DoJ doesn't have the power to remove him. Only Congress
can remove their own members.
Fair enough. It still has nothing to do with "DoJ doing their job." The Executive
branch simply can't go around putting its political enemies in prison without
enormous publicly known evidence of heinous crims. That evidence doesn't
currently exist. Not that it won't, it just doesn't yet.
Of course not. It's very rare in the first place.
Looks like a tripod, on a sidewalk, near the street, where Tonya and DJ had sex.
I've absolutely been paying attention. I'm not the one that needs to be
convinced. The general public does, and there's not an enormous amount
of public evidence of any crimes. Not yet.
>Ready to drop the subject now.
Of course you are, because you simply don't have a good argument.
Just because YOU think something should happen doesn't mean that's
what should happen. The threshold for one branch of government
to step on another in a way that would make YOU happy is simply
higher than YOU would like for a good reason. If they start doing
that based on YOUR threshold then it will never end. The evidence
has to be so overwhelming that nobody will question it. YOU are
just one person. The fact that I admit not everybody will agree is
sufficient, logically, to prove my point: there's not enough publicly
known for the DoJ to do anything. Not yet.
Get over yourself.