Bannon Seeks Delay Of Contempt Trial Over Publicity Of Jan. 6 Hearings

WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 15: Former Trump Administration White House advisor Steve Bannon gives a brief statement as he arrives to turn himself in at the FBI Washington Field Office on November 15, 2021 in Washingto... WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 15: Former Trump Administration White House advisor Steve Bannon gives a brief statement as he arrives to turn himself in at the FBI Washington Field Office on November 15, 2021 in Washington, DC. Bannon was charged on Friday with two counts of contempt of Congress after refusing to comply with a subpoena from the House Select Committee investigating the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Former Trump White House chief strategist Steve Bannon is seeking a postponement of his trial scheduled next month in the contempt charges the Justice Department brought against him last year for failing to cooperate with the Jan. 6 Select Committee’s investigation, citing the publicity that the panel’s public hearings this month have generated.

In a court filing Wednesday, Bannon’s attorneys are asking that his criminal trial be delayed until at least October, arguing that the committee’s public hearings would make it impossible for their client to have a fair trial with an impartial jury.

“Select Committee members have made inflammatory remarks about the culpability of President Trump and his closest advisers, including Mr. Bannon, and have broadcast to millions of people their purported ‘findings’ on issues that may prejudice the minds of jurors in this case,” Bannon attorneys Evan Corcoran, David Schoen and Robert Costello wrote.

“Those broadcasts have been repackaged and re-broadcast in countless forms, creating a saturation of the information sources available to Washington, D.C. residents. Under the circumstances, a continuance is warranted — to allow the effects of the Select Committee hearing coverage a chance to subside,” Bannon’s attorneys continued.

The filing noted references to Bannon during the committee’s public hearing on Tuesday that featured Cassidy Hutchinson, a former top aide to Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. During Tuesday’s hearing, the panel drew attention to Bannon’s meeting on Jan. 5, 2021 with advisers to then-President Trump at the Willard Hotel, which served as a “war room” in their efforts to subvert the results of the 2020 election.

Additionally, the filing pointed to a four-month delay in the seditious conspiracy trial of leaders of the Proud Boys, citing the “prejudicial publicity” of the extremist group during the committee’s public hearings.

“The prejudicial publicity stemming from ongoing congressional Select Committee hearings has already been recognized by a judge in this district as good cause for a trial continuance – where, as here, a defendant was mentioned by name and depicted in a video presentation during a Select Committee hearing,” Bannon’s attorneys wrote. “The Government acknowledged the same when it consented to the defense motion for continuance in United States v. Ethan Nordean et al.”

The latest filing by Bannon’s lawyers comes after an effort earlier this month to fight the contempt charges he’s facing by issuing subpoenas to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and members of the committee. Bannon’s legal team are reportedly seeking to challenge the legitimacy of the committee and the panel’s motives for targeting him. Bannon has claimed executive privilege in refusing to comply with the committee’s subpoena, similar to other Trump allies in Congress and the former president’s administration who have defied the panel.

Bannon was charged with two counts of contempt of Congress last year for refusing to comply with the committee’s subpoena. He pleaded not guilty.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. Avatar for daled daled says:

    In a court filing Wednesday, Bannon’s attorneys are asking that his criminal trial be delayed until at least October, arguing that the committee’s public hearings would make it impossible for their client to have a fair trial with an impartial jury.

    And the judges say… ERRRRRRRHHHHHH (that’s a poor attempt at a buzzer sound)

    Yeah, sorry, Stevie Boy-o, you’re charged with Contempt not anything to do with what you may or may not have done that might lead to criminal culpability. Just simply failing to respond to the subpoena. Not sure how the meetings of the committee you refuse to sit for is prejudicial in that regard.

  2. ‘broadcast to millions of people’

    Based on this argument, he couldn’t get a fair trial on this planet.

    Sorry, MOFO - this is not about the case. It is about not showing up to plead your case.

    Ya think the heat is on?

  3. Jesus, this pustulant shtick is getting old.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

97 more replies

Participants

Avatar for discobot Avatar for thehatter Avatar for epicurus Avatar for squirreltown Avatar for irasdad Avatar for callmeeric Avatar for ralph_vonholst Avatar for darrtown Avatar for benthere Avatar for noonm Avatar for brian512 Avatar for not_so_fluffy Avatar for ekcambridge Avatar for 19tibekius6 Avatar for karlwlewis Avatar for counterlife Avatar for capeksghost Avatar for occamscoin Avatar for eaharrison Avatar for yellowbeard Avatar for txlawyer Avatar for rascal_crone Avatar for communistagronomist Avatar for Gratzyn

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: