It is an insult to the intelligence to have the word "independent" used as an adjective to describe Mueller's highly suspicious "investigation"

Mueller’s “Russian investigators” Come Equipped With Obama and Clinton Axes to Grind

By —— Bio and Archives--September 17, 2017

Cover Story | Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

“The Conservative Alerts-dubbed “probe-that-became-a-witch-hunt ” that is Robert Mueller’s FBI investigation into Russia collusion has mushroomed, or should we say ‘‘metastasized’ ,  into ‘Old Home Week’ for lawyerly Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton partisans.

These anything but ‘independent’ lawyers are zooming in to Mueller’s special counsel’ probe like flies to you-know-what.

To date, some nine lawyers who, in total,  donated $65,000 to the coffers of former President Barack Obama and failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, are in on the “independent” Mueller probe.

Here’s the google available profile on Mueller’s latest legal beagle, courtesy of Legal Newsline—even though her name among other attorneys whose conduct in a high-profile immigration case was called “unseemly and unprofessional” by a federal judge,  has already been scrubbed scrubbed from court documents..

“(Kyle)  Freeny, who joined DOJ in 2007, has something in common with at least eight of her Mueller team members. (DailyCaller, Sept. 16, 2017)

“According to documents maintained by the Federal Election Commission, Freeny has donated in each of the past three presidential elections to Democratic nominees, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

The U.S. Department of Justice won’t release the names of attorneys whose conduct in a high-profile immigration case was called “unseemly and unprofessional” by a federal judge, or whether those attorneys will face internal disciplinary action. (Legal Newsline, Sept. 29, 2016)

Not all stinking fish originate in faraway Denmark.

“The DOJ says it “emphatically” disagrees with Judge Andrew Hanen’s May order in State of Texas, et al. v. United States of America, et al., in which he wrote that he was “disappointed” that the court even had to address the subject of lawyer behavior when it has “many more pressing matters on its docket.” (LegalNewsLines)

“Hanen concluded that DOJ attorneys “effectively misled” the plaintiff states into foregoing a request for a temporary restraining order or an earlier hearing on a motion for an injunction.

“Their names, following a court order, were redacted from the department’s response to the judge’s order.


“Their misrepresentations, the judge said, also “misdirected” the court as to the timeline involved in the implementation of a 2014 Department of Homeland Security directive, which included amendments to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

“DOJ attorneys said Obama’s three-year amnesty plan wasn’t being implemented, but the judge says it actually was - and more than 100,000 aliens were to be affected.

“The Justice Department declined to release a complete list of all those attorneys involved, and their salaries, to Legal Newsline.

“Many DOJ lawyers are listed as participating in the case. They are James Gilligan, Daniel Hu, Adam Kirschner, Jennifer Ricketts, Daniel Schwei, John Tyler, Kathleen Hartnett, Bradley Cohen and Kyle Freeny.

“Freeny is listed as “Attorney-in-Charge” on one of the DOJ’s earliest filings - a response to the motion for a preliminary injunction.

“The lawsuit, filed by 26 states, took issue with the constitutionality of the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans, or DAPA, program.

“The program, announced by President Barack Obama in November 2014 as part of his plan for immigration reform, attempts to grant deferred action to illegal immigrants who are the parents of a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident.

“The program, combined with DACA, would have delayed deportation of millions of undocumented aliens in the United States.

“The United States Department of Justice has now admitted making statements that clearly did not match the facts. It has admitted that the lawyers who made these statements had knowledge of the truth when they made these misstatements,” Hanen wrote in his 28-page order.

“The DOJ’s only explanation has been that its lawyers either ‘lost focus’ or that the ‘fact[s] receded in memory or awareness.’

“These misrepresentations were made on multiple occasions starting with the very first hearing this Court held. This Court would be remiss if it left such unseemly and unprofessional conduct unaddressed.”


Continued below...

History seems to be repeating itself in Mueller’s special counsel probe which seems to have lost the same “focus” the lawyers lost in the Hanen case.

“The DOJ shot back at Hanen’s searing words in an email to Legal Newsline—after numerous requests for comment on the judge’s order. (LegalNewsLine)

“The Department of Justice takes with utmost seriousness the public trust committed to it to represent the interests of the American people in the courts of the United States, and insists that its attorneys adhere to the high standards of ethical conduct and professionalism required to carry out that critical mission,” a Justice Department spokesperson said.”

Sure, DOJ.

“The Court previously found that certain representations to the Court in this case were made in bad faith or with intent to deceive. We respectfully but emphatically disagree with that conclusion and welcomed the opportunity to provide additional information to the Court.” (LegalNewsLine)

“In the wake of Hanen’s order—as an affirmation of the DOJ’s “steadfast commitment” to its “solemn obligations”—Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Benjamin Mizer directed all DOJ Civil Division attorneys complete supplemental training designed and led by an outside expert in attorney ethics and professional responsibility.”

“According to the Justice Department’s response, filed July 31 to a June 7 order, all Civil Division attorneys will be required to complete the one-hour training within the next 90 days.”

You can’t, as they say, make these things up.


“A DOJ spokesperson would not tell Legal Newsline who, exactly, would provide the training, what it would consist of, if there would be any sort of assessment after, and whether any other changes have been made within the department to prevent such “mistakes” in the future.(LegalNewsLine)

“The spokesperson also would not say whether the attorneys at the center of Hanen’s order will face any other disciplinary action.

“Mizer has said he hopes the training “will help to assure the Court that we are making every effort to maintain the trust placed in the Department of Justice.”

“The Government sincerely hopes that this significant measure will not only demonstrate the Department’s good faith generally, but also make evident that no sanctions are necessary in this matter,” the DOJ wrote in its response.

“Hanen, a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, gave the government an opportunity, in a June 7 order, to submit evidence regarding the conclusions reached in his May 19 opinion and orders.

“The DOJ, in its response, said it did not intend to mislead or misrepresent the facts to the court about the implementation of the 2014 deferred action guidance.

“We do not dispute that we made mistakes that led to the unfortunate circumstances here: at critical times we provided incomplete information to the Court because of our failure to appreciate the scope of the questions asked of us; and we used imprecise terminology in our oral and written submissions to the Court,” it wrote.

“As a result, our submissions left the Court with an incorrect understanding of the facts regarding grants by the Department of Homeland Security of three-year terms of deferred action to individuals qualifying under the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival eligibility criteria.

“We acknowledge and apologize for these mistakes, and for the valuable time the Court has expended on this matter as a result. But we did not intend to mislead the Court or to conceal any fact concerning implementation of the Guidance.”

“In a July 31 motion, the DOJ asked that the Texas federal court grant its leave to file their response under seal and in camera—meaning a hearing would be held before the judge in his private chambers.

“The department cited issues of privacy and attorney-client privilege.

“Defendants’ response and accompanying declarations will necessarily include a significant amount of information that is privileged. They will also contain sensitive personal information, and will necessarily identify the counsel named in the Court’s sealed order of May 19, 2016,” the Justice Department wrote.

“For all these reasons, filing Defendants’ response under seal and in camera is necessary to avoid the improper disclosure of these types of information.”

“The DOJ argued there was “no meaningful non-privileged, segregable” information that can be disclosed without also placing individual declarants’ personal privacy interests at risk.”

“There have been no public statements about the reasons for the dismissal and the U.S. Attorney’s Office cannot provide one, even now, months later.”


Continued below...

“Freeny, is a Justice Department attorney working in the agency’s international money laundering unit. (DailyCaller)

According to Politico, Freeny on Friday attended the grand jury testimony of Jason Maloni, the spokesman for former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort. Politico notes that Freeny is the 17th attorney identified as a member of Mueller’s investigative team.”

“According to documents maintained by the Federal Election Commission, Freeny has donated in each of the past three presidential elections to Democratic nominees, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

“She donated $250 on three separate occasions, on Sept. 13, 2008, June 30, 2012 and Sept. 9, 2016.

“For seven months in 2011, Freeny worked as an attorney in the Obama White House on security clearance issues.”

Robert Mueller’s investigation into the media-hyped Russian collusion in the 2016 presidential election is about as “independent, as Paul Volcker’s “independent” inquiry into the UN Oil for Food scandal that Senator Norm Coleman called “the most extensive fraud in the history of the United Nations occurring on Kofi Annan’s watch, the one in which the Times of London calculated that French and Russian companies cashed in on $11-billion worth of business from oil for food between 1996 and 2003.” (Canada Free Press, Dec. 8, 2004)

Mueller’s “Russian investigators” come to the investigation with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton axes to grind.

It is an insult to the intelligence to have the word “independent” used as an adjective to describe Mueller’s highly suspicious “investigation”.

Robert Mueller’s special counsel should be dismissed, his Russian investigators disbanded and sent back to the tainted DOJ for which they have always worked.

Please SHARE this story as the only way for CFP to beat Facebook anti-Conservative Suppression.

Only YOU can save CFP from Social Media Suppression. Tweet, Post, Forward, Subscribe or Bookmark us

Judi McLeod -- Bio and Archives | Comments

Copyright © Canada Free Press

RSS Feed for Judi McLeod
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh, Newsmax.com, Drudge Report, Foxnews.com.

Older articles by Judi McLeod

Commenting Policy

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban.
-- Follow these instructions on registering: