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]oldhippydude
(2,514 posts)50. i don't suspect anybody here remembers Watergate....
Nixon had an enemies list that he persecuted, and prosecuted through the Justice Department. his attorney General John Mitchell, resigned in disgrace as the investigation unfolded...
one has to very careful investigating political rivals..
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