Adam Schiff told MSNBC on Wednesday.
Schiff, who also chairs the Intelligence Committee, noted that Bannon had refused to cooperate with the House's Russia investigation during the Trump administration because he "would never be held in contempt.""He would never be prosecuted by the Trump Justice Department."This is a legal order as well as a civic duty to share info about the most sweeping violent attack on Congress since the War of 1812."
In a letter to the committee earlier this month, Bannon's attorney argued that "the executive privileges belong to President Trump" and "we must accept his direction and honor his invocation of executive privilege."The letter from Bannon's legal team goes on to say it may be up to the courts to decide whether he is ultimately forced to cooperate -- essentially daring the House to sue or hold him in criminal contempt."As such, until these issues are resolved, we are unable to respond to your request for documents and testimony," wrote the lawyer, Robert Costello.The claim that Bannon could be covered by the former President's privilege is unusual, because Bannon was not working for the federal government during the period surrounding the January 6 insurrection.Privilege claims normally apply to close officials around the President and deliberations between government employees, and Bannon was fired from his role as a White House adviser in 2017.Many legal experts agree with the committee that Bannon, as a private citizen, would have no standing to block a subpoena by claiming executive privilege.Historic criminal contempt cases As severe as a criminal contempt referral sounds, the House's choice to use the Justice Department may be more of a warning shot than a solution.In more recent administrations, the Justice Department has declined to prosecute contempt referrals -- though in those situations, Congress has made contempt referrals on members of the sitting president's administration.
"I'm watching people on TV bloviate about this.