The Daily Caller believes that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian collusion is dead. They believe the only reason it is still continuing is that the biased left media is supporting it but from a legal perspective, Mueller has no ground anymore.
Mueller doesn’t have a case because the FBI’s “key agent” in both the Russia investigation and the Clinton email probe was an ardent Hillary supporter and has now been found to harbor anti-Trump bias.
Under federal law, a prosecutor is required “to disclose exculpatory and impeachment information to criminal defendants and to seek a just result in every case.”
“Specifically, pursuant to Giglio v. United States, prosecutors are obligated to provide defendants with impeachment evidence, which includes, according to the DOJ’s guidelines, evidence of a witness’s biases, ‘[a]nimosity toward defendant,’ or ‘[a]nimosity toward a group of which the defendant is a member or with which the defendant is affiliated,’ reports the Daily Caller.”
As a result, in any prosecution brought by Mueller against a Republican target like President Trump, the defense counsel would be entitled under the Constitution to all evidence in the government’s possession relevant to exploring the apparent biases of the FBI agent, Peter Strzok.
That action would likely kill the possibility of impeachment claims right there because it is very unlikely that Mueller or the Department of Justice would want defense counsel poring through all the records and documents, emails, and texts that I am sure would reveal Strzok’s or the DOJ’s biases.
If those records are released to the defense counsel then the FBI’s decision to recommend charging General Michael Flynn with lying to federal agents could also come under speculation, especially since two of Hillary Clinton’s top aids also lied to FBI agents.
Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, who have both worked closely with Clinton during her campaign said they knew nothing about her private email server to an FBI agent, when in fact there is proof that’s not true.
The real reason why Mueller will not risk a criminal trial is the lasting damage that would be done to the FBI’s reputation by having Strzok’s baggage brought into the daylight.
His baggage that the defense counsel would have a chance to air out publicly would be about Strzok’s apparent mistress, who is an FBI lawyer who also worked on Mueller’s investigation and the Clinton email probe. Additionally, the agent’s wife, another high-profile attorney at another federal agency that was apparently pro-Obama and pro-Hillary on Facebook.
“‘The prospect of having to reveal to defense counsel and the public the FBI’s dirty laundry concerning Strzok—the former deputy head of the agency’s counterespionage unit—plus having to watch as defense attorneys parade the disgraced agent, his disgraced FBI mistress, and possibly his betrayed wife before the jury to explore the extent of his anti-Trump biases pretty much kills the likelihood of Mueller indicting any other Republicans. There’s simply too much downside,’ reports The Daily Caller.”
If Mueller does continue indicting Republicans, then he will inevitably be showing the nation and internationally as well, the U.S.’s vaunted legal system and the agency he was once the head of.
The FBI’s claim to any kind of impartiality and unbiased investigative work would be ruined forever and reputation probably impossible to regain once lost.
Mueller’s offer of a light plea deal with Flynn also points to a sign that Mueller wanted to have Flynn to the notch on his prosecutorial belt before the DOJ notified the public of the real reason for Strzok’s removal from Mueller’s team.
The final reason that Mueller’s investigation is a mute point now follows the reasoning behind fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree doctrine, that is that any FBI agents or officials that worked with Strzok (including James Comey) have now been tainted with suspicion of motives and cannot truly be trusted to testify with unbiased testimony.