Late to the thread, but one note for the OP:
In general, the DOJ is supposed to be non-partisan and they would usually prefer to avoid any prosecution which could cast them as being partisans or working for the sake of partisans. Especially after Trump and Barr, this is very important.
There’s also the issue that, if you look hard enough, you can probably find something to charge someone with and - when it comes to the President - you’ve got a pretty big target on your back. Having a strict no-prosecutions standard for the President makes life a lot easier, rather than having to deal with a million and one accusations that all have to be investigated and ruled to be real, concerning, and necessary to prosecute or just partisan trash, innuendo, and old grievances made large.
If you have a crazy hard balancing act to contend with, just not getting into that game to begin with is the safest way to not lose it one way or the other. See, for example, Ken Starr.
Through all of this, we really only have one person in the Federal government today who could credibly bring charges against Trump and that’s John Durham.
From what we are aware, Durham’s special counsel mandate from Bill Barr was to investigate any criminality related to the Crossfire Hurricane or Mueller investigations.
Assuming that to really be the full and complete description of his duties and limits, all of the cases of obstruction of justice given in the Mueller Report would have become actionable by Durham when Trump left office. Whatever the 12 (15?) other investigations referred by Mueller could also potentially fall under Durham’s mandate, if they haven’t already been prosecuted.
All of them, however, may have sat dead from the end of Mueller’s investigation until January 20, 2021 if they required investigating or implicating the President himself. Mueller, for example, wasn’t investigating obstruction of justice and may not have sat his people down to give statements on what they witnessed from Trump’s people. That all would still need to be done and then double-checked against records and emails.
And ultimately, we have no idea whether Durham is on this. Plausibly, Barr restricted his investigation to matters which made Trump look guilty and ignored everything else. Plausibly, Garland has decided to avoid the risks associated with trying to lock up a man who half the country loves and who believe that the nation is being run by a Deep State of corrupt and perverted individuals.
But, as someone appointed by Trump’s own people and who has charged some individuals for harming Trump, Durham is probably the only game in town who could follow this through and have credibility, and he might have only been properly unleashed at the start of the year.
Going after Trump is in his (public) mandate though and it just requires someone in power to point that out to him to make it a question that he would be obliged to ask Garland. If that hasn’t happened yet, then that could also be an explanation for the delay.
Personally, I’d suggest writing your Representatives to ask them to ask Durham.
(guess not - this one is just called “