News

(WASHINGTON) — The House Jan. 6 committee’s second prime-time hearing focused on what it said was then-President Donald Trump’s “187 minutes” of inaction — from the time he left the rally at the Ellipse, to then watching the attack on the U.S. Capitol on TV at the White House until he finally called on his violent supporters to go home.

Here is how the hearing unfolded:

Jul 21, 10:55 PM EDT
Cheney asks: Can Trump ever be trusted to hold power again?

Rep. Liz Cheney, one of two Republicans on the committee, criticized Trump for “preying” on the patriotism of his supporters by lying to them about the 2020 election. His conduct on Jan. 6, she said, was “indefensible.”

“In our hearing tonight, you saw an American president faced with a stark and unmistakable choice between right and wrong. There was no ambiguity, no nuance. Donald Trump made a purposeful choice to violate his oath of office, to ignore the ongoing violence against law enforcement, to threaten our constitutional order. There is no way to excuse that behavior,” she said.

“And every American must consider this: can a president who is willing to make the choices Donald Trump made during the violence of Jan. 6 ever be trusted with any position of authority in our great nation again?” she asked.

Jul 21, 10:46 PM EDT
Cheney thanks witnesses for their testimony

In her closing statements, committee vice chair Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., acknowledged the testimony from dozens of Republican witnesses throughout its investigation.

“The case against Donald Trump in these hearings is not made by witnesses who were his political enemies,” she said. “It was, instead, a series of confessions by Donald Trump’s own appointees.”

That included those who served Trump loyally for years and his own family members, she said.

She thanked the witnesses — including ex-staffers Sarah Matthews, Matthew Pottinger and Cassidy Hutchinson — for their bravery in speaking out publicly before millions of Americans.

“[Hutchinson] knew all along that she would be attacked by President Trump and by the 50-, 60- and 70-year-old men who hide themselves behind executive privilege,” Cheney said.

Jul 21, 10:38 PM EDT
Trump’s conduct on Jan. 6 a ‘supreme violation’ of his oath: Kinzinger

Rep. Adam Kinzinger said one area where all Americans must agree is on Trump’s behavior on Jan. 6.

“Whatever your politics, whatever you think about the outcome of the election, we as Americans must all agree on this: Donald Trump’s conduct on Jan. 6 was a supreme violation of his oath of office and a complete dereliction of his duty to our nation,” the Illinois Republican said.

“It is a stain on our history,” Kinzinger continued. “It is a dishonor to all those who have sacrificed and died in service our democracy.”

Jul 21, 10:35 PM EDT
Trump in Jan. 7 statement outtakes: ‘I don’t want to say the election is over’

The House select committee shared never-before-seen raw footage of outtakes from former President Donald Trump’s recorded message on Jan. 7, in which he “still could not say that the election was over,” Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., said.

“This election is now over. Congress has certified the results,” Trump starts to say, then adding, “I don’t want to say the election is over.”

“I just want to say Congress has certified the results, without saying the election is over, OK?” he continues.

Trump had refused to record the address for hours, Luria said, but ultimately relented “because of concerns that he might be removed from power by threats of the 25th Amendment.”

The 25th Amendment lays out the procedures for replacing the president in the event of death, removal, resignation or incapacitation.

Jul 21, 10:11 PM EDT
Panel airs new footage of urgent call between congressional leaders, defense secretary

Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., introduced what she called “never-before-seen” photos and videos of what lawmakers were doing during the attack.

Congressional leaders called then-acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller at 4:45 p.m. that day to regain control of the Capitol.

“We’re not going to let these people keep us from finishing our business,” GOP Sen. Mitch McConnell can be heard saying in a huddle of lawmakers. “So, we need you to get the building cleared, give us the okay so that we can go back in session and finish the peoples’ business as soon as possible.”

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., then asked Miller if he agreed with one assessment that it was going to take “several days” to secure the area. Miller disagreed, stating it would take four to five hours.

At one point, Schumer, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Majority Steny Hoyer grouped together taking a phone call about securing the Capitol.

Jul 21, 10:03 PM EDT
Trump went off-script in never-before-seen footage of Rose Garden message

When President Trump recorded his message in the Rose Garden more than three hours after rioters stormed the Capitol, he went “off the cuff,” according to committee testimony.

“His staff had prepared a script for him to read, but he refused to use it,” Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., said.

The prepared script said, “NO ONE should be using violence or threats of violence to express themselves. Especially at the U.S. Capitol.”

The committee shared raw footage from the recording, in which Trump told his supporters, “We love you. You’re very special,” while urging them to go home.

The committee juxtaposed the filming of this message with footage of the heavy violence still occurring on the Capitol at that moment.

Jul 21, 9:53 PM EDT
Kushner testifies that a ‘scared’ Kevin McCarthy asked for help during riot

Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and White House adviser, told the committee in taped deposition that House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy wanted help to stop the violence as rioters breached the U.S. Capitol building.

Kushner said McCarthy told him it was “getting really ugly.”

“He was scared, yes,” Kushner said of McCarthy’s state of mind during their call.

The committee also discussed a tense phone call between Trump and McCarthy where Trump alleged it was Antifa at the Capitol — an allegation that’s been debunked by FBI Director Chris Wray and other intelligence officials. McCarthy told Trump it was “your people” and told him to call them off.

Jul 21, 9:40 PM EDT
Donald Trump Jr. texted that his father needed to ‘condemn’ riot

Text messages displayed by the committee show Donald Trump Jr. thought more needed to be done by his father besides his two tweets calling on rioters to “stay peaceful” even though violence had already begun.

Trump Jr. texted chief of staff Mark Meadows the message: “He’s got to condemn this sh**. Asap. The capitol police tweet isn’t enough.”

When Meadows responded that he was pushing hard for Trump to do so, Trump Jr. told him: “go to the mattresses.” “They will try to f*** his entire legacy on this if it gets worse,” Trump Jr. added.

Fox News personality Sean Hannity also texted Meadows to get Trump to instruct the mob to peacefully leave.

Sarah Matthews, the former deputy press secretary, testified White House staff had to ask several times for the president to include the word “peaceful” in his tweet on Jan. 6. She said it wasn’t until Ivanka Trump said “stay peaceful” that he decided to include it.

Jul 21, 9:22 PM EDT
Witnesses react to Trump ‘courage’ tweet on Pence: ‘Fuel being poured on the fire’

The House select committee highlighted strong reaction to a tweet by former President Trump about his vice president amid the riot.

“Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands the truth!” the tweet, posted at 2:24 p.m. on Jan. 6, stated.

“He put a target on his own vice president’s back,” Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., said after sharing the message.

Witness Matthew Pottinger, a deputy national security adviser, said it was in that moment that he decided to resign.

“It looked like fuel being poured on the fire,” he told the committee. “I did not want to be associated with the events that were unfolding on the Capitol.”

Witness and ex-staffer Sarah Matthews, who served as deputy press secretary, said she thought the tweet “was the last thing that was needed in that moment” from Trump.

“He should have been telling these people to go home, and to leave, and to condemn the violence that we were seeing,” she said. “For him to tweet out the message about Mike Pence, it was him pouring gasoline on the fire, and making it much worse.”

Jul 21, 9:32 PM EDT
Committee shows Hawley’s raised fist, then video of him fleeing

In a moment that’s resonated from Thursday’s hearing, the committee shared a photo of Missouri GOP Sen. Josh Hawley walking across the Capitol before protesters who had started to gather at the security gates.

“As you can see in this photo, he raised his fist, in solidarity, with the protesters,” Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., said.

Luria said a Capitol police told the committee that the gesture “riled up the crowd.”

“It bothered her greatly because he was doing it in a safe space, protected by the officers and the barriers,” Luria said.

The committee then showed footage of Hawley, who had voted against certifying the results of the election, later fleeing “after those protesters he helped to rile up stormed the Capitol,” Luria said.

Jul 22, 9:14 PM EDT
Secret Service agents began to ‘fear for their own lives’: Witness

The Jan. 6 committee played new audio of Secret Service radio traffic as the attack occurred.

The traffic indicated that officers were very concerned about safely evacuating Vice President Mike Pence after the Capitol was breached.

“If we lose any more time, we may lose the ability to leave. So, if we’re going to leave, we need to do it now,” one agent is heard saying.

An unidentified White House security official said in chilling testimony that members of Pence’s detail “were starting to fear for their own lives.”

“There were calls to say goodbye to family members,” the official said in a recorded interview. “Whatever the reason was on the ground, the DCPD (D.C. police department) felt that it was going to be very ugly.”

Jul 21, 8:57 PM EDT
White House logs show Trump did not make calls to issue orders

White House logs showed that former President Donald Trump “did not call to issue orders,” according to Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va.

Senior law enforcement officials, military leaders, members of former Vice President Mike Pence’s staff and D.C. government officials that the committee interviewed also said they did not hear from Trump that day, Luria said.

Call logs shown during the hearing indicated that Trump did not make any calls between 11:04 a.m and 6:54 p.m. that day.

Kayleigh McEnany, former White House press secretary, testified for the committee that Trump did want a list of senators to call.

“He was calling senators, to encourage them to delay, or object, the certification,” Luria said.

Jul 21, 8:54 PM EDT
Pat Cipollone describes effort to have Trump make a ‘strong’ statement

Former White House counsel Pat Cipollone told the committee he and other officials attempted to push Trump to make a strong statement condemning the violence almost immediately.

“I think it was pretty clear there needed to be an immediate and forceful response, statement, public statement, that people needed to leave the Capitol now,” Cipollone said in a taped deposition.

Ivanka Trump, White House lawyer, Eric Herschmann and then-chief of staff Mark Meadows all felt the same, Cipollone testified.

Cipollone said it would’ve been “possible” for Trump to go to the White House briefing room to make a statement at any time. Sarah Matthews, the deputy press secretary at the time, testified live that it would have taken “probably less than 60 seconds” for Trump to go to the briefing room from his position in the dining room off the Oval Office.

Jul 21, 8:45 PM EDT
Witness confirms ‘heated’ exchange in Trump’s SUV on Jan. 6

Rep. Elaine Luria said that there is “evidence from multiple sources regarding an angry exchange in the presidential SUV” confirming Cassidy Hutchinson’s previous bombshell testimony.

Hutchinson told the committee on June 28 that a member of Trump’s security detail told her the president tried to grab the steering wheel as he demanded to join his supporters after his speech at the Ellipse. His team ultimately refused the request.

Sgt. Mark Robinson, a retired member of the Metropolitan Police Department responsible for the motorcade that day, told the committee he heard a similar description of what took place inside the vehicle.

“The description I received was the president was upset and was adamant about going to the Capitol, and there was a heated discussion about that,” Robinson said in a videotaped interview.

Jul 21, 8:27 PM EDT
Trump ‘chose not to act’ during attack: Kinzinger

Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., attempted to explain Trump’s behavior on Jan. 6, when it took him several hours to respond to the riot.

“The mob was accomplishing President Trump’s purpose, so of course he didn’t intervene,” Kinzinger said, noting the congressional certification of Joe Biden’s victory was delayed for hours due to the violence.

“Here’s what will be clear by the end of this hearing,” Kinzinger said. “President Trump did not fail to act during the 187 minutes between leaving the Ellipse and telling the mob to go home. He chose not to act.”

Jul 21, 8:29 PM EDT
Cheney swears in witnesses

Committee vice chair Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., has sworn in the hearing’s witnesses — ex-staffers Matthew Pottinger, who was a member of the National Security Council, and Sarah Matthews, who served as deputy press secretary.

Both witnesses, seen as Trump White House insiders and supporters, resigned from their positions on Jan. 6 in the wake of the riot.

Jul 21, 8:11 PM EDT
Vice Chair Liz Cheney gavels in hearing, committee to reconvene in September

Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., gaveled in the committee around 8 p.m. as Chairman Bennie Thompson participates virtually after testing positive for COVID-19.

Cheney, the committee’s vice chair, will preside over the hearing. Thompson said she will be responsible for maintaining order and swearing in witnesses.

Thompson also gave a preview of what’s in store tonight as the committee analyzes Trump’s response to the attack as it unfolded on Jan. 6, 2021.

“For 187 minutes, this man of destructive energy could not be moved,” Thompson said of Trump. “He could not be moved to rise from his dining room table, and walk the few steps down to the press room.”

Thompson said the committee’s work won’t stop here, stating it will reconvene in September.

Jul 21, 7:59 PM EDT
Bennie Thompson will chair the committee remotely after contracting COVID-19

Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., will chair the committee remotely after testing positive for COVID-19. He announced his diagnosis on Monday.

“Gratefully, I am fully vaccinated and boosted,” he said at the time. “I am continuing to follow CDC guidelines and will be isolating for the next several days.”

Jul 21, 7:56 PM EDT
Hearing expected to show outtakes from Trump’s Jan. 7 message

During Thursday’s hearing, the House select committee is expected to show outtakes from former President Donald Trump’s recorded message delivered on Jan. 7, in which he condemned the attack on the Capitol and pledged a “seamless transition of power.”

But sources familiar with their contents tell ABC News that Trump had to be pressured to condemn the attack, taking about an hour to record this message: “The demonstrators who infiltrated the Capitol have defiled the seat of American democracy. To those who engaged in the acts of violence and destruction, you do not represent our country.”

Sources say Trump argued with aides as the statement was being written and wanted to call the attackers patriots. — ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl

Jul 21, 7:45 PM EDT
Rep. Aguilar: ‘Our responsibility is to find the truth’

Just ahead of Thursday’s hearing, committee member Rep. Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., said Americans can expect to learn “exactly what was happening” on Jan. 6 from when former President Donald Trump left his rally to his address in the Rose Garden three hours later.

“Where was the president at? Who was talking to him? What was he saying?” Aguilar told anchor Linsey Davis on ABC News Live Prime. “Those are the types of details that we want to get to, because while the Capitol was being overrun and law enforcement officers were providing the last line of defense to save democracy, I think it’s important that the American public knows what was going on at the White House.”

Aguilar said the hearing will also address Trump’s statements on social media the day after the attack.

“The statements and addresses that he made on Jan. 6 and Jan. 7 are both important to his state of mind at the time and what he was willing to say and more importantly, what he wasn’t willing to say,” he said.

Aguilar said the committee continues to receive investigative material that may come out.

“To the extent that we need to share that with the American public, we plan to do that,” he said. “Our responsibility is to find the truth here. And that’s what we plan to do.”

Jul 21, 7:25 PM EDT
Bannon on trial for defying House select committee subpoena

As the House select committee’s last scheduled session gets underway, Steve Bannon, a former top political adviser in Donald Trump’s White House, is currently on trial for defying a subpoena in connection with its investigation.

Bannon was subpoenaed by the Jan. 6 panel for records and testimony and ultimately charged with two counts of criminal contempt of Congress.

His defense attorney, David Schoen, said in court Thursday that Bannon wanted to testify but decided not to based on the advice of his attorney at the time, who reportedly told Bannon that “executive privilege had been invoked and he was not permitted by law to comply with the subpoena.”

The House committee and federal prosecutors have said the executive privilege claims never covered Bannon, since the insurrection occurred long after he left his post as chief White House strategist in 2017.

Ahead of the contempt trial, Bannon had said he would be willing to testify in a live, public hearing.

Closing arguments and jury instructions in the trial are planned for Friday morning.

Jul 21, 7:07 PM EDT
Criminal probe opened into Secret Service’s deleted Jan. 6 messages

A revelation about deleted text messages by the Secret Service is looming large over Thursday’s hearing.

The House committee subpoenaed the agency earlier this month for text messages sent on Jan. 5 and Jan. 6, 2021. But the agency said most of those records were lost in a planned data migration.

So far, the Secret Service has provided a single text exchange to the Department of Homeland Security inspector general investigating the agency’s record-keeping, according to an agency letter to the House Jan. 6 committee obtained by ABC News on Wednesday.

The committee is suggesting the Secret Service broke federal records keeping laws. Hours before the hearing, news broke that the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general has turned the inquiry into a criminal investigation.

Jul 21, 6:45 PM EDT
Kinzinger: Trump was ‘derelict in his duty’ to try to stop mob

The House select committee plans to focus Thursday night’s hearing on what it says was Trump’s dereliction of duty to act to stop the insurrection.

“It’s obvious the president was derelict in his duty, but for all the details you have to watch,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., who is co-leading the hearing, told ABC Congressional Correspondent Rachel Scott.

Jul 21, 6:37 PM EDT
Kinzinger previews testimony about Trump watching Capitol attack on television

Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., on Thursday morning teased snippets of depositions previewing testimony from Kayleigh McEnany, former press secretary; Ret. Lt. Gen. Keith Kellog, then-national security adviser to Vice President Mike Pence; Molly Michael, Trump’s former executive assistant; and Pat Cipollone, the White House counsel at the time.

In the montage, the former White House officials recall how Trump was in the private dining room off the Oval Office watching television as the violence unfolded.

“To the best of my recollection, he was always in the dining room” McEnany said in her deposition.

Jul 21, 5:53 PM EDT
Former White House staffers to testify about resigning in protest

Two former White House aides are expected to testify before the committee on Thursday, sources previously confirmed to ABC News.

Those ex-staffers are Sarah Matthews, who served as deputy press secretary, and Matthew Pottinger, who was deputy national security adviser. Both resigned from their positions after the pro-Trump mob stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

At the committee’s June 16 hearing, a clip from Matthews’ prior testimony was played in which she described what it was like on the White House press team as the insurrection unfolded. She said that Trump’s tweet attacking then-Vice President Mike Pence during the attack “felt like he was pouring gasoline on the fire.”

 

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The House Jan. 6 select committee used its second prime-time hearing Thursday to make the case that President Donald Trump not only did nothing to stop the assault on the U.S. Capitol but did so because he wanted it to succeed.

Chairman Bennie Thompson, leading off the hearing remotely as he recovers from COVID-19, called for accountability at every level of what the committee has described as Trump’s “attempted coup.”

The panel detailed the 187 minutes that passed between Trump’s speech at the Ellipse and his taped statement telling his supporters still storming the Capitol to leave.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., said Trump didn’t move to immediately discourage rioters because they were carrying out his plot to delay the congressional certification of Joe Biden’s electoral victory.

“President Trump did not fail to act during the 187 minutes between leaving the Ellipse and telling the mob to go home,” Kinzinger said. “He chose not to act.”

Former White House officials — including live witnesses Sarah Matthews and Matthew Pottinger — painted a picture of Trump sitting in a private dining room off the Oval Office watching the events unravel on television while the mob closed in on Vice President Mike Pence and congressional lawmakers.

Here are some key takeaways:

Trump resisted pressure to take action, watching the riot on TV instead

Former White House officials described Trump, after his Jan. 6 speech at the Ellipse, spending three hours in the private dining room off the Oval Office simply watching the attack on the Capitol on television while making calls to supportive senators.

Then-White House counsel Pat Cipollone said he was among several officials — including Ivanka Trump — who pushed for Trump to quickly make a “strong” statement to tamp down the violence shortly after it broke out.

Matthews, a deputy press secretary at the time, told lawmakers Thursday that it would’ve taken “less than 60 seconds” for Trump to leave the dining room and make a statement at the briefing room — but he declined.

Text messages sent by Donald Trump Jr. to chief of staff Mark Meadows showed Trump’s son also thought his father should “condemn” the attack as soon as possible.

He finally taped a statement issued at 4:17 p.m., calling on his supporters to end the attack, but also telling them, “We love you. You’re very special.”

The committee juxtaposed the time of that statement with video of heavy violence continuing at the Capitol.

White House reaction to Trump ‘courage’ tweet on Pence

An incendiary tweet by former President Trump about his vice president amid the riot was a pivotal moment for the live witnesses. The tweet, sent at 2:24 p.m. at the height of the riot, said Pence “didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done.”

Pottinger said it was in that moment that he decided to resign.

“It looked like fuel being poured on the fire,” he told the committee. “I did not want to be associated with the events that were unfolding on the Capitol.”

Matthews said she thought the tweet “was the last thing that was needed in that moment” from Trump.

“He should have been telling these people to go home, and to leave, and to condemn the violence that we were seeing,” she said. “For him to tweet out the message about Mike Pence, it was him pouring gasoline on the fire, and making it much worse.”

Rep. Elaine Luria, D-Va., characterized Trump’s tweet as putting a “target on his own vice president’s back.”

Secret Service agents feared for their lives, witness recalls

The public heard new audio of Secret Service radio traffic from the attack indicating officers were very concerned about safely evacuating Pence as rioters made their way into the building.

“If we lose any more time, we may lose the ability to leave,” one agent said over the radio. “So, if we’re going to leave, we need to do it now.”

An unidentified White House security official, whose voice was distorted to hide the person’s identity, provided a chilling detail that members of Pence’s detail “were starting to fear for their own lives.”

“There were calls to say goodbye to family members,” the official said in a recorded interview.

Trump outtakes: ‘I don’t want to say the election is over’

The committee revealed never-before-seen raw footage of outtakes from a message Trump recorded a day after the Capitol attack — on Jan. 7 — that showed, the committee said, that even after everything that happened, Trump insisted on sticking to the “big lie.”

“This election is now over. Congress has certified the results,” Trump starts to say, reading off a teleprompter. He then stops to say, “I don’t want to say the election is over.”

“I just want to say Congress has certified the results, without saying the election is over, OK?” he continues.

Trump had refused to record the address for hours, Luria said, but ultimately relented “because of concerns that he might be removed from power by threats of the 25th Amendment.”

The 25th Amendment lays out the procedures for replacing the president in the event of death, removal, resignation or incapacitation.

Cheney says Trump can’t be trusted

Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., concluded the hearing with a central question as rumors swirl about a Trump comeback in 2024.

The former president was given a choice between right and wrong on Jan. 6, Cheney argued, and his behavior was “indefensible.”

“Every American must consider this: can a president who is willing to make the choices Donald Trump made during the violence of Jan. 6 ever be trusted with any position of authority in our great nation again?” she asked.

The committee’s work isn’t over

While the committee’s hearing on Thursday was its last scheduled proceeding, Thompson and Cheney emphasized that the panel’s work isn’t over.

“Doors have opened, new subpoenas have been issued and the dam has begun to break,” Cheney said.

The panel said it has received an abundance of information since the hearings began in early June, and will continue to collect evidence through the month of August when Congress is on recess. They said the committee will reconvene in September.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The focus of the House Jan. 6 committee’s second prime-time hearing will be what it says was then-President Donald Trump’s “187 minutes” of inaction — from the time he left the rally at the Ellipse, then watching the attack on the U.S. Capitol from the White House until he finally called on his violent supporters to go home.

Please check back for updates. All times Eastern.
Jul 21, 5:53 PM EDT
Former White House staffers to testify about resigning in protest

Two former White House aides are expected to testify before the committee on Thursday, sources previously confirmed to ABC News.

Those ex-staffers are Sarah Matthews, who served as deputy press secretary, and Matthew Pottinger, who was deputy national security adviser. Both resigned from their positions after the pro-Trump mob stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

At the committee’s June 16 hearing, a clip from Matthews’ prior testimony was played in which she described what it was like on the White House press team as the insurrection unfolded. She said that Trump’s tweet attacking then-Vice President Mike Pence during the attack “felt like he was pouring gasoline on the fire.”

 

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Senate Democrats on Thursday unveiled their long-awaited marijuana legalization proposal, announcing sweeping legislation that would lift the federal prohibition on the drug and cede power to states to determine how to regulate it.

The Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act, championed by Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., looks to legalize marijuana at the federal level while creating FDA monitoring requirements like those that already exist for tobacco and alcohol.

“Cannabis legalization has proven immensely successful at the state level, so it is time that Congress catches up with the rest of the country,” Schumer said in floor remarks Thursday. “I am proud to be the first Majority Leader ever to say that it is time to end the federal prohibition on cannabis, and this bill provides the best framework for updating our cannabis laws and reversing decades of harm inflicted by the war on drugs.”

Schumer did not announce next steps on the legislation or whether he will attempt to bring it up for further consideration on the Senate floor, though he said he hopes to get something done on marijuana “this year”.

Voter support for legalization is growing. According to April reporting by 538, a majority of registered voters in all 50 states now favor making cannabis legal. Eighteen states, plus Washington, D.C., have legalized the recreational use of marijuana for those over 21.

“I’d ask my colleagues in the Senate to think long and hard about what keeping the federal government stuck in yesteryear means for public health and safety,” Wyden said in a statement. “By failing to act, the federal government is empowering the illicit cannabis market, it’s ruining lives and propping up deeply rooted racism in our criminal justice system, it’s holding back small cannabis businesses from growing and creating jobs in their communities. Cannabis legalization is here, and Congress needs to get with the program.”

But Congress may not be as ready for a federal change. If Schumer does try to move the legislation forward it faces an uphill battle in the Senate. At least 10 Republicans would need to support the measure for it to pass, and not all Democrats would necessarily back it either.

Still, proponents of the legislation say the simple introduction of the bill is a step in the right direction.

“I’m very excited about this day, but it also now gives us momentum to get something done,” Booker said, noting that the bill sponsors are looking for the best path to move the legislation forward.

“I want to stress that this is the beginning of the legislative process, not the end. We are going to work hard to create support for our bill, and I hope we can make more progress towards cannabis reform in the future,” Schumer said.

Lawmakers first introduced a discussion draft of the bill last summer after Schumer branded legalization as a legislative priority for Democrats. Over 1,800 comments later, the senators unveiled a bill today that aims to attend to concerns among both Democrats and Republicans about regulating marijuana.

The bill includes a host of pubic safety measures and regulations, modifies tax policy on marijuana, requires additional federal research on the impact of marijuana use and removes drug testing for federal workers in most cases.

But anti-legalization advocates fear the newly-introduced legislation does not do enough to regulate potency of cannabis, and could pose a threat to children who might be more easily able to access the legalized drug. Randi Schuster, an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School at the Center for Addiction Medicine, said at a press conference Thursday that the legislation does not do enough to set limits on products that might be appealing to kids and teens.

“We are in a position where policy has far outpaced the science, and making public policy decisions that are not aligned with science poses risk for quite a serious health concern,” Schuster said.

Critical for proponents, the Democratic proposal also focuses on racial equity. It aims to rectify harm caused by previous federal drug restrictions that have disproportionately impacted communities of color by expunging federal cannabis convictions from records and expanding access to loans and business licenses for those impacted by former federal drug policy.

“This is a comprehensive bill to right a lot of wrongs,” Booker said Thursday. “It’s a really solid restorative justice bill, opens up our nation to extraordinary economic opportunity, would create a tremendous amount of jobs, and would again correct the scales of justice.”

But Kevin Sabet, a former White House adviser for three different administrations, said Thursday he has concerns that the equity proposals aren’t enforceable. Sabet, now the president and CEO of SAM (Smart Approaches to Marijuana), an anti-legalization organization, said legalization could create another dangerous industry like “big alcohol” or “big tobacco.”

“This idea that we are going to turn people who would be poor selling marijuana on the street into successful marijuana millionaires is a dream,” Sabet said. “The idea that we are going to now get it finally right when it comes to marijuana, and everything else we’re going to let go the same but it’s going to change a lot because we’re going to give a few social equity licenses when it comes to marijuana, is a joke.”

The NAACP has previously called for legalization measures that include equal access to business licenses in the marijuana industry.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Steve Bannon, who served as former President Donald Trump’s chief strategist before departing the White House in August 2017, is on trial for defying a subpoena from the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Bannon was subpoenaed by the Jan. 6 panel for records and testimony in September of last year.

After the House of Representatives voted to hold him in contempt for defying the subpoena, the Justice Department in November charged Bannon with two counts of criminal contempt of Congress, setting up this week’s trial.

Here is how the news is developing. All times are Eastern.

Jul 21, 3:05 PM EDT
Defense rests its case after telling judge they were ‘stymied’

The defense has rested its case and the jury has been sent home for the day, with closing arguments and jury instructions planned for Friday morning.

“Your honor, the defense rests,” Bannon’s attorney Evan Corcoran said before the jury was dismissed for the day.

The move comes after defense attorney David Schoen told Judge Carl Nichols that Bannon was never able to mount a full defense in the trial because the judge limited the types of arguments the defense could make, and because the defense had been unable to question members of the Jan. 6 committee rather than just a staffer.

The defense especially wanted to question committee chairman Bennie Thompson, who signed the subpoena at issue and then referred the case to the Justice Department for prosecution.

“Our view is we’ve been badly stymied in bringing a defense in this case,” Schoen said. Bannon, he said, has been “handcuffed and not able to explain his story of the case.”

Nichols disputed the characterization, telling Schoen that he has simply been following the law in deciding what should be allowed at trial.

Jul 21, 12:49 PM EDT
Attorneys argue over whether subpoena dates were ‘in flux’

In asking the judge to acquit Bannon of the charges against him, defense attorney Evan Corcoran said of the prosecution, “They have not presented evidence upon which a reasonable person could find beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Bannon is guilty of the charges of contempt of Congress.”

Regarding the deadline for Bannon to comply with the subpoena, Corcoran said that “it was clear” from the testimony of Jan. 6 committee staffer Kirstin Amerling that “the dates were in flux … but even the dates in the subpoena, she was unable to identify why those dates were in the subpoena at all. She was unable to identify who put those dates in the subpoena. And that’s a critical issue.”

Corcoran also argued that the indictment claims Bannon didn’t provide documents “by Oct. 18, 2021” — but the deadline on the subpoena itself was Oct. 7, 2021, a different date.

“In our view, the return date is either the date on the subpoena, or it’s open” — all of which shows “this was an ongoing negotiation,” Corcoran said.

In response, prosecutor Amanda Vaughn said, “The reasons for the dates are irrelevant.”

“The dates are on the subpoena,” Vaughn said. “The committee made clear in its letters to the defendant that those were the dates and that he had violated them, and the evidence is clear that he did not provide documents by Oct. 7 and did not come for his deposition on Oct. 14.”

The government “has provided sufficient evidence” of his guilt, and letters from the time and posts to Bannon’s social media “made clear” that he did not intend to comply, she said.

Jul 21, 12:13 PM EDT
Defense says no witnesses, including Bannon, will take the stand

At the start of the third day of testimony Thursday morning, the defense team in the contempt case against Steve Bannon said in court that they do not plan to call any witnesses to the stand — including Bannon himself — and instead asked the judge to dismiss the case.

“The jury has now heard all the evidence it is going to hear,” U.S. District Court Judge Carl Nichols subsequently announced.

The move came after the defense team asked the judge to acquit Bannon and rule that the government had not presented enough evidence to warrant continuing the trial.

In making its argument for acquittal, the defense said one of the government’s two witnesses “didn’t add much,” so it’s “really a one-witness case.”

The judge said he wouldn’t rule on the motion for acquittal yet.

Jul 20, 6:18 PM EDT
Bannon again rails at Thompson as he leaves courthouse

For the second day in a row, Bannon blasted Jan. 6 committee Chairman Bennie Thompson on his way out of court at the end of the day.

“Does he really have COVID?” said Bannon of the chairman, who announced Tuesday that he had tested positive for COVID-19.

“What are the odds that a guy that is vaxxed, boosted and double boosted, following Dr. Fauci’s recommendation — what are the odds, on the very day this trial starts, he comes up with COVID?” Bannon said of Thompson’s absence as a witness in his trial.

“Why is Bennie Thompson not here?” Bannon repeated.

-Laura Romero and Soo Rin Kim

Jul 20, 5:55 PM EDT
FBI agent details Bannon’s social posts about subpoena before government rests its case

After just two witnesses, the government rested its case against Steve Bannon.

FBI agent Stephen Hart, the prosecution’s second witness, spent less than an hour on the stand.

Hart spent much of time testifying about Bannon’s page on the social media platform Gettr, which Hart described as “similar to Twitter.”

Prosecutor Molly Gaston showed that on Sept. 24, 2021, the day that Bannon’s subpoena was received by his then-attorney, Robert Costello, Bannon’s Gettr page posted a link to a Rolling Stone article with the words, “The Bannon Subpoena Is Just the Beginning. Congress’s Jan. 6 Investigation is Going Big.” Then on Oct. 8, 2021, the day after he was supposed to produce records to the Jan. 6 committee, Bannon’s Gettr page posted a link to a Daily Mail article with the words, “Steve Bannon tells the January 6 select committee that he will NOT comply with their subpoena.”

The Gettr post included images of Bannon, Trump, and a letter from Costello.

The materials prompted a debate over whether the posts were made by Bannon himself or by someone with access to his account, and whether those were Bannon’s own words or the media outlets’ words.

Gaston then had Hart read from the Daily Mail article, which quoted Bannon as telling the Daily Mail, “I stand with Trump and the Constitution.”

“Those are his words,” Gaston said of Bannon.

Hart also testified about a November 2021 videoconference he and prosecutors had with Costello after Costello requested the meeting to try to convince prosecutors not to pursue the contempt case against Bannon.

Hart testified that during that meeting, Costello told them that by Oct. 7, 2021, the deadline to produce documents, “they had not gathered any documents by that point.” Costello also had no other reason for Bannon’s refusal to comply other than executive privilege, Hart said.

Hart also testified that Costello, in the meeting, did not suggest they thought the deadlines were flexible, or that they were negotiating for a different date, or that Bannon would comply if the committee set different deadlines.

At one point, Corcoran tried to remind jurors that many lawmakers didn’t support the resolution to find Bannon in contempt of Congress. On cross examination, he asked Hart about the investigative steps Hart took in this case, asking him, “Did you interview … the 200-plus members of Congress who voted not to refer Steven Bannon to the U.S. Attorney’s office for contempt of Congress?”

Gaston objected, and the judge agreed, so Corcoran moved on.

Prosecutor Amanda Vaughn subsequently stood up and told the judge, “Your honor, the government rests.”

Court will reconvene on Thursday morning.

Jul 20, 4:39 PM EDT
Defense says Bannon was in ongoing negotiations with committee

As his cross-examination of Jan. 6 committee staffer Kirstin Amerling wrapped up, defense attorney Evan Corcoran continued to frame Bannon’s noncompliance with the subpoena as happening at a time when Bannon’s attorney was still in negotiations with the committee.

Amerling, however, testified that Bannon wasn’t in negotiations because there was nothing to negotiate — Trump hadn’t actually asserted executive privilege, Amerling said, so there was no outstanding issue to resolve. And she said that the committee had made clear to Bannon repeatedly that there were no legal grounds for his refusal to turn over documents and testify before the committee.

Corcoran showed the jury the letter that Trump sent to Bannon on July 9, 2022 — just two weeks ago — in which Trump said he would waive executive privilege so Bannon could testify before the committee. He also displayed the letter that Bannon’s former attorney, Robert Costello, sent the committee on the same day saying that Bannon was now willing to testify in a public hearing.

But Amerling then read aloud from the letter that the committee sent to Costello in response, noting that Bannon’s latest offer “does not change the fact that Mr. Bannon failed to follow [proper] process and failed to comply with the Select Committee’s subpoena prior to the House referral of the contempt resolution concerning Mr. Bannon’s defiance of the subpoena.”

Prosecutor Amanda Vaughn noted that before two weeks ago, Bannon never offered to comply with the subpoena, even after being told repeatedly by the committee last year that his claims had no basis in law and that he could face prosecution; even after he was found in contempt of Congress in October last year; even after he was criminally charged a month later for contempt of Congress; and even after a lawsuit related to executive privilege had been resolved by the Supreme Court six months ago.

Amerling testified that had Bannon complied with the subpoena in time, the committee would have had “at least nine months of additional time” to review the information, and now there are “five or so months” left of the committee.

“So as opposed to having 14 in total, the committee only now has five?” Corcoran asked.

“That’s correct,” said Amerling.

Jul 20, 3:48 PM EDT
Defense argues Bannon was constrained by questions over executive privilege

In the defense’s ongoing cross examination of Jan. 6 committee staffer Kirstin Amerling, attorney Evan Corcoran continued to stress how Bannon was prevented from testifying due to the right of executive privilege that protects confidential communication with members of the executive branch.

But Amerling testified that there are two main issues with such a claim.

First, she said, some of what the subpoena requested “had nothing to do with communication with the former president” and “could not possibly be reached by executive privilege” — especially Bannon’s communications with campaign advisers, members of Congress and other private parties, as well as information related to Bannon’s podcast, she testified.

In addition, despite what others may have said, “The president had not formally or informally invoked executive privilege,” Amerling said. “It hadn’t been invoked.”

Yet Bannon still refused to comply with the subpoena, despite having no legal grounds to do so, she said.

Amerling reiterated that by the time the committee met to decide whether to pursue contempt charges, “there had been extensive back-and-forth already between the select committee and the defendant’s attorney about the issue of executive privilege, and the select committee had made its position clear.”

Corcoran also argued that Bannon didn’t comply with the subpoena right away because he expected the deadline would ultimately change, due to the fact that it’s common for subpoena deadlines to shift.

Amerling, however, testified that Bannon’s situation was different.

“When witnesses are cooperating with the committee and indicate they are willing to provide testimony, it is not unusual to have some back-and-forth about the dates that they will appear,” she said. However, she said, “it is very unusual for witnesses who receive a subpoena to say outright they will not comply.”

In his questions, Corcoran also suggested that Amerling might be a biased witness, noting that she had donated to Democratic causes in the past, and that she is a member of the same book club as one of the prosecutors in the case, Molly Gaston.

“So you’re in a book club with the prosecutor in this case?” Corcoran asked.

“We are,” Amerling replied.

Amerling said that it had been some time — perhaps as much as a year or more — since she and Gaston both attended a meeting of the club. But she conceded that, with the types of people who are in the book club, it was “not unusual that we would talk about politics in some way or another.”

Jul 20, 12:55 PM EDT
Defense attorney presses Jan. 6 staffer on timing of subpoena deadline

Under cross-examination from Bannon defense attorney Evan Corcoran, House Jan. 6 committee senior staffer Kristin Amerling was pressed on why the committee set the deadlines it did for Bannon to comply with the subpoena — especially since “the select committee is still receiving and reviewing documents” now, Corcoran said.

Corcoran pressed Amerling over who specifically decided that Bannon should have to produce documents by 10 a.m. on Oct. 7, 2021, and who specifically decided that Bannon should have to appear for a deposition on Oct. 14, 2021.

Amerling said that the “process” of drafting the subpoena involved many people, including senior staff like herself, but it was all ultimately approved by committee Chairman Bennie Thompson.

“To the best of my recollection, because of the multiple roles that we understood Mr. Bannon potentially had with respect to the events of Jan. 6, at the time that we put the subpoena together, there was a general interest in obtaining information from him expeditiously, because we believed this information could potentially lead us to other relevant witnesses or other relevant documents,” Amerling said. “There was general interest in including deadlines that required expeditious response.”

“The committee authorization is just through the end of this year,” so it is operating under “a very tight timeframe,” she said.

Corcoran also said he wanted to made clear to the jury that, as he put it, “in this case, there is no allegation that Steve Bannon was involved in the attack” on the Capitol.

Earlier, Amerling testified that the committee tried to give Bannon “an opportunity” to explain his “misconduct” in ignoring the subpoena and to provide “information that might shed light on his misconduct, such as he might have been confused” about the subpoena — but Bannon never presented any such explanation or information before he was found in contempt, she said.

Jul 20, 11:17 AM EDT
Jan. 6 staffer says panel ‘rejected the basis’ for Bannon’s privilege claim

Kristin Amerling, a senior staffer on the House Jan. 6 committee, returned to the stand to continue her testimony from Tuesday. She testified that Bannon was clearly informed that any claims of privilege were rejected by the committee, and that his non-compliance “would force” the committee to refer the matter to the Justice Department for prosecution.

She said the subpoena issued to Bannon indicated he was “required to produce” records encompassing 17 specific categories, including records related to the Jan. 6 rally near the White House, his communications with Trump allies and several right-wing groups, his communications with Republican lawmakers, and information related to his “War Room” podcast.

The committee was seeking to understand “the relationships or potential relationships between different individuals and organizations that played a role in Jan. 6,” Amerling said. “We wanted to ask him what he knew.”

Asked by prosecutor Amanda Vaughn if Bannon provided any records to the committee by the deadline of 10 a.m. on Oct. 7, 2021, Amerling replied, “He did not.”

“Did the committee get anything more than radio silence by 10 a.m. on Oct. 7?” Vaughn asked.

“No,” said Amerling.

Amerling said that in a correspondence she received that day at about 5 p.m. — after the deadline had passed — Bannon’s attorney at the time, Robert Costello, claimed that Trump had “announced his intention to assert” executive privilege, which Costello said at the time rendered Bannon “unable to respond” to the subpoena “until these issues are resolved.”

But the next day, Amerling recalled on the stand, she sent Costello a letter from Jan. 6 committee chairman Bennie Thompson, “explaining that the committee rejected the basis that he had offered for refusing to comply.”

“Did the letter also tell the defendant he still had to comply?” Vaughn asked Amerling.

“Yes, it did.” Amerling said.

“Did the letter warn the defendant what might happen if he failed to comply with the subpoena?” Vaughn asked.

“Yes, it did,” said Amerling.

The letter was “establishing a clear record of the committee’s views, making sure the defendant was aware of that,” Amerling testified.

Jul 20, 10:06 AM EDT
Judge won’t let trial become ‘political circus,’ he says

Federal prosecutors in Steve Bannon’s contempt trial raised concerns with the judge that Bannon’s team has been suggesting to the jury that this is a “politically motivated prosecution” before the second day of testimony got underway Wednesday morning.

Before the jury was brought in, prosecutor Amanda Vaughn asked U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols to make sure the jury “doesn’t hear one more word about this case being” politically motivated, after she said the defense’s opening statement Tuesday had “clear implications” that the defense was making that claim.

Nichols had barred such arguments from the trial.

In response, defense attorney Evan Corcoran defended his opening statement, saying it “was clearly on the line.”

Nichols then made it clear that during trial, the defense team may ask witnesses questions about whether they themselves may be biased — “but may not ask questions about whether someone else was biased in an action they took outside this courtroom.”

“I do not intend for this to become a political case, a political circus,” Nichols said.

Jul 19, 6:14 PM EDT
Bannon, outside courtroom, criticizes Jan. 6 panel

Speaking to reporters after the first full day in court, Bannon blasted members of the Jan. 6 committee and House Democrats for not showing up as witnesses in his trial.

“Where is Bennie Thompson?” asked Bannon regarding the Jan. 6 committee chairman. “He’s made it a crime, not a civil charge … have the guts and the courage to show up here and say exactly why it’s a crime.”

“I will promise you one thing when the Republicans that are sweeping to victory on Nov. 8 — starting in January, you’re going to get a real committee,” Bannon said. “We’re going to get a real committee with a ranking member who will be a Democrat … and this will be run
appropriately and the American people will get the full story.”

-Laura Romero and Soo Rin Kim

Jul 19, 5:23 PM EDT
A subpoena isn’t voluntary, says prosecution witness

The first witness for the prosecution, Kristin Amerling of the Jan. 6 committee, testified that a subpoena is not voluntary.

Amerling, the Jan. 6 panel’s deputy staff director and chief counsel, read aloud the congressional resolution creating the committee and explained that the committee’s role is to recommend “corrective measures” to prevent future attacks like the one on Jan. 6.

“Is a subpoena voluntary in any way?” asked prosecutor Amanda Vaughn.

“No,” Amerling replied.

Amerling also discussed how important it is to get information in a timely manner because the committee’s authority runs out at the end of the year. “There is an urgency to the focus of the Select Committee’s work … we have a limited amount of time in which to gather information,” she said.

Amerling noted that Bannon was subpoenaed pretty early on in the committee’s investigation.

She said the committee subpoenaed Bannon in particular because public accounts indicated that Bannon tried to persuade the public that the 2020 election was “illegitimate”; that on his podcast the day before Jan. 6 he made statements “including that all hell was going to break loose, that suggested he might have some advance knowledge of the events of Jan. 6”; that he was involved in discussions with White House officials, including Trump himself, relating to “strategies surrounding the events of Jan. 6”; and that he had been involved in discussions in the days leading up to Jan. 6 with “private parties who had gathered in the Willard hotel in Washington, D.C., reportedly to discuss strategies around efforts to interfere with the peaceful transfer of power or overturning the election results.”

“Is that something that would have been relevant to the committee’s investigation?” Vaughn asked.

“Yes, because the Select Committee was tasked with trying to understand what happened on Jan. 6, and why,” Amerling replied.

Amerling will be back on the stand Wednesday morning when the trial resumes.

Jul 19, 3:55 PM EDT
Defense tells jury ‘there was no ignoring the subpoena’

Bannon’s defense attorney Matt “Evan” Corcoran said in his opening statement that “no one ignored the subpoena” issued to Bannon, and that “there was direct engagement by Bob Costello,” Bannon’s attorney, with the House committee, specifically committee staffer Kristin Amerling.

He said Costello “immediately” communicated to the committee that there was an objection to the subpoena, “and that Steve Bannon could not appear and that he could not provide documents.”

“So there was no ignoring the subpoena,” Corcoran said. What followed was “a considerable back and forth” between Amerling and Costello — “they did what two lawyers do, they negotiated.”

Corcoran said, “the government wants you to believe … that Mr. Bannon committed a crime by not showing up to a congressional hearing room … but the evidence is going to be crystal clear no one, no one believed Mr. Bannon was going to appear on Oct. 14, 2021,” and the reasons he couldn’t appear had been articulated to the committee.

Corcoran told the jury that the government has to prove beyond a reasonable that Steve Bannon willfully defaulted when he didn’t appear for the deposition on Oct. 14, 2021 — “but you’ll find from the evidence that that date on the subpoena was the subject of ongoing discussions” and it was not “fixed.”

In addition, Corcoran told jurors, you will hear that “almost every single one” of the witnesses subpoenaed led to negotiations between committee staff and lawyers, and often the appearance would be at a later date than what was on the subpoena.

Corcoran also argued that the prosecution may have been infected by politics, telling the jury that with each document or each statement provided at trial, they should ask themselves: “Is this piece of evidence affected by politics?”

Jul 19, 3:31 PM EDT
Prosecutors say Bannon’s failure to comply was deliberate

Continuing her opening statement, federal prosecutor Amanda Vaughn told the jury that the subpoena to Bannon directed him to provide documents by the morning of Oct. 7, 2021, and to appear for a deposition the morning of Oct. 14, 2021 — but instead he had an attorney, Robert Costello, send a letter to the committee informing the committee that he would not comply “in any way,” she said.

“The excuse the defendant gave for not complying” was the claim that “a privilege” meant he didn’t have to turn over certain information, Vaughn said. “[But] it’s not up to the defendant or anyone else to decide if he can ignore the [request] based on a privilege, it’s up to the committee.”

And, said Vaughn, the committee clearly told Bannon that “your privilege does not get you out of this one, you have to provide documents, and you have to come to your deposition.” And importantly, she said, the committee told Bannon that “a refusal to comply” could result in criminal prosecution.

“You will see, the defendant’s failure to comply was deliberate here,” Vaughn told the jury. “The only verdict that is supported by the evidence here: that the defendant showed his contempt for the U.S. Congress, and that he’s guilty.”

Jul 19, 2:58 PM EDT
Prosecution begins opening statements

Federal prosecutor Amanda Vaughn began opening statements by saying, “In September of last year, Congress needed information from the defendant, Steve Bannon. … Congress needed to know what the defendant knew about the events of Jan. 6, 2021. … Congress had gotten information that the defendant might have some details about the events leading up to that day and what occurred that day.”

So, Vaughn told the jury, Congress gave Bannon a subpoena “that mandated” he provide any information he might have.

“Congress was entitled to the information it sought, it wasn’t optional,” Vaughn said. “But as you will learn in this trial, the defendant refused to hand over the information he might have.”

Vaughn said Bannon ignored “multiple warnings” that he could face criminal prosecution for refusing to comply with the subpoena and for preventing the government from getting “important information.”

“The defendant decided he was above the law and decided he didn’t need to follow the government’s orders,” she said.

Jul 19, 2:51 PM EDT
Judge instructs jury of the burden of proof

Prior to opening statements, the judge made clear to the jury that the Justice Department has the burden to prove four distinct elements “beyond a reasonable doubt”:

(1) that Bannon was in fact subpoenaed for testimony and/or documents;

(2) that the testimony and/or documents were “pertinent” to the Jan. 6 committee’s investigation;

(3) that Bannon “failed to comply or refused to comply” with the subpoena;

(4) that the “failure or refusal to comply was willful.”

Jul 19, 2:44 PM EDT
Jury sworn in after judge denies continuance

A 14-member jury has been sworn in for the contempt trial of ex-Trump strategist Steve Bannon.

Of the 14 jurors, nine are men and five are women.

The swearing-in of the jury comes after U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols denied the defense’s request for a one-month delay of the trial, which attorneys for Bannon argued was necessary due to a “seismic shift in the understanding of the parties” of what the government’s evidence will be.

“We have a jury that is just about picked,” Nichols said in denying the request for a one-month continuance.

One of the jurors, a man who works for an appliance company, said Monday during jury selection that he watched the first Jan. 6 committee hearing and believes the committee is “trying to find the truth about what happened” on Jan. 6.

Another juror, a man who works as a maintenance manager for the Washington, D.C., Parks and Recreation department, said he believes what happened on Jan. 6 “doesn’t make sense.”

Another juror, a woman who works as a photographer for NASA, said “a lot” of her “photographer friends were at the Capitol” on Jan. 6, and she has watched some of the Jan. 6 hearings on the news.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.