Now that Mark Meadows has declared his desire to be uncooperative with a congressional inquiry into the 1/6 insurrection, it is fair to ask: Should the House select committee with which Meadows once worked cite him for contempt of Congress?
Hmm. Let me think. OK, here goes: Hell yes it should!
Meadows served as chief of staff in the White House during Donald Trump’s final year as president. Prior to that, Meadows served Trump in another capacity: as a chief congressional apologist for the appalling conduct of Trump.
Former Trump policy adviser Steve Bannon has been cited for contempt of Congress and has been indicted on the allegation by a federal grand jury. He could spend a year in the slammer if he’s convicted. The penalty is far too light … but that’s another story for another blog post.
Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson of Mississippi need not waste too much time deciding whether to approve a motion to cite Meadows. It seems clearcut to me.
Meadows knows in intimate detail what went down in the White House on 1/6. He served at Donald Trump’s behest and knows what the president said and knew and when he said it and knew it.
Without a doubt Meadows possesses intimate knowledge of the president’s conduct. I daresay it’s relevant to what the committee needs to know and understand about what many of us consider a frontal assault on our democratic process. It was — in my humble view — an insurrection.
Mark Meadows knows what happened inside the White House that day. He needs to tell the world what he knows. The House select panel that is leading the search for the truth needs to force Meadows to spill the beans.