Mark Meadows complied with DOJ subpoena in January 6 probe

[brooklynite]

Source: CNN

(CNN)Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows has complied with a subpoena from the Justice Department's investigation into events surrounding January 6, 2021, sources familiar with the matter tell CNN, making him the highest-ranking Trump official known to have responded to a subpoena in the federal investigation.

Meadows turned over the same materials he provided to the House select committee investigating the US Capitol attack, one source said, meeting the obligations of the Justice Department subpoena, which has not been previously reported.

Last year, Meadows turned over thousands of text messages and emails to the House committee, before he stopped cooperating. The texts he handed over between Election Day 2020 and Joe Biden's inauguration, which CNN previously obtained, provided a window into his dealings at the White House, though he withheld hundreds of messages, citing executive privilege.

In addition to Trump's former chief of staff, one of Meadows' top deputies in the White House, Ben Williamson, also recently received a grand jury subpoena, another source familiar with the matter tells CNN. That subpoena was similar to what others in Trump's orbit received. It asked for testimony and records relating to January 6 and efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Williamson previously cooperated with the January 6 committee. He declined to comment to CNN.

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/14/politics/mark-meadows-subpoena-justice-department-january-6/index.html

[gab13by13]

1. Why did DOJ only ask for documents that Meadows already provided

to the J6 committee? Remember when Meadows turned over a boat load of incriminating documents and then Trump gave him a million dollars and Meadows stopped co-operating?

I do not understand this request? Why not ask for everything? Meadows is the key figure to indict Trump, in both the J6 and stolen document cases, he knows all of it.

[msfiddlestix]

2. ✔️

[Beastly Boy]

3. The J6 Committee DID ask for everything. So did DOJ.

They got thousands of records, but not those where Meadows claimed executive privilege:

Last year, Meadows turned over thousands of text messages and emails to the House committee, before he stopped cooperating. The texts he handed over between Election Day 2020 and Joe Biden's inauguration, which CNN previously obtained, provided a window into his dealings at the White House, though he withheld hundreds of messages, citing executive privilege.

It was probably more expedicious for DOJ to subpoena the records from Meadows himself for their own investigation rather than obtaining them through the J6 Committee.

It is no big surprise that DOJ asking for the same thing produced identical results. Demanding the records allegedly covered by executive privilege would have required a lawsuit, which will take months and which Meadows has a good chance of winning.

[gab13by13]

4. So we can't have Meadow's juicy, incriminating documents

because he may win an executive privilege claim in the courts. I see, so let's not bother. Executive privilege doesn't apply in a cover up of a crime, so DOJ should win in the courts unless it gets a Magat judge, or fascist SC justices.

Many months have passed since the J6 committee subpoenaed those documents.

[Beastly Boy]

5. We cannot have his juicy incriminating evidence because the courts will not allow it

Meadows is very likely to win the executive privilege claim in court.

And that's not my opinion, it's the opinion shared by many seasoned prosecutors. And my wishful thinking has nothing to do with it.. It's the law.

If DOJ were to test these opinions in court, it would take months and is likely to amount to nothing. And then DOJ critics would come back complaining that it took months and amounted to nothing.And that would be a legitimate complaint.

[gab13by13]

6. Strongly disagree,

precedence with Nixon and Reagan says otherwise. The SC has ruled that executive privilege is authorized by the sitting president, not a former president. Give me a name of a seasoned prosecutor.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/11/22/mark-meadows-executive-privilege-legal-merits-wrong/

[Beastly Boy]

7. Unless you subscribe to the conspiracy theory of DOJ being complicit with Meadows,

DOJ declining to charge Meadows with contempt of Congress based on Meadows' claim of privilege is by itself sufficient evidence that many seasoned prosecutors consider the law not being in favor of such action. As you know, DOJ is full of seasoned prosecutors. I could go on their site and copy-paste a bunch of names, but that would be redundant. And I would take their legal opinion over a WP editorial opinion any time.

The records in question are likely to contain information connected with Trump the President, and Meadows can claim them as privileged. Regardless of whether his claim are found to be legitimate, which is likely, trying to get a hold of these records is certain to take months of litigation that have a good chance to amount to waste of time and effort. Should this turn into a legal nothingburger, it will give Meadows and Trump and who knows how many more suspects tons of political capital, and will discredit DOJ. You will never hear the end of it. Is it worth the risk? Not from where I stand.