Meadows, what is his argument exactly . His argument is in two parts. Basically says the subpoenas sent against him by the January 6th Committee are overly broad and too burdensome, not targeted enough. Essentially accusing the Investigative Committee of investigating too hard. He also makes a Privilege Claim here and says he cant decide whether he needs to follow the subpoenas from the committee or need to follow the guidance from former President Trump that he is subject to Executive Privilege and doesnt have to testify. The committee looks at this, though, and sees a classic trump tactic. Which you dont have the goods you stall for time and you stall for time by suing. So theyre trying to force the issue, Force Contempt Proceedings to move forward on him and hopefully get something from mark meadows beyond some documents they say they have already received. Talk about that in a minute. Chuck, you say the committees flaw. May well be flawed, but to garretts point, the reason he filed
Because heres what happens and he had a cup of coffee and he had difficulty in picking it up and bob said thats not the issue, robert. We want to show civility and unity. He said i just cant do it, and i have great pride and he showed it. I tell you, if robert byrd had been in the senate these last few weeks or months, hed have collared his own party and some of us and tell you ill tell you what ate the cabbage around here, and so it was his outreach was great and then of course, dont forget we had a rule, wonderful rules unwritten, if one of our Senate Colleagues of the other party was roaming, we wouldnt go on campaign against him. That broke down at the race of tom daschle, a member of the u. S. Senate republican when they campaigned against daschle in south dakota, that broke that mold. That never got healed. So them and the people who came from the house have been tortured over there for 40 years, and didnt know the slaves, some of the slaveholders and they got tired of it, and th