Legal experts said they were "absolutely gobsmacked" on Monday after former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows offered surprise testimony in court.

Hosts of the Opening Arguments podcast, run by attorney Andrew Torrez and legal journalist Liz Dye, reacted to Meadows' decision to testify on his own behalf at a federal court hearing arguments about whether his Georgia election interference case should be removed from state court.

"I'm absolutely gobsmacked that Mark Meadows would testify at today's evidentiary hearing in connection with his efforts to remove his indictment in Fulton County, GA to federal Court," one host wrote on the social media platform formerly known as Twitter. "Removal to federal court doesn't change what law applies (GA state), it doesn't make him eligible for a federal pardon, etc."

The podcast host argued Meadows may have jeopardized his Fifth Amendment rights.

"Meadows, of course, has a Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination," the post explained. "He cannot be compelled to testify against himself in the underlying criminal indictment... unless he's deemed to have waived the privilege by voluntarily testifying. Typically, the standard is that when a witness discloses any incriminating fact, he waives the 5th with respect to all details about that fact; that prevents selective disclosure."

"GA law seems particularly bad (for Meadows) on waiver; Carter v State 288 SE2d 749 says a voluntary waiver on any fact 'is a waiver as to all other relevant facts,'" the post added.

But the attorney said it could depend on what Meadows discloses during his testimony.

"So, uh, we'll be watching to see what he said!" they concluded.

Read the thread below.