A close supporter of former President Donald Trump, Steve Bannon, was found guilty of contempt of Congress on Friday after being charged with disobeying a congressional subpoena issued by a House committee investigating the uprising that occurred on January 6 at the United States Capitol. The heads of the committee described the decision as "a win for the rule of law."
After a trial lasting four days in federal court, Bannon, 68, was found guilty on two counts. On the first count, he was found guilty of refusing to attend for a deposition, and on the second count, he was found guilty of refusing to disclose documents in answer to a committee's subpoena. The jury, which consisted of eight men and four women, deliberated for just less than three hours.
When he is sentenced on October 21, he might receive a maximum of two years in a federal correctional facility. There is a mandatory minimum penalty of thirty days in prison for each offence.
One of Bannon's attorneys, David Schoen, made the statement outside of the courthouse that the judgment will be overturned. "We're starting out with this round," Schoen stated. "If you appeal this decision, you will find that it is overturned."
In a similar vein, Bannon expressed his own sentiments by saying, "We may have lost the battle here today; we are not going to lose this war."
He expressed his gratitude to the members of the jury and stated that he was only disappointed in one thing: "and that is the cowardly members of that show trial committee, the J-6 committee didn't have the courage to come down here and testify."
When it came to the opposite side of the verdict, the prosecution was just as adamant as the defense.
The United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, Matthew Graves, stated in a statement that the subpoena that was issued to Stephen Bannon was not an invitation that could be declined or disregarded. "Mr. Bannon was required to come before the House Select Committee in order to submit documents and provide evidence. It was intentional on his part not to comply, and the jury has decided that he is now responsible for the consequences of his actions.
The committee wanted to hear from Bannon because of his role in Trump's efforts to derail the presidential election that will take place in 2020. Bannon's original line of defense was that Trump's assertion of executive privilege should shield his testimony from further investigation. Bannon was a private citizen when he was consulting with the then-president in the lead up to the riot on January 6, 2021, according to the House panel and the Justice Department's argument. This is because Trump had fired Bannon from the White House in 2017, and Bannon was a private citizen at the time. The riot took place on January 6, 2021.
During the course of the trial, Bannon's legal team attempted to establish that their client did not refuse to comply and that the dates "were in flux." They referred to the fact that Bannon had changed his mind and offered to appear before the committee just a short time before the trial began — after Trump had waived his objection — and said that this was evidence of his change of heart.
Both parties used their final arguments on Friday morning to reiterate the principal views they had maintained throughout the trial. The defense argued that Bannon had a reasonable belief that the timeframes in question were malleable and open to negotiation, while the prosecution contended that Bannon wilfully disregarded deadlines that were both obvious and unambiguous.
On September 23 of the previous year, a subpoena was delivered to Bannon. The subpoena required him to give the specified papers to the committee by October 7 and to appear in person by October 14. Following a month of the Justice Department receiving the referral from the House panel, Bannon was ultimately charged with two counts of criminal contempt of Congress and indicted in November.
In his final statements on Friday, the counsel for Bannon, Evan Corcoran, told the jury that the deadlines in question were nothing more than "placeholders" as the attorneys on each side negotiated agreements.
Corcoran asserted that the committee "rushed to judgment" because its members "wanted to make an example of Steve Bannon."
Corcoran also dropped hints that the primary witness for the government, the top attorney for the January 6 committee, Kristin Amerling, was biased in her own favor. During her testimony, Amerling admitted that she has always identified as a Democrat and that she has known one of the prosecutors as a friend for many years.
They made the following statement: "Just as there must be responsibility for all those involved for the events that took place on January 6th, so too should anybody who obstructs our inquiry into these matters face penalties." Nobody is beyond the reach of the law.
The emphasis of the investigation by the prosecutors was on the correspondence that took place between the Jan. 6 committee and Bannon's legal team. The communication reveals that Thompson promptly rejected Bannon's assertion that he was exempted by Trump's claim of executive privilege and specifically threatened to criminally prosecute Bannon. Thompson's statements are shown to be in the correspondence.
During her closing address, Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Vaughn stated, "The defense wants to make this hard, tough, and confusing." "This shouldn't be too tough. This is not a difficult task. Because it's not nearly as complicated as it appears, there were only two witnesses."
On Thursday, the defense filed a request for an acquittal, arguing that the prosecution had not proven its case against the defendant. Bannon's attorney, Corcoran, argued for his client's acquittal by stating that "no reasonable jury could conclude that Mr. Bannon refused to cooperate." This argument was made in front of Judge Nichols.
Once the motion was made, the defense rested its case without bringing on any witnesses. Bannon told Nichols that he did not see any sense in testifying because the judge's earlier judgments had destroyed his intended lines of defense. The request was granted. In addition to other matters, Bannon's legal team was not permitted to make the allegation that their client believed he was protected by executive privilege or to summon House Speaker Nancy Pelosi or members of the House panel as witnesses in the case.
Bennie Thompson, the Democratic Chairman of the January 6 Committee from Mississippi, was a specific target for Bannon and his defense team. Throughout the course of the trial, his name was brought up on several occasions, despite the fact that U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols had already cautioned the defense against claiming in court that the committee itself was politically biased. When Bannon made his daily speeches outside the courthouse, he was quite critical of Thompson by name. At one point, he even implied that Thompson's COVID-19 diagnosis from the previous week was fabricated in order to escape the obligation to appear in court.
In a joint statement, Thompson and Liz Cheney, a Republican from Wyoming who serves as the committee's Vice Chair, praised the judgment and hailed it as "a win for the rule of law and a significant endorsement of the Select Committee's work."
SOURCE: NEWS AGENCIES
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire