Proceedings began Monday with jury selection in federal court in Washington, D.C., and by mid-afternoon most of the 22 potential jurors had been identified.
The polarizing longtime Trump ally has always been at the top of the Jan. 6 witness list for House investigators. But Justice Department prosecutors say the trial is intended to punish Bannon for not complying with subpoenas, rather than compel him to share information. The case is a major test of what leverage Congress has when a witness evades a House subpoena. Bannon is the first of two similar House Select Committee subpoena cases to go to trial; A contempt case against former White House trade adviser Peter Navarro is still in its early stages. The Bannon trial is also of particular importance to the House panel as it continues to negotiate to bring additional witnesses and as it prepares for a major prime-time hearing Thursday night that aims to highlight which committee members called former President Donald Trump’s “dereliction of duty” on Jan. 6.
Jurors asked about House’s investigation
During the first part of the jury selection process Monday, potential jurors were not pressed about their general feelings about Bannon or Trump.
However, they are asked about their take on news of the House investigation and the case itself. Some said they absorbed little from the House hearings, if that.
Many of the potential jurors said they had heard minimally about Bannon’s case, but many had attended at least some of the special committee’s public hearings. But awareness alone is not enough to throw them off the jury.
Among the jurors qualified so far are a man who works with Covid-19 tests, a woman retired from a union job who is now writing a dissertation, and a self-described “recovering” lawyer who now works at the State Department.
The attorney-turned-government official told the judge he believed executive privilege might be part of the case and that the case was about whether Bannon had to testify or was protected.
It’s unclear whether Bannon’s legal team will be able to present any arguments that even mention executive privilege to a jury. The judge, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, allowed her to continue as a potential juror because her knowledge of the case was limited.
Bannon’s team has repeatedly argued that pretrial publicity, especially with congressional hearings, should at least get his case delayed.
But many potential jurors say they haven’t made up their minds or know few of the details and haven’t been questioned extensively about Bannon’s political history.
One potential juror said she was “highly informed” about the select committee’s proceedings and the case and heard that not everyone responded to the subpoenas they received – even if they should have. But “we haven’t heard the whole story yet,” the legal aid officer told the judge. “I guess you’ll have to explain the law to us.”
She remained in the jury pool.
One potential juror was thrown out of the pool after telling the judge he had watched all the select committee hearings, then criticized Republicans who say the election was stolen and, looking at Bannon, said: “I believe that he is guilty’.
The process is expected to proceed quickly
Prosecutors promise their case against Bannon will be presented briefly, in just a few days, with only two or three prosecution witnesses. This list includes investigative committees of the House.
It is not known how extensive Bannon’s defense will be or whether he will want to take the stand in his defense. He will not be able to compel members of the House to testify, the judge said. At the start of the case, Bannon vowed to make the proceedings “a crime from hell for (Attorney General) Merrick Garland, (House Speaker) Nancy Pelosi and (President) ) Joe Biden.” But at a recent court hearing, his defense attorney, David Schoen, complained : “What’s the point of having a trial here if there’s no defense?” Bannon — who accepted an 11th-hour pardon from Trump in 2021 as he faced conspiracy wire fraud and money laundering charges in Manhattan federal court , related to a border wall fundraising scheme — has made a series of attempts in court in recent days to halt the trial, create more defenses or prepare for possible appeals. So far, Nichols has overwhelmingly sided with the Justice Department on of the evidence the jury could hear, thus depriving Bannon of the opportunity to try to follow the advice his attorney had given him or to use the insider’s Justice Department policy on presidential advisers he hoped would protect him. Trump has indicated in recent weeks that he wants to waive any executive privilege that might apply to Bannon, and Bannon has suggested he might be interested in talking to the House committee — a series of events that Bannon’s team now he wants to try to show a jury. But his ability to raise arguments about executive privilege will be severely limited at best. Bannon was not a government official during the period the committee is investigating. A federal grand jury indicted the right-wing figure in November on two counts of criminal contempt — one for failing to provide testimony requested by a House Special Committee subpoena in the fall and the other for failing to produce documents. A key question during the trial will be whether jurors agree with prosecutors and the House of Representatives that Bannon’s October subpoena deadlines were final and that he willfully ignored them.
Both of the charges he faces are felonies. But if convicted, each faces a mandatory minimum of 30 days in jail.
Bannon was one of the first potential witnesses on Jan. 6 that the House committee called — and he is one of a handful of people the committee holds in contempt. The committee said it wanted to obtain his documents and ask him questions because Bannon had contact with Trump, was in the so-called war room of Trump allies at the Willard Hotel in Washington during the unrest and made a prediction in his podcast before the riot that “hell” was “going to run wild”.
“In short, Mr. Bannon appears to have played a multifaceted role in the events of January 6, and the American people have a right to hear his first-hand account of his actions,” the House committee’s report said. resolution of contempt against Bannon.
When Bannon faced deadlines in October, his lawyer, Robert Costello, told the committee that Bannon would not cooperate with the investigation because of instructions from Trump that he should, “where appropriate, invoke all immunities and privileges that there could be”. criminal investigators have interviewed Costello, as well as Trump’s lawyer, Justin Clark, in building their case. According to their description of Clarke’s statements, he told Costello that Trump could not protect Bannon from fully complying with the subpoenas.
Before Bannon’s trial, the House committee detailed him in some of its public presentations. At a hearing last Tuesday, the committee released White House phone logs showing Bannon and Trump spoke twice on Jan. 5, 2021, including once before Bannon made his predictions for the next day on the podcast.
The commission has another hearing scheduled for prime time Thursday night. Depending on the pace of the proceedings in D.C. federal court and the length of his defense and jury deliberations, Bannon’s trial could be over by then.
This story has been updated with additional details.
Add Comment