Steven Bannon leaves after being sentenced at the E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington, Oct. 21.
Photo:
graeme sloan/Shutterstock
Steve Bannon
was sentenced on Friday to four months in prison, and it’s difficult to avoid the conclusion that he earned it. Mr. Bannon, a private citizen who left White House employment in summer 2017, did not have a plausible claim of executive privilege when he received a subpoena last year from the House Jan. 6 inquiry. Yet he decided to defy the subpoena anyway.
Mr. Bannon will remain free while his case is on appeal, but if Congressional oversight by either party is going to mean anything, then potential witnesses can’t be permitted to flout lawful subpoenas with impunity. Those who don’t want to answer Congress’s questions can show up, cite the Fifth Amendment, and decline to reply. That’s what other allies of President Trump did before the Jan. 6 committee. But witnesses still have to appear.
After Mr. Bannon refused, the House voted to recommend that he be charged with contempt of Congress. The Justice Department indicted him, and then a jury convicted him. This is such a clear-cut case that his punishment might be useful discipline.
“Others must be deterred from committing similar crimes,” said federal Judge
Carl Nichols,
who was appointed by Mr. Trump. Yet making this prosecution a precedent requires following it when the shoe is on the other foot.
If critics see the case against Mr. Bannon as an example of politicized law enforcement, one reason is that the Justice Department has a history of refusing to pursue contempt referrals by a GOP Congress. In 2013, when Republicans were investigating IRS targeting of Tea Party groups, the House called
Lois Lerner,
who at the time was head of the agency’s Exempt Organizations office. Ms. Lerner came to the hearing, defended herself with an opening statement, and…
Click Here to Read the Full Original Article at RSSOpinion…