REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein
After presenting zero witnesses of their very own, Steve Bannon’s protection attorneys closed Friday by asking jurors to contemplate whether or not the rightwing podcaster actually meant to disregard a congressional subpoena—nevermind that Bannon repeatedly celebrated his personal defiance on the time on social media.
“What was Steve Bannon's intent?” protection lawyer Evan Cocoran requested. “Possibly Mr. Bannon ought to have taken a special route.”
In the meantime, federal prosecutors remained targeting a single level: He didn’t seem when ordered to by the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021 riot.
"This case will not be sophisticated, however it is vital. This can be a easy case a couple of man, that man, Steve Bannon, who did not present up," mentioned District of Columbia assistant U.S. lawyer Molly Gaston.
"He did not present up as a result of he didn't wish to present the January 6 Committee with paperwork. He didn't wish to reply its questions,” Gaston mentioned. “And when it actually comes all the way down to it, he didn't wish to acknowledge Congress' authority or play by the Authorities's guidelines.”
“Our authorities solely works if individuals present up,” she continued. “It solely works if individuals play by the foundations. And it solely works if individuals are held accountable when they don't. And on this specific case, when the defendant intentionally selected to defy a congressional subpoena that was a criminal offense.”
In maybe essentially the most damning proof proven to jurors, prosecutors pointed to posts Bannon made on his verified Gettr account wherein he shared two information tales about his refusal to indicate up and testify or ship paperwork.
"That is the defendant celebrating his defiance," Gaston mentioned.
Bannon’s authorized protection workforce spent most of their closing arguments merely casting doubt on essentially the most elemental components of the Division of Justice’s proof, at one level shocking your entire courtroom after they requested jurors to query whether or not Jan. 6 Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-MS) truly signed the paperwork that bears his signature—together with the subpoena. The weird transfer pressured U.S. District Choose Carl J. Nichols to spring into motion to keep away from risking a mistrial.
“It's essential to give Steve Bannon the good thing about the doubt,” Corcoran mentioned, citing “an inexpensive doubt as as to whether or not Chairman Thompson signed the subpoena.”
Corcoran began, “In the event you wonder if or not the subpoena is legit-”“Sidebar,” the decide interrupted, forcing attorneys to talk quietly to 1 one other.
When the Division of Justice made its ultimate message to the jurors, prosecutor Amanga Vaughn spoke plainly.
“You’re not lacking something. This isn't tough. This isn't laborious. There have been two witnesses as a result of this is so simple as it appears. Your eyes aren't deceiving you,” she mentioned. “How a lot clearer might the committee’s letters have been?”
Vaughn additionally took a shot straight at Bannon personally for ignoring the subpoena, infantilizing the rightwing media character who ended each court docket look with a fiery government-hating speech however wouldn’t even testify at trial.
“This is sort of a little one arguing with their mum or dad after they're grounded,” Vaughn mentioned. "That child is aware of they’re grounded. They will argue all they need. The choice has been made.”