Justice Department compliance counsel Hui Chen is going after her boss – Donald Trump.

Chen’s recently opened Twitter page shows her protesting outside the White House on May 10 at lunchtime in a ballcap with the word “Resist” on it. Chen is holding a sign that reads “Support and Defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Yesterday, Chen tweeted – “As a CCO (chief compliance officer), I always made sure to have a paper trail documenting improper influences in my work. #TrumpRussiaCoverUp”

On Monday she retweeted the picture of the artist’s projection of “Pay Trump Bribes Here” sign onto the Trump Hotel just a block from the Justice Department.

On May 13, four days after FBI director James Comey was fired, Chen wrote – “As a CCO, I had been told to back off of #investigations. My persistent was met with hostility & withholding of resources, but not firing.”

And apparently, Chen feels she’s being prevented from doing her work within the Criminal Division.

This morning, she put up a poster that reads “Free Hui.”

When asked whether the poster means she’s being muzzled, Chen said – “I’m wondering what it means too.”

“It’s open to interpretation,” she said. “I think I’m going to just leave it to people’s imagination.”

Chen declined to elaborate.

Before joining the Justice Department, Chen worked in house compliance at a number of major corporations, including Standard Charter Bank, Pfizer, and Microsoft in China.

“I was Microsoft’s first in field compliance person four months before the Beijing Olympics,” Chen said at a November 2015 conference at NYU Law School. “I moved to Beijing in April 2008. My first job was to review all of the hospitality offerings related to that event. It was an experience that made me not want to go to any of the Olympic events. (She didn’t go.) I ended up going to the Paralympics afterwards. It was less commercial.”

Chen provides expert guidance to Fraud Section prosecutors as they consider the enumerated factors in the United States Attorneys’ Manual concerning the prosecution of business entities, including the existence and effectiveness of any compliance program that a company had in place at the time of the conduct giving rise to the prospect of criminal charges, and whether the corporation has taken meaningful remedial action, such as the implementation of new compliance measures to detect and prevent future wrongdoing.