Mark Meadows Has Likely Ratted Out Donald Trump
If you were Donald Trump, the words you probably would least like to read in a New York Times headline are “Mark Meadows Testified to Grand Jury.” That’s because, as a mob boss type, your practice would be to secure the loyalty of a few key people, to interpose between you and the world, who would be willing to go to prison rather than turn on you.
Your CFO, Allen Weisselberg, for example, did this despite enormous pressure from Manhattan prosecutors, choosing to serve time in Rikers and possibly face even more future jail time rather than flip on you.
That’s why the news about Meadows’s testimony, reportedly now before both Washington D.C. federal grand juries, would probably turn that face of yours a shade redder. Meadows was your Chief of Staff, your consiglieri, the guy there at nearly every important moment in the last year of your presidency. If he testified without taking the Fifth, that would be a political earthquake. That’s why what Meadows’s lawyer said, rather carefully, about his client’s reported testimony is so worrisome to you: “Mr. Meadows has maintained a commitment to tell the truth where he has a legal obligation to do so.”
Uh oh.
Let’s break down what this statement implies, and then for yucks let’s review some of the “best of” moments between Donald Trump and Mark Meadows. This refresher will help clarify why the news of Meadows’s testimony is a big Heinz 57 moment for Trump.
A “legal obligation to do so”
The most striking thing about Mark Meadows these days is that we have heard almost nothing about him for months. After an initial flurry of news stories relating to a trove of communications he voluntarily turned over to the January 6 Committee last year, a move which he apparently later regretted which then led to him stonewalling the Committee, the rest of Meadows’s legal drama has played out behind closed doors.
Congress voted to hold Meadows in contempt for refusing to answer a subpoena and appear before the Committee, but the Justice Department declined to prosecute him. That was maddening, but it raised a significant question: Why? Could something be happening behind the scenes with Meadows and the feds?
When the grand jury ultimately called Meadows to testify, his lawyers and Trump’s moved to quash that subpoena on executive privilege grounds. But Chief Judge Beryl Howell ruled against them, as did a unanimous panel of the D.C. Circuit. So we knew at that point that Meadows would have to appear before that grand jury to testify. As Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA), himself a former prosecutor, laid out:
Mark Meadows had three options:
1. Take the Fifth Amendment.
2. Voluntarily cooperate.
3. Cooperate because he was given immunity or a plea deal.
Based on the public reporting, it appears he did 2 or 3 above. This makes it more likely Donald Trump will be indicted, again.
Indeed, looking at his lawyer’s statement through this lens, the import of the words is clear: “Meadows has maintained a commitment to tell the truth where he has a legal obligation to do so.” That obligation arises two ways: 1) tell the truth voluntarily because he’s under oath, and/or 2) tell the truth because he is obliged by some prior agreement to do so.
As the next part of our discussion will show, Meadows likely has some legal exposure in both of the cases being investigated by Special Counsel Jack Smith. That’s because he was there at many critical, crimey moments with Trump.
The best of those crimey moments
There are two federal cases now being pursued by Smith that may soon result in indictments from separate federal grand juries. The first relates to Trump’s alleged willful retention of government records, including top secret and other classified documents, and his obstruction of attempts to recover them. The second relates to Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election and the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Illegal retention of top secret and classified documents. As former White House Chief of Staff, Meadows had a daily view into the way Trump handled (or mishandled) government documents, even top secret or classified ones. It’s helpful to recall here that Trump’s defenses in the documents case amount to a few broad claims:
1) He didn’t take anything intentionally because he didn’t do the packing himself,
2) Even if he did take classified documents, they were already declassified by standing order, and
3) Even if there was no standing order to declassify, as president he didn’t need one anyway because he could declassify something just by thinking about it.
Meadows would have key information with respect to each of these claims. Here are just a few examples:
Meadows was responsible for overseeing, and signed off on the plan for, the packing of boxes at the end of the Trump presidency. His staff worked with the General Services Administration to have four pallets of items delivered from the White House to Mar-a-Lago. Did the ex-president pack up any boxes himself? If not, how did confidential and classified documents get packed into them? Was Trump aware that he still had documents marked classified in his residence and other non-secure areas? Who else had knowledge of the move?
Trump had a habit of destroying documents in violation of the Presidential Records Act, including instances where staff had to retrieve ripped up documents and tape them back together. Did Meadows personally witness him doing this with any documents, including classified documents?
To the best of his knowledge, did Trump ever actually issue a standing order to declassify any document that he took with him from the Oval Office to the White House Residence, as Kash Patel has claimed?
Was Trump ever told about or reminded of his obligations with respect to top secret and classified documents, and did he understand what those were?
In September 2021, Trump boasted that he had a top secret war plan, allegedly drafted by Gen. Mark Milley, to invade Iran. Meadows referenced the plan directly in his book, and Trump apparently said on a taped recording, which was made for the purpose of Meadows’s book, that the war plan was still classified and that he believed he no longer had the power to declassify it. That’s why he couldn’t show it to anyone. Was that his recollection of what Trump believed? Were there other documents Trump took with him, to Meadows’s knowledge, that Trump deemed to be still classified and therefore restricted?
Overturning the election. With respect to the January 6th attack and the attempted nullification of the national presidential election, here are some highlights of Meadows being there in the room, along with some obvious follow-up questions that Smith’s team would likely have asked him:
Leading up to Election Day, Roger Stone and Steve Bannon stated in recorded film and audio clips that the White House intended to contest the election as fraudulent, no matter what. Did Meadows ever hear Trump agree to this or a similar plan?
On Election Night, in November of 2020, Trump claimed prematurely that he had won the election. But what did Trump say to Meadows privately about whether he had won or lost the election?
An internal Trump campaign report and two outside studies commissioned by the campaign confirmed that there was no truth to the claims of a stolen election. Did Meadows ever communicate the results of these studies to Trump? Did Trump understand what his own team and outside teams had concluded?
Meadows was present in key Oval Office meetings, including the infamous “unhinged” December 18, 2020 meeting where Trump allies pressed the White House for extreme action, including martial law. Meadows even personally escorted Rudy Giuliani off the White House grounds. What did Trump say to Meadows afterwards about the extremists’ demands? Why did Trump continue to allow Giuliani to spread lies and conspiracies?
Trump called up RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel to discuss alternate slates of electors in the battleground states. Did Meadows ever help Trump organize the slates of fake alternate slates to be falsely presented to Congress on January 6? How aware was Trump of the progress of such plans?
Meadows was on the infamous “find 11,780 votes” call to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in December 2020. What did Trump say in private to Meadows before and after that recorded call?
Per Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony, is it true that Meadows burned documents “once or twice a week” in the lead-up to Jan. 6, 2021, including after a meeting with election denier and Freedom Caucus leader Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA)? What documents was Meadows burning, and why?
Meadows warned star Committee witness Cassidy Hutchinson on January 2, 2021, that “things might get real, real bad” on January 6. What facts did he know that led him to predict that things might get “real, real bad” and why did he tell Hutchinson that? Did Donald Trump have the same information? Did they discuss it?
Hutchinson testified that Meadows, at Trump's request, contacted Roger Stone and Mike Flynn on January 5. Stone has close ties to the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, the leaders of which have since been convicted of seditious conspiracy. Flynn had earlier pressed Trump to seize voting machines. Did Meadows speak to Stone and Flynn, and if so why? What did they say? Did he speak to Trump later about the call?
Meadows’s text messages that he turned over to the January 6 Committee include many high profile Republican figures, from Freedom Caucus members to Ginny Thomas, urging him to take action to keep Trump in power. Which among these people had knowledge of and were directly involved in the conspiracy to overturn the election using Mike Pence and the fake elector scheme?
Per Hutchinson’s testimony, on the day of the January 6 attack on the Capitol, White House counsel Pat Cipollone had told Meadows, “Mark, we need to do something more. They’re literally calling for the vice-president to be fucking hung,” and Meadows responded, “You heard him, Pat, he thinks Mike deserves it. He doesn’t think they’re doing anything wrong.” Did Trump actually say this to Meadows? Did Trump tell him Pence deserved to die for refusing to overturn the election?
After the election, Trump admitted to others, including to aide Alyssa Farah Griffin, that he had lost the election to Joe Biden. Did he ever privately state anything similar to Meadows?
There are many more examples I could cite, and more questions that Meadows could answer, but I hope this set already makes it abundantly clear how central Meadows was to everything— and what a disaster it is for Trump if, as it appears, Meadows is now cooperating with federal prosecutors.
As a version of the poem might go,
Oh, somewhere in indictment land, the sun is shining bright.
The jury’s heard from Meadows, and Hillary’s heart is light.
Somewhere Liz Cheney’s laughing, while MAGAs cry and shout,
For there is no joy in Trumpville—Forty Five’s been ratted out.
That closing poem... [chef's kiss]
I just hope Meadows doesn’t get a get-out-of-jail-free card. He was complicit in all of this and needs to be held accountable as a traitor to the United States.