DOJ's Review of Roger Stone's Sentence Change Found No Political Bias

The Justice Department's internal watchdog has deemed the decision to alter the sentencing proposal for Roger Stone, a close ally of former President Donald Trump, as "highly unusual." However, the investigation did not uncover evidence of improper political influence. This inquiry was prompted by the department's issuance of a second sentencing memo that recommended a significantly lighter sentence for Stone, who was convicted of lying to Congress. The change in recommendation followed critical tweets from Trump regarding the initial 7-9 year sentence suggested by Stone's trial team, which led to the resignation of all four members of that team. Stone ultimately received a 40-month prison sentence, which was later commuted by Trump. The inspector general's report indicated that even career lawyers within the department acknowledged that opinions could vary on the appropriateness of the original sentencing recommendation. Inspector General Michael Horowitz noted that while there was no conclusive evidence of political interference, the actions of then-Attorney General Bill Barr and the interim U.S. Attorney for D.C., Timothy Shea, raised questions about the decision-making process. The report criticized Shea's leadership as ineffective, citing indecisiveness and poor communication. It revealed that Barr had expressed a desire to "fix" the higher sentencing recommendation shortly after it was filed, prior to Trump's tweets. The report highlighted that prosecutors felt their proposal for Stone was subjected to unusual scrutiny, suggesting a potential politicization of the case. Stone's attorney expressed satisfaction that the report confirmed his client's truthful account of the events surrounding the case.