'Meadows knows everything': J6 panelist says ex-chief of staff is key to nailing Trump
Former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, who was key in relaying conspiracy theories between former President Donald Trump's inner circle and officials in the Justice Department, is the central piece of the puzzle to bringing down the former president in the January 6 investigation, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) suggested on MSNBC Tuesday.
Lofgren, who was a key member of the House January 6 Committee, weighed in as legal experts raise questions about Meadows' mysterious disappearance from public view despite his centrality to the allegations against Trump, a possible sign he is cooperating.
"You know, there are some key people who refused to speak to your committee but did testify before Jack Smith's grand jury, including former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and former Vice President Mike Pence," said anchor Katie Phang. "I have to ask, do you have any regrets now as you kind of look back, the benefit of hindsight being 20/20, any regrets in terms of timing and how aggressively you sought their testimony?"
"Well, as you know, we did pursue the chief of staff pretty aggressively," said Lofgren. "In fact, we referred him for prosecution for contempt of Congress and the DOJ declined to prosecute, so I don't know that we could have done anything more than that. But I think it's important that he's testifying instead of taking the Fifth, because Meadows knows everything, and that would be helpful in putting together facts we couldn't get because he refused to talk to us. We got much of what we thought we'd know from the vice president. His people came in. There are a few things we wanted to find out. We got a lot from his chief of staff and his counsel. And some of the evidence we got — Bernie Kerik, they're talking about him in the news today, but his testimony to the Committee was, they didn't find any fraud, so that's not new."
"Your committee made four criminal referrals to the DOJ," continued Phang. "It included obstruction of an official proceeding of Congress, conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to make a false statement, and inciting an insurrection. I spoke to Congressman Jamie Raskin this weekend about how important it was for the DOJ to prosecute that last one, the insurrection offense. We haven't heard that's in the any of the target letters or the target letter to Trump ... do you believe that incitement should be a charge that somebody like Jack Smith should pursue?"
"Only if he thinks he has evidence that can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt," said Lofgren. "Clearly that's what then-President Trump did, but whether it can be proven with the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, that's a judgment he needs to make. Clearly he had a multifaceted effort to try and hold on to power by preventing the election from being certified and counted, whether he incited the riot. But the prosecutor has to make the judgment. I'm not going to be second-guessing him. Clearly the American public knows what then-President Trump did."
Watch the video below or at the following link.
Leave a Comment
Related Post