Warm Southern Breeze

"… there is no such thing as nothing."

Overwhelming Voices: “Actions… require Mr. Barr to resign” As 1100 Former DOJ Employees Decry Corruption

Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Monday, February 17, 2020

Inept. Incompetent. Careless. Reckless. Unethical. Immoral. Contemptuous. Brazen. Illegal. Nefarious. Corrupted. Wicked. Criminal. Deceitful. Perfidious. Duplicitous. Recreant. Treacherous.

Those adjectives, and more, characterize not only the POTUS, but his entire administration.

“Political interference in the conduct of a criminal prosecution is
anathema to the Department’s core mission
and to its

sacred obligation
to

ensure
equal justice under the law.”

Recently, in contravention of ethical protocol, Attorney General William “Bill” Barr intervened following the Federal conviction of Roger Stone, a corrupt Republican political operative known for his “dirty tricks” – whom has a bizarre adoration of Richard Nixon to the extent he has a tattoo of Nixon’s face on his upper back – who was found guilty on all counts with which he was charged, which included:

1 count – Obstruction of an Official Proceeding;
5 counts – False statements, and;
1 count – Witness Tampering.

In an official memorandum written by the DOJ last week, Barr’s office wrote in part, that,

“The government respectfully submits that a sentence of incarceration far less than 87 to 108 months’ imprisonment would be reasonable under the circumstances.”

“While it remains the position of the United States that a sentence of incarceration is warranted here, the government respectfully submits that the range of 87 to 108 months presented as the applicable advisory Guidelines range would not be appropriate or serve the interests of justice in this case.”

United States Attorney General William “Bill” Barr

Following Barr’s interference, all FOUR career Federal Prosecutors in the Roger Stone case resigned following the Attorney General’s recommendation that the Prosecuting Attorneys recommendation of 7-9 years as Stone’s punishment be significantly reduced.

The four whom resigned are:
Aaron S.J. Zelinsky, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney (lead prosecutor), and U.S. Attorney in Maryland;
Jonathan Kravis, Assistant U.S. Attorney, from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia (whom also resigned from the DOJ entirely);
Adam C. Jed, Special Assistant U.S. Attorney;
Michael J. Marando, Assistant U.S. Attorney, also Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia.

To say that there’s little confidence left in the Department of Justice (DOJ), would be a diplomatically generous characterization.

“Mr. Barr’s actions
in doing the President’s personal bidding
unfortunately
speak louder than his words.”

Most recently, in response to his meddling, over 1100 former DOJ employees have publicly called upon Barr to resign.

Writing in part, they identified that “The Justice Manual — the DOJ’s rulebook for its lawyers — states that “the rule of law depends on the evenhanded administration of justice”; that the Department’s legal decisions “must be impartial and insulated from political influence”; and that the Department’s prosecutorial powers, in particular, must be “exercised free from partisan consideration.””

They further stated wholehearted support for the four now-resigned prosecutors in the Stone case, by writing that,

“We support and commend the four career prosecutors who upheld their oaths and stood up for the Department’s independence by withdrawing from the Stone case and/or resigning from the Department. Our simple message to them is that we — and millions of other Americans — stand with them. And we call on every DOJ employee to follow their heroic example and be prepared to report future abuses to the Inspector General, the Office of Professional Responsibility, and Congress; to refuse to carry out directives that are inconsistent with their oaths of office; to withdraw from cases that involve such directives or other misconduct; and, if necessary, to resign and report publicly — in a manner consistent with professional ethics — to the American people the reasons for their resignation.”

Acknowledging that Barr is unlikely to resign, despite the overwhelming numbers of voices calling for him to do so, they wrote that,

“It is wrong for the President to interfere in specific enforcement matters, either to punish his opponents or to help his friends; and that the President’s public comments on DOJ matters have gravely damaged the Department’s credibility. But Mr. Barr’s actions in doing the President’s personal bidding unfortunately speak louder than his words. Those actions, and the damage they have done to the Department of Justice’s reputation for integrity and the rule of law, require Mr. Barr to resign. But because we have little expectation he will do so, it falls to the Department’s career officials to take appropriate action to uphold their oaths of office and defend nonpartisan, apolitical justice.”

The group stated that the reason for their actions were not motivated by political interests, and cited that they had all worked in the administrations of Presidents in the Republican, and Democratic parties. They wholeheartedly, and unequivocally stated that Barr’s “behavior is a grave threat to the fair administration of justice.”

They noted further that “President Trump and Attorney General Barr have openly and repeatedly flouted this fundamental principle, most recently in connection with the sentencing of President Trump’s close associate, Roger Stone, who was convicted of serious crimes. The Department has a long-standing practice in which political appointees set broad policies that line prosecutors apply to individual cases. That practice exists to animate the constitutional principles regarding the even-handed application of the law.”

Stone’s sentencing is set for Thursday, 20 February 2020, and District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who presided over his trial, will sentence him.

DOJ Alumni Statement on the Events Surrounding the Sentencing of Roger Stone

Their full letter and public statement opens and reads in part that:

“We, the undersigned, are alumni of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) who have collectively served both Republican and Democratic administrations. Each of us strongly condemns President Trump’s and Attorney General Barr’s interference in the fair administration of justice.

“As former DOJ officials, we each proudly took an oath to support and defend our Constitution and faithfully execute the duties of our offices. The very first of these duties is to apply the law equally to all Americans. This obligation flows directly from the Constitution, and it is embedded in countless rules and laws governing the conduct of DOJ lawyers. The Justice Manual — the DOJ’s rulebook for its lawyers — states that “the rule of law depends on the evenhanded administration of justice”; that the Department’s legal decisions “must be impartial and insulated from political influence”; and that the Department’s prosecutorial powers, in particular, must be “exercised free from partisan consideration.”

“All DOJ lawyers are well-versed in these rules, regulations, and constitutional commands. They stand for the proposition that political interference in the conduct of a criminal prosecution is anathema to the Department’s core mission and to its sacred obligation to ensure equal justice under the law.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

 
%d bloggers like this: