fast-moving scandal<\/a> that has unfolded in less than two weeks. That\u2019s when an enigmatic letter from representative Adam Schiff, the chair of the intelligence committee, first made public hints of the whistle-blower\u2019s allegations\u2014allegations that had landed in Maguire\u2019s lap when he took over as acting DNI just four days after the complaint was filed.<\/p>\nMaguire told the committee that as soon as he read the whistle-blower\u2019s complaint this summer, he knew it was serious, and that he\u2019d be forced to testify about it before Congress. As it happens, that testimony came on the heels of Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House, announcing a formal impeachment inquiry.<\/p>\n
"I never went to a suspect asking what I should do in their case."<\/p>\n
Representative Val Demings<\/p>\n
Trump\u2019s backers had hoped that the release of the White House memo\u2014not exactly a formal transcript, but an abridged summary of the call created after the fact by National Security Council officials\u2014would make clear that there was no \u201cquid pro quo\u201d between Trump and Zelensky. Instead, the release seemed the most damning document to arrive in Washington since President Richard Nixon released his White House tapes, containing a gap of more than 18 minutes missing. The call recap surprisingly pointed to how Trump tried to enlist Zelensky to work with his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, as well as US attorney general William Barr to investigate the Biden family\u2019s work in Ukraine.<\/p>\n
Far from being exculpatory, the White House\u2019s summary of the conversation appeared to show Trump using the weight of his office and America\u2019s foreign policy to advance his own personal political interests. The call summary also showed the president outlining how helpful the US was to Ukraine, and yet how not \u201creciprocal\u201d there was. Then Trump said he wanted to ask for a\u201cfavor,\u201d apparently focused exclusively on ginning up dirt on a political opponent rather than the interests of the US. The call recap, again in the White House\u2019s own words, appeared to describe clearly impeachable conduct\u2014conduct so appalling that it worried White House officials themselves.<\/p>\n
The contents of the call left Democrats and reporters slack-jawed Wednesday as well, as Washington digested what seemed among the clearest possible cases of a president prioritizing his own political interests\u2014and the punishment of his domestic electoral opponents\u2014above his duties to the nation.<\/p>\n
During his testimony, Maguire talked lawmakers through his own struggles handling a whistle-blower complaint that involved such troubling behavior by the president. The law requires him to report the complaint to Congress, but seemed to Maguire potentially covered by executive privilege that superseded his own authority as acting DNI. He ultimately turned to the Justice Department\u2019s Office of Legal Counsel\u2014the division that serves as the US government\u2019s own in-house lawyers\u2014for a binding opinion on how to respond. Democrats, for their part, pressed Maguire about the complaint\u2019s focus on the president and the head of the Justice Department. Was it appropriate, then, to ask the two main alleged conspirators in the complaint whether that conspiracy should be reported?<\/p>\n
Schiff called it at one point a \u201cprofound conflict of interest.\u201d Representative Val Demings, the Democrat from Florida who is a former police officer, told Maguire: \u201cI never went to a suspect asking what I should do in their case.\u201d<\/p>\n
Maguire said that he had little choice in the matter\u2014that even though the complaint went through the formal whistle-blower channels of the intelligence community, it concerned the behavior of the president, who is not technically a member of the intelligence community. Maguire added that he believed that both the whistle-blower and the inspector general acted in good faith throughout, but that his own hands were tied in whether to pass the complaint over to Congress, since it concerned matters that fell under executive privilege. It wasn\u2019t until the White House released the transcript and effectively waived that privilege that he was able to turn the underlying complaint over to Congress, make it public, and discuss it before the committee Thursday.<\/p>\n
Where the impeachment inquiry goes from here is hardly clear\u2014especially since little said so far seemed likely to change the mind of Republicans who remain united behind Trump, either despite or because of the uniquely chaotic nature of his presidency.<\/p>\n
\u201cNone of us is above the law in this country,\u201d Maguire said at one point. The question for the country\u2014and Congress specifically\u2014is whether that long-standing principle applies even to the wrecking ball presidency of Donald Trump.<\/p>\n
![](\"https:\/\/media.wired.com\/photos\/5d8cf11e60025e0009a70f53\/master\/pass\/security_maguire_1177252740.jpg\"\/)
<\/p>\n