DOJ IG Finds Bill Barr’s Personal Intervention in Roger Stone Sentencing “Highly Unusual” But Not Illegal
DOJ IG has released their long-awaited report on Bill Barr’s intervention in the Roger Stone sentencing.
The takeaway conclusion is that Barr (who refused to cooperate, as did several others) did not intervene in response to Trump’s tweets that day. Based on newly installed Acting US Attorney Tim Shea’s intervention, he had already intervened. DOJ IG concluded that Barr’s intervention was highly unsual, but did not look bad.
We recognize that the Department’s handling of the sentencing in the Stone case was highly unusual, including its filing of a second sentencing memorandum and DOJ leadership’s personal involvement in the preparation of that second memorandum. Moreover, Shea’s and Barr’s participation in the Stone sentencing, given their status as Administration political appointees and Stone’s relationship with the then President, resulted in questions being asked and allegations being made about the Department’s decision making. However, absent a law, rule, regulation, or Department policy that prohibits their participation (none of which exist here), whether the U.S. Attorney and/or the Attorney General should personally participate in such a matter is ultimately left to their discretion and judgment, including their assessment of how such involvement will affect public perceptions of the federal justice system and the Department’s integrity, independence, and objectivity
The report concluded that Aaron Zelinsky did not intentionally lie when he claimed there was a great deal of pressure. His belief that that was the case was good faith.
I’ll have more later.
Highly Unusual. Mark that phrase. I’m thinking it could be useful in firing Weiss. Not illegal, just highly unusual.
“The scandal isn’t what’s illegal, the scandal is what’s legal.” Kinsley’s Axiom
Is this their way of saying it looks wrong and may even be wrong, but since there no regulation forbidding it, then it can be done. The “Honorable” deserves a red line through it. Barr has no honor.
I read this bit by DOJ IG:
as a broad hint to legislators that this needs legislation or USAG/USAs will continue to interfere at their discretion and judgment.
Or at the very least a Department policy which Garland could implement if Congressional clowns can’t get it together.
At a minimum, but you know a GOP administration would completely disregard it if only a DOJ rule.
At the very least, a department policy seems like something that can be done now, to serve as a tripwire for the next admin if the first thing they do is get rid of that rule
I read as both, what you and TREPping said. Seems also similar to SCOTUS’s turning immunity into redefining the “outer extent” of executive authority, or more succinctly described as the CYA provision.
(Perfect photo of Barr for this article, btw)
The in group is protected but not bound by the law.
When the highest officer in a government department that is tasked with upholding the law does something “highly unusual” to assist a friend/supporter of his political master, that in itself undermines the core role of the department. But have I just referred to Barr’s untruthful summary of Mueller’s report, the folding of the Stone prosecution, or the pipeline for Giuliani’s disinformation campaign? Barr’s entire second term as USAG was all about doing “highly unusual” things to achieve unethical outcomes. Was he clever enough to do it all without leaving any evidence that could convict him of a crime? So far, the answer is in the affirmative.
I totally agree, but I did want to thank you for focusing on “Highly Unusual”. Now I hear Olivia’s voice in Beetlejuice, saying “I, myself, am Highly Unusual”.
Illegal is a high bar. There”s a barrel load of misconduct and impropriety – well short of illegality – that generates sanctions and other negative consequences for individuals, government employees, and legal professionals, starting with the mere appearance of impropriety.
EOH.
I See the humor in this comment.
“that generates sanctions and other negative consequences for individuals, government employees, and legal professionals, starting with the mere appearance of impropriety.”
Your ability at comedy and snark is “PAR excellence”! Thank you for that super precise comment.
LOL – especially when I think of the “honorable” Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas related to his “friendships” with Harlan Crow and members of the Heritage Foundations.
Happy Friday.
As if Deliverance Sessions preceding DarkBarr did nothing improper? Not defending either of them, to be sure.
Whataboutism. As you concede, both were dismal US AGs. Barr was far more competent and less restrained by the law, which made his improper and illegal conduct more damaging. As with his earlier stint as AG, that’s what he was there for.
Marcy’s front page photo on top of this post of Barr, is quintessential. Right down to his placard: “The Honorable William P. Barr”. Living proof the placard can’t make the man.
I can’t imagine what its like living in his skin.
NYT today regarding murdoch trying to change his irrevocable trust : To bolster his argument that he’s making the change in order to benefit all of his heirs, Mr. Murdoch has moved to replace two of his longtime executives as his personal representatives on the trust with two people with more independence. One is William P. Barr, an attorney general under Presidents George H.W. Bush and Trump, who was also a guest at Mr. Murdoch’s most recent wedding.
Wow. I think Rupert’s family might have grounds for declaring him incompetent and in need of guardianship and conservatorship.
If Bill Barr has been courting Rupert Murdoch for a starring role in Murdoch’s trust, then Barr reminds me of Roy Cohn trying the same approach with Lewis Rosenstiel back in the 1970s.
Roy and Bill, two hoodlum thug attorneys trying to steal from the rightful heirs.
After skimming a couple articles about this, it sounds like Murdoch wants to leave Lachlan in control and not let the other 3 siblings (who may be more politically moderate) influence the conservative flavor of coverage at Faux News etc. Replacing one his “personal representatives” with Barr, is supposed to bolster his argument that he’s making the change “to benefit all of his heirs”. (lol)
This Variety article re-reports the jist of the NYT article:
https://variety.com/2024/tv/news/rupert-murdoch-lachlan-james-elisabeth-prudence-family-trust-change-1236083868/
Highly Unusual!
Added:
EW Edit: Para 2 “highly unsual,” to fix?
You have to wonder if the conclusion would be the same for a Democrat-appointed AG and a defendant named Clinton.
Actually, you don’t have to wonder.
Of course it is not “illegal”. Inappropriate and unethical is a different story.
I’d not been anticipating any report on the Barr-Stone matter but if I had then this is exactly what I would expect. The universal institutional response is always put such things to bed unless there is pressure from headlines and chatter. Circle the wagons and it’s easy if nobody is making a stink. Nobody chatters about Bill Barr. On a the Clout scale in America he sits at the pinnacle and nobody who intends a career in writing or talking or being a haver of opinions, for a paycheck, dares question the big man. I don’t have the stomach to try and understand where Barr’s Mr. Gravitas or whatever the hell it is came from, which has now become shtick.
Well there is the American Roman Catholic Boy fascist thing. It’s everywhere and always has been. He’s their guy. So there is that. And the great accomplishment in life, in service to whatever he thinks he is serving, God or destiny I suppose, is to bail out a grubby little libertine rat fucker. Which goes right along with serving Trump, another real piece of work. Which is about par for the course for our Boy fascists. It’s tragic really but at least so far on a small scale.
Garland suffers from two fatal flaws as AG.
Firstly he is an institutionalist to a ridiculous degree. He puts what he perceives as defending the institution above enforcing the law. This is why it took what may be a fatal amount of time before going after Trump and his criminal associates lawless behavior.
Secondly he wants to avoid being tagged as partisan so much that he appears cowardly. He ignores blatant criminal activities by elected officials because they hold office and will use their positions to attack both him and the DOJ. (I’m specifically thinking of Jim Jordan.) This is a fool’s errand because the MAGA congress members go after him because he is breathing, and they want nothing more then turn the DOJ into the KGB or Gestapo.
No one seems to have thought this through, but if Harris wins the Presidency Garland will be shown the door. As a former state AG who has weathered intense criticism Harris will find someone for AG who will take names and kick ass. That means Barr, Stone, Sessions (everyone seems to have forgotten about that snake) and a raft of other may find themselves lawyering up and rehearsing deposition testimony. Martha Stewart did time for lying under oath, and that’s the least of the trouble that some of those co-conspirators could be facing.
Can’t say I understand most of this comment since the post is about the IG report on Barr, but of course it stands to reason that Garland will likely be out as AG if Kamala wins, if only for the simple fact that choosing the makeup of their cabinets is every President’s prerogative. Furthermore, even if Biden was still running and won, Garland sticking around isn’t guaranteed as cabinet officers don’t always last for a second presidential term.
Bill Barr is a “whitewash artist” for what used to be the traditional GOP. When prominent GOP operatives get into big legal trouble, they call for this bloated blowhard. He helped Bush I preemptively pardon Caspar Weinberger and five others in the Iran Contra scandal to avoid Bush having to disclose his personal diaries in a criminal trial, which would have shown Bush and others knew about the misappropriated arms sales to Iran before they happened. Barr also blocked naming an independent counsel in the “Iraqgate” scandal in the late 1980s which would have shown that Reagan’s team sold Saddam Hussein much of the hardware and precursor chemicals for nuclear and chemical weapons production, an egregious violation of international anti-proliferation treaties. Barr’s mischaracterization of the Mueller report and papering over of the 10 instances of obstruction of justice Mueller identified by Trump, stands as a virtual crime against humanity, in my opinion. Bill Barr belongs in prison.
I have been reading about the Rosenberg trial. This sort of behavior did not use to be unusual.
Opus Dei strikes again.
The Jesuits have a long history of the ends justifying the means.
The ends never justify the means. It’s a process: in effect, the means are the ends.