Peter Navarro, a former top White House aide to Donald Trump, has made a final attempt to hinder his impending trial for contempt of Congress. Peter Navarro testified in front of a federal judge, revealing that he was directed by Trump to defy the House Jan. 6 select committee’s subpoena. His trial for criminal contempt is scheduled for September 5, with charges stemming from his refusal to comply with the subpoena, POLITICO News reported.
Peter Navarro, Former White House Aide to Trump Revealed He Made Last-Ditch Bid To Hinder Trial For Contempt! (PHOTO:
Law & Crime)
Peter Navarro Served As Prominent Trade Adviser
Peter Navarro, who served as a prominent trade adviser and promoted unsubstantiated claims of election fraud during Trump’s final days in office, aims to argue that Trump’s assertion of executive privilege shields him from the committee’s request for testimony and documents. Peter Navarro’s defense suggests that if Judge Amit Mehta accepts this argument, the charges against him might be dismissed.
During the hearing, Peter Navarro recounted his conversations with Trump and his aides regarding the congressional subpoenas he received. He affirmed that Trump communicated that he had invoked executive privilege, which permits the president to withhold confidential communications from other government branches. Peter Navarro’s responses indicated that he had followed Trump’s directive not to attend a Jan. 6 select committee deposition.
Mehta’s decision hinges on whether he believes Peter Navarro’s account of his discussions with Trump, which lacks supporting documents or written confirmations typically provided with privilege assertions. The judge probed Navarro’s claims during the hearing.
READ ALSO: Former White House Chief Of Staff Mark Meadows Seeks Federal Court Transfer For Election Interference Charges
Peter Navarro’s Defense Lawyer
Peter Navarro’s defense lawyer acknowledged the absence of written confirmation from Trump regarding the executive privilege claim. The committee sought to question Peter Navarro about his collaboration with Trump ally Steve Bannon on obstructing Joe Biden‘s electoral votes during the January 6 session of Congress. Peter Navarro hinted that Trump had endorsed the strategy.
Furthermore, Peter Navarro’s defense referred to Justin Clark’s grand jury testimony, stating that Peter Navarro’s direct line of communication to Trump rendered a written invocation of executive privilege unnecessary. Peter Navarro also recounted a conversation at Mar-a-Lago in April 2022, where Trump expressed second thoughts about blocking Navarro’s testimony.
As the trial for criminal contempt approaches, Peter Navarro’s testimony about being directed by Trump to defy the Jan. 6 select committee’s subpoena sheds light on the intricacies of executive privilege and its implications in the legal proceedings. The judge’s decision, expected to be reached after further consideration, will determine whether Peter Navarro’s account aligns with the notion of executive privilege and if his charges will proceed to trial.
READ ALSO: White House Objects To Merit-Based Military Promotions In Defense Bill, Citing DEIA Concerns