Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump Appointee, Rejected Steve Bannon's Challenge to the House January 6 Committee. Nichols said he had "serious issues" with Prosecutors obtaining a Bannon Lawyer's Phone Records. Bannon is set to Stand Trial on July 18th.
With that ruling, Nichols joined with another Trump Appointee, Judge Tim Kelly, who had previously found that the House January 6 Committee was validly constituted in spite of not having 13 Members. Nichols acknowledged Wednesday that, in the Resolution Creating the January 6 Committee, the House said it "shall" include 13 Lawmakers, including Five Appointed after Consultation with the Minority Leader. But, citing Supreme Court Precedent, Nichols said "shall" could also be construed to mean "should," "will," or "may."
Federal Prosecutors secured an Indictment against Bannon in November, charging him with Two Counts of Contempt of Congress over his Refusal to sit for a Sworn Deposition or turn over Records to the House Panel investigating January 6. The indictment came within weeks of the House referring Bannon to the Justice Department for Prosecution.
In his Decision Wednesday, Nichols said he was giving "great weight" to the House's Interpretation of its own Rules concerning the January 6 Committee. Nichols said the House effectively Ratified its View of the January 6 Committee's Validity with Three subsequent Referrals recommending that former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, along with onetime Trump Advisors Dan Scavino and Peter Navarro, face Criminal Prosecution over their own Decisions to defy the Congressional Investigation into the Capitol attack.
The Justice Department declined to bring Criminal Charges against Meadows and Scavino, who served as Trump's Deputy White House Chief of Staff. But Federal Prosecutors in Washington, DC, charged Navarro in early June, with Two Counts of Contempt of Congress. Navarro is set to appear in Federal Court Friday, for an Arraignment where he is expected to formally plead Not Guilty.
In the months since Bannon's Indictment, his Defense Lawyers have argued that the House Committee investigating January 6 sought to make an example of him at a time when several Trump allies were snubbing their noses at the Congressional Inquiry. Bannon threatened to make his Criminal Case the "misdemeanor from hell" for the Biden Administration and, in the course of his Defense, has pushed for Access to Documents and made claims of Prosecutorial Misconduct.
During the Court Hearing Wednesday, his Lawyer Evan Corcoran said the Justice Department resorted to an "outrageous investigative technique" by obtaining the Phone Records of another Lawyer, Robert Costello, who represented Bannon in talks with the House January 6 Committee. The Justice Department did Not obtain the Content of Costello's Communications with Bannon but instead received Access to the so-called Toll Records, such as the Date and Duration of calls. But, with that move, Schoen said a "wedge was driven between Mr. Bannon and his lawyer." "If they're allowed to do it here, they'll do it in every case," Corcoran said.
Nichols declined to Dismiss the Case on those grounds, but said he had "serious issues" with the move. The Justice Department previously said that the Phone Records were needed to show Bannon was aware of his Subpoena from the House January 6 Committee, but Nichols said Wednesday that he was also troubled by how Prosecutors did not seem to see any issue with that Investigative step.
Bannon's Defense, David Schoen, on Wednesday, indicated that he might seek to Delay the July 18th Trial based on the recent talk of Criminal Charges linked to the January 6 Attack and Efforts to Overturn the Election.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
No comments:
Post a Comment