[a little elbow grease]

"Think about how easy it would be for a defense attorney representing one of the accused officials detailed in the IG report…. Take the IG report, which outlines the events for which the client is being prosecuted, and simply say: “the conclusion of the FBI investigation said “no evidence of intentional wrongdoing” so why is my client being charged?”

It’s a circular defense created by a prior conclusion. If there was no evidence of intentional wrongdoing, the downstream events cannot be prosecuted. This is by design.

____________

[melsec]

But if new evidence is found that points to intentional wrong doings then the old conclusions cannot be relied upon. Of a line of investigation was not prviously follwed to its end or if another investigation throws another light on previous investigations then surely the previous conclusions become highly suspect and can be revisited!?