Since I heard about the actual indictment handed up, I have been getting angry at the DOJ

[Stinky The Clown]

I have to add - at the DEMOCRATIC DOJ. Going after a DEMOCRATIC washed up politician.

Yeah, yeah, save it. I heard it all. Bad guy, Crimes. Party doesn't matter. Laws were broken.

There are a LOT of crimes to go after. This one is a REAL stretch. Who is being served by this? Are you or me? Do you give a fuck? I don't. I never liked Edwards. I never supported him. But I also don't give one fat fuck about this.

I care about the real criminals that are afoot.

Anyone notice that housing crisis with manipulation out the ass?

Anyone notice that march to war for made-up reasons?

Anyone notice the Wall Streeters who ran the biggest fucking Ponzi Scheme the world has ever know? No criminals there? No real victims there?

This is so FUCKING OUT OF WHACK it boggles the mind.

John Fucking Edwards indicted.

No one else to chase? Really? No big cases? No reason to use the RICO act?

Instead we get John Fucking Edwards.














What the fuck is wrong with us?

[Greybnk48]

1. Martha Stewart and John Edwards.

Everyone else gets a pass.

[trueblue2007]

6. you are right on. go after nobodies. THIS IS NUTS

[Autumn]

2. I don't know

I would guess that John Fucking Edwards is of no use to anyone in power at this time.

[sabrina 1]

19. He was a Democratic Presidential candidate.

The word 'Democratic' makes him useful to certain people in power.

[Dawson Leery]

3. When people ask me why I see "law enforcement" as being worthless.

This is why. They are used to protect the powerful.

This is in no way intended to vindicate John Edwards, but to point out that those who brought down the economic system (and the middle class)
have gotten off.

[panader0]

4. Who was the repub lady "the witch" who lost her election?

Wasn't she accused of spending campaign funds on personal shit? Haven't thousands of pols done that before?

[Bake]

5. Christine O'Donnell ... let's see HER prosecuted!

She way paying her damn RENT with campaign funds.

Bake

[99th_Monkey]

7. Yet Bush Criminal Cabal's multiple felonious war crimes get TOTALLY ignored? nt

[gratuitous]

8. Oh, that would just be lookin' backwards to the past

We're lookin' forward to the future! Besides, if the Obama administration held the Bush administration responsible for its war crimes and crimes against humanity, the Republicans would raise a big stink about it. And sooner or later, the Obama administration will have to pass into history (Shhhh! don't tell some folks around here; it's kind of a secret), and they could very well be accused of some of the same crimes the Bush folks perpetrated.

I suspect that someone, somewhere, is planning right now to hold the United States responsible for the crimes of its rulers. You don't mind getting killed as the price to be paid, do you? It's unlikely that ad hoc revenge-takers would actually be able to reach the persons they're targeting, so they'll probably settle for whoever they can get at (which would be those such as you and me).

[palmtree guy]

9. see how you are

all logical and shit, no one here who screams bush war crimes likes to scream Obama war crimes .....they both still war crimes right??

[Nye Bevan]

10. Was it right to prosecute Tom Delay? (nt)

[gratuitous]

11. DeLay was prosecuted in state court

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/25/us/politics/25delay.html

[Nye Bevan]

12. OK, but was it a just prosecution, or a witch-hunt?

[gratuitous]

14. Since he was convicted, that probably augurs for a just prosecution

But in any case, the Obama Justice Department isn't in charge of state court prosecutions, just federal prosecutions.

[KamaAina]

13. I have heard that DoJ is riddled with repuke/teabagger civil service lifers

in the Monica Goodling mold. :eyes: Maybe they're behind this.

[Octafish]

15. Leura Canary still works for US DoJ.

She's the Rove toad who bagged Gov. Siegelman.

[provis99]

16. well, then it's Eric Holders responsibility to fire them.

Since he's a useless slackass, I don't see this happening.

[KamaAina]

17. "You can't fire civil service"

not without just cause, anyway. In other words, they have to be caught in the act of politicizing the DoJ before anything can happen. Even then, it's kind of a crapshoot (Siegelman, NM judges, and so on ad nauseam).

[JDPriestly]

18. K&R

[Zebedeo]

20. I would not want to live in a country

in which the Justice Department only prosecuted those in the opposition party. That sounds more like a tin pot dictatorship than a democratic republic.

If a crime was committed, there is no reason to give John Edwards a pass because simply because he is a Dem and Dems are in power in the executive branch.

Think about what that would mean, and how you would feel if the tables were turned, with a Republican administration only "going after" political opponents, while giving political allies a pass?

No, it is better for the United States Justice Department to prosecute suspected criminal activity WITHOUT REGARD to the political affiliation of the accused.

[AlabamaLibrul]

24. That would be a fantastic statement if we had a Justice Department prosecuting anyone in the

opposition party for any *real* crime.

Instead we're concerned with pot smokers, whistleblowers and John fucking Edwards.

[Ignis]

21. Well, he made the cardinal mistake in politics:

He tried to end poverty.

He should just be thankful he wasn't assassinated, I suppose.

[mythology]

22. I think his downfall had a bit more to do with the fact that he was an idiot

It's not some big scary conspiracy. He lost the election because voters rejected him and this indictment is a result of his own flaws. If he just had the affair, even with the kid, he wouldn't be in legal trouble. It's a result of a lot of money going from campaign supporters to his mistress. Given that he was willing to sacrifice Andrew Young's reputation to hide his secret, it's not a leap to assume he'd do more.

[Ignis]

23. His downfall is done. We've entered the Public Shaming phase.