July 29, 2010

Charlie Rangel Ethics Hearing
— DrewM

There were reports that he cut a deal but based on the statements made so far at the House Ethics Sub-committee meeting, it doesn't sound like it.

Hearing is just getting under way.

13 charges in total broken down into 4 categories:

- Solicitation of donation for "Rangel Center" from individuals and organizations
with business in front of Ways and Means Committee while he was the
Chairman.

- Errors and omissions on financial statements to the House.

- Use of rent controlled apartment.

- Not reporting condo on income taxes.

Look, the dude just wrote the rules and tax laws, no one said anything about actually following them.

Republican on investigating sub-committee says Rangel was given more than one chance to settle the case and Rangel declined.

Rangel isn't going to appear today, it's an organizational meeting not the 'trial' phase.

Meeting just wrapped up after the two Congressmen who conducted the investigation gave their statements and formally filled the charges.

Chairwoman of committee says the documents are on the committee's website.

Most ethical Congress EVAH!

When it looked like there was a deal, I commented on Twitter that part of the deal would be for Rangel to permanently give up the Ways and Means Chairmanship...you know the one that he's going to lose in 5 months anyway.

If it goes all the way through the process that's a possibility but based on the charges it sounds like he'd either have to resign/promise not to run this year or really face expulsion (still hard to believe it would get there).

The last Congressman to make it this far was James Traficant (another Democrat) and he was tossed out and wound up spending about 5 years in federal prison.

On the political front...an ethics trial of one of the most senior Democrats in the House in the run up to this year's elections? Thank you Charlie Rangel!

Posted by: DrewM at 09:18 AM | Comments (62)
Post contains 324 words, total size 2 kb.

1 what is the deal? Does he have to retire? fines? prison? flogging? catapult?

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 09:22 AM (wuv1c)

2 I think one of the legacies of slavery is corruption and a culture of pseudo-victimhood.

Posted by: ParisParamus at July 29, 2010 09:23 AM (7Pu9b)

3

13 charges in total broken down into 4 categories

Nine of which consist of separate Soul Glo® violations.

 

Posted by: laceyunderalls at July 29, 2010 09:24 AM (pLTLS)

4 Just another example of The Man keeping us mongrels down!

Posted by: Barack Obama at July 29, 2010 09:24 AM (VmtE9)

5 Nothing about him storing his POS Mercedes in the House Parking structure for 4 years and saving himself $5000?

Posted by: RarestRX at July 29, 2010 09:25 AM (rmNST)

6 show trial ... You would be in jail already for the IRS stuff alone.

Posted by: bill-tb at July 29, 2010 09:27 AM (y+QfZ)

7
Hey Democrats - pay your damn taxes.  Ah - what the hell, democrats are above the law and are allowed as much tax evasion and insider-corruption as possible.


Posted by: Lemon Kitten at July 29, 2010 09:28 AM (0fzsA)

8 Nine of which consist of separate Soul Glo® violations. ___________________________________ Nice work, that was very funny. I mean, would you buy a car from this guy? No. Let him run the tax policy of 300 million people? Sure.

Posted by: MJ at July 29, 2010 09:28 AM (BKOsZ)

9 What? No charges for keeping that piece of shit '72 Mercedes in the House garage for years with invalid plates?

Posted by: Rocks at July 29, 2010 09:29 AM (Q1lie)

10 O/T:  Why is BO so obsessed with her?


Posted by: curious at July 29, 2010 09:29 AM (p302b)

11 Is this a contest? Can you top 'Charlie Rangel ethics hearing'? How about: Dignified Clown Car?

Posted by: fluffy at July 29, 2010 09:30 AM (4Kl5M)

12 I can't believe he shook somebody down while they had business in his comittee.  Fuck me, dude.

Posted by: rdbrewer at July 29, 2010 09:31 AM (1DVez)

13

Nine of which consist of separate Soul Glo® violations.

 Posted by: laceyunderalls at July 29, 2010 02:24 PM (pLTLS)

HA! I lol'd

Posted by: ErikW at July 29, 2010 09:31 AM (fDRif)

14

So this is ethics. Worst case for him is they end up slapping him with a little white glove and saying, "take that, Sirrah!"

What about criminal charges? Didn't he break the law?

Posted by: Wm T Sherman at July 29, 2010 09:33 AM (w41GQ)

15 when the GOP was in charge he continued to get away with it. There is a new sheriff in charge now

Posted by: denny crane at July 29, 2010 09:33 AM (I+7Zv)

16
BTW -  The 14th Amendment was put in place to make sure that the children of slaves were considered US citizens. As most people understand, slavery has been abolished.  The law wasn't created so that anyone and everyone can come here, plop out a baby and have automatic citizenship.  The law is being abused and it's time for a change.


Soooo.... Lindsey Graham finally gets something right.

Posted by: Lemon Kitten at July 29, 2010 09:34 AM (0fzsA)

17 You go, Charlie. Make them work for it. Drag their asses through the mud right up through November. Make 'em pay the piper. You don't need to go down alone, take as many parasitic cocksuckers as you can with you. DO IT!

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 09:37 AM (OlN4e)

18

Yeah Denny - Republicans were in charge until 2006 and did not want to be branded as raaaaacists. Which was weak. Now that's off the table.

 "Only Nixon can go to China."

Posted by: Wm T Sherman at July 29, 2010 09:38 AM (w41GQ)

19 you don't see many instances where the party in control goes after one of their own

Posted by: denny crane at July 29, 2010 09:38 AM (I+7Zv)

20

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 02:37 PM (OlN4e)

Oh yeah, I hope he drags it out and fights like a tiger. He owes it to himself.

Posted by: Wm T Sherman at July 29, 2010 09:39 AM (w41GQ)

21 It's all those racist crackers on the "white man's ethics" committee!

Posted by: Charlie Rangel at July 29, 2010 09:40 AM (VmtE9)

22 when the GOP was in charge he continued to get away with it. There is a new sheriff in charge now You are correct, Rangel has been a crook for a very long time. It's not so much that there is a new sheriff, but that the Dems can read the handwriting on the wall. They are going to get beaten like a drum in the mid-terms and Rangel is a poster child for Democrat corruption. Spin control.

Posted by: fluffy at July 29, 2010 09:42 AM (4Kl5M)

23 I like to put a few iotas of a cracker in my chicken soup.  They say I have an iota of a cracker jones.

Posted by: Iota Cracker Jones at July 29, 2010 09:43 AM (1DVez)

24

Prove it, Denny.

I'll start: Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA), sent to the big house in 2005. Denounced by the President (R) and the Speaker of the House (R).

 

Posted by: Wm T Sherman at July 29, 2010 09:45 AM (w41GQ)

25 Yeah, there's a new sheriff in town all right.  One who is feeding Charlie to crocodile in hopes the crocodile will still be sated come November.

Posted by: The guy who fucks denny crane at July 29, 2010 09:46 AM (IQBsP)

26 Plus, most of this stuff on Charlie did not come out until after 2006, so the troll can sit down and STFU.

Posted by: The guy who fucks denny crane at July 29, 2010 09:47 AM (IQBsP)

27 The Democrats are sacrificing Rangel because they know they're likely to lose the house and they figure its better if they take care of him themselves now rather than wait for the Republicans to do it (in a far harsher way) later.


Posted by: looking closely at July 29, 2010 09:47 AM (6Q9g2)

28
when the GOP was in charge he continued to get away with it. There is a new sheriff in charge now Posted by: denny crane

Libtard, please enlighten the class as to when Charlie Rangel(D) skipped paying his taxes.  Also, since tax information is a secret until after the fact, please tell us how, exactly, the mind readers in the GOP would know about his secretive attempts to not pay his taxes.



Posted by: Lemon Kitten at July 29, 2010 09:49 AM (0fzsA)

29
Libtard:

Rangel (D-N.Y.) has been under the House ethics committee's microscope since early 2008 after it was reported that he may have used his House position to benefit his financial interests. Two of the most serious inquiries have focused on Rangel's failure to declare $239,000 to $831,000 in assets on his disclosure forms, and on his effort to raise money for a private center named after him at City College of New York using his congressional letterhead.

Posted by: Lemon Kitten at July 29, 2010 09:50 AM (0fzsA)

30
Dear libtard,
If the democrats are so wonderful, virtuous, super-man like and ethical, why isn't Rangel gone?


Posted by: Lemon Kitten at July 29, 2010 09:51 AM (0fzsA)

31 Posted by: fluffy at July 29, 2010 02:42 PM (4Kl5M)

Don't you question the timing?  That guy has been around for eons and must know all the "dirty little sekrets" of everyone there so why now?

Posted by: curious at July 29, 2010 09:52 AM (p302b)

32 B-b-b-but, Sarah Palin... she said "refudiate"! And Booosh! And the racism!

Posted by: JournoList 2.0 at July 29, 2010 09:56 AM (swuwV)

33 He better get outta there before the mongrel hordes descend on DC to oust him ala Bell, CA. I wish...

Posted by: Lincolntf at July 29, 2010 09:57 AM (+O8yf)

34

Posted by: denny crane at July 29, 2010 02:38 PM (I+7Zv)

You do understand that the ethics committee is the only truly bipartisan committee in the House (4 Democrats, 4 Republicans). Thus, any alleged past wrongdoing you want to cite as examples of "Repubicans" protecting their own, you understand that at least 4 Democrats were compliciate in that protection. And no, dumbass, before you say something stupid, the ethics committee is required to investigate every claim brought before it.....so the Speaker just can't wave his/her magic wand and make the charge go away.

God, you get dumber every day.

Posted by: Mallamutt at July 29, 2010 10:05 AM (OWjjx)

35 I wish someone would investigate the unethical violation of my bunghole last night at the truck stop.

Posted by: Denny Crane at July 29, 2010 10:07 AM (OWjjx)

36 1 what is the deal? Does he have to retire? fines? prison? flogging? catapult?

Posted by: Ben at July 29, 2010 02:22 PM (wuv1c)

My guess?  He'll have to pay his back taxes and make a public non-apology apology.  Look, the purpose of this committee is to whitewash these kinds of problems, not get rid of people like Rangel.

Posted by: Ace's liver at July 29, 2010 10:07 AM (LtIsn)

37 Look, the purpose of this committee is to whitewash these kinds of problems, not get rid of people like Rangel.

Posted by: Ace's liver at July 29, 2010 03:07 PM (LtIsn)

Too bad there isn't enough whitewash in the northern hemisphere to cover the corruption up. They will all come out smelling like shit.

Posted by: maddogg at July 29, 2010 10:13 AM (OlN4e)

38 If they had anything approaching genuine ethics rules or an approximation of enforcement it wouldn't be 1 or 2 expelled per decade.  More than half of those corksuckers would be gone.

Posted by: John Galt at July 29, 2010 10:14 AM (F/4zf)

39 Not guilty.  Now, where do you guys want to go to lunch?

Posted by: Limdsey Graham at July 29, 2010 10:19 AM (F4ENs)

40

what is the deal? Does he have to retire? fines? prison? flogging? catapult?

Gut feeling.........he'll get some mild censure (he'll have to go to the well of the House, have Speaker Botox read a midl reprimand), Charlie will tell everyone he is sooo sorry, agree not to run again and then, resurface in a year, on some Presidential advisory board.

And we will suffer for the most, as we will have to hear for at least 24 hours from the MFM that this "is a sad end to a great legislative career" how Charlie Rangle was "truly one of the most effective legislator of our times" how Charlie Rangle was "the voice of the disenfranchised"...yada, yada, yada.

 

Posted by: Mallamutt at July 29, 2010 10:20 AM (OWjjx)

41

I'd be in jail.

That's why this is so unsatisfying.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 10:33 AM (RkRxq)

42 Charlie aint' ever gonna give in and go quietly, because the bottom line is that even if they ARE fellow democrats who he sympathizes with most of the time, they're still White and he ain't EVAH gonna give in to one a' them crackah bahstahds!

Posted by: Tom Servo at July 29, 2010 10:34 AM (T1boi)

43 Thank you Charlie Rangel!

Ah yes, the classic Hallmark greeting "Thank You.. For Just Being You" seems so appropriate.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at July 29, 2010 10:38 AM (0q2P7)

44

The last Congressman to make it this far was James Traficant (another Democrat) and he was tossed out and wound up spending about 5 years in federal prison.

Traficant went to prison because the Dems saw him as a DINO and the Repubs in all honesty, hated his hair and wanted no part of him. 

My bet, Rangle won't do any time.  Even some of the old time Repubs will be saying how great of a guy he is to prepare us for his eventual slap on the wrist.

 

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at July 29, 2010 10:39 AM (RkRxq)

45 Just between you and me, I hate my hair too.  What a waste of money.

Posted by: James Traficant at July 29, 2010 10:49 AM (VDgKF)

46 How much did Charlie have in the freezer, again? Oh wait! That was some other Dem.

Posted by: Lokki at July 29, 2010 11:08 AM (u9Cvt)

47 Charlie Rangel Ethics, those three words together put the ox in oxymoron. Will he blame it on his Mongrel or reptilian id.

Posted by: Buffalobob at July 29, 2010 11:40 AM (KAal5)

48 Fox Reporting NO DEAL!

Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 11:48 AM (/jbAw)

49

@36 Ace's Liver,

I feel just the same. If a Republican is even hinted at having an ethics issue he is forced to resign immediately. Rangel will probably get some award from the NAALCP.

Posted by: chuck in st paul at July 29, 2010 11:51 AM (adr25)

50

If a Republican is even hinted at having an ethics issue he is forced to resign immediately.

Yep, the old "appearance of impropriety."

Posted by: Damn Skippy at July 29, 2010 11:52 AM (VDgKF)

51 Charlie wont lose his seat and he'll be re-elected with 90% of the vote in his gerrymandered district. The repubs are smart to let this one go, it's not like Harlem would elect Allen West. If Charlie were to go, his district would elect some retard with two last names. Jackson-Lee anyone?

Posted by: ck at July 29, 2010 11:56 AM (FilQu)

52 If he gets a day less in prison than what Duke Cunningham got it will be a travesty of justice.  And he deserves even more than that. 


Posted by: the hawk at July 29, 2010 12:21 PM (/B0x7)

53 Charlie wont lose his seat and he'll be re-elected with 90% of the vote in his gerrymandered district.

The NY Post is reporting that his constituents are mad at him this time over the 4 rent control apartments. Those are limited in number and their attitude is he is stealing from them.

Posted by: Vic at July 29, 2010 12:32 PM (/jbAw)

54 What is to become of that shining beacon of enlightenment and scholarly endeavor, the prestigious Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at the City College of New York?
Is the building still going to get plastered with such an obviously awful name? Are students entering the building to learn about public service, named after and built by Charles B Rangel, one of the most blatantly corrupt men in the history of a blatantly corrupt government body?
So let's say nothing changes and this monument to one man's boundless corruption and greed educates the next generation of Charlie Rangels, what will the curriculum be like? In keeping with its namesakes philosophy of public service, will students actually learn how to be a politician in the mold of Charles B Rangel? Will it be acceptable to say, help the professors retire earlier than expected and, completely coincidentally, make an A in the course without actually doing all of that distracting studying and homework?

Posted by: CozMark at July 29, 2010 12:39 PM (HK4Kc)

55 Good point Vic. But I still think that when push comes to shove, they'll love Charlie for "stickin' it to whitey" more than they'll be mad about a few apartments. It's not like those apartments would go to someone without political connections.

Posted by: ck at July 29, 2010 12:48 PM (FilQu)

56

I hear his defense is going to be "it's not like you caught me with a dead girl or a live boy (with a wink and nod to bawney fwank)"

 

 

Posted by: StrategicCorporalUSMC at July 29, 2010 02:20 PM (tJ5MR)

57 It's not corruption-corruption.

Posted by: Whoopi G. at July 29, 2010 02:34 PM (f7A+e)

58 With five Republicans on the committee, my first thought was "no WAY they'll approve any deal and not have this thing played out on TV for the nation to see.." Then I remembered there was no guarantee the Repubs would play it smart. I'm pleasantly surprised.

Posted by: Henry Hawkins at July 29, 2010 03:55 PM (1neAq)

59

The  Democrates are going to  "Investigate" which means Rangel goes to a "taxdollar lunch" with a committee who  Profited from his "work".  I bet they try to let him Keep his job instead of Jail...

Posted by: Dw Pepper at July 30, 2010 03:32 AM (z3PA0)

60 Rangel has much better hair than Traficant.

Posted by: Doc99 at July 30, 2010 04:46 AM (I8mms)

61 Charlie Rangel Ethics Hearing -------talk about an oxymoron!

Posted by: Bill Fabrizio at July 30, 2010 05:27 AM (523eV)

62 go to buy fendi handbags on sale
many fendi products for discount
high quality of fendi bags for cheap

Posted by: fendi handbags at July 30, 2010 05:42 PM (AvlwO)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
91kb generated in CPU 0.04, elapsed 0.0656 seconds.
62 queries taking 0.0311 seconds, 249 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.