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/2020/02/20/us/roger-stone-sentencing.html
The article has changed 15 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 8 | Version 9 |
|---|---|
| Roger Stone Is Sentenced to Over 3 Years in Prison | Roger Stone Is Sentenced to Over 3 Years in Prison |
| (about 2 hours later) | |
| WASHINGTON — Roger J. Stone Jr., a longtime friend of President Trump’s, was sentenced Thursday to more than three years in prison for obstructing a congressional inquiry in a bid to protect the president. | |
| The case against Mr. Stone, 67, who has known and advised Mr. Trump for years, had become a cause célèbre among the president’s supporters. Mr. Trump has attacked the prosecutors, the jury forewoman and the federal judge overseeing the trial, casting his former campaign adviser as the victim of a vendetta by law enforcement. | |
| Hours after the sentencing, Mr. Trump lashed out again at the authorities for prosecuting Mr. Stone and claimed his trial was unfair, but he said he would not intervene using his clemency powers at this point. | |
| “I’m not going to do anything in terms of the great powers bestowed on a president of the United States,” he said at an event in Las Vegas for former convicts easing back into society. “I want the process to play out. I think that’s the best thing to do because I’d love to see Roger exonerated — and I’d love to see it happen — because personally I think he was treated unfairly.” | |
| Instead, he said he would wait to see how the case is ultimately resolved, leaving a clear impression that he would issue a pardon or commutation if he were unsatisfied. “We will watch the process and watch it very closely,” Mr. Trump said. “And at some point, I will make a determination. But Roger Stone and everybody has to be treated fairly. And this has not been a fair process. OK?” | |
| Mr. Stone was convicted of lying to congressional investigators and trying to block the testimony of a witness who would have exposed his lies to the House Intelligence Committee. At the time, the panel was investigating whether Mr. Trump’s campaign conspired with the Russian government to influence the 2016 presidential election. | Mr. Stone was convicted of lying to congressional investigators and trying to block the testimony of a witness who would have exposed his lies to the House Intelligence Committee. At the time, the panel was investigating whether Mr. Trump’s campaign conspired with the Russian government to influence the 2016 presidential election. |
| His sentencing played out amid extraordinary upheaval at the Justice Department set off by Attorney General William P. Barr overruling prosecutors on the case who had asked for a seven- to nine-year sentence. Mr. Barr said that was too harsh. | His sentencing played out amid extraordinary upheaval at the Justice Department set off by Attorney General William P. Barr overruling prosecutors on the case who had asked for a seven- to nine-year sentence. Mr. Barr said that was too harsh. |
| Judge Amy Berman Jackson excoriated Mr. Stone, saying his efforts to thwart a legitimate congressional inquiry of national importance were “a threat to our most fundamental institutions, to the very foundation of our democracy.” But she stopped well short of the original prosecutors’ recommendation and handed down a sentence of 40 months in prison. | |
| Without mentioning Mr. Trump or any of his allies by name, Judge Jackson seemed to point to their conduct, too. “The dismay and the disgust at the attempts by others to defend his actions as just business as usual in our polarized climate should transcend party,” she said. | |
| Mr. Stone is among a half-dozen former Trump aides to be convicted — many on charges of lying to investigators or obstructing inquiries — in cases stemming from the investigation by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, into Russia’s election interference. Most already served their sentences or are in prison. | Mr. Stone is among a half-dozen former Trump aides to be convicted — many on charges of lying to investigators or obstructing inquiries — in cases stemming from the investigation by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, into Russia’s election interference. Most already served their sentences or are in prison. |
| Mr. Stone’s lawyers were expected to appeal. | Mr. Stone’s lawyers were expected to appeal. |
| The case also prompted a virtual standoff between the president and Mr. Barr over Mr. Trump’s comments about it. The president has criticized the jury’s verdict, claiming that “the real crimes were on the other side.” He intensified those attacks after the prosecutors recommended that Mr. Stone be sentenced to seven to nine years in prison. Their request, Mr. Trump said, was “horrible and very unfair” and constituted a “miscarriage of justice.” | |
| Almost simultaneously, Mr. Barr overruled the prosecutors’ sentencing recommendation and a new one was filed in court. It recommended a prison term well below seven to nine years but left the specific length of time up to the judge. The reversal, more aligned with Mr. Trump’s preference, led all four prosecutors to withdraw from the case. One resigned from the Justice Department entirely. | Almost simultaneously, Mr. Barr overruled the prosecutors’ sentencing recommendation and a new one was filed in court. It recommended a prison term well below seven to nine years but left the specific length of time up to the judge. The reversal, more aligned with Mr. Trump’s preference, led all four prosecutors to withdraw from the case. One resigned from the Justice Department entirely. |
| John Crabb Jr., a prosecutor in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, apologized during the sentencing hearing for “the confusion” over the government’s sentencing position and stressed that the prosecutors who quit from the case were not to blame. | John Crabb Jr., a prosecutor in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, apologized during the sentencing hearing for “the confusion” over the government’s sentencing position and stressed that the prosecutors who quit from the case were not to blame. |
| He said that department policy is to follow the sentencing guidelines in recommending punishment, and those prosecutors did so. He also said the department continued to believe that aggravating factors in the case had boosted the penalty recommended under the guidelines for Mr. Stone fivefold. “The Department of Justice and the United States attorney’s office is committed to enforcing the law without fear, favor or political influence,” he said. | He said that department policy is to follow the sentencing guidelines in recommending punishment, and those prosecutors did so. He also said the department continued to believe that aggravating factors in the case had boosted the penalty recommended under the guidelines for Mr. Stone fivefold. “The Department of Justice and the United States attorney’s office is committed to enforcing the law without fear, favor or political influence,” he said. |
| He said Mr. Stone’s offenses were serious and worthy of a “substantial period of incarceration,” but left it up to the judge to decide the right punishment. He blamed the competing sentencing memorandums on “miscommunication” between Timothy Shea, the interim United States attorney, and his superiors at Justice Department headquarters. | He said Mr. Stone’s offenses were serious and worthy of a “substantial period of incarceration,” but left it up to the judge to decide the right punishment. He blamed the competing sentencing memorandums on “miscommunication” between Timothy Shea, the interim United States attorney, and his superiors at Justice Department headquarters. |
| Judge Jackson questioned him closely about the process, asking whether he wrote the second sentencing memorandum or simply signed it. And she asked him point-blank about the last-minute switch in the prosecution team. “Is there anything you would like to say about why you are standing there today?” she demanded. | Judge Jackson questioned him closely about the process, asking whether he wrote the second sentencing memorandum or simply signed it. And she asked him point-blank about the last-minute switch in the prosecution team. “Is there anything you would like to say about why you are standing there today?” she demanded. |
| Mr. Crabb deflected some of her questions, saying, “I apologize I cannot engage in discussions of internal deliberations.” | Mr. Crabb deflected some of her questions, saying, “I apologize I cannot engage in discussions of internal deliberations.” |
| The case ignited a broader controversy as former and current government lawyers accused Mr. Barr of failing to protect the department from improper political influence from the White House. In an open letter, more than 2,000 former Justice Department employees have called for Mr. Barr to resign, claiming “interference in the fair administration of justice” by both the attorney general and the president. | The case ignited a broader controversy as former and current government lawyers accused Mr. Barr of failing to protect the department from improper political influence from the White House. In an open letter, more than 2,000 former Justice Department employees have called for Mr. Barr to resign, claiming “interference in the fair administration of justice” by both the attorney general and the president. |
| In a television interview last Thursday, Mr. Barr said he had decided to recommend a more lenient punishment for Mr. Stone based on the merits of the case. He also asked the president to stop publicly opining about the department’s criminal cases, saying it was making his job “impossible.” | In a television interview last Thursday, Mr. Barr said he had decided to recommend a more lenient punishment for Mr. Stone based on the merits of the case. He also asked the president to stop publicly opining about the department’s criminal cases, saying it was making his job “impossible.” |
| But Mr. Trump has continued his commentary, putting him at loggerheads with Mr. Barr in a drama that has gripped Washington and seems to have no clear resolution. | But Mr. Trump has continued his commentary, putting him at loggerheads with Mr. Barr in a drama that has gripped Washington and seems to have no clear resolution. |
| After the hearing began, Mr. Trump again criticized the case as unfair, accusing two former F.B.I. officials, the former director James B. Comey and a former deputy director, Andrew G. McCabe, of crimes that have not been charged or prosecuted. | After the hearing began, Mr. Trump again criticized the case as unfair, accusing two former F.B.I. officials, the former director James B. Comey and a former deputy director, Andrew G. McCabe, of crimes that have not been charged or prosecuted. |
| In a last-ditch effort to delay the sentencing, Mr. Stone’s lawyers moved for a new trial on the basis of juror misconduct — a claim that Mr. Trump highlighted in one of his tweets. | In a last-ditch effort to delay the sentencing, Mr. Stone’s lawyers moved for a new trial on the basis of juror misconduct — a claim that Mr. Trump highlighted in one of his tweets. |
| Judge Jackson said she would review the motion and the government’s response and would schedule a hearing if necessary. But she refused to put off Mr. Stone’s sentencing while those efforts were underway. | Judge Jackson said she would review the motion and the government’s response and would schedule a hearing if necessary. But she refused to put off Mr. Stone’s sentencing while those efforts were underway. |
| At the sentencing, Judge Jackson took special umbrage at the defense team’s argument to the jury that Mr. Stone’s lies did not matter. “The truth still exists. The truth still matters” in official government proceedings, she said. Otherwise, she said, “everyone loses.” | At the sentencing, Judge Jackson took special umbrage at the defense team’s argument to the jury that Mr. Stone’s lies did not matter. “The truth still exists. The truth still matters” in official government proceedings, she said. Otherwise, she said, “everyone loses.” |
| In their initial sentencing memorandum, federal prosecutors said that Mr. Stone deserved a stiff sentence because he threatened a witness with bodily harm, deceived congressional investigators and carried out an extensive, deliberate, illegal scheme that included repeatedly lying under oath and forging documents. | In their initial sentencing memorandum, federal prosecutors said that Mr. Stone deserved a stiff sentence because he threatened a witness with bodily harm, deceived congressional investigators and carried out an extensive, deliberate, illegal scheme that included repeatedly lying under oath and forging documents. |
| Even after he was charged in a felony indictment, the prosecutors said, Mr. Stone continued to try to manipulate the administration of justice by threatening Judge Jackson in a social media post and violating her gag orders. Those and other factors justified a stiff sentence under advisory federal guidelines, they said. | Even after he was charged in a felony indictment, the prosecutors said, Mr. Stone continued to try to manipulate the administration of justice by threatening Judge Jackson in a social media post and violating her gag orders. Those and other factors justified a stiff sentence under advisory federal guidelines, they said. |
| The witness, a New York radio host named Randy Credico, ultimately invoked his Fifth Amendment rights rather than testify before the House Intelligence Committee, although he later was interviewed by the F.B.I. and appeared before a federal grand jury. | The witness, a New York radio host named Randy Credico, ultimately invoked his Fifth Amendment rights rather than testify before the House Intelligence Committee, although he later was interviewed by the F.B.I. and appeared before a federal grand jury. |
| In a letter submitted to the judge on Mr. Stone’s behalf, Mr. Credico undercut the prosecutors’ argument, saying he never feared that Mr. Stone himself would harm him. But during the trial, he testified that he feared that Mr. Stone, a well-known political commentator, could create havoc in his life if he did not bend to his wishes, and prosecutors said he feared that Mr. Stone could stir others to violence. | In a letter submitted to the judge on Mr. Stone’s behalf, Mr. Credico undercut the prosecutors’ argument, saying he never feared that Mr. Stone himself would harm him. But during the trial, he testified that he feared that Mr. Stone, a well-known political commentator, could create havoc in his life if he did not bend to his wishes, and prosecutors said he feared that Mr. Stone could stir others to violence. |
| The second sentencing memo, signed by Mr. Shea, said Mr. Stone should be imprisoned but that a term of seven to nine years would be excessive. “Ultimately, the government defers to the court as to what specific sentence is appropriate under the facts and circumstances of this case,” Mr. Shea wrote. | |
| Zach Montague contributed reporting. | Zach Montague contributed reporting. |