Liz Cheney: "We do not take this step lightly."

She is stressing that Meadows is refusing to testify about documents that he has admitted are not privileged.
Text messages leave no doubt that the White House knew exactly what was happening at the Capitol.

From text messages, it was clear the White House knew there was a "siege" and the protesters had stormed the capitol, breaking windows. "Armed standoff at the House chamber doors."
Multiple Fox News hosts knew the president needed to act immediately.

They texted Meadows.

Meadows turned over those texts to the committee.

As the violence continued, even one of the Trump sons tried to get Trump to call it off.
Meadows said, "I am pushing it hard" but Trump refused to call it off.

It's easy to see why Meadows doesn't want to testify.

Key question the committee is asking: "Did Trump, through action or action, corruptly seek to . . . "
In the weeks before January 6, DOJ officials continually told Trump the election was not stolen, so Trump wanted Clark.

Clark will stand on the Fifth. (For what that means, see my recent NBC piece)
Meadows knows that if he tells the truth, it will be devastating for Trump. So he's trying to avoid testifying.

He's a man in a corner. He's not having fun right now.

Now we know why he is trying to keep his cell phone records secret: He talked to members of Congress on his personal phone.

Seems to me that he started stonewalling when they wanted his cell phone records.
And yes, as I guessed in the past few days, it appears that Meadows may not have turned over everything to the Archives (the call records, perhaps?)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Teri Kanefield

Teri Kanefield Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Teri_Kanefield

15 Dec
Here is what's mind-boggling.

Mark Meadows willingly turned these messages over to the select committee, but then, enraged, put the brakes on his cooperation when the committee wanted his private phone records.

1/
If he willingly turned over those messages, imagine what his phone records reveal.

He filed this suit to try to keep the committee from learning what's in them.

2/

It seems to me (and this is a guess, I've never done an investigation like this—my work was criminal defense)
the committee is releasing these to put pressure on the holdouts. It's like saying, "We know what's going on so you may as well come clean."

3/
Read 5 tweets
15 Dec
It isn't that nothing is happening. It's that too much is happening for people to focus.

Remember Benghazi? The only thing happening was a made-up scandal. There weren't any real scandals so there was nothing else to talk about.

Now there's too much.
washingtonpost.com/politics/donal…

1/
Made-up scandals can capture the public imagination because they're simple. The entire "scandal" can be boiled down to one sentence.

That's the beauty of lies. They're easily digestible.

The truth is complicated. It's multifaced. Real scandals have lots of details.

2/
Complicated crimes have lots of moving parts. It's too much to digest. So instead, people prefer simple lies ⤵️

Timothy Snyder calls them "Internet Triggers."

Reality is complicated and nuanced.

Lies are easy.

Can enough people embrace complicty?
Will truth win?

3/ Image
Read 4 tweets
15 Dec
Now, I wonder who Eastman was calling from his private cell phone?

storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…

It looks like most of his argument rests on the same arguments that Trump is trying in his executive privilege case: Challenging the legitimacy of the select committee itself.

1/
About these subpoenas: lawfareblog.com/does-carpenter…
He's gonna lose this.

I get that it's a stall technique, but it can't work for long.

It also makes him look super guilty.

2/
The subpoena looks narrowly tailored to me. Without seeing it (and I've only read up to page 2) it looks like they want to know who he was talking to in the months leading up to the insurrection.

He gives a few arguments for why the subpoena should be held to be invalid.

3/ Image
Read 12 tweets
14 Dec
The D.C. AG v. insurrectionists lawsuit.

The complaint is here: s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2115…

My, what a lot of defendants (with room to add more).

The AG wants them on the hook for the cost of the damages, including punitive damages and attorney fees.

1/ ImageImageImage
The complaint alleges that these groups formed for the purpose of perpetuating violence.

It appears that the Oath Keepers took Reagan's statement that "government is the problem" to heart.

2/ ImageImage
"We will have to get violent to stop this."

Excuse me while I have a little rant:

These ⤵️are the kinds of details coming out in the indictments which Doom Twitter ignores because these are the "little guys" and so who cares?

Rant over.

Carry on.

3/ Image
Read 16 tweets
14 Dec
Oh my goodness. On January 6, as the riot was on going, a lawmaker texted to Meadows that Pence should unilaterally throw out votes. (Is anyone else listening? Did I hear that right?)

Others were beginning Trump to call this off.
They are not yet revealing the name of the lawmaker because the investigation is ongoing.

🔥Yowie.

On Jan. 7, a lawmaker apologized that nothing "worked." (translation: Darn. We failed.)
It's clear that the committee made the strategic decision to drop a few bombshells.

They clearly decided that the investigation is far enough along for them to do this.

It is a way to up the pressure on the people holding out.
Read 4 tweets
13 Dec
Here are a few things Mark Meadows won't talk about⤵️

He still isn't standing on the Fifth. He's trying to avoid testifying by claiming one bogus privilege after another.

(This is from the resolution referring him for criminal prosecution for contempt.)
docs.house.gov/meetings/IJ/IJ…
Claiming privilege doesn't mean you don't have to show up. You have to show up and object to the questions that would violate a particular privilege.

This document offers a scathing description of Meadow's front-row seat to insurrection.
For example, he was involved in this meeting (I had to grab that one in two parts)

And a January 2 phone call with state and federal officials to discuss overturning certain states' electoral college results on Jan. 6.
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(