[little jeremiah]

Good twitter thread by Larry Schweikart related to this topic. Let's see if I can copy/embed properly. Crap, twitter is screwing up, I can only copy the first two. Maybe in another comment I can copy the rest.

1) Consider this: Sessions brought in Huber to "review" and "make a determination" on whether various information brought out by the OIG needed "more resources" or to be pursued.

I don't think he's there to "review" for prosecution. I think he's there to "review"— Larry Schweikart (@LarrySchweikart) July 2, 2018

as to whether or not ANY of these cases can be successfully prosecuted without unraveling an entire 10-year history of FISA cases (which would be reopened), without enacting penalties on GB & Australia for spying etc.

2) In short he's there to see if you can excise the tumor . .— Larry Schweikart (@LarrySchweikart) July 2, 2018

[Kalamata]

If it is true that Huber is just reviewing and not prosecuting, I wonder who is filing 40,000 sealed indictmeents?