Mueller Jolted as Story About Lieutenant’s Past Leaks to Papers

Just days after it was revealed that one members of Robert Mueller’s investigation was forced to resign over anti-Trump texts sent to an FBI lawyer he was having an affair with, a Wall Street Journal report revealed that a top Mueller aide attended a party held by Hillary Clinton on election night.

Andrew Weissman, a top attorney described by The New York Times as Mueller’s “pit bull” and chief lieutenant — is the latest member of Mueller’s team to find himself facing allegations of conflicts of interest.

It wasn’t a surprise that Weissman was of an individual of liberal bent; records show that the attorney donated $2,300 to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign in 2008 and $2,000 to the DNC back in 2006.

However, it’s perhaps a sign of just how liberally-slanted Mueller’s team is that these donations hardly raised a red flag; indeed, a significant number of people hired by Mueller were prominent financial backers of Obama, Hillary Clinton or the Democrat Party.

Nor, in fact, did too many eyebrows find themselves raising when Weissman “applauded the Justice Department’s decision not to defend the initial White House travel ban on people from majority Muslim nations,” according to the Wall Street Journal.

However, in the wake of the Strzok revelations, Weissman’s conduct is being looked at a lot more closely, especially an email from the attorney obtained by conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch paint a picture of a deeply partisan man at Mueller’s right hand.

The email in question was sent to Sally Yates, the acting attorney general who had instructed lawyers at the Justice Department not to enforce President Trump’s travel ban. (And ended up getting fired, as these things do tend to work.)

“I have never been so proud,” the subject line of Weissman’s Jan. 30 email to Yates read. “And in awe,” the email continued. “Thank you so much. All my deepest respects.”

There was also the fact that, less than three months earlier, Weissman was at Hillary Clinton’s election night party at the Jacob K. Javits Center in New York City, where the expected coronation of Queen Hillary was about to take place.

Presumably, Weissman was not never so proud of what happened next. Or in awe. However, one hopes he wasn’t one of the snowflakes crying in the CNN footage we saw constantly looped from the Javits Center. That would just be embarrassing

The revelations were part of piece the Journal called “Trump’s Allies Urge Harder Line as Mueller Probe Heats Up,” which is to say that after six months of knowing that this is one of the most biased probes in the history of special counsel investigations, lawmakers are finally saying (if perhaps not doing) something about it.

GOP Rep. Steve Chabot of Ohio said that the “depths of this anti-Trump bias” on the Mueller probe are “absolutely shocking.”

The great irony, of course, is that Mueller knew most of this and has still put Weissman in charge of handling the investigation into former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his business partner, Rick Gates.

What exactly does it take to get fired for sending off politically-charged electronic messages in the Mueller investigation? Do you need to be involved in coital relations with the person you’re sending them to in order to get the axe? Is that the line?

The New York Times describes Weissman as “a bookish, legal pit bull with two Ivy League degrees, a weakness for gin martinis and classical music and a list of past enemies that includes professional killers and white-collar criminals.”

Current enemies: Donald Trump, facts, impartiality, legal travel bans and thriftiness with taxpayer money. Unfortunately, that;’s got Trump’s allies urging a “harder line” — which may mean Mr. Weissman will require a few more gin martinis.

As for Mueller’s investigation, it’s become clear this is nothing more than a Democrat-stacked witch-hunt that’s disclosed nothing of substance to the American people as of yet. If we are going to investigate Russian influence into the election, it’s time for a real probe — not a politically motivated sham that looks like it’s about to be jolted by angry conservatives.