Robert Mueller Got Animated Just Once: Defending His Prosecutors
“I have been in this business for almost 25 years. And in those 25 years, I have not had occasion, once, to ask somebody about their political affiliation," Mueller said, breaking his hesitation to stray outside his Russia report.
July 24, 2019 at 01:16 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
Robert Mueller deflected. He demurred. Whenever possible, he kept his answers monosyllabic—”yes” or “no.”
For much of Wednesday morning, Mueller was a reticent, and reluctant, witness. For hours, Democrats and Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee tried to prod the former special counsel to say something, anything, beyond the exhaustive 448-page report his office prepared summarizing the two-year Russia investigation. Again and again, Mueller referred them to the report.
“I'm not going beyond that.” “I would dispute your characterization.” “I can't go into discussion about our investigative moves.” Mueller would use variations over and over. He had cautioned in his opening statement that his testimony would be “limited.”
But at the three-hour mark, Mueller had something to say. The moment came when U.S. Rep. Kelly Armstrong, a North Dakota Republican, questioned the impartiality of Mueller's team, long a leading talking point for Republicans and other critics of Mueller and the nearly 20 lawyers who served on the special counsel's team.
“Can I speak for a second to the hiring practices?” Mueller asked.
“Sure,” Armstrong said.
“We strove to hire those individuals that could do the job,” Mueller said, in his most animated remarks of the hearing.
“I have been in this business for almost 25 years. And in those 25 years, I have not had occasion, once, to ask somebody about their political affiliation. It is not done,” Mueller said. “What I care about is the capability of the individual to do the job and do the job quickly and seriously and with integrity.”
Armstrong had noted that a top prosecutor on Mueller's team, Andrew Weissmann, had attended Clinton's 2016 election-night party. Another lead prosecutor, Jeannie Rhee, represented Clinton in litigation related to her use of a private email server during her tenure as secretary of state, Armstrong said. And the top aide seated next to Mueller at Wednesday's hearing, Aaron Zebley, had represented a top Clinton aide who helped set up the private server.
Armstrong and other Republicans claim those ties should undercut the public's confidence in the special counsel's office. “This isn't just about you being able to vouch for your team. This is about knowing that the day you accepted this role, you had to be aware no matter what this report concluded, half of the country was going to be skeptical of your team's findings,” Armstrong said.
In response, Mueller, himself a Republican who had served in various Republican administrations as a Justice Department leader and as FBI director, said he wanted to put another fact “on the table.” Of the 19 lawyers in the special counsel's office, 14 had been transferred in from other parts of the U.S. Justice Department. “Only five came from outside,” he said.
Among those who joined Mueller's team from within DOJ was Weissmann, who'd previously been the chief of the fraud section within the Justice Department's criminal division. At the hearing, Mueller described Weissmann as “one of the more talented attorneys we've had.”
Rhee and Zebley had both been partners with Mueller at Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr in Washington. Rhee has since joined the Washington office of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. Zebley has not announced his plans.
Weissmann, a former Jenner & Block partner and FBI general counsel, is now teaching at New York University School of Law.
Armstrong, during his five minutes of questioning, raised an email Weissmann sent in January 2017 to then-acting Attorney General Sally Yates praising her refusal to enforce the Trump administration's travel ban. “I am so proud. And in awe,” Weissmann wrote. “Thank you so much.”
Armstrong asked Mueller whether Weissmann had disclosed the email before joining the special counsel team.
“I'm not going to talk about that,” Mueller said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPaxton's Suit Against Election Monitors Is Latest in Flurry of Voting Litigation
6 minute read'Even Playing Field?' Wiley Rein Intervenes in Federal Election Campaign Spending Row
3 minute readBig Law Lawyers Fan Out for Election Day Volunteering in Call Centers and Litigation
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250