Now, you know, the Trump v. Thompson case will ultimately be decided one way or the other, and then we'll know where we stand on executive privilege. Both sides will know.
Mr. Schiff. Before I yield back to committee counsel, I just want to state, for the record, people in a superior position to Mr. Clark's who were at the Justice Department and were his superiors at the time of the events of interest to the committee have testified. The current Justice Department and the current President of the United States have not asserted privilege, in fact have instructed Mr. Clark they will not assert privilege.
He has refused to testify. He has refused to testify, not on the basis of any action that President Trump has taken to seek judicial intervention in this proceeding. We have not received any communication that I'm aware of from the former President asserting privilege.
And Mr. Clark, in my opinion, is asserting — arrogating to himself a decision that his superiors disagree with, that the President has not asserted to this committee, and in defiance of the lawful process of this committee.
And I yield back to counsel.
Mr. MacDougald. And, respectfully, for the record, disagree with Congressman Schiff's assertion, but let's leave it there.
Let me just ask, to follow up on Congressman Schiff's question, has there been any effort to confirm your interpretation of the August 2nd letter with the former President's counsel?
Mr. MacDougald. I have indicated previously I have not communicated with them, but I can read.
So the interpretation that you're providing today that the August 2nd letter is, in fact, a direction not to testify, just based on —
