We see Durhams path; two spokes in the wheel of Russia Hoax corruption.

Sussmann Trial

1. The Sussmann angle; HRC approved the plan as per Mook's testimony

2. FBI had/has office space within Perkins, Coie law firm, which proves FBI was working with HRC/others to further their nefarious plan to push the Alfa Bank hoax, which was a sidebar to the Russia Hoax, all to get Trump out of office when they knew everything was fake, phony & false.

3. Witness (hostile) testimony from the snake himself; Marc Elias may be used in other subsequent trials

4. The circle of 'players' in the corruption (RICO Crimes)

5. Durham cannot get a fair trial in DC

Danchenko Trial

1. Exposes FBI/DOJ Confidential Human Source and how much of tax payers' money they put up to get dirt on Trump (even fake dirt!)

2. Names more corrupt FBI & Clinton cronies willing to commit criminal acts (treason) to get Trump

3. Durham to personally try this case in court

4. Durham once again cannot get a fair trial in DC

Much much more

Question; How is it possible that two separate paneled grand juries could find evidence of crimes committed of these individuals and both panels voted to indict?** However, in each trial so far, both Sussmann & Danchenko BY JURY DECISION/VOTE were acquitted of all charges?

**Only after each grand juror has been given the opportunity to be heard will the vote be taken. It should be remembered that at least 16 jurors must be present and 12 members must vote in favor of the indictment before it may be returned (copy/paste from Google search results on grand juries)

A federal grand jury can take action only on federal crimes that have been committed within the district in which it has been impaneled.

So, if 90% of DC is Democrat, then how could the grand jury have issued indictments in the first place to bring these to trial? Seems hardly unlikely and improbable according to the overwhelming ratio.