WASHINGTON – A panel investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol Uprising unanimously on Monday ignored a summons from former White House Chief of Staff Mark Madows and called on the Justice Department to prosecute.
Meadows submitted some documents to the committee before refusing to testify in accordance with the summons. His attorney, George Tervilliger, called on the court not to prosecute him for contempt of court because Maidose worked under former President Donald Trump and sought to keep his communications secret within the authority of a senior official.
The committee’s chairman, spokeswoman D-Miss Benny Thompson, said Madows refused to testify after submitting 9,000 pages of documents to the court. Lawmakers are asking lawmakers and Fox News presenters about a text urging Trump to stop the harassment.
“He changed his mind and told us to grind sand. He didn’t even show up, “Thompson said.” There’s no good reason for him to drop the selection committee’s investigation. “
January. 6 COMMITTEE REPORT: The Duck National Guard says it will “protect Trump supporters.”
The House Rules Committee will meet Tuesday Tuesday at 9 a.m. to set the rules for discussing Meadows’ negligence, and the Justice Department may decide in a few weeks whether to prosecute.
Thompson said about 300 witnesses worked with the committee, which received 30,000 recordings.
“We are pleased to report that we are making rapid progress,” Thompson said.
Republican White House spokeswoman Liz Cheney said the White House knew the attack was serious because lawmakers, TV presenters and her son sent a text message to Meadows.
The lawmakers, who did not want to be named, described themselves as “under siege” and “someone will be killed,” Cheney said. Fox hosts Laura Ingraham, Brian Kilmiad and Sean Hanniti all told Trump to stop the mob through the meadows, Cheney said. “It’s gone too far and out of control,” Cheney said.
“The messages leave no doubt that the White House knows what’s going on,” Cheney said.
Early Monday, Tervillier told the committee that it would be “illegal” for the case to be referred to the Justice Department because Medose had worked in good faith to keep Trump’s relationship confidential.
In a seven-page letter to the committee, Tervillier said, “It will not benefit the country to hurry to resolve this issue.”
‘NO CHOICE’: Mark Meadows sues Jan. 6 over negligence
Meadows initially cooperated with the committee and filed documents, but declined to provide controversial documents or testify. Committee members said there was no legitimate claim to executive power in questions involving the 9,000 documents Meadows had already submitted.
In a 51-page report prepared for the committee’s vote on Monday, Meadows said it had no grounds to demand executive power and refused to answer questions unrelated to the executive.
“Clearly, Mr. Midou’s non-compliance and this disregarded recommendation are not based on goodwill misunderstandings about the privilege statement,” the report said. “On the contrary, Mr. Meadows has completely refused to testify, and even refused to answer questions about information that he does not have a clear preference for, or information that he has identified as non-preferential through his own request,” he said. own document production. ”
On Wednesday, Meadows summoned Nancy Pelosi, chairman of the California House of Representatives, and a U.S. district court committee, arguing that the summons was “too wide and overloaded.” He also questioned the legitimacy of the committee, saying it “threatens to violate the constitutional principles of the executive branch of government and the long-standing principles of inviolability.”
Trump is also struggling to summon his administrative documents to the National Archives and Records Administration. The U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of President Joe Biden, who resigned, and the committee upheld the motion. But Trump is expected to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The House committee is scheduled to hold a vote Monday night to ask the House of Representatives to find out that Maidouse is ignoring a request to summon documents and testimonies.
All members of the House of Representatives must vote on the issue of criminal negligence. Meadows could become the second official in the Trump administration to be convicted of contempt with political strategist Steve Bannon.
The committee also recommended that former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark be disrespected and prosecuted. However, Clark was scheduled to meet with the committee on Thursday, and the vote was postponed because he refused to answer questions under the Fifth Amendment against Self-Determination.
About 300 people worked on the committee. The report on the attack on the Capitol, which injured 140 police officers and temporarily suspended the counting of ballots by the Electoral College, is scheduled to be discussed next week.
The committee would like to receive the following information from Meadows.
After exchanging messages with the organizer of the rally on Ellipse on January 6, the organizer told him, “Most crazy, I need some instructions.” Please.”
An e-mail sent to an individual about the January 6 incident asked if the National Guard would be involved in “protecting Trump supporters” and if more people could be on standby.
Messages and emails received by Meadows about attempts by Republican lawmakers in some states to try to send voters to Congress in turn. One member of Congress acknowledged the plan was “very controversial” and Meadows replied “I love it.” this. ”
Tervillier told the committee that the law on criminal negligence does not apply to goodwill statements about the privileges of an executive. Despite constant disagreements between the executive and Congress over privileges and custody of documents, the law was not enforced against executive officials for 125 years after its enactment, until 1982.
“Congress passed the criminal law as an addition to the abomination of criminal law, especially at the end of the legislature, to allow the detention of insulted witnesses,” Tervillier said. The power to disrespect the power before committing a crime against a member of the executive branch, which guarantees the power of the executive, has never been used. “
Tervillier argued that Nuga’s case was a well-intentioned effort to ensure the secrecy of the executive branch rather than a deliberately illegal act, and compared it to a claim that the income tax form had not been completed.
“This is not the case when an individual deliberately resists a request for a legal summons on the advice of a lawyer,” Tervillier said.
Tervillier also argued that the executive branch protects the institution of the presidency, not certain residents, such as Trump.
“These protections are not for the personal benefit of any executive adviser, but to protect the institution of the presidency,” Tervillier said. “Immunity of coercion should also apply to former assistants, because if the transfer from one administration to another is deprived of privileges, it will have no privileges.”
Appellate court judges who heard Trump’s case noted that there was a conflict between the administrations, but they said that the current president’s views on the executive branch are better than those of the previous president.
The committee said in a statement that Meadows had not provided a basis for the executive’s claim.
“Mr. Meadows has refused to provide the selection committee with information and applications without any imaginable privilege claims, ”the committee said in a statement.