DOJ investigated Dems 84.79% of the time, surely there's no connection

[BR_Parkway]

to the politicization of the Dept and this. Aren't all Dems crooks and Repugs blameless?

We've asked "what did the USA's who didn't get fired do for Karl to keep their jobs?

Now we know - black and white. Less than 12% of the investigations done over the last 6 years involve Republicans - in spite of their typical attitude that they are above the law

Check out this table that shows each investigation:

[salin]

1. does seem statistically improbable

and more likely that Roveco has transformed the DOJ into a political operative operation.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

2. Interesting, but is it unusual?

The site was not easy to negotiate (for internet dummies like myself).

Are there similar tables showing investigations done under Clinton, GHWB, Reagan?

Is this strictly a Repub phenomenon? Or just current administration?

Or maybe a Texas Politician thing? What would the chart look like under LBJ?

It's obviously partisan, but is it abnormal?

[w4rma]

7. Whatever it is, it is unethical. (nt)

[mediaman007]

3. I notice that the table does not note convictions, only investigations.

It would be more interesting to see if any of these charges resulted in convictions. That would really speak to the agenda!

[rodeodance]

5. the damage is generally done with just an Invetigation

[shirlden]

4. Very Interesting ?

Would really like to know which ones resulted in indictments, convictions, or were tossed out.


:eyes:

[fasttense]

6. From some of the posts that responded, you would think

such a difference is not material, but come on, 84.79% to 12%. It should be fifty-fifty. I don't care how it was with other Presidents. Two wrongs don't make a right (but does make a republic). These numbers are astounding. Counting convictions is useless because you would have to look into appeals that overturned convictions (that's where the real test of the case comes in) and on and on. So thanks for posting BR_Parkway. These are very significant numbers.

[Benhurst]

8. Especially since the 12% was drawn from the political party out of power.

The ruling party, and I use the term advisedly, would always be the one most likely to be abusing power.

Recommended #1

[Scriptor Ignotus]

11. this was my thought exactly

Dems were not even in the majority. I declare shenangians!

[Parisle]

9. Rec'd also.

--- 60-40 could be construed as partisan,........ but 84%????. This has ROVE written all over it, and it deserves to be part of the DoJ attorney firing scandal.

[Czolgosz]

10. K & R # 5

[Tejanocrat]

12. That chart is eye popping! Contrast that with this DoJ letter offering a weak-as-dishwater

excuse for not pursuing cases against Republican appointees here in Texas in connection with a sexual-abuse-of-minors in state custody scandal:

http://www.lonestarproject.net/files/DOJletter.pdf

[angstlessk]

13. Thanks for that link..what a disgusting pair at the school and

for them to say...well, they would only receive a year if a misdemeanor...welll hells bells, just let them continue to screw the youth instead...What horrible people...I hope that mother sues the pants off Texas and then goes after this asshole!

[Maddy McCall]

15. Welcome to DU, Tejanocrat.

:hi:

[Tejanocrat]

18. Thanks.

[Morgana LaFey]

14. why are they even noting which party the person is in??

that alone is -- wrong. OTOH, if they hadn't, how would we know how politicized they've made these offices??

[Maddy McCall]

16. The crime of this is...

that Bush appointed judges oversee partisan-indicted defendants' trials. Any Democrat who is unfortunate enough to draw the ire of the Bush justice dept. just doesn't have a chance...not even for a fair trial.

One of these trials just ended in Mississippi a couple of weeks ago, with convictions of prominent Democrats.

[Sirveri]

17. Well DUH! It's like following black people around the mall.

We all know who the criminals are!

do I need it...
:sarcasm:
I'm having a real Imus moment this morning.