Weissman Andrew msnbc

===

enemies list 10 25 w # 2 lisa monaco --> MS

bannon target

mueller thus russia -gate ~ HANNITY FOX

legal suppress by flynn

DOJ 3 PASSANTINO FAIL

-=-=

AN 11 26

Former Asst. U.S. Attorney Andrew Weissmann says there are at least three reasons President Donald Trump did not try to deny the midterm election that swept Republicans out of power in a rush of voter wrath. And one of those reasons came from directly inside Trump’s administration.

“In Trump 1.0 there were internal people to the White House and the Department of Justice and the FBI and within the intelligence Community who were pushing back [against Trump’s incursions against democracy in 2021,” Weissmann told Bulwark publisher Sarah Longwell in a Thursday night podcast.

Trump 2.0, he said, is more of a science experiment on what happens when you have only loyalty and incompetence as hiring criteria. But in 1.0, Weissmann said the military and other leaders made clear that they were not willing to do to keep Trump in power.

This year, however, some members of Trump’s legal team were pushing back less overtly, subtly signaling to judges and courts that Trump’s legal filings to intercept democracy had no foundation.

“There were signs of people internally not going along with things,” said Weissmann. “… The solicitor general, when they filed a brief in the Supreme Court on the list of 20,000 [California ballots] to set aside, he obviously didn't have enough clout or power to tell the White House ‘we're not doing that,’ or ‘no, or I'm leaving.’ But when you read the [Solicitor General John Sauer’s brief, I have never read a brief that signals as loudly as it could that this is a bull—— application.”

“It's read the following way: our office has been told that there is this list and we have been told that it is believed to be accurate based on information that, at the time they looked at it, that may support a review,” said Weissmann, between smiles. “I mean, people were joking about it. I'm not sure you could put more caveats into that. That is not how you start a brief. [Sauer’s] basically saying, ‘this is bull——, and I'm forced to do this.”

The internal people not going along with Trump’s schemes to overthrow the 2026 midterms, however, did not include AG Todd Blanche, Trump’s former defense attorney who Trump brought on to run the DOJ.

“Not Todd Blanche. He's all in, in the grossest way,” Weissmann told Longwell, and then added that if there was any official in the second half of Trump’s term worthy of impeachment it was Blanche—who has been serving Trump ever since he failed to protect him from a hush-money conviction over illegal funds paid to a sex-industry worker.

-=-=-

--==

AN 10 266

Trump's recent decision to hand over $4 billion to Russia despite sanctions that he implemented is bringing up questions about his continued relationship with President Vladimir Putin.

In a podcast with The Bulwark's publisher, Sarah Longwell, former lawyer for Robert Mueller's special counsel team, Andrew Weissmann called Trump a "freaking moron" for continuing to support Putin over Ukraine.

"So, one: you're supporting authoritarians over democracy. A true national hero over an actual villain of the United States. For what? You've relieved that country of sanctions. They're you're giving them, you know, billions of dollars of sales, which they weren't supposed to get for a trickle of diesel that isn't going to make a difference to America, in terms of any sort of significant way. You know, would make a difference to America? End the g---amn war!" Weismann exclaimed.

Longwell agreed, saying with frustration that Putin is aiding Iran in killing Americans, but that "Trump has always been looking for a reason to work and do business with Putin."

Weissmann, who spent two years of his life researching and investigating the Trump and Russia connection. An incredulous Longwell said that Trump was "using our energy crisis as a pretense to like get in bed with Putin, which is clearly always wanted to do or been in. I mean, we've got these weird Russians paying for Don Jr.'s wedding!"

She asked whether Weissmann still wants to "get him on this."

"So, he managed to sort of politicize all of that," Weissmann said of the Muller investigation. "The thing that just to get cut through the chase is I still don't know the answer to what is the connection between the two of them, but I know that one theory, the innocent explanation is that Donald Trump just has a fascination with and emulates authoritarians."

While all of that is true, it doesn't answer the question, he added. It isn't as if there's a "Russian voter bloc in the United States."

Longwell closed by saying that she truly hopes that someday the world can get to the bottom of what was going on between Trump and Russia and whether it's an affinity or if it's simply that Putin is nice to him and pretends to like him and promote him.

"But also, this is where you have Steve Witoff and Jared [Kushner] freelancing on all of these things where they have financial interest. I don't know if you saw the story today," Longwell continued. "Again, we're really derailed here, but the a story just came out today that was tracking the ballroom donations and all of the favors that were given to those people who did that. And so, you know, I think some of this is just we live we have the most corrupt president of in American history."

From the executive branch perspective, Weissmann said that they operate exactly like Putin and Russia with the "pay-to-play" politics.

-=-=

AN 9 26

Attorney Andrew Weissman, known for his work as FBI general counsel under former President Barack Obama and a consultant for the late special counsel Robert Mueller during the Russian investigation in 2017, is the target of a defamation lawsuit from a former Trump administration official. But according to Law & Crime reporter Matt Naham, the lawsuit is running into major obstacles.

The former Trump official is attorney Stefan C. Passantino, who served in the Office of White House Counsel during the first Trump administration and later represented conservative Cassidy Hutchinson during an investigation of the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol Building. The lawsuit, Naham reports, alleges that Weissmann defamed Passantino when he said — without mentioning him by name — that he "coached" Hutchinson (a former aide to ex-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows) to "lie" to Congress during her testimony.

But on Monday, September 21, the lawsuit hit suffered a major rebuke when U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan (an appointee of former President Joe Biden) strongly disagreed with Passantino's claims.

AliKhan, in a ruling, wrote, "To resolve the relevant question, the court looks to the full transcript of the September 14 deposition. The court concludes that Mr. Passantino's claims about the message of the transcript are not only legally conclusory, but also incorrect. The transcript, far from contradicting Mr. Weissmann's statement, supports it."

The judge also wrote, "Ms. Hutchinson's statements indicate that Mr. Passantino repeatedly prompted Ms. Hutchinson to lie. For example, Mr. Passantino's advice included telling Ms. Hutchinson that 'Your go-to, Cass,' is 'I don't recall,' even when she asked about answering 'certain questions that [she] would recall.' When Ms. Hutchinson told Mr. Passantino, 'I'm f[—–]. I just lied.'

Mr. Passantino purportedly responded, 'You didn't lie … They don't know what you know, Cassidy. They don't know that you can recall some of these things. So you saying 'I don't recall' is an entirely acceptable response to this … In other words, the transcript reflects that even as Mr. Passantino nominally instructed Ms. Hutchinson not to lie, he repeatedly urged her to say 'I don't recall' based on the unverifiability of that response — not based on its truth."

AliKhan continued, "He encouraged her to say 'I don't recall' whenever the Committee would not know the difference, even when Ms. Hutchinson indicated to him that she did in fact recall relevant information."

Naham notes that Passantino "represented Hutchinson for three January 6 Committee depositions, advising her that 'I don't recall' was an 'entirely acceptable' response if she didn't '100 percent recall something' down to the last detail."

"Before Hutchinson's fourth and fifth depositions, however, she fired Passantino," according to Naham. "And though she herself said that Passantino 'never told me to lie,' the judge saw something else in the transcript."

Naham points out that Passantino's lawsuit "alleged that Weissmann's post amounted to an 'insidious lie' and 'smear' that damaged his reputation and harmed him financially."

But AliKhan disagreed, noting the "objective reasonableness" of Weissmann's statement.

Where Passantino goes from here, according to Naham, remains to be seen.

"Law & Crime sought comment from one of Passantino's lawyers and asked whether an appeal will follow," according to Naham.

-=-=

...

‘Lawfare’

Wilson wrote that the case exemplified the use of “lawfare” by the MAGA movement to intimidate critics.

“Flynn’s crusade against me is just one stitch in the broader MAGA tapestry of lawfare. Whether it’s their suits against the Federal Government, NBC, CNN, Nicolle Wallace, Andrew Weissmann, Fred Wellman, MeidasTouch, Jim Stewardson, or anyone else who dares to speak the truth, the strategy is clear: silence the critics of Trump World by any means necessary, ” he wrote.

“Thankfully, the lower court — and now the DCA — disagreed. Free speech isn’t a one-way street, no matter how hard Flynn and his ilk try to rewrite the rules.”

Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Michael Moline for questions: info@floridaphoenix.com.

---

src?

Legal Warfare: MSNBC Host Nicolle Wallace Scores Small Victory in Ret. General Michael Flynn's Defamation Lawsuit

nicolle wallace wants ret general michael flynns defamation lawsuit tossed pp

Source: MSNBC;mega

Douglas Montero

:{April 1 2024,

MSNBC and TV talker Nicolle Wallace convinced a federal judge to move the bombshell lawsuit filed by former U.S. National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, RadarOnline.com has learned.

Wallace and Andrew Weissmann, a legal analyst for the network, were sued by Flynn after they accused the retired general of allegedly playing a role in the January 6 insurrection and lying to the FBI during the Russian election interference investigation in a 2023 podcast show.

According to court obtained by RadarOnline.com, Wallace and Weissmann, argued that Flynn filed the lawsuit in his home state of Florida which doesn’t have jurisdiction over the case since the podcast was broadcast from New York City.

MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace was sued by retired Lt. General Michael Flynn.

“This Court does not have jurisdiction over Wallace and Weissmann or venue over Plaintiff’s claims, and this action belongs in New York in any event,” the motion to dismiss stated.

“Individual Defendants live and work in New York. They have no substantial connections to Florida. They recorded a podcast in New York for MSNBC, which is also headquartered in New York. They did not conduct any activities in Florida that gave rise to the underlying causes of action. The challenged statements relate to Plaintiff’s conduct in Washington, D.C.

“In sum, the State of Florida has nothing to do with [Flynn’s] claims,” the court documents stated.

trump advisor michael flynn blame jews deportation concentration camps jpg

Source: MEGA

The former National Security Advisor claims he was defamed in a 2023 podcast.

Flynn filed a 13-page federal lawsuit in Tampa just one month after Wallace and Weissmann, former prosecutor and top deputy to Special Counsel Robert Mueller, allegedly bad-mouthed him during the podcast titled: “Prosecuting Donald Trump.”

“These are insidious lies,” Flynn declared in the lawsuit. “Defendants were aware these statements were false but still chose to smear General Flynn to advance their careers as partisan political pundits.”

The lawsuit also claimed the talking heads “publicly impugned General Flynn’s reputation, using his platform on MSNBC, along with political pundit Defendant Nicolle Wallace, to claim that General Flynn plotted an insurrection and that he in fact was guilty of the bogus charge of lying to the FBI.”

Never miss a story — sign up for the RadarOnline.com newsletter to get your daily dose of dope. Daily. Breaking. Celebrity news. All free.

---

===

mma 12 24

December 6, 2024, edition of Real America's Voice's War Room

STEVE BANNON (HOST): What are they spending their time on, wait for it, preemptive - blanket preemptive pardons. What is a blanket preemptive pardon? I don't know. I'm not so sure it's constitutional. I'm sure the Supreme Court will have to decide.

We've so rattled these people. We've so rattled them, they know their crimes and they're so rattled because finally somebody in opposition to them is saying, hey, we're coming after you and we're not going to stop, we're not going to stop. We're going to be relentless. We're going to unearth your crimes. We're going to investigate, adjudicate, put you on trial, and then incarcerate.

You're going to go broke. You're going to spend all your money. You're going to be worried nonstop, am I going to prison? Andrew Weissman the entire crowd. We're going to get all the connective tissues of the text messages, all of it. And the vast criminal conspiracy, not simply against President Trump, but what you did to the life movement, the parents movement. There's so much. It's a vertical that will go quite deep.

…

We broke you and now you're going to pay for what you did to the American people. This has nothing to do with President Trump. It has nothing to do with Steve Bannon. It's not vengeance, it's not retribution, it is justice and the administration of justice.

---

an 67 24

matt g says scotus

Andrew Weissmann, an attorney who served as a lead prosecutor in former special counsel Robert Mueller’s office, on Monday detailed the impact of Judge Aileen Cannon’s decision to dismiss special counsel Jack Smith’s classified documents case against Donald Trump, telling MSNBC she “stands alone” in her ruling.

Cannon, a Trump appointee, delivered the shocking ruling on Monday, dismissing the classified documents case against the former president. Cannon decided the appointment of Smith violated the Constitution under both the Appointments Clause and the Appropriations Clause.

Weissmann, speaking to MSNBC, noted “under both those constitutional provisions, [Cannon] said that the executive branch does not have that power. “

“She’s restricting the power of the executive branch of government — that is the president, the attorney general — from appointing a special counsel, saying that's something that would have to be done by congressional statute, or the president himself would have had to appoint this person, not [Attorney General] Merrick Garland.”

“It is in distinct contrast to all of the other cases that have dealt with this,” Weissmann said.

Weissmann noted various special counsel appointments, including Robert Hur, who investigated President Joe Biden, and the special counsel who prosecuted Hunter Biden.

“All of those other judges, where there's been this challenge, have rejected the view of Judge Cannon,” Weissmann said. “She stands alone.”

“What she's doing in many ways is putting in writing what she has done de facto in this case: she’s delayed this case at every step,” Weissmann continued. “The one difference now is that by making this ruling in writing — not just sort of slowing the case to a complete standstill, which has been her want — this will go to the 11th Circuit [Court of Appeals]. The government can appeal this because every other case they have won.”

Weissmann explained he “actually litigated this issue when [he] was part of special counsel Mueller's investigation.”

“And the courts, I think quite correctly, rejected what Judge Cannon did, and said that the attorney general has ample authority to appoint a special counsel as an inferior officer,” he said. “This, though, is the kind of issue I think will go to the 11th Circuit and I think it might go to the Supreme Court.”

Weissmann added a “final point” for “cynical viewers,” telling MSNBC “they can put this decision by Judge Cannon alongside the Supreme Court's immunity decision from two weeks ago to really think about the problem with rule of law in this country.”

“This is the kind of decision that would affect the D.C. case,” the attorney later added. Remember, D.C. is where Jack Smith has the January 6th insurrection case. The D.C. Court of Appeals has rejected Judge Cannon's decision. They do not believe there's a problem with the way in which the special counsel was appointed. That's what they held in the Mueller investigation. they said there was ample authority.”

Weismann said in that case, a Trump-appointed judge “held there was no problem at all with the attorney general appointing [special counsel Mueller].”

“Her reasoning was that the attorney general can follow any sort of internal guidance he wants in running the Department of Justice,” Weismann said. “He can appoint all sorts of people to help him. He can hire people. He has all sorts of underlings that are at his beck and call.”

“There’s no problem in the attorney general hiring all sorts of people beneath him to carry out the work of the Department of Justice,” the attorney explained. “She said that's true of special counsel Mueller, it would be true of special counsel Jack Smith. That's the reasoning in D.C. It was rejected by Judge Cannon. So there's now conflict between the D.C. cases and Judge Cannon.”

---