talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-11--READ: DOJ Files New Watered Down Sentencing Memo For Roger Stone

The Justice Department has now officially reversed course , filing a new lighter sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone less than a day after its initial filing .
The original recommended sentence of 7-9 years was “ excessive and unwarranted , ” prosecutors said in a new , unprecedented Tuesday filing .
The Tuesday filing marks a whiplash-inducing , extraordinary reversal in the case that benefits a vocal – and convicted – ally of the President ’ s .
Three federal prosecutors assigned to the Stone prosecution resigned from the case after the Justice Department made it known through the press @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earlier sentencing recommendation .
That came after President Trump tweeted a complaint about the proposed sentence being too harsh .
Former federal prosecutors decried the move as an assault on the Justice Department ’ s traditional independence from partisan political influence , as DOJ leadership very publicly intervened to help Stone , who was convicted of making false statements to Congress , witness tampering , and obstruction .
The new filing makes only passing mention of the government ’ s previous recommendation in the case , filed less than 24 hours ago .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ recommendation “ does not accurately reflect the Department of Justice ’ s position on what would be a reasonable sentence in this matter.
” The government went on to obliquely dispute elements of its earlier sentence recommendation , saying in part that “ it was unclear to what extent ” Stone ’ s post-indictment obstruction hindered the government at trial .
In the new filing , the government declined to make a recommendation beyond saying that incarceration was appropriate .
Specific sentencing , the new memo reads , should be left to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government defers to the Court as to what specific sentence is appropriate under the facts and circumstances of this case , ” the document reads .
The new filing also attempts to dilute prosecutors ’ earlier suggestion that Stone had threatened a witness in the case – a count on which he was convicted .
The government now claims that because the witness in question – New York City comedian Randy Credico – said he never felt that Stone “ posed a direct physical threat to me or my dog , ” the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s “ beliefs.
” The filing was signed by John Crabb Jr. , the acting chief of the criminal division in the DC US Attorney ’ s Office , who entered in his appearance in the case minutes before the memo was filed .
Newly appointed U.S. Attorney Timothy Shea ’ s name is on the filing , as it was on the original sentencing recommendation .
Shea was a close aide to Attorney General William Barr , who only recently named Shea as the interim U.S. attorney .
Stone is set to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Berman Jackson on Thursday , Feb. 20 .

The Justice Department has now officially reversed course, filing a new lighter sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone less than a day after its initial filing.
The original recommended sentence of 7-9 years was “excessive and unwarranted,” prosecutors said in a new, unprecedented Tuesday filing.
The Tuesday filing marks a whiplash-inducing, extraordinary reversal in the case that benefits a vocal – and convicted – ally of the President’s.
Three federal prosecutors assigned to the Stone prosecution resigned from the case after the Justice Department made it known through the press that it intended to take back its earlier sentencing recommendation. That came after President Trump tweeted a complaint about the proposed sentence being too harsh.
Former federal prosecutors decried the move as an assault on the Justice Department’s traditional independence from partisan political influence, as DOJ leadership very publicly intervened to help Stone, who was convicted of making false statements to Congress, witness tampering, and obstruction.
The new filing makes only passing mention of the government’s previous recommendation in the case, filed less than 24 hours ago. Prosecutors said only that its earlier sentence recommendation “does not accurately reflect the Department of Justice’s position on what would be a reasonable sentence in this matter.”
The government went on to obliquely dispute elements of its earlier sentence recommendation, saying in part that “it was unclear to what extent” Stone’s post-indictment obstruction hindered the government at trial.
In the new filing, the government declined to make a recommendation beyond saying that incarceration was appropriate. Specific sentencing, the new memo reads, should be left to the judge’s discretion.
“The government defers to the Court as to what specific sentence is appropriate under the facts and circumstances of this case,” the document reads.
The new filing also attempts to dilute prosecutors’ earlier suggestion that Stone had threatened a witness in the case – a count on which he was convicted. The government now claims that because the witness in question – New York City comedian Randy Credico – said he never felt that Stone “posed a direct physical threat to me or my dog,” the court should “consider” Credico’s “beliefs.”
The filing was signed by John Crabb Jr., the acting chief of the criminal division in the DC US Attorney’s Office, who entered in his appearance in the case minutes before the memo was filed. Newly appointed U.S. Attorney Timothy Shea’s name is on the filing, as it was on the original sentencing recommendation.
Shea was a close aide to Attorney General William Barr, who only recently named Shea as the interim U.S. attorney.
Stone is set to be sentenced by U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson on Thursday, Feb. 20.
Read the memo here:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-11--Schumer Calls For Probe Into Reports DOJ Will Change Roger Stone Sentencing Recommendation

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-NY ) on Tuesday called for an investigation into reports that federal prosecutors plan to reverse their recommended prison sentence for President Donald Trump ’ s friend and adviser Roger Stone .
“ This situation has all the indicia of improper political interference in a criminal prosecution , ” the senator wrote in a letter to Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz Tuesday .
“ I therefore request that you immediately investigate this matter to determine how and why the Stone sentencing recommendations were countermanded , which Justice Department officials made this decision , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Stone in November was found guilty of all seven counts against him , including obstruction , false statements , and witness tampering .
Prosecutors on Monday recommended up to nine years ’ imprisonment for Stone , but after an angry tweet from Trump , several outlets reported that the Justice Department would scale back its sentencing recommendation .
Former prosecutors told TPM they were stunned by the development , and two career prosecutors on the Stone case , Aaron Zelinsky and Jonathan Kravis , informed the court Tuesday that they were withdrawing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office for the District of Columbia .
( Zelinsky remains an assistant U.S. attorney in Baltimore . )
Schumer on Tuesday urged Horowitz “ to conduct an expedited review of this urgent matter and issue a public report with your findings and recommendations as soon as possible.
” This post has been updated .

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on Tuesday called for an investigation into reports that federal prosecutors plan to reverse their recommended prison sentence for President Donald Trump’s friend and adviser Roger Stone.
“This situation has all the indicia of improper political interference in a criminal prosecution,” the senator wrote in a letter to Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz Tuesday.
“I therefore request that you immediately investigate this matter to determine how and why the Stone sentencing recommendations were countermanded, which Justice Department officials made this decision, and which White House officials were involved.”
Stone in November was found guilty of all seven counts against him, including obstruction, false statements, and witness tampering. Prosecutors on Monday recommended up to nine years’ imprisonment for Stone, but after an angry tweet from Trump, several outlets reported that the Justice Department would scale back its sentencing recommendation.
Former prosecutors told TPM they were stunned by the development, and two career prosecutors on the Stone case, Aaron Zelinsky and Jonathan Kravis, informed the court Tuesday that they were withdrawing from the case and leaving their positions at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. (Zelinsky remains an assistant U.S. attorney in Baltimore.)
Schumer on Tuesday urged Horowitz “to conduct an expedited review of this urgent matter and issue a public report with your findings and recommendations as soon as possible.”
This post has been updated.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-11--Trump Reversing Stone Sentencing Recommendation Would Be ‘Abuse Of Power,’ Schiff Says

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff ( D-CA ) said Tuesday that it would be an “ blatant abuse of power ” if President Donald Trump had intervened to lower the Justice Department ’ s suggested prison sentence for Trump ’ s friend and adviser Roger Stone .
According to multiple reports Tuesday , the Justice Department will in fact significantly reduce the sentence it suggests for Stone after a tweet from Trump called the initial recommendation , of 7-9 years ’ imprisonment , a “ miscarriage of justice.
” “ I do not take a position on the proper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it would be a blatant abuse of power if President Trump has in fact intervened to reverse the recommendations of career prosecutors at the Department of Justice , ” Schiff said in a statement .
“ Doing so would send an unmistakable message that President Trump will protect those who lie to Congress to cover up his own misconduct , and that the Attorney General will join him in that effort , ” he added .
“ Abuse of Power , ” notably , was one of two impeachment charges that Schiff and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate trial should be grounds for Trump ’ s removal from office .
The Senate voted to acquit Trump of both charges on Wednesday .
Stone ’ s case is personal for the Schiff : In November , Stone was found guilty on all counts against him , including for lying in his testimony the House Intelligence Committee , which Schiff chairs .
After reports of the development emerged Tuesday , the top career prosecutor on the Stone case , former Robert Mueller deputy Aaron Zelinsky , informed the court that he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entirely from the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office for the District of Columbia .
( Zelinsky is still an assistant U.S. attorney in Baltimore . )
Former federal prosecutors told TPM Tuesday that the news that a scaled back sentencing recommendation was in the works in Stone ’ s case was “ stunning .
”

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) said Tuesday that it would be an “blatant abuse of power” if President Donald Trump had intervened to lower the Justice Department’s suggested prison sentence for Trump’s friend and adviser Roger Stone.
According to multiple reports Tuesday, the Justice Department will in fact significantly reduce the sentence it suggests for Stone after a tweet from Trump called the initial recommendation, of 7-9 years’ imprisonment, a “miscarriage of justice.”
“I do not take a position on the proper prison term for Mr. Stone, but it would be a blatant abuse of power if President Trump has in fact intervened to reverse the recommendations of career prosecutors at the Department of Justice,” Schiff said in a statement.
“Doing so would send an unmistakable message that President Trump will protect those who lie to Congress to cover up his own misconduct, and that the Attorney General will join him in that effort,” he added.
“Abuse of Power,” notably, was one of two impeachment charges that Schiff and other House impeachment managers argued during a Senate trial should be grounds for Trump’s removal from office. The Senate voted to acquit Trump of both charges on Wednesday.
Stone’s case is personal for the Schiff: In November, Stone was found guilty on all counts against him, including for lying in his testimony the House Intelligence Committee, which Schiff chairs.
After reports of the development emerged Tuesday, the top career prosecutor on the Stone case, former Robert Mueller deputy Aaron Zelinsky, informed the court that he was withdrawing from the case — and resigning entirely from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. (Zelinsky is still an assistant U.S. attorney in Baltimore.)
Former federal prosecutors told TPM Tuesday that the news that a scaled back sentencing recommendation was in the works in Stone’s case was “stunning.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-11--Four Prosecutors On Roger Stone Case Bail After DOJ Sentencing Reversal

After the stunning news that the Justice Department will scale back a sentencing recommendation filed by prosecutors who led the Roger Stone case , four of those prosecutors withdrew from the case , with one of them resigning from the Justice Department entirely .
In a notice to the court that he was withdrawing from Stone ’ s case , prosecutor Jonathan Kravis told the court he was resigning from his role as Assistant U.S. attorney .
Two other prosecutors who announced their withdrawal from Stone ’ s case , Adam Jed and Aaron Zelinsky , were both members of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Michael Marando , another federal prosecutor assigned to the case , withdrew without resigning from the Justice Department as well .
Zelinksy ’ s withdrawal notice said he was resigning from his role in the U.S. Attorney ’ s office in D.C. — which took over the prosecution of Stone when Mueller ’ s shop shut down — but Zelinksy is reportedly retaining his position at the U.S. Attorney ’ s office in Maryland .
Several of the withdrawal notices came even before the Justice Department filed its amended sentencing recommendation for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sentenced later this month .
A senior DOJ official earlier Tuesday told several media outlets that the Department was going to “ clarify ” the recommendation because the sentencing memo filed Monday was “ extreme , excessive and grossly disproportionate to Mr. Stone ’ s offenses.
” Trump tweeted angrily overnight about Monday ’ s memo , but the DOJ official reportedly claimed that the decision to amend the recommendation was made before Trump ’ s outburst .
By the end of the day Tuesday , every prosecutor who had signed Monday ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of U.S. Attorney for D.C. Timothy Shea , who only stepped into that role late last month — had withdrawn from the case .
For the Department of Justice to so publicly and sloppily override the sentencing recommendation was extraordinary and shocking , former DOJ officials told TPM .

After the stunning news that the Justice Department will scale back a sentencing recommendation filed by prosecutors who led the Roger Stone case, four of those prosecutors withdrew from the case, with one of them resigning from the Justice Department entirely.
In a notice to the court that he was withdrawing from Stone’s case, prosecutor Jonathan Kravis told the court he was resigning from his role as Assistant U.S. attorney.
Two other prosecutors who announced their withdrawal from Stone’s case, Adam Jed and Aaron Zelinsky, were both members of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team.
Michael Marando, another federal prosecutor assigned to the case, withdrew without resigning from the Justice Department as well.
Zelinksy’s withdrawal notice said he was resigning from his role in the U.S. Attorney’s office in D.C. — which took over the prosecution of Stone when Mueller’s shop shut down — but Zelinksy is reportedly retaining his position at the U.S. Attorney’s office in Maryland.
Several of the withdrawal notices came even before the Justice Department filed its amended sentencing recommendation for Stone, who is slated to be sentenced later this month.
A senior DOJ official earlier Tuesday told several media outlets that the Department was going to “clarify” the recommendation because the sentencing memo filed Monday was “extreme, excessive and grossly disproportionate to Mr. Stone’s offenses.”
Trump tweeted angrily overnight about Monday’s memo, but the DOJ official reportedly claimed that the decision to amend the recommendation was made before Trump’s outburst.
By the end of the day Tuesday, every prosecutor who had signed Monday’s sentencing memo — with the exception of U.S. Attorney for D.C. Timothy Shea, who only stepped into that role late last month — had withdrawn from the case.
For the Department of Justice to so publicly and sloppily override the sentencing recommendation was extraordinary and shocking, former DOJ officials told TPM.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-11--‘Stunning:’ Former Federal Prosecutors Aghast At DOJ Reversal In Stone Case

Several former federal prosecutors told TPM Tuesday that they were shocked by the news that the Justice Department was scaling back its sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone — an announcement that was made after President Trump tweeted angrily about a recommendation that had already been filed in court less than 24 hours earlier .
Former DOJ officials called the situation unprecedented , embarrassing , and , in the words of one former U.S. attorney , “ a shocking erosion of DOJ independence that will undermine public confidence.
” How the walk-back unfolded was particularly stunning to them , and they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at play .
“ The crude way this is being done — almost oafish like — simply removes any rational doubt about what ’ s going on , ” said Patrick Cotter , a former federal prosecutor who told TPM he had never seen anything like it in his 30 years practicing law .
“ It certainly gives the unmistakable impression that this is a wholly political and partisan decision being imposed on federal prosectors , ” Cotter , now a defense attorney , said .
Less than 24 hours after Timothy Shea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ filed in a court a recommendation based on U.S. sentencing guidelines that Stone serve 7-9 years , a senior DOJ official told several news outlets that the recommendation was “ extreme , excessive and grossly disproportionate to Mr. Stone ’ s offenses.
” The Department is going to “ clarify ” its position to the court on Tuesday , the official reportedly said .
The only thing to happen in between Monday ’ s filing and the DOJ ’ s disavowal of it was a tweet by the President bashing the recommendation as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DOJ official told several outlets the decision to scale back the recommendation was made before the tweet .
But several former prosecutors didn ’ t buy that claim , and said , even if true , the situation still created a perception of undue political influence .
“ The message this sends is that there is one set of rules for most defendants and another , far more lenient set of rules , for cronies of the President , ” said Peter Zeindenberg , a former prosecutor who worked for the D.C. U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Washington Post report on the reversal , in the days leading up to Monday ’ s filing of the 7- to 9-year recommendation , there was a disagreement behind the scenes between the prosecutors who worked day-to-day on the case — known as “ line prosecutors — and their superiors , over how aggressive the recommendation should be .
The memo filed Monday reflected the line prosecutors ’ position , the Washington Post reported .
A senior DOJ official now is claiming , according to the various reports , that the Justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that it was shocked when it saw it .
Some DOJ alum were skeptical that the department wouldn ’ t get at least get a heads up about the sentencing memo for a case as high profile as Stone ’ s .
Regardless , they said that what the line prosecutors were recommending was well within the norm of what they would have expected .
It is extremely common — if not almost universally done — for prosecutors to stick to the guidelines that the U.S .
Sentencing Commission lays out , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Stone case .
“ It ’ s somewhat extraordinary to seek a sentence that is outside of the guidelines , ” said former DOJ spokesperson Matt Miller , as the Justice Department is now expected to do it in its amended memo .
Usually , the Justice Department recommends sentences below those guidelines only when the defendant has cooperated with the government , ex-DOJ officials said .
Harry Sandick , a former prosecutor who is now a defense attorney , said that the guidelines issued by U.S .
Sentencing Commission may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s no reason to flout them for an ally of the President ’ s and only for an ally of the President ’ s .
“ This benefit doesn ’ t get extended to the drug dealer who sells an ounce of crack cocaine , this benefit doesn ’ t get extended to the businessman who engages in a small fraud , and so people will ask , why is it being extended to the President ’ s friend and advisor ?
” Sandick said .
That the DOJ is now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them in a publicly filed court document makes the move all the more extraordinary .
“ It is unusual for Main Justice to get involved in a sentence recommendation made by a local U.S. attorney , ” Miller said .
“ It ’ s unusual , if not unprecedented , for them to intervene after that recommendation has been made in court.
” Even the language itself that the DOJ official used in the statement in Tuesday ’ s reports was noteworthy .
According to Sandick , in the rare circumstance where prosectors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appropriate , “ at most they would say this variance is warranted.
” “ They don ’ t trash the guidelines in that way , ” Sandick said .
The icing on the cake is that all this happened after Trump publicly expressed his disagreement .
“ [ It ] raises a fair inference that DOJ is bowing to the political pressure of the president , ” said Barbara McQuade , a former U.S. Attorney who now teaches out Michigan Law .
“ This is a shocking erosion of DOJ independence that will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kupec denied that the Department was reacting to any Trump directive or to his dismay , according to the New York Times .
Kupec said that there were no discussions with anyone at the White House , including the President , about the case , according to the Times .
Miller said that even if the Department was thinking about going easier on Stone before Trump ’ s tweet , the tweet should have given them more reason , not less , to stick to the guidelines .
“ A normal DOJ would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ follow that because it will look so obviously political and so we ’ re just going to follow the guidelines , so there is no questions , ” Miller said .
Update : This story has been updated to reflect new reporting about the Justice Department ’ s defense of the walk-back .

Several former federal prosecutors told TPM Tuesday that they were shocked by the news that the Justice Department was scaling back its sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone — an announcement that was made after President Trump tweeted angrily about a recommendation that had already been filed in court less than 24 hours earlier.
Former DOJ officials called the situation unprecedented, embarrassing, and, in the words of one former U.S. attorney, “a shocking erosion of DOJ independence that will undermine public confidence.”
How the walk-back unfolded was particularly stunning to them, and they said it further revealed the improper influence at play.
“The crude way this is being done — almost oafish like — simply removes any rational doubt about what’s going on,” said Patrick Cotter, a former federal prosecutor who told TPM he had never seen anything like it in his 30 years practicing law.
“It certainly gives the unmistakable impression that this is a wholly political and partisan decision being imposed on federal prosectors,” Cotter, now a defense attorney, said.
Less than 24 hours after Timothy Shea, the U.S. attorney for D.C., filed in a court a recommendation based on U.S. sentencing guidelines that Stone serve 7-9 years, a senior DOJ official told several news outlets that the recommendation was “extreme, excessive and grossly disproportionate to Mr. Stone’s offenses.” The Department is going to “clarify” its position to the court on Tuesday, the official reportedly said.
The only thing to happen in between Monday’s filing and the DOJ’s disavowal of it was a tweet by the President bashing the recommendation as “a miscarriage of justice.”
A DOJ official told several outlets the decision to scale back the recommendation was made before the tweet. But several former prosecutors didn’t buy that claim, and said, even if true, the situation still created a perception of undue political influence.
“The message this sends is that there is one set of rules for most defendants and another, far more lenient set of rules, for cronies of the President,” said Peter Zeindenberg, a former prosecutor who worked for the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office.
Overruling the professionals
According to the Washington Post report on the reversal, in the days leading up to Monday’s filing of the 7- to 9-year recommendation, there was a disagreement behind the scenes between the prosecutors who worked day-to-day on the case — known as “line prosecutors — and their superiors, over how aggressive the recommendation should be.
The memo filed Monday reflected the line prosecutors’ position, the Washington Post reported. A senior DOJ official now is claiming, according to the various reports, that the Justice Department was not briefed about the recommendation and that it was shocked when it saw it.
Some DOJ alum were skeptical that the department wouldn’t get at least get a heads up about the sentencing memo for a case as high profile as Stone’s.
Regardless, they said that what the line prosecutors were recommending was well within the norm of what they would have expected. It is extremely common — if not almost universally done — for prosecutors to stick to the guidelines that the U.S. Sentencing Commission lays out, which is what the Monday filing did in the Stone case.
“It’s somewhat extraordinary to seek a sentence that is outside of the guidelines,” said former DOJ spokesperson Matt Miller, as the Justice Department is now expected to do it in its amended memo. Usually, the Justice Department recommends sentences below those guidelines only when the defendant has cooperated with the government, ex-DOJ officials said.
Harry Sandick, a former prosecutor who is now a defense attorney, said that the guidelines issued by U.S. Sentencing Commission may in fact be too harsh, but that’s no reason to flout them for an ally of the President’s and only for an ally of the President’s.
“This benefit doesn’t get extended to the drug dealer who sells an ounce of crack cocaine, this benefit doesn’t get extended to the businessman who engages in a small fraud, and so people will ask, why is it being extended to the President’s friend and advisor?” Sandick said.
‘So obviously political’
That the DOJ is now stepping away from the guidelines after embracing them in a publicly filed court document makes the move all the more extraordinary.
“It is unusual for Main Justice to get involved in a sentence recommendation made by a local U.S. attorney,” Miller said. “It’s unusual, if not unprecedented, for them to intervene after that recommendation has been made in court.”
Even the language itself that the DOJ official used in the statement in Tuesday’s reports was noteworthy.
According to Sandick, in the rare circumstance where prosectors don’t think the guidelines are appropriate, “at most they would say this variance is warranted.”
“They don’t trash the guidelines in that way,” Sandick said.
The icing on the cake is that all this happened after Trump publicly expressed his disagreement.
“[It] raises a fair inference that DOJ is bowing to the political pressure of the president,” said Barbara McQuade, a former U.S. Attorney who now teaches out Michigan Law. “This is a shocking erosion of DOJ independence that will undermine public confidence.”
DOJ spokeswoman Kerri Kupec denied that the Department was reacting to any Trump directive or to his dismay, according to the New York Times. Kupec said that there were no discussions with anyone at the White House, including the President, about the case, according to the Times.
Miller said that even if the Department was thinking about going easier on Stone before Trump’s tweet, the tweet should have given them more reason, not less, to stick to the guidelines.
“A normal DOJ would say, well we can’t follow that because it will look so obviously political and so we’re just going to follow the guidelines, so there is no questions,” Miller said.
Update: This story has been updated to reflect new reporting about the Justice Department’s defense of the walk-back.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-11--Report: Cooperators Aid In Erik Prince Criminal Investigation

Multiple cooperating witnesses have helped speed up the criminal investigation into Blackwater founder and Trump ally Erik Prince , the Wall Street Journal reports .
The Justice Department is reportedly reviewing whether to charge Prince with making false statements to Congress due to November 2017 testimony he gave to the House Intelligence Committee , and with violating the International Trafficking in Arms Regulations .
It ’ s not clear at what stage of the charging process prosecutors currently find themselves .
House Intelligence Committee Chair Rep. Adam Schiff ( D-CA ) issued a criminal referral for Prince in April 2019 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contradicted the sworn testimony that the Blackwater founder gave to the panel .
The Justice Department replied to Schiff last week , telling the lawmaker that it would refer the request “ to the proper investigative agency.
” Prince allegedly misled lawmakers about the circumstances of a January 2017 Seychelles meeting with Russian Direct Investment Fund chief Kirill Dmitriev .
Also attending that summit was George Nader , the U.S.-Middle East middleman who pleaded guilty in January to child pornography charges .
Nader faces separate campaign finance charges regarding contributions he made to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pleaded not guilty in that case .
The arms allegations reportedly focus on a pitch Prince made to the UAE to supply the gulf state armed aircraft .
Matthew L. Schwartz , an attorney for Prince , told TPM in a statement that “ there is nothing new here.
” “ Erik Prince ’ s House testimony has been public for more than a year , and was available at all times that Mr .
Prince met with the Department of Justice during the Special Counsel ’ s investigation , ” Schwartz added @

Multiple cooperating witnesses have helped speed up the criminal investigation into Blackwater founder and Trump ally Erik Prince, the Wall Street Journal reports.
The Justice Department is reportedly reviewing whether to charge Prince with making false statements to Congress due to November 2017 testimony he gave to the House Intelligence Committee, and with violating the International Trafficking in Arms Regulations.
It’s not clear at what stage of the charging process prosecutors currently find themselves. House Intelligence Committee Chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) issued a criminal referral for Prince in April 2019, saying that the Mueller report substantially contradicted the sworn testimony that the Blackwater founder gave to the panel.
The Justice Department replied to Schiff last week, telling the lawmaker that it would refer the request “to the proper investigative agency.”
Prince allegedly misled lawmakers about the circumstances of a January 2017 Seychelles meeting with Russian Direct Investment Fund chief Kirill Dmitriev.
Also attending that summit was George Nader, the U.S.-Middle East middleman who pleaded guilty in January to child pornography charges. Nader faces separate campaign finance charges regarding contributions he made to pro-Hillary Clinton political groups; he had pleaded not guilty in that case.
The arms allegations reportedly focus on a pitch Prince made to the UAE to supply the gulf state armed aircraft.
Matthew L. Schwartz, an attorney for Prince, told TPM in a statement that “there is nothing new here.”
“Erik Prince’s House testimony has been public for more than a year, and was available at all times that Mr. Prince met with the Department of Justice during the Special Counsel’s investigation,” Schwartz added.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-11--Reports: DOJ To Make Extraordinary Reversal On Tough Sentence For Roger Stone

The Justice Department is expected to file a new sentencing memo Tuesday walking back its one-day old recommendation that Roger Stone serve seven to nine years in prison , Fox News reported .
The report , based on a senior DOJ source , comes less than 24 hours after federal prosecutors in D.C. filed a sentencing memo for Stone calculating the guidelines for his sentence to be between 87-108 months .
The senior DOJ official told Fox News that the Justice Department was “ shocked ” by the memo and that the recommendation was “ not what had been briefed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finds seven to nine years extreme , excessive and grossly disproportionate to Mr. Stone ’ s offenses , ” the DOJ source said , according to the report , while claiming that the decision to walk back the recommendation was made before President Trump tweeted that it was a “ miscarriage of justice.
” A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney ’ s office in D.C. declined to comment when reached by TPM .
“ We have read with interest the new reporting on Mr. Stone ’ s case , ” Grant Smith , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Our sentencing memo outlined our position on the recommendation made yesterday by the government .
We look forward to reviewing the government ’ s supplemental filing.
” Update : This story has been updated with a statement from Stone ’ s attorney .

The Justice Department is expected to file a new sentencing memo Tuesday walking back its one-day old recommendation that Roger Stone serve seven to nine years in prison, Fox News reported.
The report, based on a senior DOJ source, comes less than 24 hours after federal prosecutors in D.C. filed a sentencing memo for Stone calculating the guidelines for his sentence to be between 87-108 months.
The senior DOJ official told Fox News that the Justice Department was “shocked” by the memo and that the recommendation was “not what had been briefed to the Department.”
“The Department finds seven to nine years extreme, excessive and grossly disproportionate to Mr. Stone’s offenses,” the DOJ source said, according to the report, while claiming that the decision to walk back the recommendation was made before President Trump tweeted that it was a “miscarriage of justice.”
This is a horrible and very unfair situation. The real crimes were on the other side, as nothing happens to them. Cannot allow this miscarriage of justice! https://t.co/rHPfYX6Vbv — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 11, 2020
The AP has confirmed Fox News’ report.
A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s office in D.C. declined to comment when reached by TPM.
“We have read with interest the new reporting on Mr. Stone’s case,”Grant Smith, an attorney for Stone, said. “Our sentencing memo outlined our position on the recommendation made yesterday by the government. We look forward to reviewing the government’s supplemental filing.”
Update: This story has been updated with a statement from Stone’s attorney.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-11--Nevada Dem Caucus Will Use Paper Ballots For Early Voting After Abandoning App

The Nevada Democratic Party ( NDP ) will use paper ballots for early voting in its caucuses after Iowa Democrats ’ attempt to use a specialized caucus data-gathering app crashed and burned last week .
According to a memo published by the Nevada Independent on Tuesday , the early voter will check in using Google Forms on an iPad ( and a paper voter card as a backup ) at a voting site in their county , then they will fill out a paper ballot that will be scanned at the end of each day to be counted with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Feb 22 .
The Google Form will have a URL that will be protected by “ a series of security mechanisms , ” in the Independent ’ s words , to prevent hacking .
NDP chair William McCurdy II already promised last week that the party would not use the same glitchy app , created by Shadow Inc. , on Caucus Day that Iowa had used .
“ NV Dems can confidently say that what happened in the Iowa caucus last night will not happen in Nevada on Feb. 22 , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s four-day early voting period begins this Saturday and ends on Feb. 18 .

The Nevada Democratic Party (NDP) will use paper ballots for early voting in its caucuses after Iowa Democrats’ attempt to use a specialized caucus data-gathering app crashed and burned last week.
According to a memo published by the Nevada Independent on Tuesday, the early voter will check in using Google Forms on an iPad (and a paper voter card as a backup) at a voting site in their county, then they will fill out a paper ballot that will be scanned at the end of each day to be counted with the results of their precinct’s caucus on Feb 22.
The Google Form will have a URL that will be protected by “a series of security mechanisms,” in the Independent’s words, to prevent hacking.
NDP chair William McCurdy II already promised last week that the party would not use the same glitchy app, created by Shadow Inc., on Caucus Day that Iowa had used.
“NV Dems can confidently say that what happened in the Iowa caucus last night will not happen in Nevada on Feb. 22,” McCurdy said in a statement.
Nevada’s four-day early voting period begins this Saturday and ends on Feb. 18.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-12--Sanders Ekes Out New Hampshire Democratic Primary Win

Bernie Sanders pulled it off — but it was a close race .
At around 11 p.m .
ET , the Vermont senator was projected the winner of the New Hampshire Democratic primary .
Former Mayor Pete Buttigieg is currently at a close second .
With 87 percent of precincts reporting , Sanders pulled in 26 percent of the vote , according to ABC News and NBC .
With 24 delegates at stake , Sanders is set to gain nine in the race for the nomination .
The results were a stark contrast from the last time Sanders won the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 60 percent of the vote .
Shortly after his projected win , Sanders told supporters in Manchester “ the reason that we are going to win is that we are putting together an unprecedented , multigenerational , multiracial political movement.
” Sanders also expressed his appreciation and respect for Buttigieg , Sen. Amy Klobuchar ( D-MN ) , Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) and former Vice President Joe Biden .
Warren and Biden were duking out it for fourth and fifth place , respectively .
Biden , for his part , didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election night event in the Granite State , opting instead to address supporters in South Carolina , a state where he hopes to receive a jolt to his shaky campaign .
While speaking to supporters in New Hampshire , Buttigieg congratulated Sanders on his “ strong showing tonight ” but pledged that “ we are here to stay.
” Klobuhar was the real surprise of the night , finishing in third place after a strong debate performance late last week .
Biden and Warren will not pick up any delegates from the New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ set to meet the 15 percent threshold required to win pledged delegates , according to NBC News .
It ’ s unclear if Sanders will continue the same trajectory heading into primaries in Nevada and South Carolina later this month , which have a more diverse electorate than the first two contests .
Both Sanders and Buttigieg — who represent the oldest and the youngest Democratic presidential candidates , respectively — aimed to set themselves apart within the Democratic Party throughout their campaigns .
While Sanders has used progressive policy proposals such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of economic populism , Buttigieg has marketed himself as the solution to unite a fractured Democratic Party following the 2016 presidential election .
Sanders had resisted waging attacks against Buttigieg until after the Iowa caucuses , criticizing the former South Bend mayor ’ s wealthy donor base during the Democratic presidential debate Friday night as well as in TV appearances throughout the weekend before the New Hampshire primary .

Bernie Sanders pulled it off — but it was a close race.
At around 11 p.m. ET, the Vermont senator was projected the winner of the New Hampshire Democratic primary. Former Mayor Pete Buttigieg is currently at a close second.
With 87 percent of precincts reporting, Sanders pulled in 26 percent of the vote, according to ABC News and NBC. With 24 delegates at stake, Sanders is set to gain nine in the race for the nomination. The results were a stark contrast from the last time Sanders won the state — in 2016, Sanders captured 60 percent of the vote.
Shortly after his projected win, Sanders told supporters in Manchester “the reason that we are going to win is that we are putting together an unprecedented, multigenerational, multiracial political movement.” Sanders also expressed his appreciation and respect for Buttigieg, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and former Vice President Joe Biden.
Bernie takes a victory lap pic.twitter.com/sPAngCupUx — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 12, 2020
Warren and Biden were duking out it for fourth and fifth place, respectively. Biden, for his part, didn’t even bother to hold an election night event in the Granite State, opting instead to address supporters in South Carolina, a state where he hopes to receive a jolt to his shaky campaign.
While speaking to supporters in New Hampshire, Buttigieg congratulated Sanders on his “strong showing tonight” but pledged that “we are here to stay.”
Buttigieg congratulates Sanders on "strong showing tonight" pic.twitter.com/7JnUQDRGiw — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 12, 2020
Klobuhar was the real surprise of the night, finishing in third place after a strong debate performance late last week.
Biden and Warren will not pick up any delegates from the New Hampshire primary. Neither of them are set to meet the 15 percent threshold required to win pledged delegates, according to NBC News.
It’s unclear if Sanders will continue the same trajectory heading into primaries in Nevada and South Carolina later this month, which have a more diverse electorate than the first two contests.
Both Sanders and Buttigieg — who represent the oldest and the youngest Democratic presidential candidates, respectively — aimed to set themselves apart within the Democratic Party throughout their campaigns. While Sanders has used progressive policy proposals such as Medicare for All to tout his brand of economic populism, Buttigieg has marketed himself as the solution to unite a fractured Democratic Party following the 2016 presidential election.
Sanders had resisted waging attacks against Buttigieg until after the Iowa caucuses, criticizing the former South Bend mayor’s wealthy donor base during the Democratic presidential debate Friday night as well as in TV appearances throughout the weekend before the New Hampshire primary.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-12--The Also-Rans: Biden And Warren Battle It Out For 4th And 5th Place In NH

When the former vice president left New Hampshire before polls even closed Tuesday evening , we had an early indication that things weren ’ t going to go well for Joe Biden tonight .
But in an outcome that would have been hard to predict even a few days ago , Biden found himself battling for fourth or fifth place with Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) , reducing two of the leading contenders heading into the 2020 cycle to also-rans .
With 90 percent of precincts reporting , Warren and Biden landed in fourth and fifth place , receiving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote , respectively .
Sen. Bernie Sander ’ s ( I-VT ) win was widely anticipated ahead of the vote on Tuesday evening .
But Sen. Amy Klobuchar ’ s ( D-MN ) surge to third and Pete Buttigieg ’ s clinch of a second place finish by just 2 percentage points were not expected in the second-in-nation primary .
Signaling that his team expected an embarrassing outcome , Biden left New Hampshire early for South Carolina , where he has been counting on strong African American support to salvage his campaign later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ throughout the day on Tuesday that the former vice president was conceding the state in any way , but rather the team wanted to make another stop before heading out to Nevada to campaign ahead of the Feb. 22 caucuses there .
On the ground in South Carolina , Biden remained optimistic , repeatedly reminding those in the diverse crowd which demographic groups haven ’ t had a chance to vote yet .
“ We haven ’ t heard from the most committed constituency in the Democratic Party , the African American community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Latino community , ” he said out the gate , harping on the fact that the results only tallied up the opinions of two majority white states .
“ Where I come from that ’ s the opening bell , not the closing bell .
… it ain ’ t over man , we ’ re just getting started.
” Warren told MSNBC the results were a “ disappointment ” and stuck with a familiar theme : It ’ s still early .
“ I have to tell you , 98 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heard from yet .
We still have 55 states and territories and this is going to be a long primary process .
For me , the central question is what kind of primary process is it going to be ?
Is it going to be Democrats shooting at Democrats ?
” she told MSNBC Tuesday evening before urging fellow Democrats against tearing one another apart .
“ Is this going to be a long and bitter and divisive one or is this going to be a primary process in which we come together @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , on core American values , and help pull our party together and help pull our country together .
I think that ’ s what this moment is all about .
”

When the former vice president left New Hampshire before polls even closed Tuesday evening, we had an early indication that things weren’t going to go well for Joe Biden tonight.
But in an outcome that would have been hard to predict even a few days ago, Biden found himself battling for fourth or fifth place with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), reducing two of the leading contenders heading into the 2020 cycle to also-rans.
With 90 percent of precincts reporting, Warren and Biden landed in fourth and fifth place, receiving just 9.4 and 8.4 percent of the vote, respectively.
Sen. Bernie Sander’s (I-VT) win was widely anticipated ahead of the vote on Tuesday evening. But Sen. Amy Klobuchar’s (D-MN) surge to third and Pete Buttigieg’s clinch of a second place finish by just 2 percentage points were not expected in the second-in-nation primary.
Signaling that his team expected an embarrassing outcome, Biden left New Hampshire early for South Carolina, where he has been counting on strong African American support to salvage his campaign later this month. The Biden campaign denied throughout the day on Tuesday that the former vice president was conceding the state in any way, but rather the team wanted to make another stop before heading out to Nevada to campaign ahead of the Feb. 22 caucuses there.
On the ground in South Carolina, Biden remained optimistic, repeatedly reminding those in the diverse crowd which demographic groups haven’t had a chance to vote yet.
“We haven’t heard from the most committed constituency in the Democratic Party, the African American community and the fastest growing segment of society, the Latino community,” he said out the gate, harping on the fact that the results only tallied up the opinions of two majority white states. “Where I come from that’s the opening bell, not the closing bell. … it ain’t over man, we’re just getting started.”
Biden starts his SC speech by pointing who hasn't voted yet: "We haven't heard from the most committed constituency in the Democratic Party, the African American community and the fastest growing segment of society, the Latino community." pic.twitter.com/W9sbsqRZiL — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 12, 2020
Warren told MSNBC the results were a “disappointment” and stuck with a familiar theme: It’s still early.
“I have to tell you, 98 percent of people haven’t been heard from yet. We still have 55 states and territories and this is going to be a long primary process. For me, the central question is what kind of primary process is it going to be? Is it going to be Democrats shooting at Democrats?” she told MSNBC Tuesday evening before urging fellow Democrats against tearing one another apart.
“Is this going to be a long and bitter and divisive one or is this going to be a primary process in which we come together and we run on core democratic values, on core American values, and help pull our party together and help pull our country together. I think that’s what this moment is all about.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-12--Stone’s Friends Organize Group To Lobby For His Pardon

Roger Stone ’ s friends have his back — or at least former Trump campaign official Michael Caputo does .
The longtime friend of Stone confirmed to CNN Wednesday that the “ Pardon Roger Stone ” group was organized to gather signatures in favor of his pardon , fundraise for Stone and his family , and to open up discussions between the White House and Stone ’ s associates regarding clemency .
“ We ’ re raising money , raising awareness and assuring the White House that we stand by for contact when , and if , they ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the group , told CNN .
Stone was convicted last year on all seven counts against him , including obstruction , five counts of false statements and witness tampering during the Russia probe .
According to CNN , Caputo has yet to contact the White House or the Justice Department about a Stone pardon .
However , Caputo said that the new group , which is the latest effort in a public and private lobbying campaign to push for Stone ’ s pardon , has arranged a committee to meet with White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The path is fraught with peril : peril for Roger , peril for the President and peril for us , ” Caputo told CNN .
“ It ’ s a tightrope walk for all of us.
” Earlier Wednesday , Trump told reporters at the White House that Stone “ was treated horribly ” when prosecutors initially recommended to a federal judge that he serve seven to nine years in prison .
After calling Stone ’ s prison sentence a “ disgrace , ” Trump declined to give a straightforward answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pardon for Stone , saying that “ people were hurt , viciously and badly by these corrupt people.
” Trump ’ s latest remarks came a day after the Justice Department filed a new lighter sentencing recommendation for Stone , saying that the original recommended sentence of 7-9 years was “ excessive and unwarranted.
” In a Wednesday morning tweet , Trump congratulated Attorney General Bill Barr for “ taking charge of a case that was totally out of control and perhaps should not have even been brought ” and baselessly claimed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russia probe was “ improperly brought and tainted ” — which seemed to bolster an NBC News report Tuesday evening that Barr intervened in Stone ’ s case .
White House deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley told Fox News later Wednesday that reports of Trump pressuring Barr into watering down Stone ’ s prison sentence are “ ludicrous .
”

Roger Stone’s friends have his back — or at least former Trump campaign official Michael Caputo does.
The longtime friend of Stone confirmed to CNN Wednesday that the “Pardon Roger Stone” group was organized to gather signatures in favor of his pardon, fundraise for Stone and his family, and to open up discussions between the White House and Stone’s associates regarding clemency.
“We’re raising money, raising awareness and assuring the White House that we stand by for contact when, and if, they’re ready,” Caputo, the leader of the group, told CNN.
Stone was convicted last year on all seven counts against him, including obstruction, five counts of false statements and witness tampering during the Russia probe.
According to CNN, Caputo has yet to contact the White House or the Justice Department about a Stone pardon. However, Caputo said that the new group, which is the latest effort in a public and private lobbying campaign to push for Stone’s pardon, has arranged a committee to meet with White House officials if it’s interested.
“The path is fraught with peril: peril for Roger, peril for the President and peril for us,” Caputo told CNN. “It’s a tightrope walk for all of us.”
Earlier Wednesday, Trump told reporters at the White House that Stone “was treated horribly” when prosecutors initially recommended to a federal judge that he serve seven to nine years in prison. After calling Stone’s prison sentence a “disgrace,” Trump declined to give a straightforward answer when asked if he’s considering a pardon for Stone, saying that “people were hurt, viciously and badly by these corrupt people.”
Trump’s latest remarks came a day after the Justice Department filed a new lighter sentencing recommendation for Stone, saying that the original recommended sentence of 7-9 years was “excessive and unwarranted.”
In a Wednesday morning tweet, Trump congratulated Attorney General Bill Barr for “taking charge of a case that was totally out of control and perhaps should not have even been brought” and baselessly claimed that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe was “improperly brought and tainted” — which seemed to bolster an NBC News report Tuesday evening that Barr intervened in Stone’s case.
White House deputy press secretary Hogan Gidley told Fox News later Wednesday that reports of Trump pressuring Barr into watering down Stone’s prison sentence are “ludicrous.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-12--Iowa Dem Party Chair Resigns In Wake Of Disastrous Caucus Mess

Iowa Democratic Party chairman Troy Price has resigned from the organization Wednesday following the debacle that ensued during last week ’ s caucus , according to the Des Moines Register .
“ While it is my desire to stay in this role and see this process through to completion , I do believe it is time for the Iowa Democratic Party to begin looking forward , and my presence in my current role makes that more difficult , ” Price said in a letter to the Iowa Democratic Party ’ s State Central Committee , according to the Des Moines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resign as chair of the Iowa Democratic Party effective upon the election of my replacement.
” Earlier Wednesday , the Iowa Democratic Party agreed to accept recanvass requests after the presidential campaigns of Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-VT ) and former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg called for a partial recanvass of the caucus results due to errors in the vote tallying process .
Although the Associated Press has yet to call a winner in the Iowa caucuses more than a week later , preliminary results show Buttigieg holding a narrow lead over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ process ensued due to a number of organizational issues on caucus night , which include a broken phone app and a hoard of pro-Trump trolls clogging up caucus workers ’ phone lines .
Last Friday , Price announced during a press conference in Des Moines that “ the Iowa Democratic Party Operations Committee has begun a full , independent forensic review of the caucus : what went right , what went wrong , from start to finish .
”

Iowa Democratic Party chairman Troy Price has resigned from the organization Wednesday following the debacle that ensued during last week’s caucus, according to the Des Moines Register.
“While it is my desire to stay in this role and see this process through to completion, I do believe it is time for the Iowa Democratic Party to begin looking forward, and my presence in my current role makes that more difficult,” Price said in a letter to the Iowa Democratic Party’s State Central Committee, according to the Des Moines Register. “Therefore, I will resign as chair of the Iowa Democratic Party effective upon the election of my replacement.”
Earlier Wednesday, the Iowa Democratic Party agreed to accept recanvass requests after the presidential campaigns of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg called for a partial recanvass of the caucus results due to errors in the vote tallying process.
Although the Associated Press has yet to call a winner in the Iowa caucuses more than a week later, preliminary results show Buttigieg holding a narrow lead over Sanders.
Chaos in the vote tallying process ensued due to a number of organizational issues on caucus night, which include a broken phone app and a hoard of pro-Trump trolls clogging up caucus workers’ phone lines.
Last Friday, Price announced during a press conference in Des Moines that “the Iowa Democratic Party Operations Committee has begun a full, independent forensic review of the caucus: what went right, what went wrong, from start to finish.”
Read the Des Moines Register’s report here.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-12--Reports Tie Trump Withdrawal Of Former US Attorney’s Nomination To Politically Sensitive Cases

President Donald Trump withdrew a high-profile Treasury Department nomination over the nominee ’ s old job , as top federal cop in Washington , D.C. , reports indicate .
Jessie Liu , the former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia , was scheduled for a confirmation hearing Thursday for her nomination to become Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Crimes .
But Trump abruptly pulled the nomination Tuesday night .
Now , multiple outlets report that the change was a result of Liu ’ s old job , where she supervised a number of politically sensitive cases including those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Security Adviser Michael Flynn .
Senate Banking Committee Ranking Member Sherrod Brown ( D-OH ) said in a hearing Wednesday that “ it appears this is another stop on the President ’ s personal retribution tour ; an attempt to ensure that [ Liu ] did not come before the Banking Committee tomorrow to answer , under oath , questions about those prosecutorial decisions.
” Trump nominated Liu to be U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia in 2017 and she served in the role for more than two years .
On @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Treasury Department post .
But before she was confirmed for the new job , Attorney General Bill Barr announced on Jan. 30 that she would be replaced as U.S. Attorney by his adviser Timothy Shea .
Now , with her Treasury Department nomination cancelled , Liu ’ s future in the administration is unclear .
The Washington Post reported Tuesday night that Trump had been extensively lobbied by people upset with Liu ’ s work as U.S. attorney , particularly her handling of cases that originated in special counsel Robert Mueller ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One unnamed source identified a Republican Senate staffer upset with Liu ’ s handling of the case against Flynn : Barbara Ledeen , who was named in the Mueller report as a source for Flynn in his 2016-era search for emails hosted on Hillary Clinton ’ s private server .
Ledeen ’ s husband also wrote a book with Flynn , the Post noted .
“ I ’ m a Senate staffer , ” she said .
“ I can ’ t lobby either the Senate or the White House .
I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up in this.
” “ Somebody likes to throw around my name , ” she added .
CNN reported Wednesday that , though Liu was not the U.S. Attorney when career prosecutors recommended Monday that Stone serve 7–9 years in prison , that recommended sentence ultimately moved Trump to pull Liu ’ s nomination .
On Tuesday , top Justice Department officials overruled career prosecutors and revised Stone ’ s recommended prison sentence downward .
Four career prosecutors withdrew from the case Tuesday , and one resigned entirely from the Justice Department .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the cases that stemmed from Mueller ’ s probe , CNN reported , the case of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe also played a role in her withdrawn nomination .
Liu ’ s office had for months investigated McCabe ’ s alleged lack of candor to the Justice Department ’ s inspector general regarding a 2016 leak , but the former FBI official has never been charged criminally .
In the White House ’ s eyes , Liu had not involved herself closely enough in the politically sensitive cases , CNN @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Trump and other officials ’ thinking .

President Donald Trump withdrew a high-profile Treasury Department nomination over the nominee’s old job, as the top federal prosecutor in Washington, D.C., reports indicate.
Jessie Liu, the former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, was scheduled for a confirmation hearing Thursday for her nomination to become Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Crimes. But Trump abruptly pulled the nomination Tuesday night.
Now, multiple outlets report that the change was a result of Liu’s old job, where she supervised a number of politically sensitive cases including those against Trump confidante Roger Stone and former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.
Senate Banking Committee Ranking Member Sherrod Brown (D-OH) said in a hearing Wednesday that “it appears this is another stop on the President’s personal retribution tour; an attempt to ensure that [Liu] did not come before the Banking Committee tomorrow to answer, under oath, questions about those prosecutorial decisions.”
Trump nominated Liu to be U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia in 2017 and she served in the role for more than two years. On Jan. 6, she was nominated to the Treasury Department post. But before she was confirmed for the new job, Attorney General Bill Barr announced on Jan. 30 that she would be replaced as U.S. Attorney by his adviser Timothy Shea.
Now, with her Treasury Department nomination cancelled, Liu’s future in the administration is unclear.
The Washington Post reported Tuesday night that Trump had been extensively lobbied by people upset with Liu’s work as U.S. attorney, particularly her handling of cases that originated in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe of Russian election meddling.
One unnamed source identified a Republican Senate staffer upset with Liu’s handling of the case against Flynn: Barbara Ledeen, who was named in the Mueller report as a source for Flynn in his 2016-era search for emails hosted on Hillary Clinton’s private server. Ledeen’s husband also wrote a book with Flynn, the Post noted.
Ledeen denied involvement to the Post.
“I’m a Senate staffer,” she said. “I can’t lobby either the Senate or the White House. I’m kind of amazed my name came up in this.”
“Somebody likes to throw around my name,” she added.
CNN reported Wednesday that, though Liu was not the U.S. Attorney when career prosecutors recommended Monday that Stone serve 7–9 years in prison, that recommended sentence ultimately moved Trump to pull Liu’s nomination.
On Tuesday, top Justice Department officials overruled career prosecutors and revised Stone’s recommended prison sentence downward. Four career prosecutors withdrew from the case Tuesday, and one resigned entirely from the Justice Department.
In addition to Liu’s handling of the cases that stemmed from Mueller’s probe, CNN reported, the case of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe also played a role in her withdrawn nomination.
Liu’s office had for months investigated McCabe’s alleged lack of candor to the Justice Department’s inspector general regarding a 2016 leak, but the former FBI official has never been charged criminally.
In the White House’s eyes, Liu had not involved herself closely enough in the politically sensitive cases, CNN reported, citing an unnamed source familiar with Trump and other officials’ thinking.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-12--Report: The Army Isn’t Investigating Vindman, But His Career Could Still Suffer

Despite a suggestion from President Donald Trump , the Army is not currently investigating Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman for his testimony during the House ’ s impeachment inquiry .
However , the Defense Department official who confirmed the current lack of a probe to the Daily Beast did not guarantee that there wouldn ’ t be one in the future .
Vindman was frogmarched from the White House campus last week , after he and his twin brother Yevgeny , a lawyer for the National Security Council who did not testify in the hearings , were unceremoniously fired .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an unnamed former senior Army official told the Daily Beast , there are other more subtle ways Vindman could be punished .
For example , he could be denied a promotion to colonel when he ’ s up for the job .
Those decisions are subjective and take into account multiple factors — it would be difficult to pin the snub on his testimony alone .
Trump has sustained his anger at Vindman since his testimony , and also axed former Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland last week .
Many Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Friday Night Massacre to be reasonable , saying that it ’ s his prerogative to surround himself with only “ loyal ” officials .

Despite a suggestion from President Donald Trump, the Army is not currently investigating Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman for his testimony during the House’s impeachment inquiry.
However, the Defense Department official who confirmed the current lack of a probe to the Daily Beast did not guarantee that there wouldn’t be one in the future.
Vindman was frogmarched from the White House campus last week, after he and his twin brother Yevgeny, a lawyer for the National Security Council who did not testify in the hearings, were unceremoniously fired.
But aside from a formal investigation, as an unnamed former senior Army official told the Daily Beast, there are other more subtle ways Vindman could be punished. For example, he could be denied a promotion to colonel when he’s up for the job. Those decisions are subjective and take into account multiple factors — it would be difficult to pin the snub on his testimony alone.
Trump has sustained his anger at Vindman since his testimony, and also axed former Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland last week.
Many Senate Republicans told TPM that they found Trump’s Friday Night Massacre to be reasonable, saying that it’s his prerogative to surround himself with only “loyal” officials.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-12--Trump Calls Initial Stone Sentencing A ‘Disgrace,’ Won’t Rule Out Pardon

President Trump fired back over reports that he pressured Attorney General Bill Barr to reduce Roger Stone ’ s prison sentence .
While speaking to reporters at the White House Wednesday , Trump said that Stone “ was treated horribly ” when prosecutors initially recommended to a federal judge that he serve seven to nine years in prison for lying to Congress and witness tampering during the Russia probe .
“ The fact is that Roger Stone was treated horribly and so were many other people — their lives were destroyed .
It turns out you look at the FISA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where they found out it was fixed , that it was a dirty , rotten deal , ” Trump said .
“ So when you look at that and you see what happened to Roger Stone — but think of it .
A man leaks classified information , highly classified , they give him two months.
” Trump then ranted about how “ nobody even knows ” what Stone did , despite how he was convicted on all seven counts against him , including obstruction , five counts of false statements and witness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s prison sentence is a “ disgrace.
” “ In fact , they said he intimidated somebody .
That person said he had no idea he was going to jail for that .
That person didn ’ t want to press charges , ” Trump said .
“ They put him in for nine years .
It ’ s a disgrace .
Frankly , they ought to apologize to a lot of the people whose lives they have ruined.
” When asked if he ’ s considering a pardon , Trump declined to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ people were hurt , viciously and badly by these corrupt people.
” “ I didn ’ t speak to them , by the way .
Just so you understand , ” Trump said .
“ They saw the horribleness of a nine-year sentence for doing nothing .
”

President Trump fired back over reports that he pressured Attorney General Bill Barr to reduce Roger Stone’s prison sentence.
While speaking to reporters at the White House Wednesday, Trump said that Stone “was treated horribly” when prosecutors initially recommended to a federal judge that he serve seven to nine years in prison for lying to Congress and witness tampering during the Russia probe.
“The fact is that Roger Stone was treated horribly and so were many other people — their lives were destroyed. It turns out you look at the FISA warrants and what just happened with FISA where they found out it was fixed, that it was a dirty, rotten deal,” Trump said. “So when you look at that and you see what happened to Roger Stone — but think of it. A man leaks classified information, highly classified, they give him two months.”
Trump then ranted about how “nobody even knows” what Stone did, despite how he was convicted on all seven counts against him, including obstruction, five counts of false statements and witness tampering. He added that Stone’s prison sentence is a “disgrace.”
“In fact, they said he intimidated somebody. That person said he had no idea he was going to jail for that. That person didn’t want to press charges,” Trump said. “They put him in for nine years. It’s a disgrace. Frankly, they ought to apologize to a lot of the people whose lives they have ruined.”
When asked if he’s considering a pardon, Trump declined to give a straightforward answer, saying that “people were hurt, viciously and badly by these corrupt people.”
“I didn’t speak to them, by the way. Just so you understand,” Trump said. “They saw the horribleness of a nine-year sentence for doing nothing.”
Watch Trump’s remarks below:
Trump publicly addresses Stone sentencing recommendation reversal, calls initial recommendation a "disgrace." pic.twitter.com/2ZdV4DOhXH — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) February 12, 2020


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-12--Nunes And Other House Intel GOPers Boycott Meeting To Force Schiff To Investigate FISA

House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes ( R-CA ) and his eight Republican colleagues on the committee skipped a meeting on Wednesday in protest of committee chair Adam Schiff ( D-CA ) .
The GOP lawmakers sent Schiff a letter informing him that they would not attend a Strategic Technology and Advanced Research ( STAR ) subcommittee meeting scheduled for Wednesday morning , claiming that the committee as a whole “ has strayed far from its mandate of overseeing the Intelligence Community ” under his leadership .
The Republicans complained that Schiff had not adequately addressed the issues outlined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s report on the FBI ’ s Russia-Trump campaign probe , particularly the agency ’ s process of obtaining a FISA to monitor Trump campaign adviser Carter Page .
The FISA issue has been political catnip for President Donald Trump ’ s allies , who claim the probe was a “ deep state ” conspiracy against Trump .
“ Until the Committee prioritizes oversight activities related to urgent and critical concerns , Republican Members can not support distractions from our core responsibilities , ” the House Intel Republicans wrote in their letter .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the stunt .
“ Republicans boycotted the oversight hearing protesting the lack of *checks notes* oversight hearings , ” the Democrat tweeted after the meeting , noting that his committee had held many oversight sessions .
“ We ’ ll keep doing our job , ” he added .
Read the letter , obtained by CNN reporter Jeremy Herb , below :

House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes (R-CA) and his eight Republican colleagues on the committee skipped a meeting on Wednesday in protest of committee chair Adam Schiff (D-CA).
The GOP lawmakers sent Schiff a letter informing him that they would not attend a Strategic Technology and Advanced Research (STAR) subcommittee meeting scheduled for Wednesday morning, claiming that the committee as a whole “has strayed far from its mandate of overseeing the Intelligence Community” under his leadership.
The Republicans complained that Schiff had not adequately addressed the issues outlined in the Justice Department inspector general’s report on the FBI’s Russia-Trump campaign probe, particularly the agency’s process of obtaining a FISA to monitor Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. The FISA issue has been political catnip for President Donald Trump’s allies, who claim the probe was a “deep state” conspiracy against Trump.
“Until the Committee prioritizes oversight activities related to urgent and critical concerns, Republican Members cannot support distractions from our core responsibilities,” the House Intel Republicans wrote in their letter.
Schiff didn’t seem too shaken by the stunt.
“Republicans boycotted the oversight hearing protesting the lack of *checks notes* oversight hearings,” the Democrat tweeted after the meeting, noting that his committee had held many oversight sessions.
“We’ll keep doing our job,” he added.
Read the letter, obtained by CNN reporter Jeremy Herb, below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-12--Three Black Lawmakers Endorse Bloomberg As He Faces Scrutiny About Stop And Frisk

Amid scrutiny over audio from a 2015 speech in Colorado defending his controversial stop and frisk police policy , Michael Bloomberg announced endorsements from three members of the Congressional Black Caucus Wednesday .
The endorsement statements from Reps. Lucy McBath ( D-GA ) , Gregory Meeks ( D-NY ) and Stacey Plaskett of the Virgin Islands did not mention Bloomberg ’ s support of stop and frisk policing practices during his time as New York City ’ s mayor .
Although Bloomberg apologized for supporting the controversial policing practice last year , he came under fire for it after the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earlier this week .
In the audio , Bloomberg described the policy as a way to decrease violence by throwing minority kids “ up against the walls and frisk them.
” In crude terms , that pretty much sums up the policy .
While Bloomberg hasn ’ t been competing in the early primary contests so far , which have featured an overwhelmingly white electorate , he will need to shore up support among minority voters if he hopes to have a shot at the nomination .
A new Quinnipiac poll released this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ traction among black voters as former Vice President Joe Biden has faltered .
McBath , who became an activist with the “ Mothers of the Movement ” after her teenage son was fatally shot by a white man over his “ loud music ” in 2012 , said in a statement shared with Bloomberg ’ s campaign that he “ gave grieving mothers like me a way to stand up and fight back ” and that “ nobody running for president has done more for the gun violence prevention movement than Mike , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control measures .
In his statement to Bloomberg ’ s campaign , Meeks said that he believes the former New York City mayor “ will unite us behind the common purpose of rebuilding our nation ’ s infrastructure and driving our economy forward into the 21st century.
” Similarly , Plaskett praised Bloomberg for his economic policies , saying in her statement to his campaign that “ Mike not only has the policies to bring equality and wealth creation to communities of color and economic development to keep us competitive in the world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fight.
” TPM reached out to McBath , Meeks and the Congressional Black Caucus for comment and will update this post if we hear back .
Plaskett ’ s communications director Michael McQuerry declined additional comment .

Amid scrutiny over audio from a 2015 speech in Colorado defending his controversial stop and frisk police policy, Michael Bloomberg announced endorsements from three members of the Congressional Black Caucus Wednesday.
The endorsement statements from Reps. Lucy McBath (D-GA), Gregory Meeks (D-NY) and Stacey Plaskett of the Virgin Islands did not mention Bloomberg’s support of stop and frisk policing practices during his time as New York City’s mayor.
Although Bloomberg apologized for supporting the controversial policing practice last year, he came under fire for it after the 2015 audio of him defending it surfaced earlier this week. In the audio, Bloomberg described the policy as a way to decrease violence by throwing minority kids “up against the walls and frisk them.” In crude terms, that pretty much sums up the policy.
While Bloomberg hasn’t been competing in the early primary contests so far, which have featured an overwhelmingly white electorate, he will need to shore up support among minority voters if he hopes to have a shot at the nomination. A new Quinnipiac poll released this week showed that Bloomberg has gained some traction among black voters as former Vice President Joe Biden has faltered.
McBath, who became an activist with the “Mothers of the Movement” after her teenage son was fatally shot by a white man over his “loud music” in 2012, said in a statement shared with Bloomberg’s campaign that he “gave grieving mothers like me a way to stand up and fight back” and that “nobody running for president has done more for the gun violence prevention movement than Mike,” referring to his advocacy for gun control measures.
In his statement to Bloomberg’s campaign, Meeks said that he believes the former New York City mayor “will unite us behind the common purpose of rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure and driving our economy forward into the 21st century.”
Similarly, Plaskett praised Bloomberg for his economic policies, saying in her statement to his campaign that “Mike not only has the policies to bring equality and wealth creation to communities of color and economic development to keep us competitive in the world, he’s not afraid to fight.”
TPM reached out to McBath, Meeks and the Congressional Black Caucus for comment and will update this post if we hear back. Plaskett’s communications director Michael McQuerry declined additional comment.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-12--Barr Agrees To Testify Before House Judiciary Committee On 3/31, Dems Say

Attorney General Bill Barr will testify before the House Judiciary Committee on March 31 , the committee announced Wednesday .
The announcement of Barr ’ s impending testimony came as the Attorney General faces serious criticism regarding the Justice Department ’ s watered down sentencing recommendations for Trump confidante Roger Stone A letter to Barr signed by Democrats on the Committee notified him that he would be asked to answer questions about “ the misuse of our criminal justice system for political purposes.
” The letter stated it was confirming Barr ’ s “ agreement to testify.
” Separately , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of conduct in legal matters relating to the President that raises significant concerns for this Committee.
” In addition to concerns about Stone ’ s sentencing , committee Democrats ’ letter informed Barr that they intended to ask him about the abrupt removal of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jessie Liu from her post on Jan. 30 .
Liu was replaced by an adviser to Barr , Timothy Shea , and on Tuesday President Donald Trump withdrew Liu ’ s nomination to another post in the Treasury Department .
The Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ intake process ” that Barr acknowledged had been established to deal with political dirt from Trump ’ s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani .
“ These are not the only issues that our Committee intends to discuss with you when you appear , but they are enough to require our immediate attention , ” the Democrats wrote .

Attorney General Bill Barr will testify before the House Judiciary Committee on March 31, the committee announced Wednesday.
The announcement of Barr’s impending testimony came as the Attorney General faces serious criticism regarding the Justice Department’s watered down sentencing recommendations for Trump confidante Roger Stone
A letter to Barr signed by Democrats on the Committee notified him that he would be asked to answer questions about “the misuse of our criminal justice system for political purposes.” The letter stated it was confirming Barr’s “agreement to testify.”
Separately, it noted Barr’s “pattern of conduct in legal matters relating to the President that raises significant concerns for this Committee.”
In addition to concerns about Stone’s sentencing, committee Democrats’ letter informed Barr that they intended to ask him about the abrupt removal of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jessie Liu from her post on Jan. 30.
Liu was replaced by an adviser to Barr, Timothy Shea, and on Tuesday President Donald Trump withdrew Liu’s nomination to another post in the Treasury Department.
The Democrats also said they would ask about the “intake process” that Barr acknowledged had been established to deal with political dirt from Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani.
“These are not the only issues that our Committee intends to discuss with you when you appear, but they are enough to require our immediate attention,” the Democrats wrote.
Read Democrats’ letter below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-12--READ: Judge Shuts Down Newly Revealed Stone Demand For Retrial

A judge shut down a bid last week from GOP provocateur Roger Stone for a retrial , only revealing the convicted Trump ally ’ s request in a public order on Wednesday .
Stone moved for a new trial under seal , purportedly claiming that the jury pool in the case had been tainted by publicity .
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson revealed Stone ’ s request in a Feb. 5 order denying it , her first appearance on the docket since the entire prosecutorial team resigned on Tuesday .
That came after DOJ leadership intervened in the case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 7-9 term of imprisonment that prosecutors had proposed .
From the order , Stone apparently demanded a new trial on the grounds that one juror worked for the IRS .
Though Stone ’ s motion remains redacted , Berman Jackson retold Stone ’ s argument in her order dismissing it .
Stone purportedly argued that the juror ’ s work as an attorney for the IRS meant that Berman Jackson should have “ removed [ the juror ] for bias.
” During the trial , Stone ’ s attorneys raised the issue and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pool .
Stone also argued that the same juror was contaminated after the person admitted during the jury selection process to having been shown an article in the Wall Street Journal about the trial .
In her rejection of the retrial demand , Berman Jackson said that Stone ’ s attorneys had the opportunity to flag these concerns during the jury selection process and failed to do so .
She noted that the defense lawyers had successfully sought to strike several potential jurors , including some who they flagged for their government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s lawyers focused on was not among the jurors they sought to strike during the jury selection process , Berman Jackson wrote .
“ There was no evidence that the juror took any steps on [ redacted ] initiative to defy the Court ’ s instructions , and [ redacted ] limited exposure to a single piece in the newspaper was of minimal significance , ” the judge said .
She added that Stone failed to present grounds for a new trial .
This story has been corrected to reflect that the order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Feb. 5 .

A judge shut down a bid last week from GOP provocateur Roger Stone for a retrial, only revealing the convicted Trump ally’s request in a public order on Wednesday.
Stone moved for a new trial under seal, purportedly claiming that the jury pool in the case had been tainted by publicity.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson revealed Stone’s request in a Feb. 5 order denying it, her first appearance on the docket since the entire prosecutorial team resigned on Tuesday. That came after DOJ leadership intervened in the case to recommend a lighter sentence than the 7-9 term of imprisonment that prosecutors had proposed.
From the order, Stone apparently demanded a new trial on the grounds that one juror worked for the IRS.
Though Stone’s motion remains redacted, Berman Jackson retold Stone’s argument in her order dismissing it.
Stone purportedly argued that the juror’s work as an attorney for the IRS meant that Berman Jackson should have “removed [the juror] for bias.” During the trial, Stone’s attorneys raised the issue and attempted to have the juror removed from the pool.
Berman Jackson denied that request, the filing states.
Stone also argued that the same juror was contaminated after the person admitted during the jury selection process to having been shown an article in the Wall Street Journal about the trial.
In her rejection of the retrial demand, Berman Jackson said that Stone’s attorneys had the opportunity to flag these concerns during the jury selection process and failed to do so. She noted that the defense lawyers had successfully sought to strike several potential jurors, including some who they flagged for their government jobs.
The juror that Stone’s lawyers focused on was not among the jurors they sought to strike during the jury selection process, Berman Jackson wrote.
“There was no evidence that the juror took any steps on [redacted] initiative to defy the Court’s instructions, and [redacted] limited exposure to a single piece in the newspaper was of minimal significance,” the judge said. She added that Stone failed to present grounds for a new trial.
This story has been corrected to reflect that the order, not the request, was issued on Feb. 5.
Read the filing here:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-12--DOJ Rebuts Flynn’s Allegations Of Prosecutorial Misconduct

The Justice Department , yet again , shot down several allegations of prosecutorial misconduct made by ex-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn in a court filing addressing one of the many Flynn disputes with prosecutors that has thrown his case into chaos .
The Department ’ s rebuttals came in a court filing submitted Wednesday that opposed Flynn ’ s request that the case be dismissed due to the alleged “ egregious ” misconduct .
U.S. District Judge Judge Emmet Sullivan had initially laid out a briefing schedule that could have resolved the dispute before a sentencing hearing that was scheduled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that hearing was canceled after Flynn made a separate set of allegations against his old attorneys that have threatened a major fight over attorney-client privilege in the proceedings .
It is now unclear when he will be sentenced .
Wednesday ’ s DOJ filing focused on Flynn claims that the Justice Department inappropriately withheld from Flynn evidence of misconduct that was revealed in the recent DOJ inspector general report on surveillance warrants sought in the FBI ’ s Russia probe .
While conceding that the inspector general had found “ significant errors and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ argued that none of those issues were relevant to the crime Flynn pleaded guilty to in December 2017 : lying to the FBI in January 2017 about his communications with Russian officials .
Flynn was not a target of any of the surveillance warrants in question , the prosecutors noted .
The DOJ also rebutted Flynn ’ s claims that the Justice Department had violated discovery rules by withholding information , covered in the IG report , about one of the FBI agents who interviewed him in January 2017 .
“ As always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ongoing discovery and disclosure obligations , and continues to review information that arguably could be pertinent to the defendant ’ s guilt or punishment with those obligations in mind , ” the filing said .
“ However , the defendant relies on allegations that do not pertain to his case , that the Court already rejected , and that have no relevance to his false statements to the FBI on January 24 , 2017.
” Wednesday ’ s filing cited the legal standard for the government ’ s discovery obligations that Judge Sullivan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between Flynn and the prosecutors .
Prosecutors argued the report ’ s information about that FBI agent was not relevant to the crime Flynn pleaded to .
At best , the prosecutors said , the information was only useful for the purposes of potentially impeaching the agent .
The prosecutors pointed out that they had already agreed to delay a sentencing hearing that was scheduled in December 2019 , just as the IG report was coming out .
“ As the Court stated , defendant was not entitled to impeaching information before pleading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ And with respect to sentencing , the government ensured that the defendant had access to that information before his sentencing hearing , as it sought to delay that hearing until the Report ’ s release.
” The other allegations of prosecutorial misconduct brought by Flynn were either already rejected by the judge in that previous dispute , the prosecutors argued Wednesday , or had to do with his foreign lobbying work that was not relevant to the crime he pleaded to .
“ The defendant ’ s motion does not provide new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prior holdings , and by extension , does not provide a basis to dismiss the charge against him , ” the DOJ filing said .
The filing came as the Justice Department has come under scrutiny for the moves by political appointees to overrule the decisions of the career prosecutors leading the cases against Trump associates .
According to NBC News , top DOJ officials were involved in a sentencing memo filed in Flynn ’ s case last month that softened the DOJ ’ s posturing towards his sentence .
Much attention has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ signature of Brandon Van Grack — a career prosecutor who has led the Flynn prosecutor and worked on the special counsel probe — has been missing from some of the the DOJ filings in the case since .
He is signed on to the court filing submitted Wednesday .

The Justice Department, yet again, shot down several allegations of prosecutorial misconduct made by ex-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn in a court filing addressing one of the many Flynn disputes with prosecutors that has thrown his case into chaos.
The Department’s rebuttals came in a court filing submitted Wednesday that opposed Flynn’s request that the case be dismissed due to the alleged “egregious” misconduct. U.S. District Judge Judge Emmet Sullivan had initially laid out a briefing schedule that could have resolved the dispute before a sentencing hearing that was scheduled for later this month. However, that hearing was canceled after Flynn made a separate set of allegations against his old attorneys that have threatened a major fight over attorney-client privilege in the proceedings. It is now unclear when he will be sentenced.
Wednesday’s DOJ filing focused on Flynn claims that the Justice Department inappropriately withheld from Flynn evidence of misconduct that was revealed in the recent DOJ inspector general report on surveillance warrants sought in the FBI’s Russia probe.
While conceding that the inspector general had found “significant errors and omissions” in the warrants, prosecutors argued that none of those issues were relevant to the crime Flynn pleaded guilty to in December 2017: lying to the FBI in January 2017 about his communications with Russian officials.
Flynn was not a target of any of the surveillance warrants in question, the prosecutors noted. The DOJ also rebutted Flynn’s claims that the Justice Department had violated discovery rules by withholding information, covered in the IG report, about one of the FBI agents who interviewed him in January 2017.
“As always, the government is aware of its ongoing discovery and disclosure obligations, and continues to review information that arguably could be pertinent to the defendant’s guilt or punishment with those obligations in mind,” the filing said. “However, the defendant relies on allegations that do not pertain to his case, that the Court already rejected, and that have no relevance to his false statements to the FBI on January 24, 2017.”
Wednesday’s filing cited the legal standard for the government’s discovery obligations that Judge Sullivan himself laid out in a prior dispute between Flynn and the prosecutors.
Prosecutors argued the report’s information about that FBI agent was not relevant to the crime Flynn pleaded to. At best, the prosecutors said, the information was only useful for the purposes of potentially impeaching the agent. The prosecutors pointed out that they had already agreed to delay a sentencing hearing that was scheduled in December 2019, just as the IG report was coming out.
“As the Court stated, defendant was not entitled to impeaching information before pleading guilty,” the filing said. “And with respect to sentencing, the government ensured that the defendant had access to that information before his sentencing hearing, as it sought to delay that hearing until the Report’s release.”
The other allegations of prosecutorial misconduct brought by Flynn were either already rejected by the judge in that previous dispute, the prosecutors argued Wednesday, or had to do with his foreign lobbying work that was not relevant to the crime he pleaded to.
“The defendant’s motion does not provide new information to justify the Court revisiting its prior holdings, and by extension, does not provide a basis to dismiss the charge against him,” the DOJ filing said.
The filing came as the Justice Department has come under scrutiny for the moves by political appointees to overrule the decisions of the career prosecutors leading the cases against Trump associates. According to NBC News, top DOJ officials were involved in a sentencing memo filed in Flynn’s case last month that softened the DOJ’s posturing towards his sentence. Much attention has been given to the fact that the signature of Brandon Van Grack — a career prosecutor who has led the Flynn prosecutor and worked on the special counsel probe — has been missing from some of the the DOJ filings in the case since. He is signed on to the court filing submitted Wednesday.
Read the filing below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-02-13--Newly Released Documents Detail DNC’s Involvement With Botched Iowa Caucus App

Documents exchanged between the Democratic National Committee and the developer of the app that caused disarray during the Iowa caucuses last week details the involvement that national party officials had over the app ’ s development .
The results of the Iowa caucuses have yet to be made official more than a week later after a slew of issues related to the app .
In the days following the Iowa caucus , DNC chair Tom Perez has blamed the Iowa Democratic Party and the app developer , Shadow Inc. , for the snafu .
According to a Yahoo News report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between Shadow and the Iowa Democratic Party — obtained by an unaffiliated Democratic operative in Iowa — signed Oct. 14 shows that the company agreed to work with the DNC .
“ Consultant agrees to work with the DNC Services Corporation / Democratic National Committee ( ‘ DNC ’ ) on an on-going basis as Consultant develops the software , ” the contract reads , according to Yahoo News .
The contract also details Shadow Inc. ’ s agreement to grant the DNC access to its software for testing purposes , saying that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continual access to review the Consultant ’ s system configurations , security and system logs , system designs , data flow designs , security controls ( preventative and detective ) , and operational plans for how the Consultant will use and run the Software for informational dissemination , pre-registration , tabulation , and reporting throughout the caucus process .
”

Documents exchanged between the Democratic National Committee and the developer of the app that caused disarray during the Iowa caucuses last week details the involvement that national party officials had over the app’s development.
The results of the Iowa caucuses have yet to be made official more than a week later after a slew of issues related to the app. In the days following the Iowa caucus, DNC chair Tom Perez has blamed the Iowa Democratic Party and the app developer, Shadow Inc., for the snafu.
According to a Yahoo News report Thursday, a copy of the contract between Shadow and the Iowa Democratic Party — obtained by an unaffiliated Democratic operative in Iowa — signed Oct. 14 shows that the company agreed to work with the DNC.
“Consultant agrees to work with the DNC Services Corporation / Democratic National Committee (‘DNC’) on an on-going basis as Consultant develops the software,” the contract reads, according to Yahoo News.
The contract also details Shadow Inc.’s agreement to grant the DNC access to its software for testing purposes, saying that the app developer will “provide DNC continual access to review the Consultant’s system configurations, security and system logs, system designs, data flow designs, security controls (preventative and detective), and operational plans for how the Consultant will use and run the Software for informational dissemination, pre-registration, tabulation, and reporting throughout the caucus process.”
Read Yahoo News’ report here.