DOJ's Roger Stone Maneuvering Faces Calls for Internal Investigation
Michael Bromwich, a former U.S. Justice Department inspector general, tweeted a "memo to all career DOJ employees": "This is not what you signed up for. The four prosecutors who bailed on the Stone case have shown the way."
February 12, 2020 at 03:17 PM
7 minute read
Updated at 10:35 p.m.
The U.S. Justice Department faced mounting questions Wednesday over why senior leaders intervened to reduce the recommended sentence for President Donald Trump's longtime friend Roger Stone, a move that prompted four career prosecutors to abruptly withdraw from the case.
Legal scholars and lawyers widely condemned the extraordinary decision undercutting career prosecutors, as some joined Democratic lawmakers in calling for an investigation by the Justice Department's internal watchdog. In a letter to the Justice Department's inspector general, Michael Horowitz, Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer of New York on Tuesday said the "situation has all the indicia of improper interference in a criminal prosecution."
A group representing career government lawyers, the National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys, plans to hold a board meeting Wednesday to discuss the Justice Department's move, said Larry Leiser, the organization's president.
A spokesperson for the DOJ's inspector general declined to comment Wednesday.
Late Wednesday, the New York City bar urged the Justice Department inspector general and Congress to launch "immediate investigations" into the Stone sentencing.
"Recent actions by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, a component of the United States Department of Justice, raise serious questions about whether the Department of Justice is making prosecutorial decisions based not on neutral principles but in order to protect President Trump's supporters and friends," New York bar leaders said in a letter. "In our criminal justice system, a single standard must apply to all who are accused or convicted of violating the law—unequal treatment based on political influence is to be deplored in all cases but is especially dangerous if it emanates from the presidency."
Three of the prosecutors who handled Stone's trial—Adam Jed, Aaron S.J. Zelinsky and Michael Marando—dropped off the case, and another, Jonathan Kravis, a former clerk to Justice Stephen Breyer, resigned from the Justice Department after senior leaders stepped in to pull their original sentencing recommendation. The career prosecutors suggested that Stone should receive a prison term of between seven and nine years for obstructing into Russian interference in the 2016 election, along with lying to agents and threatening a witness.
On Tuesday, the Justice Department retracted that recommendation to instead suggest an unspecified prison term for Stone. The government said in the new memo that a prison sentence between 37 and 46 months would be "more in line with typical sentences imposed in obstruction cases."
Trump had criticized the initial sentencing recommendation as overly harsh in a tweet early Tuesday, a move that invited speculation that the Justice Department had bowed to political pressure. Trump commended U.S. Attorney General William Barr on Wednesday for intervening to lower the sentencing recommendation for Stone, who was accused of obstructing the congressional investigation to protect the president.
Barr is set to testify on March 31 at the House Judiciary Committee. The panel said it wants to talk with Barr about, among other things: "The decision to overrule your career prosecutors and significantly reduce the recommended sentence for Roger Stone, who has been convicted for lying under oath, at the apparent request of the President—a decision that led to all four prosecutors handling the case to withdraw from the proceedings in protest."
A Justice Department spokesperson, Kerri Kupec, said department leaders had not discussed Stone's case with Trump or anyone else at the White House. A senior DOJ official said department leaders were surprised by the original sentencing recommendation and had expected it to resemble what was filed Tuesday.
On Wednesday, Trump, asked about whether he would pardon Stone, told reporters: "I don't want to say that yet." Stone's sentencing is still scheduled for Feb. 20.
Lawyers said they were struck by the development in Stone's case and the withdrawals of career prosecutors.
"Former DOJ career prosecutors and former political officials at DOJ, I have to imagine, are just struck by this as profoundly unprecedented and a very serious threat to the independence of career prosecutors and the criminal justice system from political interference," said Morrison & Foerster partner Charles Duross, a former federal prosecutor who now heads the firm's white-collar defense practice.
Duross said the Justice Department's inspector general "will have to be involved," adding that U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the District of Columbia, who presided over Stone's trial last year, could question the Justice Department about the dueling sentencing recommendations.
"I can't think of a circumstance in which four prosecutors withdrew from a case on the eve of sentencing," he said. "She certainly may want to understand how the department reached the position they've now taken."
Michael Bromwich, a former Justice Department inspector general, tweeted a "memo to all career DOJ employees" Tuesday night: "This is not what you signed up for. The four prosecutors who bailed on the Stone case have shown the way. Report all instances of improper political influence and other misdeeds to the DOJ IG, who is required to protect your identity."
The Justice Department's inspector general's office does account for calls to open investigations from members of Congress, organizations and the public. Investigations regularly include the review of documents and witness interviews, in some cases, for any evidence of bias and improper considerations. In 2008, the inspector general's office investigated allegations of politicized hiring in the Justice Department honors program, a highly competitive entryway for young lawyers.
The Justice Department can expect a flood of records requests over the circumstances that led to the retraction of the Stone sentencing memo. The transparency advocate Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington on Tuesday filed a records request seeking any communication about the Justice Department's retraction of the original sentencing memo.
"The requested records will shed light on the process DOJ used to arrive at a sentencing recommendation and the extent to which that recommendation was influenced by the President and DOJ officials seeking to accommodate the president," the group's senior counsel, Nikhel Sus, wrote.
Sus described the circumstances as "unprecedented interference by senior DOJ officials in the prosecution" and said the situation "raises serious questions about the integrity of DOJ's processes and the extent to which those processes have been improperly influenced by political considerations."
Read more:
'When Character Matters Most': How Lawyers Are Defending Stone AUSAs Who Quit
Every Stone Prosecutor Quit the Case After Main Justice Scraps Call for Tough Sentence
'A Very Difficult Time': Challenges for Career Lawyers at Trump's DOJ
'Slammed': What Has Driven Departures From Trump's Justice Department
As White House Stonewalls on Ukraine Docs, Wave of FOIA Suits Seek to Pry Them Loose
Women Lawyers' Group Stands Up for Jessie Liu After DOJ Nomination Scuttled
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump Administration Faces Legal Challenge Over EO Impacting Federal Workers
3 minute readUS Judge Cannon Blocks DOJ From Releasing Final Report in Trump Documents Probe
3 minute readPrivate Equity Giant KKR Refiles SDNY Countersuit in DOJ Premerger Filing Row
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250