President Trump attacked Attorney General Barr over Barr’s criticism of Trump’s tweeting about the Roger Stone case.
Earlier this week, Barr said, “I cannot do my job here at the department with a constant background commentary that undercuts me. To have public statements and tweets made about the department, about people in the department, our men and women here, about cases pending in the department and about judges before whom we have cases, make it impossible for me to do my job and to assure the courts and the prosecutors in the department that we’re doing our work with integrity.”
In a tweet, the president claimed a “legal right” to intervene in criminal cases.
President Trump has also previously claimed that Article II of the Constitution gives him the right to do “whatever I want.”
While the president does oversee the Department of Justice, our justice system is founded upon the presumption that the law will be objectively applied. Sentencing should not be based upon race, creed, religion, or status as a friend of the president.
When voters go to the polls this November, one of the questions they must consider is whether it is appropriate for the president to weigh in on sentencing in individual criminal cases, particularly cases where he has a conflict of interest. The conservative position would be in the negative.
By 2024, we need to have come up with a better way–whether that’s an AMA or some other forum, we can’t have any more Romper Rooms. It’s embarrassing to America and to our nation around the world. Deb …