Article content continued

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or

Three people familiar with the matter confirmed to The Associated Press that McGahn spoke with Sessions just before he announced his recusal to urge him not to do so. One of the people said McGahn contacted Sessions at the president’s behest. All three spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid publicly discussing an ongoing investigation.

“What this adds that is new is that he took action to prevent, to attempt to prevent, Sessions from recusing himself,” said Notre Dame criminal law professor Jimmy Gurule, a former federal prosecutor. “So now we go simply beyond his state of mind, his personal beliefs, to taking concrete action to attempt to prevent Sessions from recusing himself.”

Though the episode makes clear Trump’s exasperation with the investigation, it remains unclear whether Mueller’s team has evidence to establish that the president’s collective actions were done with the corrupt intent needed to prove obstruction of justice.

Photo by AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, File

Trump and his lawyers have repeatedly maintained that he did nothing improper and that, as president, he had unequivocal authority to fire Comey and to take other actions. They may also argue that the president was empowered to want the attorney general he appointed to oversee the Justice Department’s Russian meddling investigation or, as McGahn contended to Sessions, that there was no basis or reason at that time for the attorney general to recuse himself.

What this adds that is new is that he took action to prevent, to attempt to prevent, Sessions from recusing himself

Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University who supports Sessions’ decision to recuse, said he sees Trump’s order to McGahn as another sign of the president’s novice — and norm-breaking — approach to governing, rather than evidence of any criminal wrongdoing.