swing. be vigilant and informed about your own health. that does it for us. "the reidout" with joe reid is -- joy reid is up next. hi, joy. >> have a wonderful evening. much appreciated. good evening. you're looking at the room where members of the house select committee on january 6th will soon be gathering for a special meeting. in this hour they will vote in a measure to refer criminal charges for donald trump's former chief of staff. mark meadows who defied their subpoena. they'll also be discussing the damming new evidence they gathered that sheds light on trump's attempted coup and meadow's personal involvement. you won't want to miss this. this comes after meadows abruptly halted his cooperation last week and twice refused to show up for scheduled depositions and suing the committee in an effort to shield trump and avoid accountability. as the committee detailed in the report they're voting on

tonight, it's clear that there is a lot that he is still hiding. for one, the committee has learned that meadows intended for the national guard to deploy to the capitol on january 6th, not to protect meadow's former colleagues in congress or their staff from bodily harm or to assist capitol police in defending the seat of american democracy, oh, no. rather to protect trump's supporters. the very people who were in the process of storming the capitol. in short, he wanted the u.s. military to take the side of the insurrectionists. we are hoping to get more on that developing story during tonight's meeting set to get underway shortly. joining me now is joyce vance, former u.s. attorney and mccaskill. in the letters between the committee chair and meadow's attorney, one thing is very clear and very confusing.

meadows turned over a lot of stuff. he's disclosed a lot of information in his book. upon what basis could one suddenly decide the information is privileged when you've begun cooperating and turns things over. >> it's such a good question, joy because meadows turns over documents including the power point we've been talking about explicitly saying they're not privileged. >> i'm going to interrupt you. i'm so sorry, joyce. i'm going to interrupt you because bennie thompson is starting. let's listen in. >> to declare the committee in recess at any time. i recognize myself for an opening statement. before i start. my statement let me on behalf of the committee offer condolences in kentucky and surrounding

states for the devastation they received during the tornados. our hearts and prayers go out to those impacted. i expect many will go on the record. we'll hear from many more informally as we continue to gather facts about the violence of january 6th and its causes. that should put us well north of the 300 mark in terms of witnesses who have given us information. add to that more than 30,000 records and nearly 250 sustaintive tips on our tip line and anyone listening at home tonight, if you have any information you want to share with us, you can find our tip line on the select committee's website. january 6th.house.gov.

the court of appeals here in washington ruled quickly in our favor regarding the select committee's work to uncover relevant information and day to day we are getting a clearer picture of what happened, who was involved and who paid for it and where the money went. so i'm pleased to report we're making some progress and before too long, our findings will be out in the open. we'll have public hearings. we'll tell this story to american people but we won't do it piecemeal. we'll do it when we can tell all at once start to finish, not leaving anyone guessing and not allowing it to fade in the memories of last week's news. this is too important. the stakes are too high. we have to do this job right, and that means we have to address the hand full of

outliers soberly and appropriately. that's why we're here this evening. the select committee's report referring mr. meadows for criminal contempt charges is clear and compelling. as white house chief of staff, mr. meadows played a role and witness to key events leading up to and including the january 6 th assault on the united states capitol. don't let lawsuits or of eds about executive privilege by mr. meadows or his representatives confuse you. it comes down to this, mr. meadows started by doing the right thing. cooperating. he handed over records he didn't try to shield behind an excuse but in an investigation like ours, that's the first step. when the records raise questions, you have to come in and answer the questions and

when it's time for him to follow the law, come in and firefighter on those questions. he changed his mind and told us to pound sand. he didn't even show up. now this happened the same day his book was published. the same book that goes into detail about matters the select committee is reviewing. it also details conversations he had with president trump and others, conversations we want to hear more about. he also appeared on national television discussing the events of january 6th. he has no credible excuse for stone walling a select committee's investigation. we did receive another letter today from mr. meadow's attorney asking that we not hold his client in criminal contempt

without objection that letter will be made part of the record. a small group of people got a lot of attention because of their defiance but a lot of others took a different path and provided important information about january 6th and the context in which the riot occurred. anyone who wants to cooperate with our investigation can do so. nearly everyone has. our democracy was inches from ruin. our system of government was stretched to the breaking point. members and staff were terrorized. officers fought hand to hand for hours. people lost their lives. the select committee recently toured the capitol and saw firsthand what our brave capitol police had to endure and heard them say had it not been for the metropolitan police timely

arrival, the rioters would have succeeded. god only knows what the outcome would have been if that had occurred. we want to find out why and help the american people. you're on the side of us trying to figure out why or stop us from getting answers. you can parade whatever argument you want. in life there aren't a lot of bright line moments. this is one of them. if you're listening at home, mr. meadows, mr. bannon, mr. clark, i want you to know this. history will be written about these times about the work this committee has under taken and history will not look upon any of you as martyrs. history will look upon you as a victim. history will not dwell on your long list of privilege claims or

legal slight of hand. history will record that in a critical moment in our democracy, most people are on the side of finding the truth, of providing accountability, of strengthening our system for future generations and history will also record in this critical moment some people would not, that some people hid behind excuses, went to great lengths to avoid answering questions and explaining what they had done and what they knew. i predict that history won't be kind to those people. what's especially jarring about the referral we are considering tonight is that mr. meadows was a member of this body for more than seven years. he was a leading voice in certain corners even briefly the ranking member of the oversight and reform committee. it's not hard to locate records of his time in the house and

find a mr. meadows full of indignation because at the time a prior administration wasn't cooperating with the congressional investigation to his satisfaction. whatever legacy he thought he left in the house, this is his legacy now. his former colleagues singing him out for criminal prosecution because he wouldn't answer questions about what he knows about a brutal attack on our democracy. that is his legacy. but he's hasn't left us any choice. mr. meadows put himself in this situation and he must now accept the consequences recommending the house cite mark meadows for contempt of congress and refer him to the department of justice for prosecution. i'll yield to a distinguished leader of the select committee.

ms. cheney of wyoming for any opening remark she care to make. >> thank you very much. mr. chairman. we're here to address a very serious matter, contempt of congress by a former chief of staff to a former president of the united states. we do not do this lightly. and indeed, we had hoped not to take this step at all. for weeks as the chairman noted, we worked with mr. meadow's counsel to reach an agreement on cooperation. but shortly before his scheduled deposition, mr. meadows walked away from his commitment to appear and informed us he would no longer cooperate. we believe mr. meadows is improperly asserting executive and other privileges but this vote on contempt today relates principally to mr. meadows' refusal to testify about text messages and communications he

admits is not privileged. he's not claimed and does not have any privilege basis to refuse entirely to testify regarding these topics. let me give just three examples. first, president trump's failure to stop the violence. on january 6th, our capitol building was attacked and invaded. the mob was summoned to washington by president trump, and as many of those involved have admitted on videotape and social media and in federal district court, they were provoked to violence by president trump's false claims that the election was stolen. the violence was evident to all. it was covered in realtime by almost every news channel. for 187 minutes, president trump refused to act. when action by our president was required, essential and indeed

compelled in his oath to our constitution, mr. meadows received numerous text messages, which he has produced without any privilege claim imploring that mr. trump take the specific action we all knew his duty required. these text messages leave no doubt the white house knew what was happening here at the capitol. the press and others wrote to mark meadows as the attack was underway. one text mr. meadows received said quote we are under siege here at the capitol. in a third, mark, protesters are literally storming the capitol breaking windows on doors rushing in. is trump going to say something?

a fourth, there is an armed standoff at the house chamber door. and another from someone inside the capitol, we are all helpless. dozens of texts including from trump administration officials urged immediate action by the president. quote he has to come out firmly and tell the protesters to dissipate. someone is going to get killed. in another, mark, he needs to stop this now. a third in all caps tell them to go home. a fourth and i quote potis needs to calm this shit down. indeed, according to the records multiple fox news hosts knew the president needed to act

immediately. they texted mr. meadows and he's turned over those texts. quote mark, the president needs to tell people in the capitol to go home. this is hurting all of us. he is destroying his legacy laura ingraham wrote. please get him on tv, destroying everything you have accomplished ryan texted. quote can he make a statement? ask people to leave the capitol sean hannity urged. as the violence continued, one of the president's sons texted mr. meadows. quote he's got to condemn this shit asap. the capitol police tweet is not enough. donald trump junior texted. meadows responded quote i'm pushing it hard, i agree. still, president trump did not

immediately act. donald trump junior texted again and again urging action by the president. quote we need an oval office address. he has to lead now. it has gone too far and gotten out of hand end quote. but hours passed without necessary action by the president. these non-privileged texts are further evidence of president trump's supreme duty during those 107 minutes and donald trump's testimony will bear on another key question before this committee. did donald trump through action or inaction corruptly seek to obstruct or impede congress' official proceedings to count electoral votes. mark meadows testimony is

necessary to inform our legislative judgments yet he's refused to give any testimony at all. even regarding non-privileged topics. he's in contempt of congress. mr. meadows also has knowledge regarding president trump's efforts to persuade state officials to alter their official election results. in georgia for instance, mr. meadows participated on a phone call between president trump and georgia secretary of state raffensperger. meadows was on the phone when president trump asked the secretary of state to quote find 11,780 votes to change the result of the presidential election in georgia. we know from the texts mr. meadows turned over at the time of that call, he appears to have been texting other participants on the call. again, mr. meadows has no conceivable privilege basis to

refuse to testify on this topic. he's in contempt of congress. third, in the weeks of january 6th trump's appointees at the justice department informed him repeatedly that the president's claims of election fraud were not supported by the evidence and that the election was not in fact stolen. in part so that mr. clark could alter the conclusions regarding the election. mr. clark has informed this committee he anticipates potential criminal prosecution related to these matters and intends in upcoming testimony to invoke his fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination. as mr. meadows' none privileged texts reveal, meadows communicated multiple times with a member of congress who was

working with mr. clark. mr. meadows has no basis to refuse to testify regarding those communications. he is in contempt. january 6th was without precedent. there has been no stronger case in our nation's history for a congressional investigation into the actions of a former president. this investigation is not like other congressional inquiries. our constitution, the structure of our institutions and the rule of law, which are at the heart of what makes america great are at stake. we cannot be satisfied with incomplete answers or half truths and we cannot surrender to president trump's efforts to hide what happened. we will be persistent, professional and non-partisan. and we will get to the objective truth to ensure that january 6th never happens again.

i yield back. >> chair lady yields back. i now call up the report on a reolution recommending the house of representatives find mark randall meadows in contempt of congress for refusal to compile with the subpoena duly issued by the seect committee to investigate the january 6th attack on the united states capitol. the report was circulated in advance and printed copies are available. the clerk should designate the report. >> report on a resolution recommending that the house of representatives find mark randall meadows in contempt of congress for refusal to compile with the subpoena dually issued by the select committee to investigate the january 6th attack on the united states capitol. >> without objection, the report will be considered as read and open to amendment at any point.

the chair recognizes the joint woman from california. >> thank you, mr. chairman. like all of us on this committee, i knew and everything -- served with mark meadows. we got along well when he was here but didn't agree on policy matters. i wished him well when he went to serve for donald trump in 2020. it's shocking that we have to face the fact mr. meadows admits he played an official and unofficial role in trying to undermine the results of the 2020 presidential election. this committee's job is find out about the plot, the plot that led to the events of january 6th and propose legislative changes to prevent something like that from ever happening again.

it's been reporting during the leadup to january 6th, the white house was directing the department of justice to ichb vest gate outrageous conspiracy theories to seed doubt about the election and as a predicate for overturning of the election and the replacement of electors. this was to benefit mr. trump's effort to overturn the election. we need to talk to mark meadows about that as the vice chair has mentioned mr. meadows made a surprise visit to the state run audit in georgia which preceded the infamous call she recited where the then president asked the secretary of state to go find votes. we need to talk to mark meadows about that. mr. meadows interacted with a lot of people allegedly

including some of our own colleagues on the day of the violent attack and we've learned that many of those interactions took place on a personal cell phone device so we need to ask mark meadows about that. mr. meadows himself has acknowledged that he has responsive and non-privileged documents and communications. he sent some of them to us. he filed others in court. it certainly appears that mr. meadows played a key role in events that cull -- resulted on the attack of our democracy. he must physical low the lay and cooperate with the lawful requests of this committee or face the consequences and that's why as much as we might personally like mr. meadows, we have to take this action today because no one is above the law. thank you, mr. chairman.

>> chair lady yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois mr. kinzinger. >> thank you, mr. chairman. this is a rare unique moment in history as we vote whether to hold a former colleague in contempt of congress. the last time that happened was 1832. mark meadows committed a crime, in this case a premeditated one. he thought carefully about his actions and actively chose to stone wall which you can clearly see in his back and forth with the select committee. first, he produced over 9,000 pages of documents from his time in the white house then after his former boss made it clear his disappointment and displeasure, he did a 180 and he refused to answer a single question from his former colleagues or even to show up at all. this constitutes legal contempt

but also person contempt. mark meadows' actions demonstrate his contempt for congress for the select committee for his colleagues and the integrity of the democratic process. he's clearly disregarded this investigation so it's time to see if the department of justice can be more persuasive. nobody is above the law, not even a former president's chief of staff. in a nation of laws, you cannot have it both ways. 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. he can't decline to answer any questions on the many non-privileged documents he produced to us. he can't unspeak what he has said and call it privileged after the fact. it is perfectly conceivable portions of what a president's chief of staff knows is subject to a presidential privilege

shielding it from disclosure. but it is also true that not everything he knew or did during that period is privileged. mark meadows knows that. it's why he sent us the documents he did and what made his book possible. that's why the law required him to show up for his deposition and specify in response to each question what the answer was and whether or not that answer in fact was privileged from disclosure. his refusal to compile with the direction of congress stated plainly on the face of the select committee subpoena as a display of contempt for congress which now forces us to sadly have to take this action. thank you, mr. chairman, and i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. chair recognizes the gentleman from california mr. schiff. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i want to pick up where mr. kinzinger left off. 9,000 pages of records is which meadows turned over and meadows himself asserted no claim of privilege. none. these include thousands of text messages spanning the months before election day between election day and the end of the former president's term in office. of these documents, i'm particularly struck by messages that come from lawmakers who were sending them to mr. meadows on january 6th. a time period he says he won't discuss with the committee. i want to display a few of the messages he received from people in congress. the committee is not naming these lawmakers at this time as our investigation is on going. if we could queue the first graphic. this one reads on january 6th, 2021, vice president mike pence, as president of the senate,

should call out all electoral votes he believes are unconstitutional as no electoral votes at all. you can see why this is so critical to ask mr. meadows about. about a lawmaker suggesting that the former vice president simply throw out votes that he unilaterally deems unconstitutional. here is another from january 6th as the riot was on going. the president needs to stop this asap. i've seen dozens and dozens of panicked messages like this and others trapped on capitol hill, people watching at home begging that the white house, that the president of the united states do something to stop the violence. how did meadows react to these

cries for help? whom did he tell? what did he do and critically, what did the president of the united states do and what did he fail to do? mr. meadows doesn't think he should have to answer the questions in the aftermath of january 6th if we could queue graphic number three. yesterday was a terrible day. we tried everything we could in our objection to the six states. sorry nothing worked. the day after a failed attempt to stop the peaceful transfer of power to the violence, an elected lawmaker tells the chief of staff i'm sorry nothing worked. that is chilling. we would like to ask mr. meadows what he thought about that. mr. meadows' behavior and his refusal to do his moral duty

shows why we need stronger tools to enforce rules. in the absence of those changes we will use the tools we have and i expect the justice department to move aswiftly in dealing with pl -- mr. meadows as we did with mr. bannon. i support advancing this contempt referral, mr. chairman and i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. aguilar. >> thank you, mr. chairman, the last tuesday december 7th we received a letter saying his client's appearance for the deposition had become and i'm quoting untenable. something else happened last tuesday. the chief's chief hit the bookstores. mr. meadows memoir, remember, this is a witness who is

refusing to compile with the law and answer our questions. in part because he says the former president has instructed him to do so. he says he was the chief of staff and he couldn't possibly disclose his conversations with the former president. but let's take a look at the book. this is from a section dealing with the january 6th rally at the ellipse and i'm going to put this quote up here on the screens. i'm not going to read the whole thing because we all know what the president said publicly that day but i want to read this part. when he got off stage, president trump let me know that he had been speaking metaphorically about the walk to the capitol. he knew we couldn't organize a trip like that on short notice. this is interesting because the select committee has a lot of questions what the president said and did on january 6th. we have a lot of questions about the protests that day and how they escalated into a riot and mark meadows says he can't discuss those details with us

but apparently, he can put them in his book. he can also discuss them on television just weeks after january 6th, mr. meadows discussed his interactions with the former president in an interview with laura laura ingraham. at any time did the president of the united states want to or seek to interfere with the vote counting of the legitimate votes of the election? he was happy to answer her question. fast forward to last week. mr. meadows is back on tv a number of times discussing conversations with the president about security concerns on january 6th. we had questions about that, too. we had questions on his emails that focused on protrump people end quote. he'll share details about the former president with laura ingraham and share details with sean hannity. he'll share details with anyone

that will shell out $25 for his book but in the face of the lawful subpoena from the select committee as we work to get answers for the american people, the only thing mr. meadows will share are his excuses. we don't accept his excuses. he member held accountable. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> chair yields back. chair recognizes the gentlewoman, ms. murphy. >> thank you. in a few moments i'll vote to recommend the house find former white house chief of staff mark meadows in contempt for failing to compile with our investigation on the january 6th attack. mr. meadow was a central participant on the events against our capitol, country and core democratic values. to create the most accurate account of what occurred, why and what specific steps we can take to prevent it from

occurring again, our committee needs to hear from mr. meadows. the supreme court once observed a subpoena is not a court invitation to a game of hounds when the witness must testify at the end of the cornered chase. yet, as detailed, it is clear to any reasonable observer that pl meadows has treated this request for information as if it were a game. to read the record how mr. meadows responded to the subpoena is to come away exhausted and enraged. any regular citizen that floated a court subpoena like mr. meadows would have faced serious legal challenges and consequences and rightly so. this is not a witness who has acted in good faith. generally willing to tell his side of the story while declining to disclose certain information based on clear and colorable assertion of legal privilege.

to the contrary, mr. meadows delayed, resisted and made unreasonable arguments, failed to produce documents in a timely fashion and refused to appear for a scheduled deposition and then had a change of heart and pledged his cooperation leading to the production of about 9,000 emails and text messages. and then he reversed course yet again categorically refusing to be deposed about what those documents reveal. in summery, mr. meadows' tactics wasted the committee's time and hindered our effort to tell the truth. it bears emphasis the documents mr. meadows ultimately turned over raise as many questions as they answer. for example, the documents conif i recall -- confirm mr. meadows used a personal g mail account and personal cell phones to send

communications related to january 6th and used signal, the private messenger application. had mr. meadows been deposed under oath, the committee would have asked him about his handling of records, a topic not conceivable to any legal privilege. this is a critical line of inquiry because we need to know if mr. meadows did not properly preserve official emails, text messages and provide them to the national archives as required by law. after all, our committee requested and will hopefully soon receive a wide range of trump administration records from the national archives. we need to know whether the universe of records in the archives' possession is complete and comprehensive. understanding mr. meadows compliance with federal recordkeeping laws will help ensure our committee ultimately receives all of the relevant documents we're entitled to review as part of the fact-finding mission. as a result of his actions and inactions mr. meadows is clearly

in contempt of congress and should be referred to the department of justice for criminal prosecution. i yield back. >> chair lady yields back. chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland, mr. raskin. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. meadows' sudden vanishing act is intolerable to the rule of law and work of our committee. imagine how the justice department would stop cooperating midway through. the 9,000 pages that mr. meadows has produced in disclosed documents without asserting in the thick of the action with donald trump as the capitol was over run and trump and others tried to over throw the majority in the electoral college on vice president pence, we are getting a comprehensive portrait of what

took place for january 6th. to accommodate mr. meadow's request is clear he has no intention of compiling with the subpoena even when his testimony could have no confection to the claim and he's refusing and turned over to the committee and assertions of executive decisions. he's refusing to testify about statements in his book published last week and the media about the events of january 6th. this is again another category of statements where any conceivable executive privilege claim that could be invoked by president biden were asserted by former president trump has already been deliberately waived

by mr. meadows. this witness must testify like 300 witness as a citizen or under subpoena by the congress of the united states but he has no right in our constitutional system to defy a subpoena from the house of representatives and if anyone we have called as a witness knows in his bones that he must testify before our committee, it is mr. meadows himself repeatedly through his career in congress he insisted that even high ranking executive branch officials must compile with congressional subpoenas that for documents, information and testimony. in the last administration, high ranking officials hiding information from congress holding relevant documents were quote even out right ignoring

congressional subpoenas that and said this at one point. this level of conduct paired with the failure to even have an interest in transparency is reprehensible and whether you're a republican or a democrat, this kind of obstruction is wrong period. for nine months we've warned them consequences were coming and for nine months we've heard the same excuses backed up by the same unacceptable conduct time is up, and the consequences are here. unquote. a subpoenaed witness could not thwart article one power and process simply by filing an article three lawsuit. the meadows' lawsuit against individual members of this committee's extremely dubious and the speech and debate clause and other major constitutional road blocks and substantive allegations are frivolous like the claim that congress has no legitimate purpose in investigating and reporting on a

violent attack on our capitol, our presidential election and the peaceful transfer of power. in investigating a violent insurrection against our government. we have no legislative purposes at all. if this investigation is not necessary and proper to everything else we're doing in congress, then the constitution has been hollowed out by official lawlessness and a shocking collapse in critical thinking skills. meadows' last minute suit is plainly a tactic to delay and obstruct. we've received overwhelming cooperation, participation from americans that can help us piece together this shocking sequence of events and we have a duty to collect all of the evidence we need to report back to congress and to the american people on a matter of the utmost gravity

american democracy. i favor to concede crime until -- criminal contempt. >> gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman. >> as many of us echoed this evening, we do not take this vote lightly. with an investigation of this magnitude, we're stone walled by every turn by those who play the central role in the planning and execution of the january 6th attack. we have a detailed picture of the attack and venting leading up to it. the committee heard from almost

350 tips from the tip line. let's be clear on the role and why his testimony is so important. in the course of our investigation, we've heard from individuals involved in the planning of the rallies that immediately preceded the violent attack. we want to ask him about that. we heard from former white house staffers helping us to understand what was going on in the white house in the time leading up to january 6th. mr. meadows was the chief of staff in the white house so we want to ask him about that. we've heard from officials at the justice department on the receiving end of instructions to support claims about the outcome of the election. mr. meadows was intergral on

those efforts. we heard about the pressure campaigns and relentless attacks on democracy in arizona, michigan and georgia. mr. meadows actually went to georgia. the committee must hear about that. we're investigating an attempt as one rioter put it to over throw the government. the fate of our republic has never faced a threat as acute and imminent as we face today and that we are looking into through this investigation. the extent of this effort reached the highest levels of our government and it runs right through mr. meadows. anything less than his full cooperation further enables the erosion of our constitution, our democratic institutions and the rule of law.

i join my colleagues in urging an i vote on this resolution and i yield back. >> gentle lady yields back. no further debate, i recognize the gentle woman from wyoming, ms. cheney for a motion. >> mr. chairman, i move that the committee favorably report to the house, the committee's report on a resolution recommending the house of representatives find mark randall meadows in contempt of congress for refusing to compile with the subpoena duly issued by the select committee to investigate the january 6th attack on the united states capitol. >> the question is on the motion to favorably report to the house. those in favor say i. >> i. >> i. >> those opposed say no. in opinion of the chair, the is have it. >> mr. chairman, i request a recorded vote. >> a recorded vote is requested. the clark will call the role.

>> ms. cheney? >> i. >> ms. cheney i. >> i. >> mr. schiff? >> i. >> mr. schiff, i. >> mr. aguilar. >> i. >> mr. aguilar, i. >> mrs. murphy? >> i. >> mrs. murphy, i. >> mr. raskin? >> i. >> mr. raskin i. >> mrs. lauria? >> i. >> mr. kinzinger. >> kinzinger, i. >> mr. kinzinger, i. >> how is the chair recorded? >> mr. chairman, you're not recorded. >> i vote i. >> mr. chairman, i. >> the clerk will report the vote. >> mr. chairman, on this vote there are nine is and zero nos. >> the motion is agreed to.

the vice chair is recognized. >> mr. chairman, pursuant to clause 2 l of rule 11 i request members have two calendar days to file with the clerk of committee supplemental or additional views on the order reported by the committee tonight. >> so ordered. without objection, staff is authorized to make any necessary technical or conforming changes to the report to reflect the actions of the committee. there being no further business without objection, the select committee stands adjourned. >> and so concludes the meeting of the january 6th committee, a 9-0 vote. not unexpected to submit contempt of congress charges. this could mean prosecution for one mark meadows who formally served in that body. and a brutal open by congressman bennie thompson of mississippi essentially saying that mark meadows' legacy as a former

member of congress, somebody who is for awhile the ranking member of the house oversight and government reform committee, his legacy will solely be that he stood in the way of finding the truth about an attack on our democracy equally brutal, each of the nine members going through and detailing why, why this is happening today. liz cheney going through and essentially saying he already begun to cooperate. he turned over records and reading from some of the text messages that were exchanged. it was pretty stunning to listen to former colleagues of mark meadows really taking him apart and taking apart his legacy as a former member of congress. let's go to leeann caldwell. standing outside where the committee disbanded. if you can grab any of them, we would love it. if you could grab anybody that comes out, we'll take it. the mood on capitol hill today is somewhat somber. this is a former member being

issued contempt of congress citation. >> reporter: yeah, that's right, joy. if you see someone walking behind me since i don't have eyes in the back of my head, feel free to tell me and i'll turn around and grab them. try to grab them, anyway. but this is a really monumental moment up here on capitol hill. of course, this is the first member of congress or former member of congress who the congress is referring for criminal contempt and recent memory at least or recent history, i should say. the committee members really laid out their case there and there was a lot of speculation at the beginning of this formation of the january 6th select committee of could there be any sort of new information -- i'm sorry. hold on. congresswoman, can we ask a couple questions? some of the lawmakers -- can you name some of the lawmakers mentioned? okay. so we're going to keep trying

here. but the committee said that everything runs through mark meadows, that they are central to this investigation and getting back to my previous point, there is skepticism that this committee would be able to find out something new. they are just in the beginning of their fact finding phase and according to this report they have received a lot of new information including text messages to mark meadows pr okay if news anchors telling him to tell the former president to call off what is happening on january 6th, joy. >> absolutely. leigh ann caldwell thank you very much. holler if you get any of those members. we'll come right back to you. we'll go away for now but if you get any members we'll come back. let me bring back my panel. joyce, you were in the middle of your answer when we cut to the live panel. i'm holding these text messages and i think those were key. this man has already given up information about fellow lawmakers that he was

interacting with, fox news personalities, we heard sean hannity named, laura ingram named. he's already told. can you walk back after you already started to talk? >> that is absolutely right, joy. he can't walk back the documents and materials he turned over without claiming privilege in them. so the most important thing we saw tonight was the committee effort to categorize meadows along with steve bannon as someone who was in flagrant violation of the subpoena. not an effort to comply that failed for whatever reason but someone who simply spit in the face of congress. that's important because doj will face an important decision about whether to prosecute meadows. certainly the clarity of the committee presentation makes it a lot easier though i'm sure it won't be an easy decision at doj to fine him in contempt and engage in prosecution. >> one of the things that really

struck me was the fact that they go through sort of systematically how he begins to turn over information, he turns over documents. they're in po tegs of text messages and other materials from him and then on the very day his book is published he reverses course and stops cooperating. one gets the sense probably donald trump was angry about what was in his book and he suddenly decides i am no longer going to cooperate. here is the problem. he's already told a dpood half of the story. they want to ask him about things he gave them. you can't say you can't ask me about things i've put in my book and that i've already told you about. your thoughts? >> i thought that was a stunning performance by the committee. it was sober, systematic, and to your point, joy, it really hit the most critical facts to demonstrate that mark meadows is not only refusing to engage. he is refusing to engage with no grounds and primarily to protect the president.

his book he's talking about the same things he turned over documents for. is refusing to answer questions about them. and i thought that jamie raskin, representative raskin did summarize the problem with this so concisely when he said, if congress does not have a legitimate legislative purpose here, when do we? because that is at stake with the fox and hair game we heard from rep murphy and i thought it was the right end point to say if it is such a legitimate claim of executive privilege, why did he stop cooperating as soon as his book became public on the very things he is talking about in his book? it was really well done. >> absolutely. the other thing of course, leigh ann caldwell you saw her try to get information from congresswoman zoe lofgren but was not successful. that the question. we have some of the text messages read into the record by

adam schiff and other members. on january 6th, 2021 mike pence as president of the senate should call out all electoral votes he believes are un-constitutional as no electoral votes at all. another lawmaker to meadows yesterday was a terrible day. we tried everything we could in our objection to the six state. i'm sorry. nothing worked. another lawmaker to meadows the president needs to stop this asap. i think the big question now is who are these lawmakers? who was he talking to? do you think this informing is ultimately going to be disclosed? congressman schiff said we're not disclosing those names for now. >> i think it will all come out. i think they're being very systematic about this. i am impressed at the discipline of this committee. they're not leaking. the presentations tonight were concise. they were not duplicative. they are going to have these hearings and they're going to lay it all out and the chairman said tonight we're going to wait until we get everything and then we will have public hearings and the people will see what we are finding out. you know what impressed me the

most tonight, though, joy, was liz cheney's focus on trump's inaction. and that is when these texts from lawmakers will be so important. they were urgent. they were frightened. there was an armed stand-off at the doors of the united states house of representatives. and trump liked it. and what she was trying to say i think she said it was 187 minutes. those 187 minutes, think what happened during that time period. and he did nothing. even though his son, his chief of staff, his supporters in congress were going, stop this. he was so desperate to hold on to power and overthrow a free and fair election that he was willing to let violence ensue in our nation's capitol and that is who liz cheney has her sites on is donald j. trump. >> just as somebody who served in the united states senate can you talk to us a little bit

about -- it is since 1832 as congressman kinzinger pointed o you the a member of the house of representatives was sanctioned for contempt. sam houston thanks to thegreat producers here, sanctioned for assaulting a fellow member. these are his colleagues. this was a brutal takedown of not just mark meadows but his entire legacy. the chairman of this committee bennie thompson said this is your legacy now. your legacy is that you have essentially spat in the face of the body you formerly served in when it was attacked. your thoughts? >> he had to make a decision. mark meadows had to make a decision. do i try to protect donald trump and the legions of people that he has convinced of this big lie, or do i stand for the institution that i was part of? do i stand for the character and integrity that i tried to tell all my constituents i had? it's pretty clear he decided to

abandon character and integrity and go for protecting the guy who was just fine with the violence in the capitol. >> let's quickly go back to leigh ann caldwell. i think everyone whole heartedly agrees, claire mccaskill. she has chairman thompson. >> it will come out. >> have you spoken directly to mr. meadows at all? you're communicating with counsel but since he did serve in this body have you spoken with him directly? >> no i have not. we've only communicated with mr. meadows through his attorney. >> that was a small sampling of the text messages read today. what else can you tell us about mark meadows' role on that day and leading up to that day? >> the information we received has been quite revealing about members of congress involved in the activities of january 6th as well as staff. >> are you going to subpoena some of these members of congress? >> chairman thompson if the

process doesn't ensure you get more information from mr. meadows how are you going to ensure that? >> that was senator thompson getting into the elevator after saying that information will come out eventually. we'll find out who some of these lawmakers were and we know some were actively rooting for the insurrection including after the danger had passed voting to try to overturn elections in several states. this is a scandal that is multi part and it is eventually, i don't know if you agree, i feel like this is going to whip through the house and the united states senate as names are revealed. >> i think it will. you know, honestly, joy, is it a shock? i mean, these guys are all hiding under their desks. they're all afraid of donald trump in a primary. i mean, in my state the republican candidates for an open senate seat next year are doing everything but lining up at mar-a-lago to shine his shoes for his endorsement. it is not shocking to me that,

you know, as hillary clinton said in her interview over the weekend a lot of these republican senators have hung their spines on the wall, and they are not showing the courage that frankly i thought many of them had to stand up to donald trump and what he did. but i think none of us are going to be surprised when we hear these names. i think we know who they all are. >> yeah. i don't think any of us will be surprised. very quickly, this is the power point. the things that donald trump seemed to believe seem like madness. one can see, if this is what you truly believe happened, all of this complicated theory of how the election was supposedly stolen my god no wonder people felt inspired to get violent. i mean, donald trump, i don't know if he is convinced of this or just convincing others. your thoughts? >> you know, look. donald trump had been told including by his attorney

general bill barr in early december there was no substantial evidence of this fraud. >> that's right. >> one of the things that did come up about mark meadows is mark meadows was actively and aggressively spreading the conspiracy theories on italy-gate. >> from inside the white house. thank you all very much. that is tonight's "reid out." "all in" with chris hayes starts now. good evening from d.c. i am mehdi hasan in for chris hayes. on january 6th, donald trump just stood there in the oval office as lawmakers and members of the press and fox news hosts and his own family members begged and pleaded for him to stop the siege, to step in and tell the mob to leave the capitol. donald trump refused. he stood by a