Could Jerome Corsi’s lawsuit destroy the Mueller investigation? By Elad Hakim
Perhaps the media and the various “experts” should reconsider salivating over the recent information stemming from the Michael Cohen plea agreement in light of the lawsuit filed by Jerome Corsi. According to Fox News, “Corsi filed a ‘criminal and ethics complaint’ against Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team, accusing investigators of trying to bully him into giving ‘false testimony’ against President Trump.” If this is true, Michel Cohen’s “admissions” will be rendered virtually meaningless, and Robert Mueller’s investigation should be immediately terminated.
As part of his plea agreement, Michael Cohen admitted to making false statements in a letter to Congress in 2017 regarding a 2016 Moscow building project that was being considered by the Trump administration. According to Cohen, the discussions regarding the deal continued until June 2016, as opposed to January 2016, as he previously stated in his letter.
Many well respected legal scholars have opined that Cohen’s admission has no bearing on President Trump and the Russia investigation. According to Alan Dershowitz, “special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe is creating crimes rather than uncovering past ones,” and the “devastating” report he will write will be based on people “who have lied.” Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett agreed with Dershowitz. According to National Review’s Andrew McCarthy, Mueller is building a report as opposed to a legal case. Said McCarthy, “With respect to the president and ‘collusion,’ Mueller does not have a crime he is investigating. He is investigating in hopes of finding a crime, which is a day-and-night different thing.” Together, these comments paint a picture of an investigation that is reeling and a prosecutor hoping to find something he can use against the president that would justify his interminable investigation.
Despite the fact that Mueller’s investigation appears to rely on the statements of people whose credibility is, at best, highly questionable, Corsi’s recent lawsuit, if verifiable, adds an entirely new problem for Robert Mueller and his team. According to Fox News, and pursuant to Corsi’s complaint, “they wanted him to demonstrate that he acted as a liaison between Stone and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on one side and the Trump campaign on the other, regarding the release of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee.” Furthermore, Corsi alleged that Robert Mueller’s office is “knowingly and deceitfully threatening” to charge him with providing a false statement unless he provides “false testimony” against Trump and others.
There is a major distinction between a case that relies on the word of less than credible witnesses (a weak case) and a case where the witnesses are allegedly told to lie or are blackmailed into testifying in a certain way. While prosecutors often make “deals” in criminal cases, Mueller’s alleged conduct, if true, is distinguishable because a prosecutor cannot knowingly support or encourage a witness to make false statements.
If Corsi’s allegations are true, there is no way to discern the veracity of anybody’s statements relating to the Mueller investigation, including Cohen’s most recent statements. To the contrary, all statements, including Mueller’s, should be viewed with the highest level of doubt. If this is the case, what basis if there to continue to investigate?
To date, there is no evidence that President Trump committed any crime, including colluding with the Russians. While Robert Mueller’s eventual report will likely lay out a damaging picture of the president and those with whom he associated, three things should be noted. First, the report will likely rely on the statements of people whose credibility has been tarnished. Second, the report will be one-sided and will most likely be refuted by the president and his legal team by way of written response. Third, and most importantly, if the allegations by Corsi turn out to be true, the Mueller investigation could be brought to an abrupt end, thereby rendering any possible report meaningless.
Mr. Hakim is a political writer and commentator and an attorney. His articles have been published in The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, The Western Journal, American Thinker and other online publications.
Comments are closed.
