal. McGahn again refused, recognizing this as an attempt to create a false documentary record. McGahn told Trump that he had already given truthful testimony to the Special Counsel’s investigators about the June 2017 incident and would not contradict that testimony or create a fabricated contemporaneous record.

The Mueller Report noted that Trump told McGahn “you didn’t think I was asking you to fire him” and suggested McGahn was “not remembering correctly.” When McGahn insisted his memory was accurate, Trump became frustrated but ultimately did not press the issue further after McGahn made clear he would not participate in creating a false record.

Mueller Report’s Obstruction Analysis

In Volume II of the Mueller Report, Special Counsel Mueller identified Trump’s directive to fire Mueller and subsequent efforts to have McGahn deny the story and create a false record as among the most serious episodes analyzed for potential obstruction of justice. The Report specifically noted that:

1. Obstructive Act: Trump’s order to McGahn to have Mueller removed would, if carried out, have had the potential to prevent or delay the Special Counsel investigation, satisfying the “obstructive act” element of obstruction.

2. Nexus to Proceeding: The conduct occurred at a time when Trump was aware that he was personally under investigation for obstruction, establishing a clear nexus between the directive and an official proceeding.

3. Corrupt Intent: The evidence suggested Trump knew that firing Mueller would be seen as an improper effort to protect himself from the investigation, and his subsequent attempts to have McGahn deny the story and create a false record demonstrated consciousness of wrongdoing.

The Mueller Report specifically stated on page 158 of Volume II: “If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment.” Mueller emphasized that Trump’s “efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests.”

Constitutional Crisis Averted by McGahn’s Refusal

Legal scholars and former prosecutors widely viewed McGahn’s refusal to carry out Trump’s order as a pivotal moment that prevented a full-blown constitutional crisis. By refusing to participate in what he viewed as an unlawful directive and by later refusing to create a false record or issue false public statements, McGahn upheld his ethical obligations as White House Counsel and protected the integrity of the Special Counsel investigation. However, McGahn’s truthful testimony to Mueller’s team ultimately contributed to Trump’s animosity toward him, and McGahn left the White House in October 2018 under strained circumstances.

The episode illustrated a disturbing pattern: a President willing to obstruct justice, but whose efforts were thwarted not by institutional safeguards or constitutional checks, but by the personal integrity of individual subordinates who chose to resign rather than comply with unlawful orders. The incident raised profound questions about what happens when such individuals are replaced with loyalists willing to follow any presidential directive, regardless of its legality—questions that would become even more urgent in Trump’s later presidency and attempts to overturn the 2020 election results.