WASHINGTON — Steve Bannon was found guilty by a Washington, D.C., jury of defying a subpoena from the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
The verdict was reached after three hours of deliberation by the jury on Friday. The trial reached a quick close after only two witnesses testified for the government and Bannon’s attorneys decided against putting on a defense.
Bannon, 68, a prominent right-wing media figure who is credited with helping Donald Trump win the presidency, was convicted on two counts of contempt of Congress. While Bannon faces two counts that each carry as long as a year in prison and a fine of up to $100,000, he’s likely to get a lesser term determined by a judge who could sentence him to serve the counts concurrently.
Sentencing was set for Oct. 21.
Bannon was subpoenaed by the Jan. 6 committee last fall to provide documents and evidence by deadlines in October. He is the first person in Trump’s inner circle to face consequences for failing to cooperate. Peter Navarro, Trump’s former trade adviser, is facing similar charges.
During the trial, prosecutors presented evidence to show Bannon thought he was above the law by deliberately choosing to ignore set deadlines on the subpoena. Bannon’s defense team argued that the dates were ambiguous and implied that the contempt referral was politically motivated.
Judge Carl J. Nichols, a Trump appointee, tried to keep the trial from devolving into “political circus” and limited the defense to asking questions about the bias of a witness. At times, he had to rein in defense attorney Evan Corcoran.
On Thursday, the defense team made one last effort to persuade Nichols to acquit Bannon arguing that the evidence presented by the prosecutors was too thin. Corcoran called the trial a “one-witness case.”
Nichols said he would rule on the motion after the verdict.
The government’s star witness was Kristin Amerling, chief counsel to the Jan. 6 committee, who testified that Bannon ignored multiple requests and warnings to comply with the subpoena. The committee demanded that Bannon send over documents by Oct. 7 and appear for testimony on Oct. 14, but he never did, Amerling told the jury Wednesday.
She also said that he didn’t follow procedures attached to the subpoena if he wanted to request more time.
During cross examination, Corcoran questioned Amerling about her politics and asked her who specifically was responsible for setting the dates on the subpoena. In an effort to get Bannon acquitted, Corcoran told the judge Amerling’s testimony was weak because “she was unable to identify why those dates were in the subpoena at all,” or identify “who put those dates in the subpoena.”
The prosecution called a second witness, Stephen Hart, an agent for the FBI who investigated Bannon’s failure to comply with the subpoena. Hart testified that Bannon’s former attorney, Robert Costello, offered no other reason aside from Bannon’s claim of executive privilege from Trump for his refusal to cooperate even though he left the White House in 2017.
On the eve of the trial, Bannon offered to testify to the committee. It was nine months after the committee initially sought his testimony. Bannon’s offer came with a letter from Trump, who said that he was waiving executive privilege to free Bannon up to testify.
Nichols previously questioned whether Trump ever invoked executive privilege and said it was unclear whether the protection applied to Bannon since he was a private citizen when offering advice.
