@GottaLaff @tommyyum @lisamelton And (catching up), I'm going to say something we lawyers rarely say:

I don't know.

His conditions of release (which remain in place even if the gag order is stayed) say he "shall not communicate about the facts of the case with any individual known to be a witness, except with counsel or in the presence of counsel."

What I don't know is whether Meadows is formally "known to be a witness" in the court case yet, nor whether the neutral, indirect "meddlesome priest" framing ("it's just a general social media post, not a DM to Meadows") is enough to keep it from being a "communication." So I get to sit back and see what Smith does, just like everyone else in the peanut gallery.

@tommyyum
1/ Smith's defense of the J6 gag order is as solid as one would expect (thanks for sharing it, @tommyyum!).

A few nuggets follow:
@GottaLaff @lisamelton

1/

2/ First, the English major in me loves this reference (which I myself made a few posts back): "[R]epeated attacks on a perceived adversary are often understood as a signal to act against that person—much like King Henry II’s famous remark, in reference to Archbishop Thomas à Becket, “Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?” which resulted in Becket’s murder. See, e.g., United States v. Smallwood, 365 F. Supp. 2d 689, 696 n.14 (E.D. Va. 2005) (explaining the idiom)."

(And the weird English major in me insists on adding that maybe Godot never showed up because an anachronistic follower of Henry II got his Beckets mixed up.)

@tommyyum @GottaLaff @lisamelton