Thread by @JordanOnRecord

Former Trump WH trade adviser Peter Navarro's sentencing hearing is set to begin shortly. DOJ is seeking 6 months in jail for Navarro defying a subpoena from the January 6th Committee. google.com/amp/s/www.wusa…

Like most, Peter Navarro's sentencing hearing begins with arguments over enhancements and credits. Navarro wants 2 levels of credit for acceptance of responsibility. Judge Mehta seems dubious.

Mehta: “I haven’t heard a word of contrition from Dr. Navarro since this case began.”

Navarro's attorney, Stanley Woodward, says Navarro wasn't playing "smoke and mirrors" with the January 6th Committee but was only doing what he thought he had to as a former WH adviser. He says he only went to trial to preserve a constitutional argument. Judge Mehta disagrees.

Judge Mehta seems to foreclose the possibility that Navarro will get credit for accepting responsibility: “The idea that somehow he has exhibited clear demonstration of acceptance [of responsibility] is hard to reconcile with the plain reading of those words.”

Navarro's attorneys are also mounting a somewhat novel argument that Steve Bannon's didn't, which is that the "common jail" referred to in the contempt of Congress statute doesn't exist anymore — and so the mandatory 30-day minimum is void.

Judge Mehta is going to deny the acceptance of responsibility credit. He notes Peter Navarro has, as recently as his sentencing memo filed last week, referred to his case as a "political prosecution."

Judge Mehta is also finding that the 30-day mandatory minimum sentence in the contempt of Congress statute still applies.

AUSA John Crabb Jr. says the prosecution of Peter Navarro was not politically motivated.

Crabb: "This was a righteous prosecution."

AUSA John Crabb: "It's hard to imagine more contemptuous behavior that that displayed by the defendant here."

AUSA John Crabb says Peter Navarro has used his case in fundraising emails.

Stanley Woodward gets back up and says Peter Navarro, under advice of counsel, won't be making a statement to the court today.

Woodward then says this case isn't about someone who habitually defies the rule of law.

Woodward says Navarro wasn't the only person who didn't comply with the January 6th Committee's subpoena. He mentions Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino, Trump's former WH chief and deputy chief of staff. The House voted to hold both in contempt, but DOJ didn't charge.

Judge Mehta and Woodward get into a testy exchange about Navarro's refusal to engage w/ the J6 Committee.

Mehta: “Any lawyer worth his salt would have said… we need to engage with Congress and try to figure out what’s covered and what isn’t covered. That didn’t happen here.”

Stanley Woodward says America's politics are divisive now but "punishing Dr. Navarro won't fix that."

Woodward is now going over Peter Navarro's role in the Trump administration during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Woodward: "This was not about politics. This was about his belief that he had a duty to assert executive privilege."

I guess I misunderstood earlier because Peter Navarro is speaking now.

Navarro: "I just want you to know that when I received that congressional subpoena... you have acknowledged, correctly, that I had an honest belief that privilege had been invoked and I was torn."

Navarro, pointing at the prosecution's table: "For them to say they needed information because of J6. They never wanted that. All they had to do was to make one phone call to the president and his lawyers."

Navarro: "I am disappointed with a process where a jury convicted me and I was unable to even present a defense... and mens rea apparently doesn't even matter in this courtroom."

Navarro: "I'm just saying one thing: If they wanted the information, make a phone call. That's it."

Navarro: "I will tell you, the minute that violence erupted on Capitol Hill was one of the worst days of my life. Because it was a desecration, and it was the end to any discussion of the Electoral Count Act of 1887, which is a law on the books sir."

Judge Mehta is back on the bench now. He begins by going through Navarro's background and his work in the administration.

Mehta: "I will say, Dr. Navarro, I think the country does owe you a debt of gratitude for the work you did on the coronavirus."

Judge Mehta goes through some of the differences between Steve Bannon, who was also convicted of defying a congressional subpoena, and Peter Navarro. He indicates he thinks Bannon was situated a bit worse. Bannon got 4 months (stayed pending appeal). wusa9.com/article/news/n…

Judge Mehta: "As the government pointed out, without even have seen the subpoena or its subject matter he at least uttered the words 'executive privilege.'"

Judge Mehta says Peter Navarro's press release calling the January 6th Committee "domestic terrorists" suggests he doesn't "rue the events" of Jan. 6 quite as much as he said today in court.

Judge Mehta says there's no evidence former President Donald Trump "ever uttered the words 'executive privilege'" or ever told Peter Navarro to assert it on his behalf. Same situation as in Steve Bannon's case.

Judge Mehta: "You're more than happy to talk to the press about what you did, write about it in your book, but not go up to the Hill and talk to Congress, who is investigating what happened that day."

Judge Mehta says Peter Navarro getting up today and saying he didn't know what he was supposed to do about the subpoena rings hollow because Steve Bannon had already been indicted two months prior to him receiving it.

Judge Mehta says the words executive privilege are not a "magical incantation" to get out of one's duty to respond to a subpoena.

Mehta: "It's not a get-out-of-jail-free card."

Judge Mehta: "In all of this, even today, there is little acknowledgement of your obligation as an American to cooperate with the committee in what they are investigating."

Mehta: "They had a job to do and you made it harder. It's really that simple."

Judge Mehta: "You want me to believe this a political prosecution and yet at the same time that you are taking responsibility. It takes some chutzpah."

🚨 SENTENCE: Former Trump White House trade adviser Peter Navarro ordered to serve 4 MONTHS in jail for defying a subpoena from the January 6th Committee. The same sentence as Steve Bannon. wusa9.com/article/news/n…