Article

2017-12-08 Home Front: Politix

From A Legal Perspective, Mueller's Investigation is Dead. Here's Why

[Daily Caller] Like a headless turkey running around in circles, Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s anti-Trump investigation is dead, even if he does not yet realize it. While his investigation stumbles onward, with life support provided by the biased media, from a legal perspective the viability of any criminal case that Mueller could possibly bring has been effectively gutted thanks to the news (suppressed for months by Mueller’s team) that the FBI’s "key agent" in both the Russia investigation and the Clinton email probe was an ardent Hillary supporter with an 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."

As a result, in any prosecution brought by Mueller against a Republican target, defense counsel would be entitled under the Constitution to all evidence in the government’s possession relevant to exploring the apparent biases of FBI agent Peter Strzok and his animosity toward Trump and the Republican Party. This, in and of itself, could be a case-killer because it is very unlikely that Mueller or the DOJ would want defense counsel poring through all the records and documents, emails, and texts in the DOJ’s and Strzok’s possession revealing the agent’s biases since this could fatally undermine any other cases or investigations the agent has worked on‐such as the FBI’s decision to recommend charging General Flynn with lying to federal agents even though Hillary Clinton’s besties, Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, were given a free pass despite apparently doing the same thing.
Emphasis added.

Posted by Besoeker 2017-12-08 03:58|| || Front Page|| [11130 views ] Top

#1 it is very unlikely that Mueller or the DOJ would want defense counsel poring through all the records and documents, emails, and texts

Or (as the onion continues to be peeled) examining electronic monitoring... or discovering how electronic monitoring was authorized.

I doubt FBI's Peter Strzok or his recently discovered accomplice, associate attorney general Bruce Ohr were involved in too many other cases. I suspect their (and possibly many others) primary area of interest was the Trump Campaign.

Posted by Besoeker 2017-12-08 04:08|| 2017-12-08 04:08|| Front Page Top

#2 Since when "legal" matters to these people?

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2017-12-08 04:11|| 2017-12-08 04:11|| Front Page Top

#3 Why does Mueller's team keep protecting that worthless former candidate and corrupt scumbag. The Clinton Foundation has effectively been shut down hasn't it? Hasn't the money dried up (or are they still living on the pilfered $12Bil from Haiti)? She's not going to be president.

Posted by JohnQC 2017-12-08 10:20|| 2017-12-08 10:20|| Front Page Top

#4 Skankcat Mueller dropping feces over the "legal system".

Posted by newc 2017-12-08 13:18|| 2017-12-08 13:18|| Front Page Top

08:37 ed in texas
08:30 Besoeker
08:30 Besoeker
08:12 Procopius2k
08:10 Procopius2k
07:54 Grom the Affective
06:54 Richard Aubrey
06:49 MikeKozlowski
06:48 MikeKozlowski
06:46 Richard Aubrey
06:46 MikeKozlowski
06:44 Richard Aubrey
06:34 NN2N1
06:33 Grom the Affective
06:30 NN2N1
06:23 Grom the Affective
06:16 NN2N1
06:09 NN2N1
05:39 Whiskey Mike
05:37 Whiskey Mike
05:29 Whiskey Mike
05:25 Whiskey Mike
05:23 Whiskey Mike
05:21 Whiskey Mike