{"id":17020,"date":"2022-07-23T17:32:21","date_gmt":"2022-07-23T13:32:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/?p=17020"},"modified":"2022-07-25T14:44:41","modified_gmt":"2022-07-25T10:44:41","slug":"steve-bannons-contempt-conviction-hailed-by-1-6-committee","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/steve-bannons-contempt-conviction-hailed-by-1-6-committee\/","title":{"rendered":"Steve Bannon\u2019s contempt conviction hailed by 1\/6 committee"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>WASHINGTON (AP) \u2014 Steve Bannon, a longtime ally of former President Donald Trump, was convicted Friday of contempt charges for defying a congressional subpoena from the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. Committee leaders called the verdict \u201ca victory for the rule of law.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Bannon, 68, was convicted after a four-day trial in federal court on two counts: one for refusing to appear for a deposition and the other for refusing to provide documents in response to the committee\u2019s subpoena. The jury of 8 men and 4 women deliberated just under three hours.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>He faces up to two years in federal prison when he\u2019s sentenced on Oct. 21. Each count carries a minimum sentence of 30 days in jail.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>David Schoen, one of Bannon\u2019s lawyers said outside the courthouse the verdict would not stand. \u201cThis is round one,\u201d Schoen said. \u201cYou will see this case reversed on appeal.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Likewise, Bannon himself said, \u201cWe may have lost the battle here today; we\u2019re not going to lose this war.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed is-type-video is-provider-youtube wp-block-embed-youtube wp-embed-aspect-16-9 wp-has-aspect-ratio\"><div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\">\n<iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"Bannon defiant after found guilty for contempt\" width=\"640\" height=\"360\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/rxbt60c8Z-Q?start=7&#038;feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe>\n<\/div><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>He thanked the jurors for their service and said he had only one disappointment \u2014 \u201cand that is the gutless members of that show trial committee, the J-6 committee didn\u2019t have the guts to come down here and testify.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Prosecutors were just as firm on the other side of the verdict.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cThe subpoena to Stephen Bannon was not an invitation that could be rejected or ignored,\u201d Matthew Graves, the U.S. attorney in Washington, said in a statement. \u201cMr. Bannon had an obligation to appear before the House Select Committee to give testimony and provide documents. His refusal to do so was deliberate, and now a jury has found that he must pay the consequences.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The committee sought Bannon\u2019s testimony over his involvement in Trump\u2019s efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. Bannon had initially argued that his testimony was protected by Trump\u2019s claim of executive privilege. But the House panel and the Justice Department contend such a claim is dubious because Trump had fired Bannon from the White House in 2017 and Bannon was thus a private citizen when he was consulting with the then-president in the run-up to the riot on Jan. 6, 2021.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Bannon\u2019s lawyers tried to argue during the trial that he didn\u2019t refuse to cooperate and that the dates \u201cwere in flux.\u201d They pointed to the fact that Bannon had reversed course shortly before the trial kicked off \u2014 after Trump waived his objection \u2014 and had offered to testify before the committee.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In closing arguments Friday morning, both sides re-emphasized their primary positions from the trial. The prosecution maintained that Bannon willfully ignored clear and explicit deadlines, and the defense claimed Bannon believed those deadlines were flexible and subject to negotiation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Bannon was served with a subpoena on Sept. 23 last year ordering him to provide requested documents to the committee by Oct. 7 and appear in person by Oct. 14. Bannon was indicted in November on two counts of criminal contempt of Congress, a month after the Justice Department received the House panel\u2019s referral.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Bannon\u2019s attorney Evan Corcoran told jurors Friday in his closing arguments that those deadlines were mere \u201cplaceholders\u201d while lawyers on each side negotiated terms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Corcoran said the committee \u201crushed to judgment\u201d because it \u201cwanted to make an example of Steve Bannon.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Corcoran also hinted that the government\u2019s main witness, Jan. 6 committee chief counsel Kristin Amerling, was personally biased. Amerling acknowledged on the stand that she is a lifelong Democrat and has been friends with one of the prosecutors for years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Jan. 6 Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., was a particular target for Bannon and his defense team. His name was brought up multiple times during the trial, although U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols had warned the defense not to claim in court that the committee itself was politically biased. Bannon harshly criticized Thompson by name in his daily statements outside the courthouse, at one point implying that Thompson\u2019s COVID-19 diagnosis last week was faked to avoid pressure to appear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Thompson and committee Vice Chair Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., hailed the verdict in a statement, calling it \u201ca victory for the rule of law and an important affirmation of the Select Committee\u2019s work.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cJust as there must be accountability for all those responsible for the events of January 6th, anyone who obstructs our investigation into these matters should face consequences,\u201d they said. \u201cNo one is above the law.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Prosecutors focused on the series of letters exchanged between the Jan. 6 committee and Bannon\u2019s lawyers. The correspondence shows Thompson immediately dismissing Bannon\u2019s claim that he was exempted by Trump\u2019s claim of executive privilege and explicitly threatening Bannon with criminal prosecution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cThe defense wants to make this hard, difficult and confusing,\u201d said Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Vaughn in her closing statement. \u201cThis is not difficult. This is not hard. There were only two witnesses because it\u2019s as simple as it seems.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The defense Thursday motioned for an acquittal, saying the prosecution had not proved its case. In making his motion for acquittal before Judge Nichols, Bannon attorney Corcoran said that \u201cno reasonable juror could conclude that Mr. Bannon refused to comply.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Once the motion was made the defense rested its case without putting on any witnesses, telling Nichols that Bannon saw no point in testifying since the judge\u2019s previous rulings had gutted his planned avenues of defense. Among other things, Bannon\u2019s team was barred from claiming Bannon believed he was shielded by executive privilege or calling as witnesses House Speaker Nancy Pelosi or members of the House panel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>____<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Associated Press reporters Michael Balsamo and Gary Fields contributed to this report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed\"><div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\">\nhttps:\/\/apnews.com\/\n<\/div><\/figure>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>WASHINGTON (AP) \u2014 Steve Bannon, a longtime ally of former President Donald Trump, was convicted Friday of contempt charges for defying a congressional subpoena from the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. Committee leaders called the verdict \u201ca victory for the rule of law.\u201d Bannon, 68, was convicted after a [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":17021,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[6],"tags":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17020"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17020"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17020\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17022,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17020\/revisions\/17022"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/17021"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17020"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17020"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17020"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}