Ethics of Mueller's lead prosecutor questioned based on his prior conduct

Margot Cleveland:

Houston-based attorney Kevin Fulton, of the Fulton Law Group, filed a motion on my behalf Thursday morning to unseal and unredact court records that may expose past misconduct by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s lead prosecutor, Andrew Weissmann.

Since Weissmann took a leave of absence from his top Department of Justice job to join the special counsel’s team, critics have questioned his impartiality. Reports suggest the man branded Mueller’s pit bull by the New York Times violated internal protocol when he met with reporters from the Associated Press in April 2017. The following day, the AP published an exposé on Paul Manafort’s relationship with Ukraine officials.

Then news broke that twice-demoted Department of Justice attorney Bruce Ohr kept Weissmann “in the loop” about the dossier penned by former MI6 British spy Christopher Steele and used to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to surveil President Trump’s campaign.

Ohr, who apparently had no official role in the Russia investigation, has come under fire for feeding the FBI intel from Steele following the latter’s termination as an informant. Ohr’s purported communications with Weissmann raise the question of whether the top DOJ lawyer likewise sidestepped FBI protocols concerning sources.

These facts raise serious concerns about Weissmann’s continued service on the special counsel’s team and justify delving further into the career of the long-time federal prosecutor.

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.

Also, Weissmann’s prosecution of former accounting giant Arthur Andersen for its role in the Enron collapse shuttered the firm, leaving tens of thousands of people unemployed. Several years later the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Arthur Andersen conviction, but it was too late by then to undo the harm Weissmann had caused.

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.
...

It was alleged that witnesses were told not to speak with lawyers for the defendants who were preparing their cases for trial.  The judge attempted to mitigate these efforts by telling the witnesses they could talk with defense counsel.  The Mueller probe has also involved hardball tactics that attack people on unrelated charges and use those charges to financial ruin the target and blackmail them into confession to "crimes" that aren't really crimes.