Trump's chief of staff facing contempt proceedings for defying Jan 6 committee: report
Mark Meadows. (Photo by Gage Skidmore)

The House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol is considering contempt proceedings against former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows.

"Meadows was first subpoenaed more than a month ago, and since then the committee has indicated he's been 'engaging' in negotiations over the terms of his turning over documents and appearing for a deposition. But weeks after the committee granted Meadows a 'short' but indefinite postponement of the initial subpoena deadline, members are growing increasingly frustrated and contemplating when and how to ramp up the pressure," CNN reported Thursday.

When Meadows was subpoenaed, the committee said he "reportedly communicated with officials at the state level and in the Department of Justice as part of an effort to overturn the results of the 2020 election or prevent the election's certification. According to other reporting, Mr. Meadows was also in communication with organizers of the January 6 rally, including Amy Kremer of Women for America First."

The committee is anxious to learn more from Meadows.

"Among the options being considered is officially setting a new deadline for Meadows to comply with the committee's subpoena or risk being held in criminal contempt, the path it pursued with Trump ally Stephen Bannon. After making clear from the outset that he had no intention of cooperating with the panel, Bannon now faces possible prosecution for defying his subpoena," CNN reported.

When the committee pursued a criminal referral for Bannon, Chair Bennie Thompson (D-MS) worried about the precedent set if witnesses were able to blow off the investigation.

"We need to take a stand for the integrity of the Select Committee's investigation, and for the future integrity of this body. What sort of precedent will it set for the House of Representatives if we allow a witness to ignore us flat-out without facing any kind of consequences? What message would it send to the other witnesses in our investigation?" he asked.