Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: why don't they indict Romney? [View all]Iggy
(1,418 posts)46. Right, Please get a Clue
this ain't going to happen.
nice try, no cigar
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
68 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Just as there are those who will excuse Holder when he disregards publicly known evidence and will
AnotherMcIntosh
Jul 2012
#47
Because you don't indict the opposition to a sitting president in an election year
Bok_Tukalo
Jul 2012
#8
so you are in favor of the Obama campaign using the IRS and other federal agencies to indict Romney
DrDan
Jul 2012
#16
it is EXACTLY what you are suggesting - using federal agencies for political purposes
DrDan
Jul 2012
#29
As explained by the IRS, the statute of limitations is not "7 years." It never has been.
AnotherMcIntosh
Jul 2012
#32
When someone says, "statute of limitations on taxes is 7 years," I assume that they are using words
AnotherMcIntosh
Jul 2012
#56
Wapo was dead wrong along fc.org, it's obvious they spoke too soon and are holding out on backtrack
uponit7771
Jul 2012
#40
Because the Justice Department isn't about Justice, it's about criminal politics
just1voice
Jul 2012
#68