Government

Bannon Judge Refuses To Postpone Trial Just Because Dog Ate Defense's Homework

You might beat the rap, but you're not gonna beat the ride.

By  
on
SiriusXM’s Coverage Of The Republican National Convention Goes Gavel-to-Gavel On Thursday, July 21

(Photo by Ben Jackson/Getty Images for SiriusXM) Stephen K. Bannon

And we’re off to the races! This afternoon Steve Bannon’s trial on contempt of Congress charges kicked off in the E. Barrett Prettyman Courthouse.

Despite vociferous protest from the former Trump aide’s lawyers that it would be impossible to seat an impartial jury in DC, there were plenty of citizens who answered “Steve WHO?” during voir dire. In the event, jury selection took just a day and a half, allowing for opening statements and witnesses to begin this afternoon.

But before that, Bannon’s lawyers threw one last Hail Mary pass to Judge Carl J. Nichols, asking to continue the case for a month due to a “seismic shift” in the defenses’s strategy. By which they mean, the lawyers spent the past three months planning to present a “mistake of law” defense, despite very clear precedent that it is not available to their client.

They first tried to argue advice of counsel, claiming that Bannon’s lawyer Robert Costello advised him that it was legal to give the January 6 Select Committee the finger in response to a subpoena for documents and testimony. When that defense got blocked, they slapped three shirts and several days of stubble on it and called it variously good faith reliance, public authority, and entrapment by estoppel. And then last week, as anyone paying a modicum of attention would have predicted, the court blocked those defenses too.

“What’s the point of going to trial if there are no defenses?” wondered a shell-shocked David Schoen, one of Bannon’s attorneys who previously represented Donald Trump in his second impeachment.

“Agreed,” replied Judge Nichols, a Trump appointee.

Sponsored

After multiple motions attempting to get the case postponed due to publicity around the Select Committee’s hearings, Bannon’s lawyers made one last ditch effort to kick the can down the road.

Would the court prettyplease give them 30 days to figure out some kind of defense for their client?

In fact, it would not.

With opening statements underway, it appears Bannon’s team will be leaning heavily into the idea that Committee Chair Bennie Thompson’s offhand statement that he hoped Bannon would still come in meant that there was no time limit to the subpoena. Just because it said he had to show up and either testify or invoke privilege on October 14, 2021 didn’t mean he actually had to show up that day — it was more like an open invitation to come whenever he felt like it. And, hey, wouldn’t ya know it, he feels like it right now!

Sponsored

The defense team is also leaning heavily into the idea that their client is only being prosecuted for his political beliefs — while trying very hard to keep the substance of Bannon’s beliefs far away from the jury. Which is a far cry from making this case “the misdemeanor from hell for Merrick Garland, Nancy Pelosi, and Joe Biden.”

Ah, well. Pay your money, take your chances.

US v. Bannon [Docket via Court Listener]

Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.

Topics

, , , , , , ,