To: Cincinatus' Wife
It's always a wonder why the recipients themselves of illegal campaign contributions aren't held liable.
2 posted on
03/03/2007 2:03:16 AM PST by
SpaceBar
To: SpaceBar
It's always a wonder why the recipients themselves of illegal campaign contributions aren't held liable.
If they're REPUBLICANS, they are!
11 posted on
03/03/2007 2:23:28 AM PST by
mkjessup
(My mechanic said "I can't fix your brakes, so I made your horn louder" - Stephen Wright)
To: SpaceBar
"Authorities say Northridge, Calif., businessman Abdul Rehman Jinnah, 56, fled the country shortly after being indicted on charges of engineering more than $50,000 in illegal donations to the Democratic committees."
He's dead, Jin.
23 posted on
03/03/2007 5:36:39 AM PST by
EQAndyBuzz
(The Clintons: A Malignant Malfeasance of the Most Morbid)
To: SpaceBar; Cincinatus' Wife; All
"It's always a wonder why the recipients themselves of illegal campaign contributions aren't held liable." Me too.....
26 posted on
03/03/2007 5:54:11 AM PST by
musicman
To: SpaceBar
It's always a wonder why the recipients themselves of illegal campaign contributions aren't held liable. Hey, you never know. A post yestesday said a court held that [unsolicited] email containing child porn was grounds for a search warrant.
Shouldn't recipients of illegal campaign funds be held to the same standard under equal protection?
Help me out here, I'm turning blue from holding my breath...
To: SpaceBar
It's always a wonder why the recipients themselves of illegal campaign contributions aren't held liable. They are if they're Republicans.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson