WASHINGTON – Federal prosecutors began unveiling their case in the contempt trial of former White House strategist Steve Bannon on Tuesday, asserting that the longtime aide to President Donald Trump “decided he was above the law” when he defied a subpoena from a House committee investigating the Capitol attack.
“It wasn’t an accident; it wasn’t a mistake,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Vaughn told jurors in opening arguments. “It was a decision; it was a choice.
“This case is about the defendant thumbing his nose at the orderly process of our government. It is that simple,” Vaughn said.
Bannon put himself above the U.S. government’s effort to examine the assault Jan. 6, 2021, she said.
“Congress was entitled (to the information),” Vaughn said. “It was mandatory. … He chose to show his contempt for Congress and its processes.”
Bannon attorney Evan Corcoran offered a stark counterpoint to the government’s case, walking to his client’s side at the defense table.
“This is Steve Bannon, and he is innocent of the charges,” Corcoran told the jury.
Corcoran argued that “politics” drove the committee’s decision to seek Bannon’s testimony.
“Politics is the lifeblood of the U.S. House of Representatives,” Corcoran said. “Politics invades every decision that they make. It’s the currency of Congress.”
Corcoran denied that Bannon ignored the subpoena, arguing that there was no set time for Bannon to appear for a deposition and provide documents as his attorneys and the committee engaged in negotiations.
“No one ignored the subpoena,” Corcoran said. “Quite the contrary, there was direct engagement (with the committee). The evidence will be crystal clear. No one expected that Steve Bannon would appear. … There will be no evidence that anyone ordered Steve Bannon to do anything.”
The government’s very first witness, Kristin Amerling, deputy staff director and chief counsel to the Jan. 6 committee, directly challenged the defense claims.
In her role as counsel, Amerling said she was personally involved in advising the committee related to the Bannon subpoena.
Amerling said the committee had established specific deadlines for Bannon’s compliance to produce documents by Oct. 7, 2021, and appear for a deposition on Oct. 14.
Asked whether Bannon had satisfied those demands, Amerling told the prosecutor: “He did not.”
U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols moved ahead with the trial after an evidentiary dispute threatened to delay the case as defense lawyers expressed confusion over the judge’s rulings.
Bannon’s defense team sought to exclude correspondence between the House committee and defense lawyers relating to the subpoena Bannon defied, resulting in his indictment.
Nichols ruled Tuesday that he would admit the letters in their entirety, including discussions of executive privilege, which Bannon argued shielded him from the subpoena.
Jan. 6 chair has COVID-19: Rep. Bennie Thompson tests positive for coronavirus
2 former Trump aides to testify: Matthew Pottinger, Sarah Matthews expected to testify at Jan. 6 hearing
The judge had previously excluded the defense’s executive privilege argument.
Referring to the dispute, Corcoran said a delay was needed to resolve evidence questions and a “seismic shift” in the defense’s understanding of the case.
Bannon faces two counts of contempt, one for his refusal to appear for a deposition and another involving his refusal to produce documents, despite a subpoena from the House committee. The panel held a series of hearings this summer featuring damning testimony from former Trump administration officials.
Each count could carry a minimum of 30 days and a maximum of one year in jail, as well as a maximum fine of $100,000.
The subpoena was issued Sept. 23, 2021, and the committee and full House voted to hold Bannon in contempt. He was indicted by a federal grand jury in November.
Amerling told the jury Tuesday that the committee’s interest in seeking Bannon’s testimony was related to alleged efforts to block the certification of Joe Biden’s election as president, his contacts with Trump in the days leading up to the Jan. 6 attack, and participation in pre-Jan. 6 strategy sessions at a downtown D.C. hotel where Trump allies gathered to discuss how to keep Trump in power.
“Mr. Bannon had played multiple roles concerning the events of Jan. 6,” Amerling testified.
Bannon also is linked to two telephone contacts with Trump on Jan. 5, 2021, according to records gathered by the House investigating committee.
Ketchup, regrets, blood and anger: A guide to the Jan. 6 hearings’ witnesses and testimony
The calls were highlighted during the panel’s public hearing last week, examining the role of extremist groups who answered Trump’s call to gather in Washington.
After their initial call Jan. 5, Bannon said on his podcast, “All hell is going to break loose tomorrow.
“It’s all converging, and now we’re on, as they say, the point of attack,” Bannon said. “Right, the point of attack tomorrow. I’ll tell you this. It’s not going to happen like you think it’s going to happen. It’s going to be quite extraordinarily different. And all I can say is strap in.”
What did Trump do on Jan. 6? On Jan. 6, Trump was out of public view as aides urged him to act. A breakdown of those 187 minutes.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Prosecutors argue Bannon ‘thumbed nose’ at Congress in contempt trial
Source: Read Full Article