The smart thing for the jury to have done would have been to convict. This would have allowed the media to spin it that sussman was just a bad or rogue lawyer. This also would have spared some face and prevented cases from being moved outside of DC. From here on, any case trying people in DC pretty much has to be moved outside DC. It is not redeemable.
If Sussman had been convicted, it would be hard to make the case that no proper jury pool could be found in DC in any future trials. Now, it's rather evident that any trial of people working in DC or at the federal level must have the trial location moved.
Plus, Sussman billed the clinton campaign for his meeting with the FBI. If he wasn't there for the campaign, then he committed mail fruad, the penalties of which are worse. Should be amusing if a ballsy prosecutor goes after him for mail fraud and his defense then is that he was there on behalf of the campaign.
The political winds are changing. The nobility - even if lacking official stature as such - are feeling the pain of incompetence with the democrat insurrection and there is interest in doing something about it.
The jury acquitted because they thought they were doing a fellow party member a favor. What they did was make it more difficult to cover for bigger names.
We will see where Durham goes with this, but I suspect it has to go a bit farther. Durham was hoping for a plea deal so that the case wouldn't go to trial and evidence made public. This greatly exposed the intelligence laundering strategy used to manufacture nonsense to weaponize the FBI. Durham, or someone, has to go farther in trying to tie this up. The problem is that it is now public that everyone should have known what was going on here and the FBI wasn't just being taken advantage of by a lawyer or law firm.