Trump attorney Justin Clark says ex-president never bothered to claim executive privileges for Steve Bannon

Donald Trump’s attorney has blasted a huge hole in Steve Bannon’s claims that he was covered by executive privileges when he refused to testify before the special committee on Jan. 6 – dramatically raising the stakes in his upcoming contempt of congress trial Has.

Bannon has since last October refused to comply with a subpoena from the House panel investigating the January 6 pro-Trump uprising, which led to the criminal charges against him. But his attorney, Bob Costello, announced Sunday night that Bannon would appear after receiving a letter from the former president promising to give up executive privileges so his former White House aide could, in theory, set the record straight .

In a bombshell revelation in the early hours of Monday, DC prosecutors announced that Trump’s attorney, Justin Clark, was questioned by the FBI on June 29 and confirmed that Trump had never invoked executive branch privilege to put Bannon on the prevent statement.

In addition, they argued in a motion filed in US District Court for the District of Columbia that discussion of Bannon’s last minute coming to Jesus should be excluded from this criminal trial when it begins next Monday.

In his January 6 hearings with the committee regarding the executive privilege claim, Bannon’s attorney Costello referred to a letter from Clark to support his claim for executive privilege. But according to the court filing, written by Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Vaughn, Clark not only confirmed the privilege was never exercised, but said Costello “misrepresented” what Clark told him and he cleared Bannon’s attorney made that this was not the basis for non-compliance with the subpoena.

Vaughn noted that an FBI report on the interview was provided to Bannon the following day, June 30.

“Defendant’s timing suggests the only thing that has really changed since he refused to comply with the subpoena in October 2021 is that he is finally about to face the consequences of his decision.” to default,” Vaughn wrote.

She added: “Even the defendant’s claim that the reason he is now willing to testify is because the former President ‘waives’ executive privilege is, given all the evidence and legislation addressed in this case, to question, of which he must be aware and show that the prerogative of management has never provided a basis for outright non-compliance,” he added.

Vaughn’s motion was formally presented to the court on behalf of Michael Graves, who was sworn in as US Attorney for DC last November and tasked with overseeing hundreds of separate Jan. 6 investigations. Just a week later, Graves signed the explosive indictment against Bannon.

Bannon’s trial is scheduled to begin next Monday, and prosecutors want the court to preempt “any evidence or argument” related to Bannon’s last-minute claim that he was now ready to testify.

The broader implications of Clark’s responses in the FBI interview go well beyond the Bannon case — and once again call into question Trump’s own veracity, particularly in light of his flowery letter to Bannon on Saturday, in which he offered to formally relinquish executive privileges, which had never been asserted before .

The prosecutors’ memo went on to say that Costello, a longtime Trump attorney whose name was allegedly removed from the Mueller report, also worked for the former president and that his law firm is paid for by Trump’s super PAC.

“All of the circumstances described above suggest that the defendant’s sudden desire to testify is not a genuine attempt to honor his obligations, but a last-ditch attempt to evade accountability,” the memo concluded.