This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/18/us/roger-stone-sentencing.html

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 4 Version 5
Trump Attacks Stone Prosecutors and Judge, Ignoring Barr’s Admonishment Trump Admits He Makes Barr’s Job Tougher but Vows to Continue
(about 4 hours later)
WASHINGTON — President Trump renewed his attacks on law enforcement on Tuesday, denouncing the prosecutors, the judge and the jury forewoman in the case of his longtime friend Roger J. Stone Jr. only days after Attorney General William P. Barr warned that the president’s criticisms were making it “impossible” for him to do his job. WASHINGTON — President Trump and Attorney General William P. Barr agree on one thing at least: The president is making the attorney general’s job much harder. What they don’t agree on: Mr. Trump sees no reason to stop.
Undeterred, Mr. Trump kept up his running commentary on the department’s criminal cases on Twitter and in comments to reporters before leaving for the West Coast. He reasserted that he had the right to intervene in individual criminal cases but had not done so, appearing to draw a distinction between opining publicly and outright ordering law enforcement officials to take specific actions. Defying Mr. Barr’s pleas, Mr. Trump renewed his public attacks on law enforcement on Tuesday, denouncing the prosecutors, judge and jury forewoman in the case of his longtime friend Roger J. Stone Jr. and defending his convicted former adviser Michael T. Flynn against Mr. Trump’s own Justice Department.
“I chose not to be involved,” he said before boarding Air Force One. “I’m allowed to be totally involved.” It was a day in which the president asserted his dominance over a justice system that has long sought to insulate itself from political pressures. Calling himself “the chief law enforcement officer of the country,” Mr. Trump demanded a new trial for Mr. Stone, urged federal judges to address the “tremendous” abuse of the special counsel investigation of his campaign and bypassed the traditional pardon process to grant clemency to celebrity convicts recommended by his friends, allies and political donors.
He told journalists that he understood that his remarks were making Mr. Barr’s job harder, but that social media had helped catapult him to the White House and had given him a worldwide megaphone. “Everybody has the right to speak their mind,” he said. “Social media for me has been very important because it gives me a voice. Because I don’t get that voice in the press.” Mr. Trump insisted he had not directly interfered in the prosecution of advisers like Mr. Stone and Mr. Flynn, but declared again that he had the power to if he wanted and at the very least, he planned to speak out for them. “You take a look at what’s happening to these people,” he told reporters. “Somebody has to stick up for the people.”
The president said he believed that Mr. Stone, a former campaign adviser, had “been treated very unfairly,” as had his former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn. Both have pending criminal cases in federal court. In doing so, Mr. Trump acknowledged that Mr. Barr was right last week when he said that the president was making it “impossible” for him to do his work. “I do make his job harder,” Mr. Trump said. “I do agree with that. I think that’s true.”
Mr. Stone was convicted in November of seven felonies for obstructing a congressional inquiry and is scheduled to be sentenced on Thursday. Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. but wants to withdraw his plea. But while he praised Mr. Barr’s “incredible integrity” and avowed “total confidence” in him, Mr. Trump dismissed the suggestion that he stop weighing in on individual cases. “Social media for me has been very important because it gives me a voice, because I don’t get that voice in the press,” he said. “In the media, I don’t get that voice. So I’m allowed to have a voice.”
On Twitter, Mr. Trump cited a “Fox & Friends” legal analyst, Andrew Napolitano, who has insisted that the president “has every right” to intervene in a criminal case. He quoted Mr. Napolitano’s calls for Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to reconsider Mr. Stone’s case. After a trial in November, a jury speedily found Mr. Stone guilty of all charges. The president’s latest public comments increased the pressure on Mr. Barr, who has taken heat from critics both inside and outside his department over what they see as the politicization of the law enforcement system. More than 1,100 former Justice Department officials have called for Mr. Barr’s resignation, and a group representing the nation’s federal judges scheduled an emergency telephone conference to address the president’s attacks on one of their own.
The continued attacks raised the question of how Mr. Barr proceeds if indeed he finds it not just harder but “impossible” to do his job amid the president’s running commentary on the department’s criminal cases, as he told ABC News last week. Just hours after Mr. Trump publicly demanded a new trial for Mr. Stone on Tuesday morning, the Justice Department, with Mr. Barr’s approval, announced that it would oppose such a retrial.
Even as he refused to take Mr. Barr’s advice, Mr. Trump expressed no anger toward his attorney general on Tuesday and some officials said the president understood why Mr. Barr believed he had to say what he did last week. But Mr. Trump has seethed with anger that the Justice Department has failed to prosecute his enemies while going after his friends.
As he granted clemency on Tuesday to figures like Rod R. Blagojevich, a former governor of Illinois, the junk bond king Michael R. Milken and the former New York City police commissioner Bernard B. Kerik, the president made clear how much he sympathized with them in what he characterized as overzealous prosecutions.
Asked whether he was likewise considering pardons for Mr. Stone, Mr. Flynn or Paul Manafort, his former campaign chairman convicted on tax and other financial fraud charges, Mr. Trump said, “I’m not even thinking about that.” But aides said he had broached the idea and critics said Tuesday’s pardons sent a clear message to his associates that he may yet clear them.
“The real test will be, what does this president do with Stone, Manafort and others who are directly connected to him and who have the ability to provide information that is harmful to him?” said Eric H. Holder Jr., who served as attorney general under President Barack Obama.
The president told reporters on Tuesday that Mr. Stone, a longtime friend and off-and-on adviser, and Mr. Flynn, a campaign adviser before serving briefly as his national security adviser, were both “treated very unfairly.” He called Mr. Stone’s conviction “a very, very rough thing” and said that Mr. Flynn’s “life has been destroyed.”
Mr. Stone, who was convicted in November of seven felonies for obstructing a congressional inquiry into the Trump campaign’s ties to WikiLeaks, which disseminated Democratic emails stolen by Russian agents, is scheduled to be sentenced on Thursday. Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. about his dealings with Russian officials but wants to withdraw his plea.
On Twitter, Mr. Trump cited a “Fox & Friends” legal analyst, Andrew Napolitano, who has insisted that the president “has every right” to intervene in a criminal case. He quoted Mr. Napolitano’s calls for Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to reconsider Mr. Stone’s case.
“Judge Jackson now has a request for a new trial based on the unambiguous & self outed bias of the foreperson,” Mr. Trump tweeted, quoting Mr. Napolitano.“Judge Jackson now has a request for a new trial based on the unambiguous & self outed bias of the foreperson,” Mr. Trump tweeted, quoting Mr. Napolitano.
Judge Jackson ruled Tuesday morning that Mr. Stone’s sentencing will go on as planned on Thursday despite last-ditch motions by his defense lawyers. She said she would allow the defense to file an amended motion for a new trial, give the government a chance to respond with its own filing and schedule a hearing if warranted. Defense lawyers are trying to argue that juror misconduct led to an unfair trial. Judge Jackson ruled Tuesday morning that Mr. Stone’s sentencing would go forward as planned on Thursday despite last-ditch motions by his defense lawyers. She said she would allow the defense to file an amended motion for a new trial, give the government a chance to respond with its own filing and schedule a hearing if warranted. Defense lawyers are trying to argue that juror misconduct led to an unfair trial.
The Justice Department has opposed their motion, a decision that Mr. Barr approved after prosecutors consulted more senior department officials, according to a Justice Department official. The handling of Mr. Stone’s case has generated tumult throughout the Justice Department and grabbed the attention of Washington’s broader legal establishment. After Mr. Barr scrapped the original sentencing recommendation in favor of a lighter one, the four career prosecutors handling the matter withdrew from the case and one resigned from the department entirely.
The handling of Mr. Stone’s case has generated tumult throughout the Justice Department and grabbed the attention of Washington’s broader legal establishment, including an association of federal judges. After Mr. Barr scrapped the prosecution team’s sentencing recommendation in favor of a much lighter one, four government lawyers withdrew from the case and one resigned from the department entirely. As the president has repeatedly pointed out, two of the four prosecutors had worked for the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, whose investigation of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election dogged Mr. Trump for two years. The president attacked Mr. Mueller’s team anew on Tuesday, saying if he were not president, he would sue it.
As the president has repeatedly pointed out, two of the four prosecutors had worked for the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, whose investigation of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election dogged Mr. Trump for nearly two years. The president attacked Mr. Mueller’s team anew on Tuesday, saying if he were not president, he would sue it. Mr. Trump tried to distance himself from Mr. Stone, saying he only worked for his presidential campaign briefly in 2015, before it gained momentum. Witnesses in Mr. Stone’s trial, however, testified that throughout the presidential race, he remained in contact with Mr. Trump and top campaign officials as an unofficial political adviser.
Mr. Stone, 67, was convicted of tampering with a witness, lying under oath and obstructing a congressional inquiry into whether the Trump campaign conspired with Russia to influence the 2016 election. Mr. Mueller’s inquiry ultimately found insufficient evidence to charge anyone associated with the campaign of conspiring with the Russians. The president said he had not intervened in Mr. Stone’s case, evidently making a distinction between his public commentaries and explicit orders, but added that he had the power to do so if he wanted. “Just so you understand, I chose not to be involved,” he said. “I’m allowed to be totally involved. I’m actually, I guess, the chief law enforcement officer of the country.”
Mr. Trump tried Tuesday to distance himself from Mr. Stone, saying he only worked for his presidential campaign briefly in 2015, before it gained momentum. Witnesses in Mr. Stone’s trial, however, testified that he remained in contact with Mr. Trump and top campaign officials throughout the presidential race as an unofficial political adviser. Republican congressional leaders defended Mr. Barr. “Suggestions from outside groups that the attorney general has fallen short of the responsibilities of his office are unfounded,” Senators Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Representative Kevin McCarthy of California said in a joint statement.
In a court filing last week, the prosecutors who handled Mr. Stone’s jury trial recommended that he be sentenced to seven to nine years in prison. But Mr. Barr, blaming the court filing on a miscommunication, said that punishment would be unduly harsh. Mr. Trump’s attacks on Judge Jackson generated alarms in the judiciary. The Federal Judges Association, a voluntary organization, scheduled an emergency telephone conference for this week. Judge Cynthia M. Rufe of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania told USA Today that the group wanted to discuss “plenty of issues that we are concerned about.”
His decision coincided with Mr. Trump’s criticism of the sentencing request as a “miscarriage of justice,” though Mr. Barr said he was not influenced by the president’s views. The prosecutors then abruptly pulled out of the case and more than 1,100 former prosecutors and department lawyers called on Mr. Barr to resign, saying he had failed to protect the department from political pressure. Mr. Trump countered that the judges should instead investigate misconduct in the Mueller investigation. “I hope the Federal Judges Association will discuss the tremendous FISA Court abuse that has taken place with respect to the Mueller Investigation Scam, including the forging of documents and knowingly using the fake and totally discredited Dossier before the Court,” he wrote on Twitter.
In a new sentencing memo, the government requested a much more lenient prison term but left it to Judge Jackson to determine its length. The role of Mr. Trump’s lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani in another politically fraught matter before the Justice Department has also come under scrutiny.
Mr. Barr defended his decision to ask for a lighter sentence on national television last week, saying he based it strictly on the merits of the case. But he also said that Mr. Trump’s public comments were putting him in an untenable position, and undermining his credibility and that the president had to stop. Mr. Barr said last week that the department had an “intake process” for information from Ukraine, prompting complaints that law enforcement officials were giving Mr. Giuliani special treatment because he has said he turned over evidence against former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son, Hunter Biden, about their dealings in Ukraine.
The next morning, Mr. Trump responded by tweet, saying he had the right to discuss specific criminal cases with the attorney general but had restrained himself. “This doesn’t mean that I do not have, as President, the legal right to do so, I do, but I have so far chosen not to!” Mr. Trump tweeted. Mr. Giuliani led the campaign to pressure Ukraine to announce investigations into Mr. Biden and other Democrats, a campaign that ultimately led the House to impeach Mr. Trump for abuse of power; he was acquitted this month in a Senate trial.
After reiterating that stance on Tuesday, he suggested that he was almost obligated to weigh in, calling himself the nation’s chief law enforcement officer. “You take a look at what’s happening to these people,” he told reporters. “Someone has to stick up for the people.” Asked if he intended to pardon Mr. Stone, he said, “I haven’t given it any thought.” A senior official clarified on Tuesday that the department routes all Ukraine matters through a central process, not to circumvent channels but to avoid duplicating efforts. The United States attorney in Brooklyn, Richard P. Donoghue, oversees the process, and his counterpart in Pittsburgh, Scott W. Brady, accepts any unsolicited information from the public, including from Mr. Giuliani, said the official, Stephen E. Boyd, an assistant attorney general.
He expressed satisfaction with his “very powerful” Twitter presence, which he said enables him to counter the thrust of news coverage by major outlets. He said he felt “at least a little bit proud” that someone had referred to him as “number one in the world on social media.” “The department regularly assigns U.S. attorneys to coordinate or focus on certain matters,” Mr. Boyd wrote in a letter to Representative Jerrold Nadler, Democrat of New York and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. The procedures do not give anyone “unique access to the department.”
Mr. Trump’s attacks on Judge Jackson appeared to prompt broad concern within Washington’s legal establishment. The Federal Judges Association, a voluntary organization, scheduled an emergency telephone conference for this week. Katie Benner and Michael D. Shear contributed reporting.
Judge Cynthia M. Rufe of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania told USA Today that the group wanted to discuss “plenty of issues that we are concerned about.”
The role of another Trump adviser, his lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani, in another politically fraught matter before the Justice Department has also come under scrutiny, and a law enforcement official sought on Tuesday to clarify the department’s handling of the issue.
Mr. Barr said last week that the department had an “intake process” for information from Ukraine, prompting complaints that law enforcement officials were giving Mr. Giuliani special treatment because he has said he turned over evidence against former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter Biden about their dealings in Ukraine.
Any information from Mr. Giuliani would be viewed as highly controversial because he has long urged further scrutiny of the Bidens, which could benefit the president by potentially undermining his political rivals.
A senior official clarified on Tuesday that the department routes all Ukraine matters through a central process, not to circumvent channels but to better coordinate and to avoid duplicating efforts. The United States attorney in Brooklyn, Richard Donoghue, oversees the process, and his counterpart in Pittsburgh, Scott Brady, accepts any unsolicited information from the public, including from Mr. Giuliani, said the official, Stephen E. Boyd, an assistant attorney general.
“The department regularly assigns U.S. attorneys to coordinate or focus on certain matters,” Mr. Boyd wrote in a letter to Representative Jerrold Nadler, Democrat of New York and the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. The procedures do not give anyone “unique access to the department,” Mr. Boyd added.
Katie Benner contributed reporting.