Stephen Bannon Indicted For Contempt Of Congress; Jeffrey Clark And Mark Meadows Could Be Next

A Grand Jury has indicted Stephen Bannon for contempt of Congress. Department of Justice advisory, Stephen K. Bannon Indicted for Contempt of Congress:

Two Charges Filed for Failing to Honor House Subpoena From Select Committee Investigating Jan. 6 Capitol Breach

Stephen K. Bannon was indicted today by a federal grand jury on two counts of contempt of Congress stemming from his failure to comply with a subpoena issued by the House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol.

Bannon, 67, is charged with one contempt count involving his refusal to appear for a deposition and another involving his refusal to produce documents, despite a subpoena from the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol. An arraignment date has not yet been set in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

“Since my first day in office, I have promised Justice Department employees that together we would show the American people by word and deed that the department adheres to the rule of law, follows the facts and the law and pursues equal justice under the law,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “Today’s charges reflect the department’s steadfast commitment to these principles.”

“As detailed in the indictment, on Sept. 23, 2021, the Select Committee issued a subpoena to Mr. Bannon,” said U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves for the District of Columbia. “The subpoena required him to appear and produce documents to the Select Committee, and to appear for a deposition before the Select Committee. According to the indictment, Mr. Bannon refused to appear to give testimony as required by subpoena and refused to produce documents in compliance with a subpoena.”

In its subpoena, the Select Committee said it had reason to believe that Bannon had information relevant to understanding events related to Jan. 6. Bannon, formerly a Chief Strategist and Counselor to the President, has been a private citizen since departing the White House in 2017.

Each count of contempt of Congress carries a minimum of 30 days and a maximum of one year in jail, as well as a fine of $100 to $1,000. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

An indictment is merely an allegation and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

The case is being investigated by the FBI’s Washington Field Office. The case is being prosecuted by the Public Corruption and Civil Rights Section of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia.

Read the Indictment.

The House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol may now pursue a contempt referral resolution against former DOJ attorney Jeffrey Clark who refused to answer substantive questions at his deposition last week, and for former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, who failed to appear for his deposition today.

CNN reports, Mark Meadows did not appear for deposition with January 6 committee:

Former Trump White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows did not appear for a deposition on Friday in front of the House select committee investigating January 6, sources familiar with the investigation tell CNN, setting up a potential showdown that could lead to the panel beginning a criminal referral process against him.

Committee staffers had been prepared to go forward with the interview and waited in a room on Capitol Hill with a stenographer, but started to file out of the room nine minutes after the deadline passed.

The committee has not commented on whether Meadows was a no-show, and his attorney did not respond to a request for comment after the scheduled deposition.

Ahead of the scheduled deposition Friday morning, Meadows’ attorney, George J. Terwilliger III, issued a statement saying his client would not cooperate with the committee until courts ruled on former President Donald Trump’s claims of executive privilege, noting “a sharp legal dispute with the committee.”

“The issues concern whether Mr. Meadows can be compelled to testify and whether, even if he could, that he could be forced to answer questions that involve privileged communications,” Terwilliger said. “Legal disputes are appropriately resolved by courts. It would be irresponsible for Mr. Meadows to prematurely resolve that dispute by voluntarily waiving privileges that are at the heart of those legal issues.”

Terwilliger added, “No matter how important the subject matter of the committee’s work, decades of litigation over Executive Privilege shows how critically important it is for a president to have access to advice and counsel without fear that political opponents in Congress will later be able to pull away the shield of confidentiality that protects candor in those communications.”

Note: The trial court ruled earlier this week that Donald Trump, an ex-president has no executive privilege to assert, and Congress’s need for the information outweighs any assertion of executive privilege by an ex-president. The Court of Appeals will almost certainly affirm the trial court’s opinion in December.

By officially setting a deadline that Meadows did not meet, the committee took an official step toward possibly referring Meadows to the Department of Justice for contempt of Congress.

Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, scheduled the Friday deposition late Thursday evening in an effort to force Meadows’ compliance.

“The Select Committee will view Mr. Meadows’s failure to appear at the deposition, and to produce responsive documents or a privilege log indicating the specific basis for withholding any documents you believe are protected by privilege, as willful non-compliance,” Thompson wrote on Thursday ahead of the scheduled deposition.

Thompson continued, “Such willful noncompliance with the subpoena would force the Select Committee to consider invoking the contempt of Congress procedures … which could result in a referral from the House of Representatives to the Department of Justice for criminal charges — as well as the possibility of having a civil action to enforce the subpoena brought against Mr. Meadows in his personal capacity.”

Earlier Thursday, White House Deputy Counsel Jonathan Su wrote to Meadows’ attorney, informing him of Biden’s decision and once again citing “the unique and extraordinary circumstances where Congress is investigating an effort to obstruct the lawful transfer of power under our Constitution.”

Su noted to Terwilliger that Biden has already determined that executive privilege does not apply to particular subjects within the committee’s purview, including “events within the White House on or about January 6, 2021; attempts to use the Department of Justice to advance a false narrative that the 2020 election was tainted by widespread fraud; and other efforts to alter election results or obstruct the transfer of power.”

The Washington Post first reported Su’s letter.

The House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol has issued a joint statement. THOMPSON & CHENEY STATEMENT ON MARK MEADOWS:

Bolton, MS & Wilson, WY—Chairman Bennie G. Thompson and Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-WY) today issued the following statement on Mark Meadows’s failure to comply with the Select Committee’s subpoena:

“Mr. Meadows’s actions today—choosing to defy the law—will force the Select Committee to consider pursuing contempt or other proceedings to enforce the subpoena. If his defiance persists and that process moves ahead, the record will reveal the wide range of matters the Select Committee wished to discuss with Mr. Meadows until his decision to hide behind the former President’s spurious claims of privilege. Many of those matters are not even conceivably subject to any privilege claim, even if there were one.

“Indeed, Mr. Meadows has failed to answer even the most basic questions, including whether he was using a private cell phone to communicate on January 6th, and where his text messages from that day are.

“It’s important to note that there’s nothing extraordinary about the Select Committee seeking the cooperation of a former senior administration official. Throughout U.S. history, the White House has provided Congress with testimony and information when it has been in the public interest. There couldn’t be a more compelling public interest than getting answers about an attack on our democracy.

“It’s unfortunate that Mr. Meadows has chosen to join a very small group of witnesses who believe they are above the law and are defying a Select Committee subpoena outright. The Select Committee has talked with more than 150 individuals who are engaging and cooperating with our probe and providing critical details. And while we’re determined to get all the information we’re seeking, Mr. Meadows, Mr. Bannon, and others who go down this path won’t prevail in stopping the Select Committee’s effort getting answers for the American people about January 6th, making legislative recommendations to help protect our democracy, and helping ensure nothing like that day ever happens again.”

A conviction for criminal contempt does not force the witness to testify. It does get you up to a year in prison for each count if convicted.

The legal process will take too much time. These principal witnesses are unlikely to testify, even if ordered to do so, and will try to delay as long as possible in court. Today’s indictment is a warning to other witnesses who are not willing to go to prison for Donald Trump to encourage them to testify.

The House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol has already interviewed over 150 witnesses who testified voluntarily, as any patriotic American who believes in the rule of law would do. That does not include Donald Trump and his seditious co-conspirators.