A globalist, dirty American attorney (“Mueller’s pit bull”) who, in 2015 was the proverbial fox guarding the hen house as chief of the criminal fraud section of the U.S. Dept of Justice. He attended Hillary Clinton’s election night party in 2016, and was one of several officials told by then-DOJ #4 Bruce Ohr prior to the DOJ obtaining a FISA surveillance warrant that the ‘Steele Dossier’ was opposition research connected to Clinton and might be biased. In June 2017, the avid anti-Trumper (as exposed by Judicial Watch FOIA requests of Weissmann texts) was appointed to a management role on the 2017 special counsel team of 16 (with zero republicans) headed by Robert Mueller and the chief architect of the failed coup to oust President Trump. Former head of the Enron Task Force, Weissmann was notorious for running rough-shod over everyone in his path. He destroyed Arthur Andersen and its 85,000 jobs by indicting the company—only to have the case reversed by the Supreme Court nine to zip. Then he turned his sights to Merrill Lynch executives. He, Kathryn Ruemmler and Matthew Friedrich made up crimes, hid evidence, lied to the court and jury, and sent four innocent men to prison for up to a year on their concocted case. Weissmann is famous for prosecutorial terror tactics like the pre-dawn raid on Paul Manafort’s home, adding charges of obstruction of justice, and finding various ways to impair a defendant’s ability to mount a defense.
According to investigative journalist Sara Carter, Weissmann has been busted for withholding evidence in a previous court case involving prosecution of organized crime, to put an extra thumb on the scale of justice in his own favor. Carter writes that:
- In 1997 Andrew Weissmann was officially reprimanded by a judge in the Eastern District of New York for withholding evidence.
- Weissmann was reported to the Department of Justice Inspector General and Senate Judiciary Committee for alleged “corrupt legal practices.”
- A formal letter from U.S. Attorney Eastern District of New York Zachary Carter requested the judge to remove Weissman’s name, according to documents.
- Civil rights and Criminal Defense Attorney David Schoen said Weissmann needs to be investigated for alleged past misconduct in court cases.
More specifically, Weissmann withheld evidence to a court that would have helped the other side in a criminal case, which is required by law. In that previous case:
Evidence suggested that Scarpa was involved in a personal relationship with his FBI handler, Lindley DeVecchio. DeVeccio, who was also a witness in a case connected to the Persico case. Weissmann had DeVecchio testify against Michael Sessa, a captain in the Colombo family, despite knowing DeVecchio was under investigation by the FBI for his relationship with Scarpa. Weissmann and his team failed disclose that to the courts and presented him as a solid witness in the case, according to Schoen and court documents.
Mafiosos may not be a sympathetic bunch, but the law is the law and Weissmann didn’t think it applied to him.
This, from a man gushingly portrayed in the New York Times last year as “fair.”
No, actually, Weissmann doesn’t really sound fair. According to the leftwing Daily Beast, in a piece published last August:
[Legal experts] believe [Weissmann’s] presence on Mueller’s team means the probe may push legal boundaries as it investigates alleged collusion between Trump and Russian interests.
Both The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway and former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell have exposed Weissmann’s reckless win-until-reversed modus operandi that has destroyed countless lives. Weissmann’s tactics sent four Merrill Lynch executives to prison, until a federal appellate court overturned their convictions and freed the men—but not before upending their lives.
As had of the Enron Task Force, Weissmann dealt the death penalty to the venerable accounting firm of Arthur Andersen LLP, which employed 85,000 people world-wide and represented approximately 2500 publicly-traded companies. It even coerced a guilty plea out of Andersen partner David Duncan.
In a trial rife with prosecutorial misconduct obviously calculated to win at any cost, Weissmann helped rewrite crucial jury instructions defining the “crime” and the intent required.
Three years later, a unanimous Supreme Court reversed the conviction. All the justices agreed that Andersen’s conduct was not a crime, and it was “shocking how little criminal culpability the jury instructions required.”
In plain English, Mr. Weissmann concocted a crime, destroyed a company and 85,000 jobs, spent millions of tax dollars, and obtained a wrongful conviction — all over a junk case that was thrown out of court and this guy didn’t care?
The prosecutors were so over-reaching that the judge even allowed Mr. Duncan to withdraw his guilty plea.
Weissmann ran the grand jury like a petty tyrant. He instructed one defendant — who had appeared voluntarily — to share his “personal understanding” of a telephone call he had not even participated in, “whether his understanding was accurate or not.” Then, Weissmann indicted him for perjury and obstruction of justice for his answer.
Determined to “send a message to Wall Street,” Weissmann supervised the prosecution of four Merrill Lynch executives on charges that were unprecedented. Like a character from the TV series The Blacklist, Weissmann himself often made multiple phone calls to lawyers for potential defense witnesses, threatening the indictment of anyone who might testify for the defense — including in-house legal counsel.
To top it off, Weissmann and team actually yellow-highlighted evidence that was favorable to the defense before the Barge trial, but hid it for six years while four Merrill executives served a year in prison on an indictment that failed to allege a crime as charged.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed 12 out of 14 counts of conviction, acquitted one defendant completely, and later held that the prosecutors “plainly suppressed evidence” favorable to the defense and provided misleading summaries instead.
Weissmann left the Enron Task Force amid escalating allegations of prosecutorial misconduct during the Enron Broadband case. No one seemed to notice what had happened to the victims, or that all of the cases they actually tried and at least two of the guilty pleas they coerced were reversed.
Twenty thousand people lost their jobs over a junk case that was thrown out of court and this guy didn’t care? Weissmann seems to have a history of dirty-cop tactics in his bid to make headlines, and it’s particularly relevant in the current case with Robert Mueller since it now involves withheld evidence, the evidence that the phony Steele dossier, paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign, and which the FBI knew was fake, was nevertheless the basis for a FISA warrant to spy on Trump advisor Carter Page, and with it, the entire Trump team, as Team Obama went wild with the unmaskings.
Further research into Weissmann’s role in the prosecution of Enron executives Jeffrey Skilling, Kenneth Lay, and Richard Causey (the “Enron case”) reveal a more startling and concerning possibility: that Weissmann improperly threatened witnesses. In that case, co-defendants Skilling, Lay, and Causey filed a joint motion to dismiss the criminal charges brought against them, arguing the Enron Task Force, which Weissmann joined in 2002 and headed from 2004 until his abrupt departure in July 2005, engaged in multiple incidents of prosecutorial misconduct.
While the original motion was filed under seal, the judge later released a redacted version of the court filing, which chronicled the claimed misconduct:
The above redactions and others found in the brief leave unknown the extent of the claimed prosecutorial misconduct. For instance, the defendants placed great emphasis on a threatening email from one of the government attorneys to an unnamed witness. Those redactions remain in place to this day, although the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals later outed Weissmann as the email’s author and Ken Rice as the witness allegedly threatened.
Notwithstanding the allegations of misconduct, the judge presiding over the Enron case denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss the criminal charges. Significantly, though, the district court did not resolve the question of whether Weissmann had engaged in prosecutorial misconduct. Rather, the court stressed that a defendant’s due process rights are not violated “if the government’s actions do not affect the witness’s decision” to cooperate with a defendant. The court then focused on the question of whether the threats had silenced the witnesses.
In addressing this question, the district court highlighted the efforts it had taken to counter the prosecution’s conduct: The judge wrote letters to the attorneys for numerous potential witnesses, assuring the lawyers that their clients could meet with the Enron defendants without the government’s permission and that the government could not target witnesses for prosecution based on their cooperation with the defendants.
The court also questioned the attorneys of the allegedly threatened witnesses to determine if the government’s coercion had silenced their clients. After hearing this testimony, the court concluded that the defendants had not established that the government substantially interfered with the ability of defense counsel to interview the witnesses.
On appeal, the Fifth Circuit deferred to the lower court’s decision, stressing that the attorney representing Rice—the witness Weissmann allegedly threatened in an email—stated under oath that the “government’s communications played no part in Rice’s decision not to meet with Skilling.” However, after noting Weissmann’s excuse for sending the email—that he believed Rice’s attorney had a conflict of interest—the court stated that “Weissmann would have done well to have brought the issue to the court’s attention” instead of sending the note.
While this outcome ended matters for the Enron defendants, questions still remain concerning Weissmann’s conduct. What, exactly, did he say in the email? What other “communications” were involved? Did Weissmann approve of similar conduct by other agents? And how did the DOJ justify Weissmann’s conduct?
Or did the DOJ not approve of Weissmann’s conduct? Had the DOJ instead axed Weissmann as claims of prosecutorial misconduct against the government’s lead attorney continued to mount?
Weissmann’s abrupt resignation from his top spot on the Enron Task Force and his departure from the DOJ raise that possibility: Weissmann resigned from the task force in the middle of jury deliberations in another Enron-related prosecution. Also, Weissmann’s departure came following trial testimony from two witnesses that “based on discussions with the Task Force before their testimony, they both felt threatened by a possible indictment if they testified on behalf of the [Enron] defendants.”
Additionally, at that trial, the government elicited false testimony from Rice, the witness Weissmann purportedly threatened, which defense counsel was able to establish based on a video tape that contracted Rice’s testimony.
Weissmann’s resignation also came on the heels of the court’s order in the Enron case that directed the attorneys of clients who had pleaded guilty to any Enron-related charge to provide the defendants with all communications from members of the Enron Task Force addressing whether they should communicate with Skilling, Lay, and Causey, or their attorneys.
Weissmann’s conduct, even if it did not violate the defendants’ constitutional rights, may well have crossed ethical lines: An expert witness with nearly 40 years of experience trying criminal cases in state and federal courts, and who had argued seven cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, stated that “while he had seen prosecutorial misconduct in the past, in all his years of handling criminal cases he had never seen such “unfair pressures brought to bear on the adversary system in a single case.” The expert then specifically called out as an example the email Weissmann had authored.
Given Weissmann’s role in the politically charged special counsel investigation, reports that he improperly spoke with reporters about the Manafort investigation, and information indicating that Ohr updated Weissmann about the Steele dossier, it is imperative to know whether Weissmann also has a history of prosecutorial misconduct. That is why I asked a federal court in the Southern District of Texas to unseal and unredact the relevant court records.
There is both a common law and a First Amendment right to access such court records. While that right is not absolute, there are no countervailing reasons that justify the continued concealment of the facts surrounding the claims of prosecutorial misconduct.
It is unclear whether the U.S. attorney or DOJ will object to releasing the email and the related court filings in unredacted form. It is also unclear when the district court will rule on the motion. But until these records are released, the public has yet another reason to doubt the integrity of Mueller’s special counsel team.
Then there was the weird recusal of Judge Rudolph Contreras in the case against former NSC Advisor Michael Flynn described by Clarice Feldman here. She writes:
The only reason I can imagine why Judge Contreras was recused – note: did not recuse himself – is that he was a member of the FISC, the court that grants surveillance warrants under FISA. As the evidence mounts that the warrant [to investigate Trump advisor Carter Page based on the tainted and phony contents of the Hillary Clinton campaign’s Steele dossier] was improperly granted, someone – perhaps the chief judge of the district – removed him from further participation in the case, likely because Contreras approved the warrant and its extension. If the warrant was improperly issued, all the evidence it garnered is tainted.
As to why the agreed upon delay, Mueller probably wanted to wait until the inspector general report so that, in a sense, his hands would be clean if the case was dropped, that he was compelled by the record to do so.
On December 12 of 2017, Judge [Emmett] Sullivan issued a tough demand of the prosecution. They are compelled immediately to turn over all exculpatory material in their possession to General Flynn. The last paragraph of the order is particularly strong:
And here Weissmann has this history of not turning over exculpatory evidence to the extent that he has been blasted by other judges, even though the law tells him to do so. There’s also Weissmann’s willing to take down whole companies to get a collar as well. And according to the Daily Beast, there is Weissmann’s crony closeness to Obama’s lieutenants such as Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch from his Brooklyn prosecutor days. Does this sound like someone who’s fit for his job as dispassionate prosecutor in the nominally non-partisan Special Counsel’s office?
Attorneys and authors Gregg Jarrett and Sydney Powell were on the Sean Hannity radio show and discussed Mueller’s creepy prosecutor Weissmann and the corrupt Mueller investigation –
Powell referred to Weissmann from the early 2000’s. She claims that he should never-ever be a prosecutor. Documents uncovered from Techno Fog confirm this. One attorney stated that Weissman threatened that speaking with a defendant “could get his client’s indicted”.
More from the newly unsealed records of Andrew Weissmann’s misconduct.
From a sworn declaration:
Another attorney stating that Weissmann’s Enron Task Force made clear that speaking with a defendant could “get his clients indicted”
cc @ProfMJCleveland @FultonforTexas pic.twitter.com/DQBlsKyuqX
— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) March 17, 2019
This is the kind of person the Robert Mueller invited on his team to “investigate” President Trump, an avid anti-Trumper as exposed by Judicial Watch FOIA requests of Weissmann texts. Weissmann, who was involved in the early stages of the fake Russia dossier, who was at Hillary’s inauguration party, was Mueller’s first choice. These crooks should die in prison!
Uranium One
Vadim Mikerin, director of Tenex, plea agreement shows that the Obama DOJ’s Fraud Section was then run by Andrew Weissmann.
The Justice Department instructs prosecutors that when Congress has given a federal offense its own conspiracy provision with a heightened punishment (as it has for money laundering, racketeering, narcotics trafficking, and other serious crimes), they may not charge a section 371 conspiracy. Section 371 is for less serious conspiracy cases. Using it for money laundering — which caps the sentence below Congress’s intent for that behavior — subverts federal law and signals to the court that the prosecutor does not regard the offense as major.
Yet, that is exactly what Rod Rosenstein’s office did, in a plea agreement his prosecutors co-signed with attorneys from the Justice Department’s Fraud Section. (See in The Hill’s report, the third document embedded at the bottom, titled “Mikerin Plea Deal.”) No RICO, no extortion, no fraud — and the plea agreement does not to mention any of the extortions in 2009 and 2010, before Committee on Foreign Investment in the US approved Rosatom’s acquisition of Uranium One. Mikerin just plead guilty to a nominal “money laundering” conspiracy charge, insulating him from a longer sentence. Thus, he got a term of only four years’ for a major national security crime.
Source: Uranium One bribery scandal
Article sources:
- https://saraacarter.com/muellers-pit-bull-andrew-weissmann-busted-withholding-evidence-previous-case/
- https://thefederalist.com/2018/11/08/robert-muellers-lead-prosecutor-history-ethics-violations/
- https://www.conservapedia.com/Andrew_Weissmann
- https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/02/andrew_weissmann_robert_muellers_dirty_cop.html
- https://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/robert-mueller-andrew-weissmann/2017/06/07/id/794685/
- https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/03/dirty-cop-muellers-right-hand-man-weissmann-threatened-witnesses-for-telling-the-truth/
- https://www.creepsonamission.com/#1524859903711-c11e2676-66bd
See Also:
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART I: The Many Corrupt Acts of Former DOJ Attorney and Mueller ‘Pitbull’ Andrew Weissmann (TGP Exclusive)
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART II: 80,000 Innocent Professionals Lost Their Jobs Due to a Weissmann Indictment that Was Ultimately Overturned by Supreme Court
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART III: For 30 Years a Condemned Man Sits in Prison Because of Weissman’s Actions in the Most Corrupt Prosecution in DOJ History
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART IV: “I Consider Andrew Weissmann to be the Most Ethically Bankrupt Prosecutor I Have Ever Encountered” – Attorney David Schoen
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART V: Weissmann Concealed the FBI’s Source Used in Indictments in the Early 1990’s Was Mafia Hitman Responsible for 50 Murders
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART VI: Exclusive Interview with Attorney Sidney Powell – “I’m Very Concerned About the State of the Country Right Now”
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART VII: Weissmann Used a Corrupt FBI Agent as a Witness Who Later Was Charged with Several Murders Related to Case
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART VIII: Weissmann and the Mueller Gang “Accidentally” Wiped 31 Phones Clean After DOJ IG Requested Phones
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART IX: Weissmann Covered Up Russian, Clinton and Obama Actions Related to the Sale of Uranium One to Russia
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART X: “There Is a Special Place in Hell for Andrew Weissmann” – Exclusive Interview with Roger Stone
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART XI: To Tie the Trump-Russia Collusion Lie to Russia, Weissmann Indicted 13 Russians, Most Were Entirely Made Up
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART XII: Weissmann Placed Paul Manafort in Solitary Confinement for 11 Months in Effort to Get Him to Lie About President Trump
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART XIII: Weissmann and the Mueller Gang Made Up Charges Against 11 Mystery Russians in Effort to Claim Russia Hacked the DNC – It Was All a Lie
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART XIV: “A Desecration of a Prosecutor… Has Disgraced Every Single Ethical Tenet that Prosecutors Hold Dear” – Rudy Giuliani on Weissmann
- ANDREW WEISSMANN PART XV: Judge Sullivan’s “Appointed Judge” in Flynn Case Was an Old Weissmann Colleague at DOJ
Chronological History of Events Involving Andrew Weissmann
DOJ Hires Special Council to Investigate Trump on Mar-a-Lago
CBS Obtains 94-Page Outline Showing FBI and Chris Steele Collaborative Use of Media Reporting…
FOIA: DOJ Records Show Weissmann, Other Mueller Henchmen Claimed to Have “Accidentally Wiped” 31+ Phones in Russia Probe
Leaked FOX News Internal Memo Refers to Hannity, John Solomon and Rudy Giuliani as “Disinformation”
Ex-Treasury Staffer Pleads Guilty in Court for Leaking Classified Info to Liberal Hack Reporters
DOJ Inspector General Horowitz Releases FISA Report
Report: Bruce Ohr Warned FBI and DOJ Officials that Steele’s Dossier was Connected to Hillary Clinton and Cautioned them It May be Biased
DOJ’s Andrew Weissmann Joined Mueller’s Russia Investigation Team
Chuck Schumer: “…you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”
