recounts a conversation he had with former president trump after the former president urged people to march to the capitol and told people he would be with them in that march. mr. meadows recounts his conversation after that. of course details like that that he s recounting in a book but then refusing to answer questions before congress about, there s legitimate questions that he s obligated to appear to provide responses. failing to do so puts him in con contempt. i continue to scratch my head about the notion you would author a book on the subject, sell it to the american public and not be willing to testify to congress about the comments you made in the book. it s really astonishing to me that we re here. i also my colleagues have raised this, it s almost as though i appreciate what people have said, i don t want to engage in repeating this, but it s almost as though if you
what are you learning? a source tells me this won t just be a vote on contempt, that there are significant new details, that the committee is going to lay out in black and white the substance of these texts. we re going to hear members read exactly what was being said to mark meadows and what he was saying back in realtime on january 6th during the riot. let me give you an example of two that we re aware of from the 51-page document. this is a stekt from a former white house employee to mark meadows, quote, you guys have to say something even if the president is not willing to put out a statement. you should go to the cameras and say we condemn this, please stand down. if you don t, people are going to die. although the committee does not identify who that former white house employee is, reknow who it is from a washington post
so strap in. a vote on contempt is expected to the full house tomorrow. if the recommendation charge willing bannon is approved, merrick garland will have to decide whether to prosecute him. joining me now is maggie haberman. good morning, maggie. reporter: good morning. i want to start with what liz cheney said. the indicates he certainly had knowledge, she said, before january 6th and was likely involved in the planning. how significant is that? reporter: it is certainly a significant statement. it is hard to assess. it s coming at a time obviously when they are trying to add weight to their argument as to why they should have access to records and why bannon should be
from the white house to bannon s lawyer basically saying a similar thing to what they have said in the national archivist, there s no assertion here. it says at this point, we are not aware of any basis for your client s refusal, president biden s determination that an assertion of privilege is not justified with respect to these subjects applies to your client s deposition testimony and to any documents your client may possess concerning either subject. that s deputy counsel jonathan su writing to bannon s lawyer. my understanding is your committee has issued a report recommending a vote on contempt for steve bannon is that correct? that s correct. we ll be having a vote after votes tomorrow evening in washington to consider whether to refer to the department of justice criminal contempt for mr. bannon. his actions here are particularly outrageous. you know, if he has some claim, i can t imagine what it is, he s
seeking? well, i think these four individuals are going to be in a very different position than prior investigations of trump officials. because, first of all, there will not be a basis for executive privilege because this was political activity, misuse of the office by donald trump, and all of their activities are involved in the political realm. but more importantly, there s no the former president cannot claim executive privilege. so even though donald trump has said he s going to claim privileges, he doesn t have any to claim. so i think they can quickly move to hold them in contempt. if they do not comply by october 7th, i would recommend they be writing the report already and make clear how quickly they are going to move to hold them in con contempt. we have a vote in the committee, then the floor. then it goes over to the justice department, who would probably give it to the d.c. u.s.