Among the first set of subpoenas issued by the House Select Committee on Jan. 6 back in September, the one issued to Trump advisor and professional fascist Steve Bannon has gotten the most attention. That’s because Bannon’s refusal to testify was followed by a vote, first in the committee and later before the full House, to hold him in contempt of Congress. A motion to that effect was referred to the Department of Justice on October 21, and then waiting for the DOJ to do something became the nation’s most frustrating pastime.
But Bannon wasn’t the only recipient in round one. The other members of the un-fabulous four were Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows, former deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino, and former Devin Nunes aide operating way above his abilities as Pentagon chief of staff, Kash Patel. Since these folks haven’t had their name run up the line to set in queue behind Bannon, it may seem that nothing is happening and that the odds of their ever appearing before the Committee are decidedly on the “none” side of a scale running up to “slim.”
According to The Washington Post, that’s not the case. In particular, Meadows has been “engaged” with the committee’s staff in an effort to “negotiate the terms of his deposition and turning over of documents.” Which sounds like something … until it’s immediately followed by concerns about “the pace of these discussions.” That makes it seem less like Meadows is attempting to negotiate in good faith and much more like he’s merely playing with the committee in an attempt to stop them from taking even the ineffective steps so far applied to Bannon.
Friday, Nov 12, 2021 · 3:25:19 PM +00:00
It’s after 10 AM, and Mark Meadows has not appeared. Instead, the committee has a new letter from his attorney claiming that there is “a sharp legal dispute” with the committee over issues including “whether Meadows can be compelled to testify” and testimony involving privileged communications. Except there are no such issues. Congress ability to compel testimony has never been in dispute, and the issues revolving around claims of protected information were tackled in Nixon v. General Services Administration (1977) which upheld the rules of the Presidential Recordings and Material Preservation Act under which the House Select Committee is operating.
Comments are closed on this story.