YES! that is the bloody point! He has had a majority in the Parliament and Senate and has changed laws to fit his situation by giving himself immunity or by changing the law all together so to avoid prosecution. Alone the immunity issue took years to get rid off and all in the while he ran the country as he saw fit.
OK, So "he" didn't actually do anything illegal because the majority in Parliament supported him. And of course he should run the country, with the approval of parliament, as he sees fit.
The wire taps of them. Ironically I believe the wire taps were part of a prostitution case and it snared the big man himself. They also have paperwork of payments from him via his aides to many women, many of which have a history of selling the bodies for sex.
Is prostitution now illegal in Italy? Have the Italians recently become rather prudish when it comes to sex? I thought they were more sophisticated than that. Someone seems to be making a big fuss out of this and getting people all excited. Who's the loudest voice?
Changing the law so to avoid court cases is not corruption any more?
Not if it is done legally. But you seem to be saying that the entire political system in Italy is corrupt.
I see where he was found guilty of one crime but amnesty was applied. You seem to be implying that "acquittal" is the same as guilty.
Is he being recharged for any of those crimes?
My point is that because he was acquitted for one reason or another he shouldn't be tried now on trumped up charges because people are pissed with him. None of what you said should be related to whatever the charges are against him now. In fact there are laws in the democracies to protect us from whatever we have done in the past to be reintroduced at another trial for unrelated offenses. This also smacks of double jeopardy.
Considering he is a Prime Minister of a country, the amount of cases against him is mind boggling.
That's true, but it could also mean he has a lot of political enemies who want to make mischief. I can certainly understand his competition in the media wouldn't mind demonizing him, though that is also speculation.
Google it. Plenty of evidence out there.
You want to make claims and then have me investigate their veracity? Not likely.
Nope, but how would you react if Bush 2 had sex orgies in the White House with GOP politicians and CEOs of big GOP doners, and all the women were paid for sex? Is that something you would accept?
No, i would find it irresponsible and wouldn't vote for him but that doesn't make it illegal. It is certainly, if true, poor judgment,
There is only one country where one man can do that.. and that is Italy and he has as I have shown. As for "going back to their bad old ways", what exactly does that mean.
But you said earlier he had to have the majority in Parliament. Did the entire Parliament vote against him and he, as one man, was still able to change the law? Does Italy not have a proper Constitution?