If the Supreme Court does not provide a last-minute exemption, Peter Navarro, a former adviser to Trump’s White House, plans to spend the next several months working in air conditioning and sleeping in a dormitory for “elderly” male convicts at a prison adjacent to a zoo.
As of this coming Tuesday, Navarro, who is 74 years old, will have made history as the first ex-White House official to be imprisoned for contempt of Congress. On Tuesday morning, he is expected to arrive at a federal Bureau of Prisons satellite camp in Miami that houses minimum-security inmates.
“Not only can you hear the lions… you can hear the lions roar every morning,” remarked Sam Mangel, a jail consultant for Navarro.
According to Mangel, Navarro is “nervous” (AWN). “No matter how long a person’s sentence is, they are entering a foreign land.”
In the legal community, Mangel is a part of a cottage industry that assists wealthy inmates and their families in getting ready for prison. After speaking with Navarro on Monday, he claimed.
In the House’s inquiry into the US Capitol attack that occurred on January 6, 2021, Navarro was found guilty by a jury and sentenced to four months in jail for refusing to answer to subpoenas seeking records and testimony.
In his last appeal, Navarro is pleading with the Supreme Court to step in before his Tuesday early surrender. Steve Bannon, another Trump advisor, is appealing his four-month prison sentence for contempt of Congress stemming from the same inquiry. Neither of them has yet scheduled their prison report dates.
On Monday, Stanley Brand—a former House general counsel and current defence attorney for Navarro—said, “It’s historic, and will be to future White House aides who get subpoenaed by Congress.”
Due to legislation that permits early release for federal prisoners, Navarro is highly unlikely to spend the entire four months of his term unless the Supreme Court steps in and decides to postpone his prison report date. According to Mangel, he anticipates a sentence of approximately 90 days.
Navarro will be required to enrol in lessons and find employment within the institution, according to Mangel. So that he might enjoy the air conditioning in Miami during the upcoming months, the jail consultant has suggested that he apply for positions such as law library clerk or orderly.
Navarro, being of advanced years, will also request to be housed in a dormitory for older offenders, which has around eighty guys sleeping in bunk beds.
“The dorm isn’t private,” Mangel said. Feelings of terror and awe are common. He will, however, be completely secure.
According to Mangel, Navarro will be assisted in his “acclimatisation” by two other customers now serving time in that prison camp. One of them is a doctor, while the other is an unnamed political figure.
Navarro is on his way to one of the nation’s oldest prison camps—a federal correctional institution in Miami—which houses less than 200 offenders in its crumbling infrastructure. Being the nearest Bureau of Prisons institution to the territory, the jail houses a significant number of inmates from Puerto Rico.
From inside, Navarro may access email and make over eight hours of phone conversations every month. Mangel also mentioned that he will have access to news broadcasts in both Spanish and English on a handful of televisions within the prison.
Justice Department urges Supreme Court to turn down Navarro’s final appeal
On Monday, the DOJ requested that the Supreme Court deny Navarro’s final request to stay out of jail.
General Solicitor Elizabeth Prelogar characterised Navarro’s contentions as “meritless” and asked the court to reject his emergency appeal, stating that Navarro’s petition is unlikely to lead to the overturning of his conviction.
As far as Prelogar could tell, Navarro had “numerous arguments that fall into two main categories,” and neither of them would lead to a new trial or a cancellation of the verdict. She stated that the outcome of Navarro’s criminal case will not be changed by his principal claim, which is that a federal judge’s decision to deny him the opportunity to assert an executive privilege argument during trial was incorrect.
“The applicant’s complete refusal to comply with the subpoena would not be excused, even if the claim of privilege were to be successful,” Prelogar stated. “(Navarro) has failed to present any counterarguments on any of those points, which is sufficient evidence to reject his claims in this case.”
