President Trump finds himself in the center of more controversy this week, this time for weighing in on the sentencing of former political confidant Roger Stone.
Last year, Stone was convicted on charges of obstruction, making false statements, and witness tampering as part of the Mueller investigation into alleged Russian collusion with the Trump campaign during the 2016 campaign.
Earlier this week, prosecutors recommended Stone be sentenced seven to nine years in prison. President Trump blasted the recommendation on Twitter as too harsh and as a “miscarriage of justice.” Tuesday, the Justice Department announced it was withdrawing that sentencing recommendation and urging a shorter prison term of 37-46 months. DOJ sources also contend prosecutors misled department officials on the recommendation. Trump subsequently thanked Attorney General Bill Barr for taking action.
Critics of Trump and Barr contend this is evidence of the erosion of the rule of law and that Barr is simply doing Trump’s bidding. All four prosecutors on the case subsequently resigned in protest.
So why was the original recommendation seven to nine years? Was there a sound legal basis for it or was it excessive? Was Trump way out of line to intervene in the case or is that his right as head of the executive branch? And why did the prosecutors resign?
We discuss all of this and more with former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Andrew C. McCarthy, who is now a contributing editor at National Review Online and a Fox News Channel contributor.