Brough and Juliar are in the same basket.

Most of what Juliar did 17 years ago was not illegal, but very unethical. For Juliar to ask for Brough to be de selected while staying as PM is rank hypocrisy.

P,

Like the hard evidence of Thomson'c credit card, his signature, his driver's license, the phone calls from his mobile and hotel room linking him to the brothel.

I hear from you

"Gillard did nothing illegal..."

Are you saying (with a straight face) that Juliar's participation in the grubby theft and fraud should be overlooked?

SM it is imposable to work you out.
I could get rude, tell you what I truly think.
But have no need to hurt your feelings.
Bloke you will or should know I DISRUST/DISLIKE, GILLARD.
Honestly, I see every chance she knew nothing about the fraud.
I had walk in relationship with my branches lawyers, things like this did not get formal.
YOU CLUTCH AT STRAWS.
Thomson, you gleefully get right in to him, but he has been charged with NOTHING YET.
Skipping past the ex SA womans faults current dirt in QLD and Vic you invent crimes on my side.
I would sell Gillard and three front benchers for Tuppence.
If Thomson is guilty HE THEN FALLS IN TO THE MAGGOT SECTION.
My crime? I want conviction before execution.
Not a day not an hour gos, by I do not shudder at the actionsof NSW filth, those under investigation and those who helped them near kill my6 party.
IF my wish is granted my post Gillard party post slugs and maggots who once betrayed me and NSW we will be trusted BECAUSE WE REFORMED.
You?
In my view want only victory, free of accountability.

SM,

If the "evidence" against Thomson is so obvious and overwhelming - why hasn't he been charged?

Why was there no evidence forthcoming from the brothels after the subpoenas?

Poirot,

Civil proceedings against Thomson have already started, to recover the monies, the sheer volume of criminal charges, their complexity, and that the police have only recently been given a reworked FWA report have probably something to do with it.

What does a "reworked" FWA report consist of?

And those "civil charges" I presume emanate from the flawed investigation.

As for criminal charges and their complexity...you seem to regard all the "evidence" as obvious. Perhaps the police are a little more circumspect and not quite so partisan - you reckon?