Trump & Barr v. Kahnby ROBERT KAHN
“There will come cruel gods with eyeglasses,
Lice and lickspittles …”
— Pablo Neruda
Well, at least we still have three attorneys in the Department of Justice who’ve managed to retain a shred of honor — despite their lying, boot-licking sycophant of a boss, Attorney General Bill Barr.
A fourth, even more honorable former Justice Department attorney, Jonathan Kravis, 42, quit his job this week after our corrupt attorney general disgraced himself, and our country, again, by going to bat for the despicable felon Roger Stone, on orders from our criminal president.
That’s right, criminal president.
Could don the john schlumpf sue me for libel for saying that? “… and win a lot of money,” as he said on the campaign trail?
Try it, please, don john schlumpf. G’wan ahead. Sue me for calling you a criminal and see if you can win a lot of money.
You try it too, Bill Barr: Mr. Attorney General.
You are a criminal too: Aiding and abetting felonies and violations of the Constitution.
The Dishonorable Bill Barr belongs in jail along with don the john. I hope to live to see the both un em locked up in small cells in a big prison with angry guys named Spike.
So the Dishonorable Bill Barr bends over for Trump, again, literally over Roger Stone, asking a federal judge to reduce or eliminate Stone’s recommended prison sentence of 7 to 9 years for seven felonies, including obstructing Congress and lying to it and tampering with witnesses — crimes punishable by up to 50 years in prison.
The prosecutors’ recommended sentence was well within, even lenient, by federal sentencing guidelines.
Remember, now, that Stone was convicted of felony jury tampering. Prosecutors said Stone forged documents, lied under oath and threatened the life of a witness who could have exposed Stone’s lies to the House Intelligence Committee. Stone even threatened the life of the witness’s dog.
And what is Trump’s latest criminal, unconstitutional, and vindictive outrage? He wants Stone’s conviction overturned because a member of the jury — a former member of the Memphis School Board — “had significant bias.” As proof, Trump said, she had once been a Democratic candidate for Congress.
So, don the john: A jury of your peers means a Democrat can’t be on it?
I don’t think so.
So Trump and Barr intervene in the sentencing of a corrupt political crony, because a juror must have had “significant bias” because she’s a Democrat — but they want a federal court to take it easy on a felon who threatened the life of a witness and lied to Congress?
These guys obviously don’t understand how the jury system works. Or care.
In August last year, Barr gave a speech to police chiefs in which he blasted progressive (read: Democratic) district attorneys who “style themselves as ‘social justice’ reformers” and then “spend their time undercutting the police, letting criminals off the hook, and refusing to enforce the law.”
When those damn liberal Democrat prosecutors do bring charges, Barr pontificated and whined, they seek “pathetically lenient sentences.”
Well, Mr. Barr, you mealy-mouthed toe-sucking criminal agitator and traitor, what about it?
Is 15 years in prison OK for a young black woman who sold marijuana to her friends and acquaintances, but 7 to 9 years is too much for an old white millionaire who obstructed and lied to Congress and threatened the life of a juror?
We report. You decide.
You can sue me for that, too, Faux News.
Return To Top
Copyright © 2020 courthousenews.com