Rules drafted in the wake of the Starr investigation of Clinton say that a special counsel “may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General” (or in this case, the acting attorney general)” for good cause.
Merrick Garland has the power to fire Durham. I can't figure out why he hasn't done so.
Didn't Barr make Durham a special council, specifically so that doesn't happen?
Doesn't matter, the Attorney General still has the ability to fire a special prosecutor.
https://www.jacksonville.com/reason/2017-06-27/fact-check-can-president-fire-special-prosecutor
Looks like you are have no faith in Q and are baffled at why things happen the way it happens
So do you "TRUST WRAY" as Q says, or can you explain it? That's a Q anti-proof if you can't explain it.