I'm anti-Trump, just to get that out of the way, but I'm also curious about the legal aspects. I hope this falls enough under political and not legal but if you think it's better for the legal board, feel free to move.
Mueller recently got a warrant and "raided" - I don't like the word raided when a warrant is obtained, but that's the word most articles are using, so he raided Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen - all legal, all well and good.
Fox News and Team Trump is saying that Mueller has no business going after campaign finance violation in a Russia-collusion investigation. My question is, is that correct, or does the FBI have an obligation to seek out any crime?
I know that if it's the police, and they think I might be guilty of murder, they get a warrant, they search my apt, they don't find a murder weapon but they do find my bag of illegal drugs, that there's a good chance I'll be charged for possession of illegal drugs. Perhaps the same thing applies to Mueller that he "can" use whatever he finds.
Is there a law that defines whether Mueller should go after anything, or is he legally or perhaps ethically bound to only pursue Russian collusion? (He could have searched Michael Cohen's office for Russian collusion, and that may even be what was presented to the judge when they got the warrant) I'm not sure.
I'm just curious if, when it's the FBI investigating a politician, is anything they find fair game (like cops searching my house after obtaining a warrant), or are there legal or ethical reasons why Mueller should stick 100% to possible Russian collusion, and, as team-Trump suggested, pass the campaign finance stuff to another agency/person? (I'm guessing that the FBI would investigate campaign finance violations, so it would be passed on within the FBI).