Anurag Kumar
Peter Navarro, an employee in the Trump White House, was found guilty of contempt of Congress on Thursday for refusing to participate with a congressional inquiry into the attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
The verdict was reached following a brief trial for Navarro, who served as a White House trade adviser under President Donald Trump and subsequently promoted the Republican’s unfounded claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election he lost.
Navarro was the second Trump aide to face contempt of Congress accusations after former White House adviser Steve Bannon. Bannon was found guilty of two counts and sentenced to four months in prison, but he is currently free pending an appeal.
The sentencing of Navarro was set for January 12 by Judge Amit Mehta. In the federal courthouse in Washington, he was found guilty of two misdemeanor counts of contempt of Congress, each punishable by up to one year in prison.
Stanley Woodward, the defense attorney, moved for a mistrial, stating that the jurors had taken a break near where demonstrators and the media frequently congregate outside the courthouse and returned shortly thereafter with a verdict. Mehta stated that he would examine written arguments on the issue before rendering a decision.
Prosecutors alleged that Navarro behaved as if he were “above the law” when he disobeyed a subpoena for documents and a deposition issued by a House committee on January 6.
A defense counsel argued that Navarro did not ignore the House January 6 Committee on purpose. Woodward argued that Navarro instead instructed staff members to contact Trump about what might be protected by executive privilege, which did not occur.
A judge has ruled that the executive privilege argument is not a valid defense against the allegations, as Navarro was unable to demonstrate that Trump invoked the privilege. However, according to Woodward, prosecutors have not demonstrated that Navarro acted “willfully” or solely out of loyalty to Trump.
“Do we know that his failure to comply beyond reasonable doubt wasn’t the result of accident, inadvertence or mistake?” he said.
Prosecutors, though, said Navarro should have handed over what material he could and flagged any queries or documents believed to be protected under executive privilege. They stated that much of the requested information was already available to the public.
“Peter Navarro made a determination. “He chose not to comply with the congressional subpoena,” said prosecutor Elizabeth Aloi. “The defendant chose to pledge allegiance to former President Donald Trump over compliance with the subpoena.”
Trump confronts a federal indictment in Washington, D.C., and a state indictment in Georgia for his efforts to overturn Joe Biden’s 2020 election victory. He has refuted wrongdoing and stated that he acted lawfully.
ALSO READ : At least 27 dead, 1,600 homeless in Brazil storm as family seek aid.
In its final report, the House Jan. 6 committee concluded that President Trump engaged in a criminal “multi-part conspiracy” to overturn the legal results of the 2020 election and failed to prevent a mob of his supporters from assaulting the Capitol.
