A top national attorney in consultation with U.S. attorneys confirmed to Big League Politics that special counsel Robert Mueller and members of his team can be formally disbarred for waging the “Russia” case against President Donald Trump. Mueller and his associates have glaring conflicts of interest in the case concerning Trump.

Mueller’s team is tainted not only by partisan political donations and activities, but by direct relationships with former clients like Hillary Clinton, who is integrally involved in most of the possible evidence in this case. These conflicts clearly violate American Bar Association guidelines.

Hillary Clinton colluded with the Russians in selling them our uranium. Clinton handpicked Mueller to give a sample of uranium to the Russians, and Mueller subsequently flew to Moscow, according to publicly available documents.

Trending: Nebraska Small Business Owner Commits Suicide After Being Railroaded With Manslaughter For Defending His Bar From Criminal Rioters

Don Trump Jr.’s meeting at Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer, a showbiz manager and others — in which the adoption-related Magnitsky Act was discussed — is the only thing resembling evidence that the mainstream media has been able to find. But that meeting is tarred with Clinton connections. According to Wikileaks, a Hillary Clinton campaign spokesman said that “With the help of the research team we killed a Bloomberg story trying to link HRC’s opposition to the Magnitsky bill to a $500,000 speech that [Bill Clinton] gave in Moscow.” Radio host Andrew Wilkow said that Clinton took $500,000 from Sberbank, a Russian bank represented by the Podesta Group that also happens to be a client of Natalia Veselnitskaya’s law firm (Veselnitskaya is the Russian lawyer who met with Don Jr.).

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense? VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters?

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot 3 BLM rioters? * Yes, his life was in danger. No, his safety wasn’t threatened by an armed attacker.

Email *

Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged. Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and the DNC accuse the Russians of hacking their emails, despite evidence to the contrary, which provides further Clinton involvement in the case and further conflicts for Mueller’s Clinton-linked team.

Mueller’s 13-member Dream Team is comprised of anti-Trump stalwarts including three Democratic Party donors, legal representatives for Hillary Clinton during her email scandal, and vociferous anti-Trump tweeter Preet Bharara, who was fired by Trump from his position as a U.S. Attorney within the Department of Justice. These conflicts of interests, especially pertaining to Clinton, make it necessary for some members of the team to recuse themselves. If they don’t, they can be disbarred.

The American Bar Association’s Criminal Justice Standards for the Prosecution Function make clear that Mueller’s team is in violation of standards, according to the top national attorney. Here are the relevant sections (emphasis added):

“A prosecutor should not use other improper considerations, such as partisan or political or personal considerations, in exercising prosecutorial discretion. A prosecutor should strive to eliminate implicit biases, and act to mitigate any improper bias or prejudice when credibly informed that it exists within the scope of the prosecutor’s authority.

(b) A prosecutor’s office should be proactive in efforts to detect, investigate, and eliminate improper biases, with particular attention to historically persistent biases like race, in all of its work. A prosecutor’s office should regularly assess the potential for biased or unfairly disparate impacts of its policies on communities within the prosecutor’s jurisdiction, and eliminate those impacts that cannot be properly justified.”

“Standard 3-1.7 Conflicts of Interest

(a) The prosecutor should know and abide by the ethical rules regarding conflicts of interest that apply in the jurisdiction, and be sensitive to facts that may raise conflict issues. When a conflict requiring recusal exists and is non-waivable, or informed consent has not been obtained, the prosecutor should recuse from further participation in the matter. The office should not go forward until a non-conflicted prosecutor, or an adequate waiver, is in place…”

“(c) The prosecutor should not participate in a matter in which the prosecutor previously participated, personally and substantially, as a non-prosecutor, unless the appropriate government office, and when necessary a former client, gives informed consent confirmed in writing.

(d) The prosecutor should not be involved in the prosecution of a former client. A prosecutor who has formerly represented a client should not use information obtained from that representation to the disadvantage of the former client.”

“(f) The prosecutor should not permit the prosecutor’s professional judgment or obligations to be affected by the prosecutor’s personal, political, financial, professional, business, property, or other interests or relationships. A prosecutor should not allow interests in personal advancement or aggrandizement to affect judgments regarding what is in the best interests of justice in any case.”

“g) The prosecutor should disclose to appropriate supervisory personnel any facts or interests that could reasonably be viewed as raising a potential conflict of interest. If it is determined that the prosecutor should nevertheless continue to act in the matter, the prosecutor and supervisors should consider whether any disclosure to a court or defense counsel should be made, and make such disclosure if appropriate.”

“(j) The prosecutor should promptly report to a supervisor all but the most obviously frivolous misconduct allegations made, publicly or privately, against the prosecutor. If a supervisor or judge initially determines that an allegation is serious enough to warrant official investigation, reasonable measures, including possible recusal, should be instituted to ensure that the prosecution function is fairly and effectively carried out. A mere allegation of misconduct is not a sufficient basis for prosecutorial recusal, and should not deter a prosecutor from attending to the prosecutor’s duties.”

The conflicts of interest are everywhere.

Peter Strzok, who oversaw the Hillary Clinton email investigation for the FBI and interviewed Hillary Clinton, is on Mueller’s team.

Clinton donor Jeannie Rhee, who represented the Clinton Foundation and also Hillary Clinton during the email investigation, is on Mueller’s team.

Aaron Zebley, who repped Clinton aide and key email-scandal figure Justin Cooper, is on Mueller’s team.

Andrew Weissmann defended the federal government’s surveillance rights in a panel discussion at the George Soros-funded New America Foundation, is also an Obama donor.

Preet Bharara, the man who prosecuted conservative writer Dinesh D’Souza and was a leading contender to be Hillary Clinton’s theoretical Attorney General, was fired by the Trump administration but still landed his office’s prosecutor Andrew Goldstein on Mueller’s team, presenting another conflict of interest that he seems to have no intention of hiding.

Final: If Mueller is fired, then does rule of law matter at all anymore or only personal loyalty, public flattery and private gain? MAGA? — Preet Bharara (@PreetBharara) July 21, 2017

How about Mueller himself?

CIA and NSA whistleblower Dennis Montgomery identified former FBI director Mueller as having overseen a secret surveillance program that spied on Trump’s phone calls for years. The alleged program, created during the Bush administration and run by Obama intelligence officials John Brennan and James Clapper, is detailed on 47 hard drives that Montgomery and his lawyer turned over to the FBI, which James Comey buried. Montgomery is suing Obama, Brennan, Clapper and others in a case before D.C. District Court Judge Richard Leon. This case is being watched closely by insiders on both sides of the Russia probe.

Mueller also helped stonewall the Obama administration’s “investigation” of its own IRS targeting scandal.

As Big League Politics reported, Mueller has formed a political team with his friend, fired FBI director James Comey, and the current FBI director Andrew McCabe to work together against President Donald Trump. But Mueller and Comey are not the ringleaders. Surprisingly, it’s McCabe.

An inside source told Big League Politics that McCabe is “running the show,” and “he’s the key.”

“Mueller and McCabe are assembling a better political operation than Hillary had in the campaign. The trio of Mueller/McCabe and Comey are all creatures of the swamp,” the source explained. “Any Republican who thinks this isn’t a political operation and isn’t geared toward impacting 2018 and beyond is absolutely nuts.”

“I think McCabe is the most politically savvy given how he navigated the controversy with his wife’s campaign donations and the Clinton investigation,” the source continued.

McCabe took over when Comey got fired and quickly set up the team’s power play. McCabe said that Comey did not get fired from the FBI for performance issues. That sets up the premise for a potential obstruction of justice move by the McCabe-Mueller-Comey trio.

FIGHT BACK. LIKE BIG LEAGUE ON FACEBOOK