Marjorie Taylor Greene: Voters challenging eligibility say texts with Mark Meadows ‘undermine her credibility’

Andrew Feinberg
Washington, DC
Saturday 30 April 2022 19:00
Comments
Marjorie Taylor Greene calls CNN's Jim Acosta a liar in heated exchange

The Georgia voters seeking to bar Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene from seeking re-election because she allegedly supported the insurrection that took place in the form of the 6 January 2021 attack on the Capitol, now say newly revealed text messages she sent to ex-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows cast doubt on whether she testified truthfully during an administrative hearing earlier this month.

On 25 April, Ms Greene claimed she had no recollection of whether she ever called for martial law to be declared by former president Donald Trump during his push to remain in office against the wishes of American voters.

The same day, CNN reported that Ms Greene had sent Mr Meadows a text message on 17 January — three days before Mr Trump’s term expired — in which she said participants in a group chat for Republican members of the House of Representatives were saying the only way to “save” the US would be for Mr Trump to call for “Marshall [sic] law”.

In a filing asking the administrative judge who conducted Monday’s hearing to admit the text message with Mr Meadows into the record, attorneys for the Georgia voters said the text message “further undermines” Ms Greene’s credibility.

“Greene’s testimony at the hearing that she could not remember discussing martial law with anyone was already dubious. This text with President Trump’s Chief of Staff makes her testimony even more incredible because it seems like the kind of message with the kind of recipient that a reasonable person testifying truthfully would remember,” they wrote.

The attorneys added that the message “sheds light on the meaning of her pre-January 6 statements” because it shows Ms Greene was “still fighting against the peaceful transfer of power by advocating extra-legal means” 11 days after the attack on the Capitol.

“This text, like her statements on January 5, shows the lengths to which she was willing to go to help Mr Trump remain in power,” they said.

In a response filing, Ms Greene’s attorney James Bopp Jr argued that the alleged text message is inadmissible as evidence because it was laid out in a CNN article and did not include copies of the message in question.

“As a result, there is no one to cross-examine and this is hearsay within hearsay,” he said, adding that he was “authorized to say on behalf of [Ms] Greene that she has no recollection of this text and, since her texts are automatically deleted after 30 days, she has no way to verify anything about it,” he said.

He added that the voters’ claim that the text showed she was “still fighting against the peaceful transfer of power by advocating extra-legal means” was an “outrageous fabrication”.

“This claim is nothing short of a false and outrageous political smear, which this tribunal should not dignify by granting Petitioners’ Motion,” he said.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in