Andrew Weissmann: Pitbull or Pitfall? – The Daily Conspiracy

Andrew Weissmann, a prominent top investigator on special counsel Robert Mueller’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) team looking into the ongoing “Trump-Russia conspiracy” inquiry, has been accused of personal, partisan, political bias in his often-zealous pursuit of justice.

Andrew Weissmann in 2004 (Photo: Sanchez/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Weissman is no newbie to the Law and Justice. Among the highlights of his career as a prosecutor are the Enron scandal and New York mob boss cases – he prosecuted more than 25 members of the Genovese, Colombo and Gambino crime families.

You Might Like

Weissman also directed the controversial raid conducted by the FBI last July 2017 before sunrise at Paul Manafort’s Virginia home. Manafort was charged on October 30, 2017, as part of the Russia investigation. He has pled not guilty to 12 counts, including money laundering, failing to register as a foreign agent, and conspiracy against the United States. None other than “Pitbull” Weissman is the lead prosecutor for this case.

Paul Manafort

There are several testaments to Weissmann’s Democratic, leftist leanings which, together, suggest strongly that he is unfit to serve on any investigation concerning President Donald Trump.

Before joining Mueller’s FBI squad, Weissman sent an enthusiastically supportive email to former acting Attorney General Sally Yates after she refused to enforce President Trump’s original travel ban issued by executive order on January 27, 2017.

Sally Yates (Photo: AP Photo/Newscom)

Quartz quoted a memo Yates wrote and sent to her staff:

“I am not convinced that the defense of the Executive Order is consistent with these responsibilities nor am I convinced that the Executive Order is lawful.”

Yates understood the consequences of violating a direct order from the US Commander-in-Chief, but rather than resign, she issued a Justice Department directive not to present legal arguments in defense of the travel ban, and then waited for the proverbial axe to fall, which it did, in the form of a letter of dismissal later that evening.

Weissman let Yates know that, as a fellow jurist, he agreed that Trump’s executive order halting travel to the US by citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries for 90 days, by Syrian refugees indefinitely, and by all refugees for 120 days, was both unlawful and unconstitutional.

Business Insider quoted Weissman’s email to Yates:

“I am so proud,” Weissmann wrote. “And in awe. Thank you so much.”

Yates’ failure to uphold the federal travel ban would have left the government without a legal defense in subsequent court cases.

(Dana Boente, the US attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia since December 2015, succeeded Yates as Attorney General. In an interesting side note, the CIA and the Pentagon are both located in the Eastern District of Virginia, which often oversees high-profile terrorism cases.)

Questions of loyalty aside, is Weissman a good lawyer? An article from Heavy casts some reasonable doubt on even that claim:

“Time after time, courts have reversed Weissmann’s most touted ‘victories’ for his tactics. This is hardly the stuff of a hero in the law. Weissmann, as deputy and later director of the Enron Task Force, destroyed the venerable accounting firm of Arthur Andersen LLP and its 85,000 jobs worldwide — only to be reversed several years later by a unanimous Supreme Court.”

As far back as 2008, Weissman revealed his partisan position when he gave $2,300 to Obama’s first presidential campaign. Although government attorneys have the legal right to donate to presidential candidates, Weissman’s choice indicates his Democratic party preference. This is fine – unless or until that preference sways his professional decisions.

A recent report from The Wall Street Journal indicates that Weissman was among the attendees at the Hillary Clinton election night concession party at the Jacob K. Javits Center in New York City – if you call that a party. This revelation has provoked outrage among the House Judiciary Committee.

Republican Rep. Steve Chabot called “the depths of this anti-Trump bias on” the special counsel’s team “absolutely shocking,” according to Business Insider.

The Democrats’ reply is…predictable. Again, from Business Insider:

“‘I predict that these attacks on the FBI will grow louder and more brazen as the special counsel does his work, and the walls close in around the president, and evidence of his obstruction and other misdeeds becomes more apparent,'” Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York, recently promoted to ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, said.”

Given these two completely opposing views, history will bear witness as to which side is telling patriotic truths and which is consumed with treasonous lies. We may not have long to wait.