Peter Navarro is accused of contempt of Congress for ignoring a February subpoena issued by the House select committee tasked with investigating the January assault on the US Capitol . The former White House trade adviser has been dealt a series of pretrial rulings that severely limited the defense arguments he could put forward . The trial is expected to be a short one and already the proceedings have moved briskly . Just a handful of witnesses are expected to take the stand and its possible the case will go to jury deliberations by the end of Wednesday . Judge Amit Mehta expressed frustration that he had to respond on the fly to testimony prosecutors sought from a witness on references to domestic terrorism language that were included in the House resolution setting up the January committee . The judge asked both sides if they would be presenting any other evidence that includes similar language that are potentially inflammatory that relate to the case but are not central to it so that they can sort out a solution ahead of time . Navarro and his lawyers have signaled that they would like to litigate that and other issues on appeal to Navarros charges . If Navarro was convicted he has signaled that he would want to file an appeal against the use of language that was included in his own opening statement, he did again at a later point of the testimony. After the jury left the room for a midmorning break, MehtA told the jury that the document does not relate to Navarro. After he did so. The judge was concerned that he was concerned about Navarro and Navarra. Mehtas said that he did not. He declined to provide an opportunity for Navarries. He said that the trial. The trial was concluded that he and his defense. He has declined to give an opportunity to
Prosecutors say former Trump adviser Peter Navarro ‘acted as if he is above the law
