Breaking news.
And let's get right to the breaking news.
A second
Trump senior
ally convicted of contempt of Congress
for stonewalling
the January 6th select
committee investigation.
CNN senior justice correspondent Evan
Perez is joining us right now.
He's got details
on this important verdict.
Evan, that's right, Wolf.
The jury deliberated
just a few hours
today before rendering this verdict
guilty on two counts
of contempt of Congress.
Peter Navarro was we received a subpoena
from the committee that was investigating
the January six attack on the U.S.
Capitol.
This subpoena was for from 2022.
And he declined to cooperate.
He didn't show up for their requests
for testimony.
He also declined to provide documents
that the committee was requesting.
And as a result,
the Justice Department said
that you can't do that.
You can't just ignore
a lawful subpoena
from a congressional committee.
And that's the reason why
they brought this case.
Now, one of the things that
that Navarro was arguing
was that the testimony
and the documents in question
were actually subject
to executive privilege
from the former president.
Of course,
the former president
never actually asserted that
in this case, Wolf.
And that's one reason why
the judge did not allow for
for Peter Navarro
to actually present
that as part of his argument.
As part of his defense in court.
Now, Navarro faces
a lot of different issues.
He also.
These same documents
that he refused to turn over to
the committee
are also being sought by Jack Smith
and the Justice Department
as part of the
as part of their efforts
to get a hold of documents that he took
after he left the White House.
And so you see, as you can see,
he has a lot of legal problems
on his hands.
He addressed reporters
at the end of today's proceeding
and spoke about his relationship
with the former president.
President Trump
has been a rock in terms of assistance.
We talk when we need to talk.
He will win the president's race.
In 20, 24 in November.
You know why?
Because the people are tired of Joe Biden
weaponizing courts like this.
And the Department of Justice
And we expect, from what Mr.
Navarro said after court,
he we expect that he will appeal this
this ruling or this verdict today.
Wolf,
we should note that you mentioned
this is the second former
aide of the former president
to be convicted on these same charges,
Steve Bannon,
was similarly convicted
here in Washington.
And he's appealing that conviction ever.
There are also some new and important
developments from the Fulton
County District Attorney.
Finally, Willis.
What can you tell us? Well, that's right.
She is pushing back again
against efforts from Jim Jordan,
who is running a committee here
in Congress, the Judiciary Committee.
He wants to investigate
the fact
that finally Willis has,
of course, indicted the former president
and has asked for a series of documents
and a lot of questions
about her investigation.
And she pushed back very strongly today
in a letter to Jordan.
I'll read
you just a part of what she said.
She says, Your job description
as a legislator does not include
criminal law enforcement,
nor does it include
supervising a specific criminal trial
because you believe that doing
so will promote
your partizan political objectives.
We should note, Wolf, that the
this is the second time
that the congressional Republicans
have launched investigations of
of of prosecutions that they say
they believe are political.
One of the things that finally Willis
does in her letter
today, pushing back against Jim Jordan's
request for information
is she cites some of the
some of the threats
that her office is getting
including one that is highly racist.
I'll read you just a part of it.
It says, we are coming for you funny.
We are going to see you again.
Very, very explicit language in that one.
And you can see, Wolf, that
what she is saying here
is that
as a result of some of the attacks
that she's getting,
not only from from political opponents,
but also from
allies of the former president,
she's getting attacks
like this
anonymously,
some in some cases
from people
who are threatening her or her staff.
And that's the reason
why we have all this,
all the security there.
One last thing I will mention
is that we also heard
from the former president's legal team
They raised the issue that they say
they're going to try to move
the case against the former
president to federal courts,
something that we always anticipated
Wolf.
Evan Perez with the latest on that,
thank you very much.
Let's get some more on the breaking news
right now.
Joining us, Representative Zoe Lofgren,
who served on the January six House
Select Committee.
Congresswoman
Thanks so much for joining us.
As you now know,
as all of us know, Peter Navarro,
he now joins Steve Bannon
and being
convicted by a jury
for refusing to cooperate
with your committee.
What's your reaction to this verdict?
Well, relief, frankly,
it's just verdict and it's important.
Mr.
Navarro was the trade adviser,
but his role in the Trump administration
was far wider than that.
He authored a so-called report
that the president
carried around undercutting the election
He was connected with Steve Bannon
talking about the Green Bay sweep.
He and Bannon were in cahoots
and, of course, abandoned.
Also, refused to come in and testify.
And I'm sure you'll recall Steve Bannon's
presentation the day before
January six
that this is going to be very different
than you think.
We had a lot of questions for Navarro
and for Bannon.
They illegally refused to answer.
And I'm glad that they're being held
to account.
It's about upholding the rule of law.
And they've both been convicted Now,
what kind of message,
Congresswoman, do you think this sends
to others
who may be tempted to defy
a congressional subpoena,
so.
Well, obviously, the
subpoena needs to be well
grounded, as ours was.
It needs to be
within the confines
of the jurisdiction of the committee
But once you're on firm ground
and you issue a subpoena,
it's not a suggestion.
It's a requirement.
Nancy Pelosi,
do you expect
Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon,
for that matter,
to ultimately serve time in jail
for things?
Yes, I do.
The statute provides for up to a year
in custody for each count.
Both Mr. Bannon and Mr.
Navarro
have been convicted of two counts.
So I would guess
they will spend
some significant time in custody.
And frankly, I think they should,
not only because of their
illegal activity,
but also is a message to others
who might
think that it's okay to violate the law.
Representative Zoe Lofgren, thanks so
much for joining us.
You bet.
Good to you.
Let's bring in our correspondents
and analysts
covering the Trump investigations.
Let me start with Laura Coates.
Laura, the January six
committee doesn't exist anymore.
So what's the significance
of this conviction?
Well,
many of us won't remember that
for a long time.
In the recent years,
it seemed that its congressional subpoena
meant nothing.
Right.
People were thumbing their nose
at it all the time.
They assumed
they'd be never having enforcement
in the seventies
or hadn't
been a lot of enforcement
from the DOJ
in terms of actually prosecuting.
Now, we have not one,
but two recent advisers
of a former president
who are being held to account.
And this was not a
presentation of evidence
by the prosecution
to think that it was inadvertent,
that somehow
it slipped his mind
that you wanted me to appear on one date
and I came the very next date.
Now, this was somebody who said, I'm
not going to appear.
I'm not going to explain
why the president, United States
told me that
I should not comply with you.
And guess what?
He was left out to hang dry. Right.
Because you never heard from Trump
to support that notion.
The presidential attorney
or the executive privilege
that you're talking about
really belongs to the president
of the United States,
the current president, United States.
That was always an issue.
And he, even as a former,
did not assert it for this person.
And so
it sends a very clear signal
that maybe Congress is back in business,
that they're there are subpoena
and compliance and contempt
referrals will be taken seriously.
It's not without an appeal,
but it does send a very strong message.
Andrew McCabe, how do you see it?
Absolutely the same.
And I think the chances that
he'll do prison
time are pretty good pending unless he's
has a conviction reversed on appeal.
The statute
actually carries
a mandatory minimum of at least one month
in jail for each conviction.
And it's, of course,
capped out at a year or so.
Convictions on two counts.
He could do
anywhere from one month to a year.
We know that Steve
Bannon's already been sentenced
to four months in prison.
He hasn't served those yet
because he's his appeals pending as well.
So we'll see how that goes.
But yeah,
I think prison time is certainly
in the cards.
And Jeremy is, you know,
he could have avoided all of this
had he simply complied
with that
subpoena and gone and gone ahead
and testified.
Look, other people came in,
they took the Fifth.
He could have done that.
You know,
as Laura said, you have to show up.
No one is above the law.
And what this case shows with the Steve
Bannon case shows is, as Laura said,
someone is enforcing that now.