HawkShack.com

This was a pretty extraordinary remark by Attorney General William Barr:

Attorney General William Barr publicly swiped at President Donald Trump on Thursday, declaring the president’s tweets about Justice Department prosecutors and open cases “make it impossible for me to do my job.”

Barr made the comment during an interview with ABC News just days after his Justice Department overruled its own prosecutors — who had recommended in a court filing that Trump’s longtime ally and confidant Roger Stone be sentenced to 7 to 9 years in prison — and took the extraordinary step of lowering the amount of prison time it would seek. The department didn't offer an amended number.

Apparently there was a near revolt within the Justice Department regarding the prosecutors in the Stone case and that Barr had been trying to convince his people that the recommended sentence was too high but when Trump started opening his cake hole, it undercut Barr as the timing of his tweets made it look like Barr acted under pressure from the POTUS when according to Barr, he had acted independently.

Barr has also gone on to complain about Trump's tweets about judges before which they have cases that are to appear before them. I've never heard an AG complain about his bosses' habits to the degree of which Barr is complaining about Trump.

This is just another of many examples at to why I think that Donald Trump is a piss poor manager. He'd be impossible to work for.

Near revolt? 4 prosecutors working the case quit over the amended sentencing. (three quit the case, one quit the DOJ all together)

And I don't buy Barr's timeline. I think Trump tweeted, Barr acquiesced, his department revolted, he defended himself by saying "it was my idea all along" and now that people are calling for him to resign he's finally standing up to Trump. To a degree ...

c_hawkbob wrote:Near revolt? 4 prosecutors working the case quit over the amended sentencing. (three quit the case, one quit the DOJ all together)

And I don't buy Barr's timeline. I think Trump tweeted, Barr acquiesced, his department revolted, he defended himself by saying "it was my idea all along" and now that people are calling for him to resign he's finally standing up to Trump. To a degree ...

Being that Barr was so unusually forthcoming regarding his dismay about having to deal with Trump's interference, I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt regarding his timeline.

I can't remember any AG, or for that matter, any cabinet member of any administration being as critical in public about their boss's rather juvenile habits and the problems it's causing them in performing their duties as Barr has been with Trump. Certainly there's been the "kiss and tell" books that followed months or years after having served, but not in real time.

You're an old wrinkle faced Boomer like me. Can you remember a situation analogous to this one?

Trump's used to always having his way. Only Trumpbots defend this behavior as "draining the swamp" and fighting the establishment. Stone is straight up dirty and establishment along with a bunch of other Trump cronies. Not even sure why some pretend they aren't. No swamp has been drained, just replaced by the Trump swamp.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Trump's used to always having his way. Only Trumpbots defend this behavior as "draining the swamp" and fighting the establishment. Stone is straight up dirty and establishment along with a bunch of other Trump cronies. Not even sure why some pretend they aren't. No swamp has been drained, just replaced by the Trump swamp.

Yup. Spoiled rich kid syndrome. Although there's a big difference in scale as none of those I knew were billionaires, I've grown up with, gone to school with, and worked with enough of them to know them when I see them, and Trump fits the spoiled rich kid syndrome to a 'T'. He's never had to manage by building a consensus and convincing his subordinates that his view is the correct one, a process his attorney general was trying to do (according to Barr's account) until Trump undercut him. He only knows how to dictate to others by the use of his power and threats to coerce his people into doing what he wants. Pi$$ poor management style.

c_hawkbob wrote:Near revolt? 4 prosecutors working the case quit over the amended sentencing. (three quit the case, one quit the DOJ all together)

And I don't buy Barr's timeline. I think Trump tweeted, Barr acquiesced, his department revolted, he defended himself by saying "it was my idea all along" and now that people are calling for him to resign he's finally standing up to Trump. To a degree ...

RiverDog wrote:Being that Barr was so unusually forthcoming regarding his dismay about having to deal with Trump's interference, I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt regarding his timeline.

I can't remember any AG, or for that matter, any cabinet member of any administration being as critical in public about their boss's rather juvenile habits and the problems it's causing them in performing their duties as Barr has been with Trump. Certainly there's been the "kiss and tell" books that followed months or years after having served, but not in real time.

You're an old wrinkle faced Boomer like me. Can you remember a situation analogous to this one?

No I can't.

As for Barr being "so unusually forthcoming regarding his dismay about having to deal with Trump's interference", as I said:

https://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/more-th ... YaulGhU-Ww

He's in full scramble.

c_hawkbob wrote:As for Barr being "so unusually forthcoming regarding his dismay about having to deal with Trump's interference", as I said:

https://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/more-th ... YaulGhU-Ww

He's in full scramble.

I am in complete agreement with you that Barr is knee deep in alligators and I don't contest the accuracy of the article you posted. But it doesn't mean that Barr's timeline is wrong. It's entirely possible that he could have been acting independent of Trump and "in full scramble" before Trump sent out his tweets just as he claims.

Trump can't help himself. He's drawn to Twitter like a moth to a flame. He just can't keep his mouth shut.

No, it doesn't mean that his timeline is wrong, but I thoroughly believe that to be the case. This link wasn't to prove the point conclusively, merely to support the logic behind it.

c_hawkbob wrote:No, it doesn't mean that his timeline is wrong, but I thoroughly believe that to be the case. This link wasn't to prove the point conclusively, merely to support the logic behind it.

I guess whether or not the timeline is right or not is beside the point. The point I was trying to make is that it's an extraordinary development when a cabinet member publicly complains about his boss.

And yes, they've created a frigging mess. They really ought to take the Justice Department out of the Executive Branch and have it report to the Supreme Court. This is by far the most blatant example of abuse but it isn't the only one.

I dont believe the walrus one minute when he says he acted independently of Trump in this last instance with Stone. It came after a presidential tweet. If Barr had truly cared about an appearance of impropriety he would have laid off the case rather than stick his neck out for a felon lifetime dirty trickster scumbag with a Nixon tattoo on his back. . He's replaced the prosecutor overseeing Flynns case as well among legal manipulations as Barr is reportedly reviewing Flynn's call with russia. This was a guy heavily lawyered up who pled guilty . Stone went to jury trial. Guys who go to jury trial with big time lawyers and lose normally get punished for it. Considering that and the profile of the case the sentence was not out of line.
I'll grant that Barr fired a shot over Trump's bow with the tweeting comments. maybe he's tired of carrying water for the constant corruption. Of course the response was predictable, Trump can tweet about anything, he knows better than his AG, his Sec of State, generals, whoever, he's a stable genius.

Barr 5 did throw some red meat to the protesting horde of federal prosecutors and members of the press,people in the congress calling for him to resign by announcing Andrew McCabe would not face prosecution. Trump is enraged. But regarding timing Barrs decision came within a day of the leak that the judge in the case had referred to the case as "a banana republic type prosecution" in open court.Still it will not endear him to trump. But the destruction of his reputation within the legal community and all but the staunchest trump allies has already occured.

This is the sleaziest in the bag justice department ever or should I say AG. The worst.

Hawktawk wrote:Stone went to jury trial. Guys who go to jury trial with big time lawyers and lose normally get punished for it. Considering that and the profile of the case the sentence was not out of line.

I don't know what the sentencing guidelines are for witness tampering and lying to investigators or what people that were convicted of similar crimes received, but 9 years seems like A LOT for a non violent, victimless crime and no previous convictions. This isn't John Gotti or El Chapo that we're talking about. But I do agree that based on his failure to cooperate and his abhorrent behavior during his trial that he shouldn't be given a huge break.

I'm not sure why Barr and the White House is so concerned anyway. It's only a recommendation and the judge is not obliged to accept them. Trump can pardon Stone and not give anymore reason than "it's a witch hunt."

RiverDog wrote:
I don't know what the sentencing guidelines are for witness tampering and lying to investigators or what people that were convicted of similar crimes received, but 9 years seems like A LOT for a non violent, victimless crime and no previous convictions. This isn't John Gotti or El Chapo that we're talking about. But I do agree that based on his failure to cooperate and his abhorrent behavior during his trial that he shouldn't be given a huge break.

I'm not sure why Barr and the White House is so concerned anyway. It's only a recommendation and the judge is not obliged to accept them. Trump can pardon Stone and not give anymore reason than "it's a witch hunt."

Attacking the US presidential election is not remotely a victimless crime nor is covering it up and tampering with witnesses which in the case of Stone these crimes were ultimately proven to have had an effect on the actual broader investigation conducted by Mueller.This was the election for the president of the united states......... And again he went to trial unlike all the other guys except Manafort who also got nailed when his state charges were added in. It was also true of Manfort that he withheld critical testimony to the broader investigation and even double dealt when supposedly cutting a deal.

It's a fair debate the Russian influence in many many ways might have victimized 60 million people who preferred Hillary .Good lord I'll go to my grave wondering why every single american of any party was not furious that our greatest geopolitical foe, gravest military threat influenced our election and as Chris Wray has said they are already ramping up for 2020. I guess Republicans dont care as long as Putin favors their guy and everyone else just doesn't get the significance of this. He seeks and gets foreign influence twice, gets impeached, acquitted. Now he's on a rampage settling scores and lawmakers are terrified of him. His Ag is in the bag and has declared any investigation of any campaign will have to go through him. So good luck making sure Trump obeys the rules this time around . I guess wait for Nov and let the voters and Putin and whoever the hell else decide .

No sympathy for sleazebag stone. he should have been in jail a long time ago. I hope the Judge nails him,she has no obligation to abide by any sentencing recommendation. Trump and the walrus need slapped down.

Hawktawk wrote:Attacking the US presidential election is not remotely a victimless crime nor is covering it up and tampering with witnesses which in the case of Stone these crimes were ultimately proven to have had an effect on the actual broader investigation conducted by Mueller.This was the election for the president of the united states......... And again he went to trial unlike all the other guys except Manafort who also got nailed when his state charges were added in. It was also true of Manfort that he withheld critical testimony to the broader investigation and even double dealt when supposedly cutting a deal.

Yes, it is a victimless crime, the same types of crimes committed by Nixon's aides in the Watergate scandal, ie Haldeman, Erlichman, and Mitchell. They got a range of 2.5 to 8 years, later commuted to 2-4 years. They were convicted of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury, IMO a little more serious crimes than lying to an investigator or witness tampering.

Hawktawk wrote:No sympathy for sleazebag stone.

I have no sympathy for him, either. But he's a small player, more like a cheerleader than a team member, quite unlike those I mentioned above that were convicted and sentenced in the Watergate scandal. Throwing the book at him isn't going to deter anymore people from doing what he did than giving him a more standard sentence. All it's going to do is satisfy your urge for revenge.

Barr went about it all wrong. Had he concerns, he should have been talking to his team before they recommended the sentences, not under cutting them afterwards. And of course, Trump is way out of bounds in trying to project his influence to protect a personal friend, especially when he has the power to pardon him. But the sentences that were recommended do seem that they are a bit over the top.

I'm still not certain why this is such a big issue. These are just recommendations. The judge will determine the actual length.

[quote="RiverDog"]

Yes, it is a victimless crime, the same types of crimes committed by Nixon's aides in the Watergate scandal, ie Haldeman, Erlichman, and Mitchell. They got a range of 2.5 to 8 years, later commuted to 2-4 years. They were convicted of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury, IMO a little more serious crimes than lying to an investigator or witness tampering.

Barr went about it all wrong. Had he concerns, he should have been talking to his team before they recommended the sentences, not under cutting them afterwards.

It's not a victimless crime depriving every American citizen the right to a free and fair election. Stone wasn't some bit player. He was a confidant of Trump for 3 decades and surely knew everything.He was the conduit between Russia and Wikileaks He and Manafort above all else robbed the public of the truth with their lies and obstruction. And it was with our greatest geopolitical foe, colluding with Russia!! This isn't some 3rd rate burglary that was all about the cover up. It's not a victimless crime. I feel victimized as do tens of millions of others.I want americans electing and campaigning for americans. Its what makes us different. Im furious Vlad Putin would do it and more furious Trump accepted, encouraged, and rewarded Putin for the help.

I do not believe one word out of Barrs mouth. I dont believe for one minute he was unaware of the sentencing recommendations for Stone prior to them being announced. Barr would know exactly what was going on with Trump's buddies.Barr was just throwing up a smokescreen to divert some heat with these tweet comments but he's a liar to say he wasn't doing trumps bidding all the way. Hes meddling with Flynn now as well and Trump just pardoned a laundry list of high profile felons today. 11 to be exact. The most lawless administration in history is unchained from accountability and the rule of law.

Hawktawk wrote:It's not a victimless crime depriving every American citizen the right to a free and fair election.

That's not the definition of the term as I'm using it. The 'victim' in this case is one single individual, not the collective 'us.' A 'victim' as I am using the term, and is commonly used to gauge the seriousness of a crime, is a person that has suffered some sort of personal injury or loss of property. It's like cheating on your taxes. You're stealing from the taxpayers but there is no single individual that is out any substantial money.

Hawktawk wrote:Stone wasn't some bit player. He was a confidant of Trump for 3 decades and surely knew everything.

Stone was not part of the Administration. The people I compared his sentencing to in Nixon's Watergate scandal were all part of his inner circle. Stone was not part of Trump's inner circle.

Hawktawk wrote:I do not believe one word out of Barrs mouth.

So you don't believe Barr when he said that Trump's tweets makes it impossible for him to do his job?