Trump’s attorney spoke to FBI, court filing says

In his interview on June 29, the attorney, Justin Clark, contradicted former top Trump adviser Steve Bannon’s claim that the former president invoked executive privilege over particular information or materials, which Bannon had cited as an excuse to avoid testifying before the House select committee investigating the insurrection.

In October, Bannon’s attorneys told the House select committee that Clark had informed them that Trump would exercise executive privilege over Bannon and “has directed Mr. Bannon not to produce documents or testify until the issue of executive privilege is resolved.”

Prosecutors have previously cited emails from Clark telling Bannon’s attorney, Robert Costello, that the letter Costello cited to the committee did not, in fact, indicate that the White House believed Bannon could claim executive privilege.

“The former President’s counsel made clear to the Defendant’s attorney that the letter provided no basis for total noncompliance,” prosecutors wrote in Monday’s filing.

The January 6 committee was interested in speaking to Bannon about his communications with Trump in December 2020, when Bannon reportedly urged him to focus on the January 6 certification of the presidential election results. Committee members were also interested in Bannon’s comments in the run-up to the Capitol insurrection, including a podcast on January 5, in which he predicted, “All hell is going to break loose tomorrow.”

In a Monday court filing, federal prosecutors called Bannon’s willingness to now testify before the House select committee a “last-minute” effort that doesn’t change the case against him, pointing out that he has not produced subpoenaed records.

“The Defendant’s last-minute efforts to testify almost nine months after his default — he has still made no effort to produce records — are irrelevant to whether he willfully refused to comply in October 2021 with the Select Committee’s subpoena,” prosecutors wrote.

Bannon is currently set to go to trial on July 18.

“The criminal contempt statute is not intended to procure compliance; it is intended to punish past noncompliance,” prosecutors wrote in their filing.