The New York Times' Robert Draper provides some context to reports confirming that former Malignant Loser Chief of Staff Mark Meadows received an immunity order last year to testify to Special Counsel Jack Smith's Grand Jury in the election subversion case, and why the Malignant Loser should be worried:
... The question of what Meadows may have said, and might say on a witness stand, has significant implications for Trump’s fate in the federal trial, which was scheduled to start March 4 but was recently removed from the court calendar. A firsthand verification from Trump’s former top aide that the president knew that he lost the election but proceeded with efforts to overturn the results anyway might by itself sway the jury to find Trump guilty and send him to prison. In turn, some polls have suggested that a guilty verdict might cost Trump enough votes from independent voters to deny him an election victory — and thus the ability to pardon himself. All of which is to say that Trump’s entire fate could depend on what it means to Mark Meadows, then and now, to be “the chief’s chief.”...
Draper, having studied the untrustworthy Meadows, has a cautionary note to add:
... But if that outcome has indeed arrived and Meadows chooses to do as he has typically done — which is to look after Mark Meadows — then the man who was once dubbed Two-Face, after the DC Comics supervillain, by House Republican leadership staffers is not just Trump’s problem but the problem of Trump’s prosecutors as well. The recurrent feature of Meadows’s career ascent is that he persuaded people to trust him, leaving them to later regret having done so...
We can only hope Special Counsel Smith got value for Meadows' immunity deal, and that it (and the weaselly Meadows) holds up in court.
