Is ANY successful Prosecution of Domestic Spying on Trump possible in Washington, D.C.?

The recent DOJ (Department of Justice) announcement that it had closed without prosecution the investigation into ex-DOJ employee A. McCabe triggered (you'll excuse the term) public scrutiny and thoughts on when, if ever, there would be prosecutions stemming from the apparent (& in some cases, admitted) over-reach of our intelligence agencies in spying on citizens and on those in the Trump election campaign.  Such spying is explicitly illegal unless a FISA warrant is first obtained.

McCabe has admitted in involvement in leaking confidential material to the "Press."  Such actions are a violation of law.

Years earlier Sec.State Clinton kept a private unsecured email server which was used on multiple occasions for keeping and transmitting classified material & documents.  She claimed not to know the material was classified, and also claimed she had no intent to break the law.  The applicable law does not require either intent or knowledge of the classified nature of material held or transmitted.

In both of these cases there was admitted and demonstrable violation of law with significant penalties attaching.

In both of these cases (and there are many others that could have been added if numbers were the goal) no prosecution was brought.

Those not favoring the actions of Ms. Clinton & Mr. McCabe have suggested both collusion (a favored word today in America), and partisan abandonment of law enforcement obligations and oaths on the part of the DOJ as the reason(s) behind the failure to prosecute and punish admitted law-breaking.

Such bad-faith reticence is certainly a possible if not probable factor;  to hold anyone accountable, a prosecutor must bring charges, either on his(her) department's own initiative or on and indictment brought by a Grand Jury.  The recent ascendancy to the position of Attorney General of the United States by Mr. Barr was seen by many as the needed antidote to the dedicated practice of not bringing charges for political spying.  Yet...the recent decision to not prosecute Mr. McCabe after a two year investigation seems to pour cold water on expectations of renewed law enforcement.

Whispers currently heard in Washington suggest that a "fail-safe" secondary level of protection of the Deep State and its members exists that has remained little considered, investigated and/or received the publicity it deserves.

FACT: to convict, there must be a conviction by PEOPLE!  They sit on the Grand Jury if the case is prosecuted on an indictment, and in any trial, on the jury impaneled for that specific purpose.  The people eligible for a Grand Jury are residents of the place where the Prosecutor is investigating possible crimes.  In a Jury trial, the members of the Jury are residents of the town or county where the trial is being held.  In cases where consideration is of law breading by employees of the Federal Government at the highest levels, that place is Washington, D.C., and its immediate surrounding environs (eastern Virginia, Maryland, etc).

The single most ubiquitous employer in this area is the Federal Government.  Is it reasonable...or even possible...to conceive of the ability to impanel a Grand Jury and/or Jury where the members did NOT have (in descending order) a relative, spouse, close friend, neighbor or employer that was employed in some direct or indirect way by the Federal Government?  And, despite protestations, does anyone seriously believe that they will chance loss of regard, friendships and club memberships by not protecting the common employer and "friend," the Federal Government by voting to convict any Federal employee or associate of simply protecting themselves and all beltway residents from unwarranted attacks by "outsiders?"

Contrary to the Media claims of attacks FROM President Trump, I'd suggest that should President Trump while in attendance is a meeting on a high floor of any building in Washington, D. C., with FBI, CIA, and members of Congress and suddenly fall to his death, the unanimous testimony would be that Mr. Trump stabbed himself 15 times in his back with a carving knife, then broke a window and threw himself to his death and a clear case of suicide.  And the matter would be closed without prosecution of any sort.

And the matter would likely be reported in the papers on the bottom of page 22, and receive a one line mention on the evening news, and not at all in the Congressional Record.

It is NOT possible to successfully prosecute any member of the Deep State for any law-breaking that the Deep State sees as simply protecting itself from "out of towners" that want to both reveal and stop the self-serving practices of centuries in Washington.

The only way to change that is to change the venue.  Move the Grand Jury process to a place like West Virginia...or, better yet, Texas.  And hold the jury trial there also.

Of course to do that, a Judge would have to approve the reason for, as well as the choice of, such an action.  And that brings up still another un-investigated element standing in the way of enabling objective law-enforcement:  the Federal Judiciary.

But that is a subject for another day.