Tuesday, May 14, 2019

Judicial Watch: Andrew Weissmann Hand-Picked Team Mueller's "Angry Democrats"

You've all heard about the key role legendarily unethical prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, a Mueller protege going way back, played on Team Mueller. Sundance at CTH, and other commenters as well, have gone so far as to state that Team Mueller was essentially Team Weissmann--key players at DoJ and the FBI selected Mueller to be the figurehead. Now, Judicial Watch has, through a FOIA lawsuit, learned details of the process by which outrageously conflicted and partisan Dems were recruited for the "Get Trump" team.

Bear in mind that, just yesterday, Rod Rosenstein stated: 

“I was responsible for overseeing that investigation.”

Per Zerohedge:

When Trump called the Mueller investigators "18 angry Democrats," he wasn't kidding.  
According to 73 pages of records obtained by Judicial Watch, Mueller special counsel prosecutor Andrew Weissmann led the hiring effort for the team that investigated the Trump campaign. 
Notably, Weissman attended Hillary Clinton's election night party in 2016, and wrote a positive email to former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates when she refused to defend the Trump administration's travel ban. And as you will see below, he was on a mission to recruit a politically biased fleet of lawyers for the Mueller probe. 

Per Judicial Watch:

"These documents show Andrew Weissmann, an anti-Trump activist, had a hand in hiring key members of Mueller’s team – who also happened to be political opponents of President Trump," said Judicial Watch President, Tom Fitton. "These documents show that Mueller outsourced his hiring decisions to Andrew Weissmann. No wonder it took well over a year to get this basic information and, yet, the Deep State DOJ is still stonewalling on other Weissmann documents!" 
Weissman’s calendar shows that he began interviewing people for investigator jobs on the Mueller operation almost immediately after it was announced that he had joined the team in early June. 
On June 5, 2017, he interviewed former Chief of the Public Corruption Unit of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York Andrew Goldstein. Goldstein was a Time magazine reporter. Goldstein contributed a combined $3,300 to Obama’s campaigns in 2008 and 2012. His wife, Julie Rawe, was a reporter and editor for Time for 13 years, until 2013. He became a lead prosecutor for Mueller. 
The next day, on June 6, 2017 Weissmann had a meeting with “FARA [Foreign Agents Registration Act] counsel.” 
Weissmann interviewed another prosecutor, Kyle Freeny, from the DOJ Money Laundering Section for the team on June 7, 2017. She contributed a total of $500 to Obama’s presidential campaigns and $250 to Hillary Clinton’s. She was later detailed to the Mueller investigation. 
He interviewed a trial attorney who worked with him in the Criminal Fraud Section, Rush Atkinson, on June 9, 2017. Records show that Atkinson donated $200 to Clinton’s campaign in 2016. He is a registered Democrat and contributed $200 to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign. Atkinson also became part of the Mueller team. 
Weissmann interviewed DOJ Deputy Assistant Attorney General Greg Andres for the team on June 13, 2017. Andres donated $2,700 to the campaign for Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) in 2018 and $1,000 to the campaign for David Hoffman (D) in 2009. Andres is a registered Democrat. His wife, Ronnie Abrams, a U.S. district judge in Manhattan, was nominated to the bench in 2011 by Obama. He joined the Mueller team in August 2017. -Judicial Watch


  1. Laws need to be changed so that a partisan witch hunt like this never occurs again. How can anyone dispute that Weissmann doesn't seek justice; he seeks vengeance and intimidation.

    I have said this before but there are so many bad actors in this that it is hard to pick a "favorite" villian. I'm not just talking about who's most responsible. I'm also taking account of who is most reprehensible. Weissmann, Clinton and Brennan are three of my top picks. Not that I'm saying Comey, Clapper, etc., are cretins. There seems to be a special cruelty among my list of three.

  2. The laundry list of government attorneys with political partisan interests gives pause (give away the game) when, say, Congress references "career DOJ attorneys" for some investigation or another--as if so-called career attorneys are free of political partisanship, unlike political appointees. What a sham.

    1. Yes, that is a sham. Career attorneys are just as subject to partisan motivations as political appointees. They may have to conceal their views from some of the political appointees, but they can resist to one degree or another, or push their agenda.