Mark Meadows Told National Archives Mar-A-Lago Document Boxes Were Filled With News Clips: Report

Topline

Mark Meadows, who once served as chief of staff to former President Donald Trump, previously told the National Archives the boxes of documents taken by the former president to Mar-a-Lago were “news clippings” and were not classified or of a sensitive nature, the Washington Post reported Friday.

Former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows arrives for the Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life Americas … [+] annual gala and fundraising dinner at the National Building Museum in Washington, DC, on September 13, 2022.

AFP via Getty Images

Key Facts

During a September 2021 call between National Archives lawyer Gary Stern and former deputy White House counsel Pat Philbin, Philbin said Meadows had told him he was not aware of any other materials taken besides the 12 boxes of “news clippings,” according to people familiar with the conversations, the Post reported.

Philbin also relayed that Meadows said no documents were destroyed, two sources with knowledge of the conversation and a third person with contemporaneous knowledge of the call told the Post.

A spokesperson for Philbin declined to comment to the Post, while a spokesperson for Meadows did not respond and a lawyer for him declined to comment to the Post.

The report demonstrates Meadows was more involved with the communications between team Trump and the National Archives than previously known.

Key Background

The FBI seized more than two dozen boxes of materials from Mar-a-Lago last month, and the Department of Justice is investigating if Trump violated federal laws, including the Espionage Act, by taking the documents, some of which include highly-classified information. U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon—a Trump appointee—ordered Thursday that retired judge Raymond Dearie will serve as special master to independently review the documents, a position Trump asked the judge to appoint someone to two weeks after his home was raided. The DOJ is expected to appeal the decision, as the appointment could slow down its investigation, and said the special master’s review would be “unnecessary and significantly harm government interests.”

Topline

Key Facts

Key Background

Further Reading