调查1月6日国会大厦袭击事件的众议院特别委员会周一建议，对前总统唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)的最后一任白宫办公厅主任马克·梅多斯(Mark Meadows)进行全院拘留，以藐视国会，因为他拒绝在传票下出庭作证。
在委员会一致投票后，众议院全体议员最早可能在周二对梅多斯提出藐视。
在周一晚上的简短会议上，委员会抨击梅多斯拒绝出庭作证，拒绝回答关于他之前提交给委员会的9000多页电子邮件和短信中的一些问题。
该小组副主席、众议员利兹·切尼(Liz Cheney)广泛引用了福克斯新闻频道主持人、共和党议员和前总统长子小唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump Jr .)在骚乱期间发给梅多斯的短信。
切尼说，这些信息“毫无疑问”让白宫“确切知道”暴乱期间国会大厦发生了什么。
据切尼称，小特朗普在一条短信中告诉梅多斯，“他必须尽快谴责(骚乱)”，并表示特朗普关于国会大厦警察的推文“还不够。”
“我正在努力，”梅多斯回答。“我同意。”
“我们需要一个椭圆形的地址，”小特朗普在后续信息中说。“他现在已经领先了。它走得太远了，已经失控了。”
“请让他上电视，”福克斯新闻频道主持人布莱恩·基尔米德写信给梅多斯。“摧毁你所完成的一切。”
加州民主党众议员亚当·希夫(Adam Schiff)大声朗读了梅多斯在骚乱前后从未透露姓名的共和党议员那里收到的短信。
“昨天是可怕的一天，”一个人写道。“我们竭尽全力反对这6个州。很抱歉，没有任何效果。”
“在阻止和平移交权力的努力失败一天后，一名民选议员对白宫办公厅主任说，‘很抱歉没有任何效果。’“这令人不寒而栗，”希夫说我们想问问梅多斯先生对此有何看法。"
在最初发出与委员会合作的信号后，梅多斯改变了方向，表示他将尊重特朗普的特权主张，尽管拜登的白宫拒绝对他的证词援引行政特权。
在一份51页的报告中报告该委员会周日晚间发布的报告称，鉴于梅多斯在总统选举和1月6日国会大厦袭击之前、期间和之后都与特朗普关系密切，而且他本人也广泛参与了对选举结果的质疑，因此他“处于为其调查提供关键信息的独特地位”。
该委员会表示，梅多斯在这些挑战中发挥了核心作用，他经常使用个人电子邮件账户和非政府手机，与共和党议员、活动人士、特朗普盟友和白宫西翼的竞选官员进行沟通。
梅多斯最初同意配合调查，向调查人员移交了9000多页的记录，包括在骚乱期间与共和党议员和一名总统家庭成员的短信，以及与司法部官员的电子邮件，鼓励他们调查选民欺诈的指控。
但他在上个月计划在国会山亲自出庭作证之前改变了路线，辩称他将尊重特朗普的特权主张，尽管拜登白宫拒绝就他的证词这样做。
“明确地说，梅多斯先生未能遵守，以及这一藐视法庭的建议，并不是基于对特权主张的善意异议。相反，梅多斯未能遵守并承认藐视法庭的调查结果，因为他完全拒绝出庭提供任何证词，甚至拒绝回答有关明显非特权信息的问题，这些信息是他本人通过自己的文件制作认定为非特权的，”专家组在报告中写道。
J.斯科特·阿普尔怀特/美联社
众议院特别委员会主席本尼·汤普森1月6日在众议员佐伊·洛弗格雷的陪同下...
马克·梅多斯(Mark Meadows)的律师乔治·特威利格(George Terwilliger)在周一给调查国会大厦袭击事件的众议院特别委员会的一封信中，敦促陪审团和众议院不要因为梅多斯拒绝配合传票而对其进行蔑视，称这将是“不公正的”
“急于对此事做出判断将对国家不利，”特威勒格写道。
他写道:“我们承认并不否认，2021年1月6日发生的暴力和对我们民主机构进程的干涉是令人遗憾和不合理的事件。“但我们民主制度的真正力量来自于支撑它们的原则，没有任何单一事件可以证明超越共和国数百年的保护措施是正当的。”
除了已经移交给调查人员的记录之外，专家组认为，梅多斯的说法被一个事实削弱了，即他在1月6日刚刚发布的回忆录《酋长的酋长》中讲述了自己的经历
众议员亚当·金辛格(Adam Kinzinger)说:“他不能拒绝向国会讲述这个故事，并在同一天出版一本书来填补他的口袋。该委员会的一名成员周一表示。
加州民主党众议员亚当·希夫(Adam Schiff)此前告诉美国广播公司新闻，“很难调和他怎么能为了一本书而谈论1月6日，以及他和其他人关于1月6日的谈话，而不是向国会。
如果司法部决定起诉梅多斯，他可能会因拒绝出庭而面临最高一年的监禁和10万美元的罚款。
拜登司法部已经指控特朗普顾问史蒂夫·班农两项藐视国会罪，罪名是拒绝配合委员会要求提供记录和证词的传票。一名联邦法官上周宣布，对他的审判将于7月开始。
如果众议院投票通过，梅多斯将成为第一个被其前议院以刑事藐视罪拘留的前议员。
1832年，前众议员萨姆·休斯顿被拘留和训斥被众议院议长以攻击一名前同事的罪名，依据众议院“固有的蔑视”权力。
“不管他认为他在众议院留下了什么遗产，这都是他现在的遗产，”迪密斯公司董事长本尼·汤普森说。，说到梅多斯。“他的前同事们挑选他进行刑事起诉，因为他不愿回答关于他所知道的对我们民主的野蛮攻击的问题。”
Jan. 6 committee recommends holding Mark Meadows in criminal contempt
The House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol attack on Monday recommended the full chamber hold Mark Meadows, former President Donald Trump's last White House chief of staff, in contempt of Congress for refusing to appear for a deposition under subpoena.
After the unanimous committee vote, the full House could hold Meadows in contempt as early as Tuesday.
In the brief session Monday night, the committee blasted Meadows for refusing to appear for a deposition to field questions about some of the more than 9,000 pages of emails and text messages he had previously turned over to the committee.
Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., the vice chair of the panel, quoted extensively from text messages sent to Meadows during the riot from Fox News hosts, GOP lawmakers and Donald Trump Jr., the former president's eldest son.
Cheney said the messages left "no doubt" the White House "knew exactly what was happening" at the Capitol during the riot.
"He's got to condemn [the riot] ASAP," Trump Jr. told Meadows in a text message, according to Cheney, saying that Trump's tweet about Capitol Police "is not enough."
"I'm pushing it hard," Meadows replied. "I agree."
"We need an Oval address," Trump Jr. said in a follow up message. "He has to lead now. It has gone too far and gotten out of hand."
"Please get him on tv," Fox News host Brian Kilmeade wrote to Meadows. "Destroying everything you have accomplished."
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., read aloud from text messages Meadows received from unnamed GOP lawmakers before and after the riot.
"Yesterday was a terrible day," one wrote. "We tried everything we could in our objection to the 6 states. I'm sorry nothing worked."
"A day after a failed attempt to stop the peaceful transfer of power, an elected lawmaker tells the White House chief of staff, 'I'm sorry nothing worked.' That is chilling," Schiff said. "We would like to ask Mr. Meadows what he thought about that."
After initially signaling cooperation with the committee, Meadows reversed course and said he would respect Trump's assertion of privilege even though the Biden White House declined to invoke executive privilege over his testimony.
In a 51-pagereportreleased Sunday night, the committee argued that Meadows is "uniquely situated to provide critical information" to its inquiry, given his proximity to Trump before, during and after the presidential election and Jan. 6 Capitol attack, as well as his own extensive involvement in efforts to contest the results.
Meadows, the committee said, played a central role in those challenges, communicating with GOP lawmakers, activists, Trump allies and campaign officials from the west wing, often using a personal email account and a nongovernment cell phone.
Meadows had initially agreed to cooperate with the inquiry, turning over more than 9,000 pages of records to investigators, including text messages with GOP lawmakers and a member of the president's family during the riot, as well as emails with Justice Department officials encouraging them to investigate claims of voter fraud.
But he changed course before he was scheduled to appear for an in-person deposition on Capitol Hill last month, arguing instead that he would respect Trump's assertion of privilege even though the Biden White House declined to do so over his testimony.
"To be clear, Mr. Meadows's failure to comply, and this contempt recommendation, are not based on good-faith disagreements over privilege assertions. Rather, Mr. Meadows has failed to comply and warrants contempt findings because he has wholly refused to appear to provide any testimony and refused to answer questions regarding even clearly non-privileged information—information that he himself has identified as non-privileged through his own document production," the panel wrote in its report.
In a Monday letter to the House select committee investigating the Capitol attack, George Terwilliger, an attorney for Mark Meadows, urged the panel and House not to hold Meadows in contempt for refusing to cooperate with a subpoena, saying it would be "unjust."
"It would ill-serve the country to rush to judgment on the matter," Terwilliger wrote.
"We recognize and do not dispute that the violence and interference with the processes of our democratic institutions as occurred on January 6, 2021, were deplorable and unjustifiable events," he wrote. "But the real strength of our democratic institutions comes from the principles that undergird them, and no singular event can justify overrunning centuries-old safeguards of the republic."
In addition to the records already turned over to investigators, the panel argued that Meadows's claims were undercut by the fact that he recounted his experience on Jan. 6 in his just-released memoir, "The Chief's Chief."
"He can't decline to tell the story to Congress and on the very same day publish part of that story in a book to line his pockets," Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., a member of the committee, said Monday.
"It's hard to reconcile how he can talk about Jan. 6 and his conversations about it and others for a book but not to Congress," Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., a member of the commitee, previously told ABC News.
If the Justice Department decides to charge Meadows, he could face up to a year in prison and a $100,000 fine for refusing to appear before the panel.
Already, the Biden Justice Department has charged Trump adviser Steve Bannon with two counts of contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate with the committee's subpoena for records and testimony. His trial is set to begin in July, a federal judge announced last week.
Should the House vote go through, Meadows would become the first former lawmaker to be held in criminal contempt by his former chamber.
In 1832, former Rep. Sam Houston wasdetained and reprimandedby the House speaker for assaulting a former colleague, under the House's "inherent contempt" powers.
"Whatever legacy he thought he left in the House, this is his legacy now," Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said of Meadows. "His former colleagues singling him out for criminal prosecution because he wouldn’t answer questions about what he knows about a brutal attack on our democracy."
