I read that Stone wasn’t qualified to receive commutation per the DOJ guidelines. I also read that Bill Barr recommended personally to Trump that he shouldn’t extend the commutation. I assume Barr will be resigning today.
The Roger Stone Commutation Is Even More Corrupt Than It Seems
The president’s clemency for his confidante is totally unsurprising—which is part of what makes it so bad.www.lawfareblog.com
www.nbcnews.com
Aren't you the person who usually discounts someone's post when people post editorials you don't like? I remember you doing that quite often.
Since Weissmann has been giving his opinions recently it's good to show how Mueller and Weissmann claims in their recent Op-Eds don't match up with the information their investigation found. The article goes into detail to show that there claims in their articles don't match up with their investigation.This is a really detailed explanation of why what Barr did was just wrong in the Stone sentencing. It’s written from the viewpoint of a federal prosecutor, taking into account that what Barr did was to flout the rules in an example of corrupt cronyism.
America’s Prosecutors Know What Bill Barr Did Was Wrong
His actions in U.S. v. Stone strike at the heart of the Aristotelian principle central to the rule of law, that we treat likes alike.www.theatlantic.com
“The four career prosecutors handling the Stone matter did what we federal prosecutors are all trained to do: They correctly applied the guidelines to the facts in the case and advised the court that the guidelines suggested a sentencing range of seven to nine years. They notably also informed the court that it had the authority to depart downward from that range “in fashioning a reasonable and just sentence” if the court determined that the guidelines overstated the seriousness of Stone’s offenses.
Barr was promptly informed of this submission by the then–U.S. attorney in the District of Columbia—an amanuensis he had recently installed after summarily removing his predecessor. Barr stepped in; having the judge start her evaluation of the appropriate sentence from such a high range was unacceptable. Barr ordered that a new submission be made and that submission—untethered to the facts or law—urged a guideline calculation of three to four years, claimed a nonexistent factual basis for lowering the sentence (a bogus assertion of health issues), and withdrew the prior government position.”
“That is not the end of the problems with Barr’s actions. Even if you put all the above aside, Barr had to admit in his congressional testimony that he could not recall intervening in any sentencing proceedings during his tenure as attorney general except those of two of the president’s friends. Stone was one and Michael Flynn was the other, in whose case Barr similarly submitted a revised sentencing memorandum to lower the government’s sentencing position.
So what does this all mean? It means that if you are personally connected to the president or have information that could hurt the president, or both, you can be treated far more favorably by this attorney general, as he will bend the law and facts to the president’s desired result. His actions in U.S. v. Stonestrike at the heart of the Aristotelian principle central to the rule of law, that we treat likes alike. John Locke warned that “where law ends, tyranny begins.” Now, more than three centuries later, that statement applies to the head of the American system of justice.”
This is corruption so stark, it’s obvious we don’t have adequate protection against a corrupt AG.
For the record, you believe this story despite its anonymous sources, correct?
I was mostly referring to the new information that's come out in the last 24 hours about the Russia investigation that makes the investigation look a lot worse. Check out the Durham thread.
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account on our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
