News
‘Mark Meadows Has a Potential Perjury Problem’: Former Special Counsel

Former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, charged in Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis‘ racketeering prosecution of Donald Trump and his 18 co-defendants for alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election, may have some challenges surrounding possible perjury, according to several legal experts.
“Mark Meadows has a potential perjury problem,” writes professor of law Ryan Goodman, a former U.S. Dept. of Defense Special Counsel. Goodman is referring to court documents filed Thursday by Willis arguing against allowing Meadows to move his case to federal court and severing it from his co-defendants.
District Attorney Fani Willis “puts it in understated terms in new brief,” Goodman says, adding that “Meadows’ testimony included [a] false statement – his lack of ‘any role’ in coordinating false electors. Was then forced to acknowledge it.”
Former FBI General Counsel Andrew Weissmann, pointing to Goodman’s comments, adds: “Meadows perjury in the removal hearing can be both separately prosecuted and be additional proof against him in the 1/6 case. Note: it can be used for both ends by Jack Smith.”
READ MORE: ‘Outstanding’: Judge Says All Court Proceedings in Trump RICO Case Will Be Live-Streamed on YouTube
“Fani Willis’s just-filed supplemental brief … as much as accuses Meadows of perjury,” writes professor of law, political commentator, and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General Harry Litman. “He’s in the soup.”
Professor of law and former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance says, “Willis makes a compelling argument against permitting Meadows to remove his case to fed’l court simply because one or more overt acts involved his official position, pointing out he’s charged with a conspiracy to violate the RICO act & he must have a fed’l defense to that crime.”
Willis opens by writing: “The defendant’s prosecution was not commenced against him ‘for or related to any act’ under color of his office. The defendant’s prosecution commenced because he knowingly and willfully entered into an agreement to violate the Georgia RICO Act.”
As Lawfare’s Anna Bower points out, even in a footnote Willis makes a good case against allowing Meadows to move his case to federal court.
“In addition to the contradiction highlighted above, the defendant said repeatedly that he misused the pronoun ‘we,’ an assertion that would materially alter the plain meaning of several of his relevant statements. The defendant also repeatedly insisted he was merely ‘trying to land the plane’ and achieve ‘a peaceful transition of power,’ a statement clearly belied by his participation in the Trump campaign’s attempts to overturn the outcome of Georgia’s election.”
Image by Gage Skidmore via Flickr and a CC license
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
![]() |