“Boasberg ruled against Pirro because her office presented no specific evidence“
Wrong, he ruled against Pirro because he is a rat tool and a traitor.
If you can’t present specific evidence of a crime and connect that “evidence” to the investigation target, you simply haven’t done your job properly.
A grand jury should never be a surprise, and should never be used to “throw it all against the wall and see what sticks.” That’s both illegal and unethical.
Quid Pro Quo horse trading.
Vacating the case against Powell ended hard stops in the Senate.