Skip to content

Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law.

Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law.

Because no one
is above the law!

Donate

Issue Deep Dive

How the DOJ-Mueller Operatives Abused Their Powers to “Punish” Roger Stone

 This week’s Judicial Watch Weekly Update focused on deciphering the truth behind the Stone prosecution, and the actions taken by the President in fulfilling his “positive constitutional obligation… to confront Justice Department corruption.”  

This week, “we’ve got the Justice Department trying to put a man in jail for an unnecessarily long period of time,” Fitton states. That man is Roger Stone. In order to “score political points… make Trump look embarrassed, and help vindicate the Mueller investigation,” the four prosecutors suggested that Stone be convicted for 7-9 years, a sentence Fitton describes as excessive considering his crime, which would deserve 3-4 “at most,” according to sentencing guidelines. However, the proposed 7-9 year sentence shouldn’t surprise those who are familiar with the current state of the Justice Department, a totally “out of control” agency as Fitton puts it. In fact, the Stone prosecutors are FBI Mueller-holdovers which Fitton describes as “activists [hired] to man the prosecution team.” In response, Fitton calls on Attorney General Barr to reform his internal ranks, removing politically-affiliated lawyers who are still employed by the agency despite having been involved with “all the improprieties of the Mueller investigation.”

Furthermore, the “Deep State prosecutors… registered Democrats,” Fitton contends, “falsely implied that the Stone prosecution was part of foreign intervention in our election,” despite those claims not being mentioned in the charges against Mr. Stone. The prosecutors demonstrated a truly “punitive abuse of their powers,” resulting in the Justice Department “retreating and suggesting that those lawyers may have violated the rules.” If the Stone case demonstrated anything, it’s that “Barr had to step in to stop the abuse of power,” Fitton continues.

In an effort to uphold transparency in the Stone case, Fitton suggests that AG Barr “should’ve frozen everything related to Mueller.” Going forward, Fitton advocates that “the 4 lawyers who tried to punish Stone inappropriately be subject to prosecution.” While credit must be given to AG Barr “for coming in [to the prosecution] and stopping the corruption,” he must continue to “focus on the corruption in his own agency and pay attention to the president’s concerns.” After all, as the Stone case has shown, the Justice Department is in a state of disarray, a place where “Barr can’t ensure that justice is done without his personal intervention.”