So why is everyone resigning in the Roger Stone case?

So what is going on in the Roger Stone case? How is it that a 67 year old man who originally was arrested during a late night raid that included SWAT team members, and then got a recommendation from prosecutors to go to jail for nearly 9 years....

Over process crimes?

Let's be clear. Roger Stone did not commit murder, he did not commit crimes associated with any election interference, he was not found to be conspiring with any Russians, he was not convicted of anything having to do with campaign violations, and he was not convicted of any tax violations, fraud, or anything else that had anything to do with anything alleged in the Mueller investigation or any of the numerous offshoots of his investigation.

He apparently lied to Congress. Which is perfectly acceptable if you are Hillary Clinton, or any number of people who lie to Congress every day. But for Roger Stone, that is a crime worthy of spending multiple years in prison.

None of this EVER made any sense.

Now it turns out that the prosecutors might have been dirty, and that the foreperson of the jury was a former Democratic Congressional candidate who was on social media "during" the trial promoting the Russian conspiracy hoax, attacking Trump and his staff as racists, and defending the Mueller probe as a "success" because of all of the Trump associates who were charged with process (or other unrelated charges).

How this person was on the jury (much less elected foreperson is anyone's guess).

Oddly, the judge did not provide any gag order on the jury during the trial and apparently he has protected the identities of the jurors (so nobody would have been able to identify anything anyone from the jury might have been stating).

But this juror foreman came out on her own to "defend" the prosecutors and now the shit is hitting the fan. Now everyone is wondering how this person made it on the jury? It's almost a foregone conclusion that either she would have had to have lied during jury selection or that normal issues that would have otherwise disqualified a juror were being ignored by the Judge in question. Moreover, what sort of jury make up do you have when they choose to elect a Democrat with anti-Trump and pro-Russian conspiracy views as their foreperson?

Stone and his attorneys are asking for a new trial. The Judge has stated no, ruling that the apparently bias exhibited by the jury foreperson did not get in the way of a fair trial. I suspect this ruling will be appealed, and I suspect another Judge might not agree.

Democrats are pushing back on this as "interference".  Some are calling for Barr to resigned or to be impeached, because they still do not understand that Barr is the boss of the DOJ and it's not interference for him to step in if there are obvious problems with how his employees acted. People just don't resign and quit their jobs because they did everything by the books. There is likely more to come in terms of why Stone was treated like Al Capone over a lack of cooperation in a failed congressional investigation. I suspect it won't caste a very good impression on the prosecutors in question.

Ultimately, I am not sure this is a situation that Democrats are going to want to continue to defend once more information comes out. But for now, the usual suspects are clutching pearls and demanding more "investigations".