Roger stone case: Four prosecutors quit after interference

Share

Roger Stone exits federal court in Washington, Friday, Nov. 15, 2019.

The purported agreement with the House came after Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told reporters on Wednesday that he wouldn't subpoena Barr to testify about the Stone case.

After chastising the prosecutors and judge in the trial of his longtime adviser Roger Stone, President Donald Trump on Thursday criticized the jury that convicted the veteran Republican operative, raising further concerns about political interference in the USA judicial system.

Now, Democrats have renewed calls for Barr's impeachment, this time for his involvement in the Roger Stone sentencing debacle.

Attorney-General William Barr has taken a public swipe at Donald Trump, saying the US President's tweets about Justice Department prosecutors and cases "make it impossible for me to do my job".

The juror's husband also worked at the same Justice Department division that handled the criminal probe that led to Stone's arrest.

News broke Tuesday that the Justice Department had overrruled the sentencing recommendation.

After Trump criticized prosecutors who recommended the seven-to-nine-year prison term, the Justice Department asked Judge Amy Berman Jackson to ignore that filing and impose whatever sentence she thought appropriate.

Stone was convicted in November of a seven-count indictment that accused him of lying to Congress, tampering with a witness and obstructing the House investigation into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russian Federation to tip the 2016 election.

Aaron Zelinsky, Jonathan Kravis, Adam Jed and Michael Marando quit the case while Democrats demanded an independent investigation into what they described as a dangerously politicised and corrupt justice department.

Napolitano went on about how there would've been "nothing wrong" with it if Trump called Barr to raise his objections to the Stone sentencing that way. Although advisory federal sentencing guidelines take a mathematical approach to sentencing, some decisions about aggravating factors can turn on subjective judgment, and prosecutors sometimes overreach.

Stone and his lawyers have not spoken with Trump about the latest developments in his case, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

To me, what is so dramatic and outrageous about this case is the fact that the department appeared to have responded to a direct - either direct or indirect request from the president to change a recommendation, so that he could do a favor to one of his personal friends and someone who had gone out in the 2016 campaign and really welcomed foreign interference in our election.

Mr. Barr, the Justice Department's leader, has been a steady ally of the president's since taking the position.

Share