Bannon, an unofficial adviser to President Donald Trump at the time of the attack on Capitol Hill, is accused in federal court of defying a Jan. 6 subpoena from the committee seeking his records and testimony. He was indicted in November on two counts of criminal contempt of Congress, a month after the Justice Department was impeached by Congress. Each count carries a minimum of 30 days in jail and up to a year behind bars. Monday’s hearing before U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols focused entirely on jury selection in a slow process known as voir dire. By the end of the day, 22 prospective jurors had been identified. The trial will continue Tuesday morning as lawyers for Bannon and the government whittle the panel down to 14 — with 12 jurors and two alternates. Much of Monday’s questioning of potential jurors by Bannon’s attorney, Evan Corcoran, focused on how much of the extensive coverage of the Jan. 6 hearings they have watched and whether they have opinions about the commission and its work. At one point, a prospective juror told Nichols that remaining impartial would be a “challenge” for him since “I believe (Bannon) is guilty.” That admission, in addition to disqualifying the potential juror, prompted additional questions from others seated next to the man to determine how widely he had shared his opinion. The high-profile and divisive nature of the case hung over Monday’s hearing, with Corcoran trying to block jurors who expressed strong views about Bannon or Trump or who had any personal connection to Jan. 6 or Capitol Hill. At one point, Judge Nichols agreed to disqualify a woman whose mother is a staffer for Democratic Florida Rep. Lois Frankel. In another case, Corcoran successfully argued to disqualify a man who said the Jan. 6 committee’s work was “important” and that he was following developments closely. “He’s coming into it with a frame of mind where he’s very focused on Jan. 6,” Corcoran said. “I just don’t think he can be fair.” Bannon attended the entire session, but never spoke. The trial follows a flurry of activity in the case since July 9. A week ago, the former White House general informed the committee that he is now willing to testify. His former lawyer, Robert Costello, said the change was made because Trump had waived his claim of executive privilege by blocking the deposition. Bannon, 68, has been one of the most prominent of Trump’s allies to refuse to testify before the committee. He had argued that his testimony was protected by Trump’s claim of executive privilege, which allows presidents to withhold confidential information from courts and the legislature. Trump has repeatedly claimed executive privilege — despite being a former, not current, president — to try to block the testimony of witnesses and the release of White House documents. The Supreme Court ruled in January against Trump’s efforts to stop the National Archives from cooperating with the committee after a lower court judge — Ketanji Brown Jackson, now on the Supreme Court — noted, in part, “Presidents are not kings.” . The committee also noted that Trump fired Bannon from the White House in 2017, so Bannon was private when advising the president ahead of the uprising. Judge Nichols rejected motions to delay the contempt trial in separate hearings last week, including Thursday when Bannon’s lawyers raised concerns about an upcoming CNN report that has since aired about their client that they said was prejudicial. comments made during a hearing last week held by the Parliamentary committee. “I know the current concerns about publicity and bias and whether we can seat a jury that will be fit and fair, but as I said before, I think the appropriate course is to go through the difficult process,” said Nichols. Thursday. The judge said he intended to get a jury that “will be appropriate, fair and impartial.” While the judge allowed the trial to proceed, Nichols left open the possibility that letters about Trump waiving his privilege and Bannon’s offer to cooperate with the committee could be referred to in the trial, saying the information was “at least potentially relevant ” in defense of Bannon. Roscoe Howard Jr., a former U.S. attorney in Washington, said Bannon’s best case scenario was if information about his cooperation offer reached the jury. Even if he does, however, the claim that executive privilege prevented him from cooperating earlier will be a difficult argument because Bannon has refused to even respond to the subpoena, Howard said. “You must appear to plead the claim of privilege. You can’t phone it in,” he said.
This story has been corrected to make the next-to-last word “legislative” instead of “executive,” in the 12th paragraph, which begins “Bannon, 68
