A lot of people are assuming that "immunity" means Meadows is off the hook.

I also see some reputable legal commentators buying into the "Meadows flipped" narrative.

Immunity doesn't mean he can't be prosecuted. It means that anything he says after he was immunized can't be used against him.

It keeps people from hiding information by invoking the 5th.

If the prosecution learns something new from his testimony that implicates HIM, they can't use it.

Continued . . .

. . . but if they already had the info, they can use it, but they will have to show that they already had it.

To prevent this from being a problem they likely question him on a narrow topic that has nothing to do with his own criminal liability.

It is bad for Trump because obviously, they are forcing him to say something he doesn't want to say.

It is good for the DOJ because they get the info they want.

It is unlikely to be good for Meadows.

Read all about it here:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-5/immunity#:~:text=“Transactional”%20immunity%20means%20that%20once,from%20or%20obtained%20because%20of

and here:

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-718-derivative-use-immunity

To clarify:

Meadows did not agree to a deal.

His testimony is coerced.

He had no choice.

If the DOJ gives him use immunity he has to testify truthfully because what he says cannot be used against him, so he cannot stand on the fifth.

However, anything he says to his compelled testimony cannot be used against him.

This doesn't mean he cannot be prosecuted. It means that anything he says to questions after being immunized cannot be used against him.

This means he hasn't made any deals.