Biggest News aggregator with 200 million news articles | com
was what nicholls had found earlier. let me unpack hello. this and certainly i'm not above clarification if you think it's necessary to do so, but let me talk for the audience's perspective on the case. you just described. i'm just going to in plain speak this comes down to notion of advice of counsel and whether that was a willful action by steve bannon to not comply with the subpoena if it was advice of counsel, i think he wanted to argue that list send it wasn't a deliberate act. it was advice of counsel. he was following and that's why didn't provide the information or respond. they'd court though did fine, although they did wait some time that they were their hands were tied on the idea of it had to be a deliberate, intentional act and that was enough to go forward in this case. and so here you are. >> getting ready to appeal this matter. likely. i'm assuming all way up the supreme court, if necessary, peter navarro though, did try to appeal to the supreme court what would make this instance different to you? >> navarro was cases completely different? there was no executive privilege ever invoked in the case. that's what the court found. and there's no advice of counsel.