First, there is the title. There is nothing “brilliant” about the meeting.
Secondly, the “meeting sends the right message to the professional prosecutors”, is garbage.
The meeting irrevocable destroys the credibility of any non-indictment. That is the message that is sent by the meeting.
You must have missed the question mark at the end of the title. Of course there was nothing brilliant of the meeting. If the author thought there was he would have omitted it.
Anyway thanks for your reply.