So did Lindsey Graham just win or lose in court?
There are no magic wands for getting out of testifying to a grand jury in a criminal investigation. There are only temporary reprieves, and even those are finite. Just ask Rudy Giuliani, who was forced to testify to the grand jury last week even after being informed that he was a criminal target of the probe.
Another subpoenaed witness in the probe, Lindsey Graham, is still dragging out his inevitable testimony a bit longer by playing the “I’m a Senator” card in court. Today a judge gave Graham a temporary reprieve from having to testify. Different legal experts are portraying this as a win for Graham, or a loss for Graham. So what really happened?
The short answer is this. Graham has bought himself a bit of time with this reprieve, which sends things back to the lower court. However, this ruling also largely guts the arguments that Graham wanted to make in lower court. So this delays Graham’s testimony, but also ensures that he’ll lose in court. He’ll have to testify, and he’ll have to answer most or all of the questions he’ll be asked. Anything short of that, and he’ll end up charged with obstruction.
So is this a win or a loss for Lindsey Graham? If a win is delaying his testimony just a bit longer, then he won. But if Graham’s definition of winning is not having to testify at all, then he lost. These things can be complicated. But here’s what’s straightforward: Graham will end up having to testify, and he won’t be able to delay it by that much longer. Grand jury subpoenas aren’t mere suggestions.
