WASHINGTON – The Justice Department wants former Trump White House adviser Peter Navarro to spend six months in prison found guilty of criminal contempt of Congress for ignoring the challenge.
Federal prosecutors filed a lawsuit Thursday saying Navarro “deserves a severe sentence,” including a $200,000 fine in addition to his prison term. His sentencing is scheduled for January 25.
Navarro was 74 years old found guilty on two counts of contempt last year after he refused a congressional subpoena to testify and provide relevant documents before the disbanded committee on Jan. 6.
“The defendant chose loyalty to former President Donald Trump over the rule of law,” prosecutors wrote in a sentencing letter Thursday.
“He has cloaked his strategy of malicious defiance and contempt behind baseless, baseless invocations of executive privilege and immunity that cannot and will never apply to his situation,” they said.
Navarro’s attorneys did not immediately respond to Justice Department requests for comment on the sentencing request.
In a separate filing Thursday, Navarro’s attorneys asked the court not to sentence him to more than six months in prison and to pay a $200 fine.
“Despite the administration’s attempts to paint Dr. Navarro as a rebel, the reality is that his conviction stemmed solely from his conviction for refusing to comply with a Select Committee subpoena and had nothing to do with the events that occurred at the Capitol in January. 6, 2021,” Navarro’s attorneys wrote in their filing.
Navarro is not the first former Trump adviser to face the possibility of arrest after ignoring a committee subpoena on Jan. 6. In 2022, Steve Bannon was sentenced four months behind bars and a $6,500 fine—prosecutors asked for six months in prison and a $200,000 fine.
Bannon appealed the sentence and a federal judge has been suspended during the appeal process of his sentence.
Prosecutors drew comparisons to Bannon in Navarro’s sentencing.
“Like Stephen Bannon before him, throughout the pendency of this case, the Defendant has used his notoriety through courthouse press conferences, books and podcasts to demonstrate to the public why he did not comply with the Committee’s subpoena: a disregard for government processes and the law, particularly the work of the Committee,” prosecutors said. wrote.