Federal prosecutors want Steve Bannon, a former top aide to former President Donald Trump, to be sentenced to six months in prison for contempt of Congress, according to a recommendation presented Monday.
In addition to serving time, the government is seeking US$200,000 in fines.
“For his sustained and bad faith contempt of Congress, Defendant should be sentenced to six months in prison – the maximum limit in the Sentencing Guidelines – and fined $200,000 – based on his insistence on paying the maximum fine. rather than cooperating with the Parole Office’s routine pre-conviction financial investigation,” the prosecutors wrote in their court filing on Monday.
They said he had not fully complied with the parole office in its pre-sentence investigation, writing that Bannon “freely answered questions about his family, work life, personal background and health. But Defendant refused to disclose his financial records, insisting he is willing and able to pay any fine imposed, including the maximum fine on each conviction charge.”
Prosecutors added: “The rioters who stormed the Capitol on January 6 didn’t just attack one building — they attacked the rule of law on which this country was built and through which it endures. By disregarding the Select Committee’s subpoena and its authority, Defendant has exacerbated this attack.”
Bannon was found guilty by a jury in July of two counts of contempt of Congress. His sentence is set for Friday.
Bannon is seeking parole and is asking for the sentence to be delayed pending his appeal.
“The ear of a sentencing judge hears the note of contrition. Someone has been convicted. Did they learn their lesson? This case requires something more. It involves larger issues that are important to all Americans,” Bannon’s lawyers wrote in a court filing on Monday.
“Should a person who has spent a lifetime listening to experts — as a naval officer, investment banker, corporate executive and presidential adviser — be arrested for relying on the advice of their lawyers? Should a person be arrested where the prosecutor refused to prosecute others who were in a similar situation — with the only difference being that that person uses his or her voice to express strongly held political opinions? If the answer to any of these questions is no, then a sentence of parole is warranted.”
Prosecutors argued that, once subpoenaed, Bannon’s attorney approached an attorney for the former president to seek an assertion of executive privilege, “even if executive privilege could not allow for the defendant’s total breach.”
Bannon, the administration said, received a letter saying the privilege may be important, but that the letter did not order that any specific documents be withheld because Trump’s lawyer was not sure there were documents or inside information. The government added that the former president “did not believe that the defendant had immunity from testimony.”
Prosecutors also revealed that ahead of Bannon’s trial this summer, a last-minute offer to comply with the committee’s subpoena “had strings attached.”
“Namely, that it would require the committee and the government to agree that if the defendant complies with the subpoena, the government would defer and ultimately drop his trial,” according to the new document. The government obtained the information from an interview with a committee official on 7 October.
A lawyer for Bannon contacted the Jan. in the sentencing memorandum.
Bannon’s attorney, Evan Corcoran, spoke with the committee’s lead investigator, Tim Heaphy, asking if the committee would join Bannon’s attorney in a request to end the contempt trial if the client complied with the panel’s subpoena by providing documents and testimony. , Heaphy told FBI investigators in a volunteer interview last week.
Heaphy responded that Bannon’s team should contact prosecutors, but refused to agree to participate in either effort.
“My conclusion is that Bannon knows that this proposed continuation and final dismissal of his trial is probably not a good call, which led him to call us to explore support as leverage,” Heaphy wrote in an email to the team. of the House that was included in the conviction note.
“I hope the DOJ will not be receptive to this proposal, as it is guilty of the charged crime and cannot cure its guilt by subsequently serving the subpoena.”
Prosecutors wrote in the sentencing memo that Bannon’s attorney “made it clear that the defendant’s newfound cooperative spirit had its strings attached.”
“When his attempt at compensation failed, the defendant made no further attempts to cooperate with the Committee — talking a lot about his bad faith,” the Justice Department wrote.
The sentencing memo also provided new details about Bannon’s attorney Robert Costello’s interactions with Trump attorney Justin Clark over the past year. Costello wrote to the committee claiming that Trump was invoking executive privileges over Bannon’s testimony, citing a letter from Clark.
But Clark told Costello that the letter did not claim executive privilege for Bannon. Clark told federal investigators he was “upset” that Bannon’s attorney had “completely misrepresented” to the committee what he had told him, federal prosecutors said in the sentencing memo.
Clark wrote in an October 2021 email to Costello that the letter he sent “did not indicate that we believe there is immunity from testimony for your client. As I pointed out to you the other day, we don’t believe it exists. Now, you may have made a different determination. That is entirely your decision.”
Source: CNN Brasil
I’m James Harper, a highly experienced and accomplished news writer for World Stock Market. I have been writing in the Politics section of the website for over five years, providing readers with up-to-date and insightful information about current events in politics. My work is widely read and respected by many industry professionals as well as laymen.
