September 19, 2023

Weissman Prosecuted for Withholding Evidence

Timothy Birdnow

Deputy FBI director Andrew Weissman is facing serious ethics charges in New York.

Weissman, you may remember, was point man for Robert Mueller in his witch hunt probe of President Trump in the early years of the Trump Presidency.

FTA:

Serious ethical charges against FBI Deputy Director Andrew Weissmann are pending before the First Judicial Department Disciplinary Committee in New York. The charges arise from his role in hiding evidence favorable to the defense when he was a federal prosecutor leading the Enron Task Force.The Department of Justice is handling his defense.

According to the DOJ, there was no violation of the rules of ethics, even if Weissmann "plainly suppressed” evidence favorable to the defense—as the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Enron Task Force did. Mr. Weissmann, who also serves as General Counsel to the FBI, has pitched his entire ethics defense on the claim that the Rules of Professional Conduct require prosecutors to disclose to the defense team only information that is both favorable and"material.” That may be the standard for reversing a criminal conviction under the Supreme Court’s 1963 decision inBrady v. Maryland, but the ethical rules require more.

Any notion that the Rules of Professional Conduct merely codify or mirror Brady, and do not press beyond it,would be a majorNEWS FLASHto anyone even moderately familiar with legal ethics. The text of the rule (usually aparagraphof Rule 3.8, Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor), explicitly requires prosecutors "to make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused.” What part of "all” is confusing to the Department of Justice?

So Weissman hid exculpatory evidence. How many other such cases are there? Inquiring minds want to know.

But of course even if Jack Smith or Alvin Bragg or Big Fani get caught, it will be after the election when it will no longer matter.

The Democrats are willing to risk it.

In times past nobody tried to weaponize the law because it was a double-edged sword, easily weaponized by the enemy. Everyone understood that. But the GOOP has gone into complete surrender mode and the Democrats know they can do this and there will be limited response (if any) from  the cowards in the GOP.

Why not do it? When there is no price to be paid there is no reason not to do so.

I'm encouraged to see this, especially in  the extremely liberal state of New York.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:35 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 423 words, total size 4 kb.




What colour is a green orange?




23kb generated in CPU 0.0093, elapsed 0.2607 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.2538 seconds, 170 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Always on Watch
America First News
The American Thinker
Bird`s Articles
Old Birdblog
Birdblog`s Literary Corner
Behind the Black Blaze News
Borngino Report
Canada Free Press
Center for Immigration Studies
Common Sense and Wonder < br/ > Christian Daily Reporter
Citizens Free Press
>Climatescepticsparty> Daily Caller News Foundation
Conservative Angle
Conservative Treehouse
Daren Jonescu
The Daily Fetched
Dana and Martha Music From the Heart Music
On my Mind Conservative Victory
Eco-Imperialism
Gelbspan Files Just the Facts
Infidel Bloggers Alliance
Lifezette
Let .the Truth be Told
Newsmax
>Numbers Watch
OANN
Real Climate Science
The Reform Club
Revolver
FTP Student Action
Veritas PAC
FunMurphys
The Galileo Movement
Intellectual Conservative
br /> Liberty Unboound
One Jerusalem
Powerline
Publius Forum
Ready Rants
The Gateway Pundit
The Jeffersonian Ideal
Thinking Democrat
Ultima Thule
Western Journalism
Science Daily
Science Tech Daily
Young Craig Music
Contact Tim at bgocciaatoutlook.com

Monthly Traffic

  • Pages: 105855
  • Files: 6535
  • Bytes: 2.0G
  • CPU Time: 212:32
  • Queries: 3932937

Content

  • Posts: 30828
  • Comments: 137776

Feeds


RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0