re: Charges against Perry should wait until he is out of office - agree/disagree?

Selling a veto is clearly corruption and would be chargeable.

Tying the continued funding of an office to the removal of someone would be questionable IF the person involved had no skeletons in their closet and it were clearly due to something they were investigating.

Tying the funding to removing someone who had threatened multiple officials *on tape* with their jobs if they didn't break the law to do what she wanted, though? Negro, please. That bitch should be the one getting charged instead of Perry.