National Review Online
Friday, February 14, 2020
Attorney General Bill Barr rightly and understandably
rebuked government by presidential tweet in a notable ABC News interview on
Thursday.
The attorney general said that President Trump was making
his job “impossible” by constantly commenting on an ongoing criminal case, and
one involving Trump’s longtime associate Roger Stone.
The latest Trump melodrama involves the DOJ’s sentencing
recommendation in the Stone case. On Monday, prosecutors recommended a harsh
seven-to-nine-year sentence after Stone’s conviction for lying to Congress and
obstructing justice.
There is often an equity issue in who gets caught up in
special-counsel probes — and nailed to the wall for offenses that others get
away with — and who does not. In the case of Stone, Robert Mueller had a
particular interest in the gadfly as a possible instrument of collusion with
the Russians and, though that obviously didn’t pan out, threw the book at him
for his dishonesty and shady maneuverings. There is no doubt that Stone is
guilty of what he’s accused of — indeed, since he committed some of the
offenses in writing, it is simply a matter of the record.
The question is how he should be punished. The
prosecutors who have been running the case out of the U.S. attorney’s office
for the District of Columbia since Mueller closed up shop went with the maximum
recommendation. The sentencing guidelines add significant jail time if the
offender has threatened a witness, which Stone — living out his bizarre fantasy
life as a protagonist in the latter-day Watergate — did, although the subject
of the threats (Stone confederate Randy Credico, whose dog was also threatened)
says he didn’t take them seriously.
The recommendation was firmly within Justice Department
guidelines, and yet was still excessive, treating Stone as if he were a mobster
or gangbanger instead of a kooky 67-year-old with no history of violent crime.
The recommendation also apparently wasn’t what Bill Barr, by his own account,
had expected. In his ABC interview, the attorney general said he had already
decided to revise the recommendation when Trump began tweeting his outrage at
the handling of the case, creating the inevitable impression that the president
had intervened in a criminal matter to help a friend.
Trump’s tweets aren’t very careful as a general matter,
but the subcategory of tweets about pending investigations and cases is
particularly problematic. This isn’t the first time that Trump has unwisely
commented on such matters, apparently oblivious that his words now carry much
more weight than they did when he was the host of Celebrity Apprentice.
Barr’s harsh words about the tweets are welcome. One can
only hope that the president heeds them, although nothing has been able to get
between his thumbs and his Twitter account to this point. Barr is an able and
experienced public servant who deserves better, and so — needless to say — does
the reputation of our system of justice.
No comments:
Post a Comment