Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
SCOTUS ruling opens the door to the DOJ indicting Mark Meadows (Original Post) LetMyPeopleVote Jan 2022 OP
Good! SheltieLover Jan 2022 #1
"Mueller, She Wrote" is wrong on the law. former9thward Jan 2022 #2
MSNBC analyst explains why Steve Bannon and Mark Meadows are 'in deep doo-doo' LetMyPeopleVote Jan 2022 #4
He is using sound bites and with no legal references. former9thward Jan 2022 #8
You are wrong LetMyPeopleVote Jan 2022 #9
Mr. Garland are you watching the news? texasfiddler Jan 2022 #3
Mark Meadows now in 'extra legal jeopardy' thanks to SCOTUS ruling on Trump documents: legal expert LetMyPeopleVote Jan 2022 #5
Haha on Mark F Meadows. Cha Jan 2022 #7
Rt TY! Cha Jan 2022 #6

former9thward

(31,802 posts)
2. "Mueller, She Wrote" is wrong on the law.
Wed Jan 19, 2022, 09:09 PM
Jan 2022

I guess that is why he/she is on twitter. The Trump case involves documents. Something that the SC has ruled on before. The Meadows case (if it becomes a case) involves conversations and thoughts. A whole different animal.

LetMyPeopleVote

(143,999 posts)
4. MSNBC analyst explains why Steve Bannon and Mark Meadows are 'in deep doo-doo'
Thu Jan 20, 2022, 03:25 AM
Jan 2022

You are wrong in your analysis. Meadows and Bannon are relying on the claim of executive privilege and the SCOTUS ruled that even if TFG was still POTUS that claim is invalid and executive privilege does not apply. Watch the clip from Neal Katyal




"It's a real problem for them," Katyal told MSNBC on Wednesday night. "Remember, Steve Bannon has been indicted already for contempt for not giving these answers to Congress, so he's facing criminal charges. Mark Meadows is on his way to the same thing. Both of their defenses to contempt is executive privilege, and the Supreme Court today blew that out of the water."

"So that means that these two individuals really do have to go and talk to the investigators in Congress, but it also more significantly means the Trump signature move – which is not just to hide these documents, but all these people from testifying on live televised hearings in Congress, he was going to invoke executive privilege for all that — that's now decimated by the Supreme Court's ruling."

"So it's going to be very hard for all these folks, not just Bannon and Meadows, but (Trump lawyers Rudy) Giuliani and (John) Eastman and the whole cast of characters, to avoid having to testify," Katyal said. "They can try other arguments, like the Fifth Amendment and so on, but today is a real nail in the coffin for them."

former9thward

(31,802 posts)
8. He is using sound bites and with no legal references.
Thu Jan 20, 2022, 09:21 AM
Jan 2022

I guess that is why he is on cable instead of being in a courtroom.

LetMyPeopleVote

(143,999 posts)
5. Mark Meadows now in 'extra legal jeopardy' thanks to SCOTUS ruling on Trump documents: legal expert
Thu Jan 20, 2022, 03:28 AM
Jan 2022

Meadows was relying on executive privilege and that privilege is not available to TFG or his minions.




New York University School of Law professor Ryan Goodman argued that, in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision to end former President Donald Trump's attempts to block the National Archive from handing over key Capitol riot-related documents, Meadows is now in "extra legal jeopardy" over his refusal to cooperate with the investigation.

Specifically, Goodman notes that Meadows's "defense against contempt of Congress" charges was "based in part on executive privilege claim" made by Trump.

Now that the court has ruled that Trump can no longer assert executive privilege over these particular documents, Goodman argues that Meadows "may want to comply" with the committee's requests even though he's already received a criminal contempt referral.

Additionally, writes Goodman, the committee "can also now scrutinize whether Meadows failed to turn over records to National Archives," which he noted that the committee "has suggested potential violation of Presidential Records Act and potential Obstruction."
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»SCOTUS ruling opens the d...