[ad_1]
(Photo by Stephanie Keith/Getty Images)
In November, Steve Bannon stood on the courthouse steps and promised to turn his contempt of Congress prosecution into “the misdemeanor from hell for Merrick Garland, Nancy Pelosi, and Joe Biden.”
“Pray for our enemies, because we’re going medieval on these people. We’re going to savage our enemies,” he brayed recently on his podcast.
Turns out … not so much.
This morning the prosecution rested its case, and so did the defense. After questioning the January 6 Select Committee’s Chief Counsel Kristen Amerling and FBI Special agent Stephen Hart, both of whom were called by the government, Bannon’s lawyers declined to present a case at all.
“Mr. Bannon won’t be testifying,” said his lawyer David Schoen, apparently jettisoning the plan to put his client and his former lawyer Robert Costello, the genius who steered Bannon into this ditch, on the stand.
This is not exactly a surprising turn of events. Last week, it finally occurred to Bannon’s lawyers that they weren’t going to be able to claim that someone, somewhere signed his “Get Out of Congressional Subpoena” permission slip. At a disastrous hearing, Judge Carl J. Nichols finally banhammered all of Bannon’s bruited “mistake of law defenses” — as he was always going to do, since there’s binding Circuit precedent on point. And to make matters worse, he quashed subpoenas for members of Congress, putting the kibosh on Bannon’s crafty plan to put the screws to “Nancy Pelosi, and little Jamie Raskin, and shifty Schiff” on the witness stand.
“What’s the point of going to trial if there are no defenses?” wondered a shellshocked Schoen.
“Agreed,” nodded Judge Nichols.
But Bannon was never going to cut a plea deal that involved admitting guilt. As prosecutors pointed out this morning, the podcaster spent months bragging on social media about defying Congress. His entire brand is a big middle finger to Democrats, which is exactly how he wound up as one of only two people charged with contempt for blowing off the committee.
So after a half-hearted attempt to get Amerling to admit she was biased because she used to be in a book club with the prosecutor, followed by a paint-by-numbers motion for acquittal, the defense rested. The court took the motion under advisement, and now, if Team Bannon can work themselves up to the task of arguing about jury instructions, we might have to wait until tomorrow for closing arguments.
Otherwise, this thing might be all over before the weekend. So much for Bannon’s lawyers howling back in December about the complicated constitutional issues at play, which would necessitate three days of jury selection and ten days of hearings.
There’s always the potential for fireworks in closing arguments, since Bannon’s lawyers have made clear that they’re going to try to sneak those mistake of law defenses in there somehow. But barring that … this thing barely rose to the excitement level of the early bird special at Medieval Times.
Ah, well. We’ll always have the whistle guy to look back on fondly.
Bannon won’t testify as contempt trial appears headed for jury [Politico]
US v. Bannon [Docket via Court Listener]
Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.
[ad_2]
