You say: “They neither confirm nor deny investigations.”
Yet still argue that not confirming an investigation, indicates that there is no investigation.
As they say, the absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence.
What of the US Attorney’s duty under the law to pursue and prosecute crime?
They have the highest level of responsibility to pursue crime of anyone in Government. Higher than a police officer, higher than an FBI agent, higher than the President himself.
That is why having a US Attorney (one in particular, known to the Senators on the Judiciary Committee) review the evidence, was such a powerful argument that no Special Counsel was needed. Not another peep about a Special Prosecutor from those responsible (and in the know), ever since. That in itself is a bit of circumstantial evidence.
You seem to assume that either the US Attorney is just a subordinate functionary within the Department of Justice, or that Huber will corruptly ignore his duty under the law and his oath.
US Attorneys are established in the Constitution and the Judiciary Act of 1789. They predate the Department of Justice, and the prosecutorial responsibility is vested in them personally (along with Subpoena and Grand Jury Powers), requiring each of the 93 to be confirmed by Congress.
The situation is one of at least triple redundancy, requiring the IG, AG and a US Attorney (from outside of DC, as requested by Conservatives in Congress, nominated by President Trump, and endorsed by Mike Lee and Orrin Hatch) each to independently corruptly willing to violate their sworn duty to the law, to avoid a criminal investigation, if supporting facts come to their attention.
No. For the third time now I will repeat my argument.
There is no real evidence that shows that Huber has been tasked to do more than what appears in the Boyd/Sessions letters.