Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry + Waters & Rangel

thoughtone

Rising Star
Registered
Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry

Do you think these investigations would occur under a republican majority congress?

source: Washington Post

AN ACCIDENTAL DISCLOSURE
Document was found on file-sharing network

House ethics investigators have been scrutinizing the activities of more than 30 lawmakers and several aides in inquiries about issues including defense lobbying and corporate influence peddling, according to a confidential House ethics committee report prepared in July.

The report appears to have been inadvertently placed on a publicly accessible computer network, and it was provided to The Washington Post by a source not connected to the congressional investigations. The committee said Thursday night that the document was released by a low-level staffer.

The ethics committee is one of the most secretive panels in Congress, and its members and staff members sign oaths not to disclose any activities related to its past or present investigations. Watchdog groups have accused the committee of not actively pursuing inquiries; the newly disclosed document indicates the panel is conducting far more investigations than it had revealed.

Shortly after 6 p.m. Thursday, the committee chairman, Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), interrupted a series of House votes to alert lawmakers about the breach. She cautioned that some of the panel's activities are preliminary and not a conclusive sign of inappropriate behavior.

"No inference should be made as to any member," she said.

Rep. Jo Bonner (Ala.), the committee's ranking Republican, said the breach was an isolated incident.

The 22-page "Committee on Standards Weekly Summary Report" gives brief summaries of ethics panel investigations of the conduct of 19 lawmakers and a few staff members. It also outlines the work of the new Office of Congressional Ethics, a quasi-independent body that initiates investigations and provides recommendations to the ethics committee. The document indicated that the office was reviewing the activities of 14 other lawmakers. Some were under review by both ethics bodies.

A broader inquiry


Ethics committee investigations are not uncommon. Most result in private letters that either exonerate or reprimand a member. In some rare instances, the censure is more severe.

Many of the broad outlines of the cases cited in the July document are known -- the committee announced over the summer that it was reviewing lawmakers with connections to the now-closed PMA Group, a lobbying firm. But the document indicates that the inquiry was broader than initially believed. It included a review of seven lawmakers on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee who have steered federal money to the firm's clients and have also received large campaign contributions.

The document also disclosed that:

-- Ethics committee staff members have interviewed House Ways and Means Chairman Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) about one element of the complex investigation of his personal finances, as well as the lawmaker's top aide and his son. Rangel said he spoke with ethics committee staff members regarding a conference that he and four other members of the Congressional Black Caucus attended last November in St. Martin. The trip initially was said to be sponsored by a nonprofit foundation run by a newspaper. But the three-day event, at a luxury resort, was underwritten by major corporations such as Citigroup, Pfizer and AT&T. Rules passed in 2007, shortly after Democrats reclaimed the majority following a wave of corruption cases against Republicans, bar private companies from paying for congressional travel.

Rangel said he has not discussed other parts of the investigation of his finances with the committee. "I'm waiting for that, anxiously," he said.


-- The Justice Department has told the ethics panel to suspend a probe of Rep. Alan B. Mollohan (D-W.Va.), whose personal finances federal investigators began reviewing in early 2006 after complaints from a conservative group that he was not fully revealing his real estate holdings. There has been no public action on that inquiry for several years. But the department's request in early July to the committee suggests that the case continues to draw the attention of federal investigators, who often ask that the House and Senate ethics panels refrain from taking action against members whom the department is already investigating.

Mollohan said that he was not aware of any ongoing interest by the Justice Department in his case and that he and his attorneys have not heard from federal investigators. "The answer is no," he said.

-- The committee on June 9 authorized issuance of subpoenas to the Justice Department, the National Security Agency and the FBI for "certain intercepted communications" regarding Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.). As was reported earlier this year, Harman was heard in a 2005 conversation agreeing to an Israeli operative's request to try to obtain leniency for two pro-Israel lobbyists in exchange for the agent's help in lobbying House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to name her chairman of the intelligence committee. The department, a former U.S. official said, declined to respond to the subpoena.

Harman said that the ethics committee has not contacted her and that she has no knowledge that the subpoena was ever issued. "I don't believe that's true," she said. "As far as I'm concerned, this smear has been over for three years."

In June 2009, a Justice Department official wrote in a letter to an attorney for Harman that she was "neither a subject nor a target" of a criminal investigation.

Because of the secretive nature of the ethics committee, it was difficult to assess the current status of the investigations cited in the July document. The panel said Thursday, however, that it is ending a probe of Rep. Sam Graves (R-Mo.) after finding no ethical violations, and that it is investigating the financial connections of two California Democrats.

The committee did not detail the two newly disclosed investigations. However, according to the July document, Rep. Maxine Waters, a high-ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, came under scrutiny because of activities involving OneUnited Bank of Massachusetts, in which her husband owns at least $250,000 in stock.

Waters arranged a September 2008 meeting at the Treasury Department where OneUnited executives asked for government money. In December, Treasury selected OneUnited as an early participant in the bank bailout program, injecting $12.1 million.

The other, Rep. Laura Richardson, may have failed to mention property, income and liabilities on financial disclosure forms.

File-sharing


The committee's review of investigations became available on file-sharing networks because of a junior staff member's use of the software while working from home, Lofgren and Bonner said in a statement issued Thursday night. The staffer was fired, a congressional aide said.

The committee "is taking all appropriate steps to deal with this issue," they said, noting that neither the committee nor the House's information systems were breached in any way.

"Peer-to-peer" technology has previously caused inadvertent breaches of sensitive financial, defense-related and personal data from government and commercial networks, and it is prohibited on House networks.

House administration rules require that if a lawmaker or staff member takes work home, "all users of House sensitive information must protect the confidentiality of sensitive information" from unauthorized disclosure.

Leo Wise, chief counsel for the Office of Congressional Ethics, declined to comment, citing office policy against confirming or denying the existence of investigations. A Justice Department spokeswoman also declined to comment, citing a similar policy.
 
Re: Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry

<font size="4"><center>

"Not a single white lawmaker is currently the
subject of a full-scale ethics committee probe." </font size></center>





<IFRAME SRC="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29055.html" WIDTH=780 HEIGHT=1500>
<A HREF="">link</A>

</IFRAME>
 
Re: Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry

<font size="5"><center>
Will ethics problems add to Democrats' woes?</font size></center>



4web-rangel-major.major_story_img.prod_affiliate.91.jpg

Congressman Rangel has gotten into an ethical pickle


McClatchy Newspapers
By William Douglas and
David Lightman
Thursday, March 4, 2010


WASHINGTON — Unethical behavior by lawmakers helped Democrats win control of the Capitol in the 2006 elections, and the same issue could come back to haunt the party this November.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, faced with new and ongoing allegations of ethical lapses by some Democrats, vigorously defended her party's record Thursday and said that she'd taken strong steps to clean up the House of Representatives during her three-year tenure.

Watchdog groups say, however, that Pelosi's actions have fallen woefully short of House Democrats' promise to "drain the swamp" of unethical behavior, a vow they emphasized when they won control of the House in 2006 after Republican corruption scandals centered on disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Now Republicans see an important campaign issue emerging for November's congressional elections.

Last week the House ethics committee admonished Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., for taking two corporate-paid trips to the Caribbean in 2007 and 2008, but it didn't force him to step aside as the chairman of the powerful tax-writing Ways and Means Committee. As Republicans called for his ouster, Rangel stepped aside Wednesday in a bid to neutralize the issue before it damaged his party.

Also last week, the House ethics committee:

  • Cleared Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., who died Feb. 8, and six other members of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee of charges that they'd taken campaign money in exchange for legislative favors. The committee reviewed reports that the members had influenced earmarks — funding for special projects — for clients of the one-time lobbying firm PMA Group. The ethics committee said the lawmakers were more interested in the local impact of the projects than in campaign money.

  • Issued a "public admonishment" to Dawn Kelly Mobley, former counsel to the late Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-Ohio, who was then the chairwoman of the ethics panel. It found that Mobley had worked in 2007 to skirt House travel restrictions in order to smooth the way for Rangel and other Congressional Black Caucus members to take corporate-paid trips to the Caribbean.

"The ethics committee is operating as before, which is nonfunctioning," said Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a watchdog group. "Representative Charlie Rangel was pushed out, not that Pelosi wasn't supporting him. Rangel was crowding out the news, which is what they (Democrats) don't want in an election year."

Pelosi proclaimed Thursday that the House has come "a long way" in dealing with ethics problems. She pointed to Rangel's decision to step down as an example.

"Some of the issues that you reference in terms of the issues that transpired in the last few days, they are behind us. They are behind us," she said. "We have a new ... acting chair of the Ways and Means Committee. That's a very big change."

Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., became the acting chairman Thursday as Democrats bypassed Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., who'd been next in line but was dogged by a long history of controversial behavior.

Pelosi also said that until Wednesday, she didn't know about the latest ethics claim against a House Democrat, a nearly month-old allegation that freshman Rep. Eric Massa of New York had sexually harassed an aide.

Massa, 50, announced his retirement from Congress earlier this week, saying that he's suffering from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Massa denied the harassment allegation. The House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct — the official name of the ethics committee — is looking into the matter.

Pelosi maintained that she's fulfilling the House Democrats' 2006 pledge to change the ethical climate in Washington. She cited the 2007 establishment of the Independent Office of Congressional Ethics, which examines complaints before sending them to the ethics committee, as one of her accomplishments.

"I established something unprecedented, an outside group to receive complaints and, if they saw fit, to convey them to the ethics committee," she said. "We have a functioning ethics committee, which is independent, bipartisan and now functioning."

Watchdog groups say, however, that the power of the Independent Office of Congressional Ethics — whose board includes former George W. Bush administration CIA Director Porter Goss and former Clinton White House Counsel Abner Mikva — is limited because it doesn't have subpoena power and the ethics committee isn't required to follow its findings.

"The big part of the problem in Congress is that it is loath to police itself, even with the OCE, which has done a good job," said Mary Boyle, a spokeswoman for Common Cause, a watchdog group. "Without self-policing, you're going to continue to have problems, regardless of who is speaker. Members don't want to police themselves; they don't want to tell on each other. Congress is like a club.


http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/03/04/89865/amid-democratic-stumbles-on-ethics.html
 
Re: Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry

<font size="5"><Center>
Rangel Reaches Tentative Deal With Ethics Panel</font size></center>



OB-JK323_0729ra_G_20100729144145.jpg

Rep. Charles Rangel walks to his office after going for a vote on Capitol Hill in
Washington, Thursday




Wall Street Journal
By DEVLIN BARRETT
And BRODY MULLINS
JULY 29, 2010


WASHINGTON—Lawyers for House ethics investigators and for Rep. Charles Rangel (D., N.Y.) reached a tentative settlement Thursday that could end the two-year ethics probe into the once-powerful New York lawmaker.

The settlement proposal is preliminary and could still be rejected by the 10-member ethics committee, which must approve or reject the agreement by a majority vote. That vote could take place Thursday afternoon.

With no settlement final, the House ethics committee began a public hearing this afternoon that starts the process of adjudicating the charges against Mr. Rangel. The panel charged the veteran Harlem lawmaker with 13 counts of violating ethics rules.

"Credibility is what's at stake here," said Rep. Michael McCaul (R., Texas), the senior Republican on the committee, who added that the public dislikes and distrusts Congress. "We must regain the people's trust," he said.

Mr. Rangel did not attend the session, but several of his lawyers did.

Rep. Jo Bonner (R., Ala.) said the Harlem Democrat "may have broken the rules of the House and brought discredit to this body at a time when the American people have such little faith in our ability.…It is the duty of the House to punish its members for disorderly behavior."

Republicans are still in a position to block a settlement deal and force Mr. Rangel into the congressional equivalent of a trial, which would take place in the weeks before congressional elections this fall. Many Democrats fear the proceedings would damage them politically just before voters go to the polls.

It is not known whether the Republicans on the ethics committee think the plea deal includes a tough enough penalty for Mr. Rangel. At least one of the five Republicans on the panel must vote with all five Democrats to approve any settlement.

Two people close to the investigation say members of the ethics panel are reviewing the preliminary agreement before bringing it to a vote. The terms of the agreement and the proposed punishment for Mr. Rangel are unclear.

The ethics panel, formally known as the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, was scheduled Thursday afternoon to open its first public hearing on the charges.

Earlier on Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said the ethics charges should come to light even if that could have a negative impact on Democrats' election prospects this fall.

"The panel will work; it's bipartisan; the political chips will have to fall where they may," she told reporters at a press conference. She denied that Mr. Rangel's ethics problems show that she has failed to deliver on a promise to "drain" an ethical swamp in Washington.

Mr. Rangel made it clear he was bracing for a difficult day. "Sixty years ago, I survived a Chinese attack in North Korea, and as a result I haven't had a bad day since," the combat veteran told reporters. "But today, I have to reassess that statement."

In recent days, Mr. Rangel, 80 years old, has held out hope for a settlement. According to people familiar with events, ethics investigators have found evidence to support allegations that Mr. Rangel wrongly used a rent-stabilized apartment in his Harlem district as a campaign office, failed to accurately report his ownership of a vacation villa in the Dominican Republic and the rental income it generated, and used official stationary to seek support for a City College center named after the congressman.

A major sticking point in the talks has been Mr. Rangel's contention that he did not willfully break any rules. He has insisted that whatever his transgressions, they were honest mistakes. The wording of the House ethics panel's findings about Mr. Rangel's alleged violations has also been at issue, according to a person familiar with the case.

Negotiations between Mr. Rangel and ethics investigators dragged on for months. Last week, the ethics committee announced that it had found enough evidence of wrongdoing against Mr. Rangel that it would begin a public hearing to determine whether to convict him.

Democrats have been privately and publicly urging Mr. Rangel to settle the case, and the Harlem lawmaker has said he hoped to do so. In the last week, four House Democrats have publicly called on Mr. Rangel to resign.

Mr. Rangel has served in Congress for nearly 40 years, and is running for a 21st term. This year, he has a handful of primary opponents, but none with a large campaign account or widespread popularity.


Write to Brody Mullins at brody.mullins@wsj.com


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703578104575397303987006546.html
 
Re: Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry

Rangel 'spredecessor, Adam Clayton Powell Jr. was under allegations of ethics violations and was removed from a powerful committee under those allegations. Ironically, Adam Clayton Powell, Jr's son, Adam Clayton Powell IV is challenging Rangel's congressional seat in 2010.
 
Re: Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry

Rangel 'spredecessor, Adam Clayton Powell Jr. was under allegations of ethics violations and was removed from a powerful committee under those allegations. Ironically, Adam Clayton Powell, Jr's son, Adam Clayton Powell IV is challenging Rangel's congressional seat in 2010.

<font size="3">Ironically, indeed. See, Sun setting on Harlem


3283282389_0a56c8e72b.jpg


<font size="4">
<center>
Can a Powell Oust a Rangel
who Ousted a Powell?
</center>

</center>
 
Re: Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry

Ironically, indeed. See, Sun setting on Harlem


3283282389_0a56c8e72b.jpg





<CENTER>
Can a Powell Oust a Rangel
who Ousted a Powell?
</CENTER>



<CENTER></CENTER>



Sun setting on Harlem


Don't believe the hype. Some of our enemies would love it to be so.

That photograph above illustrates how far right the American conscience has tilted. The premier African American politician of the time and arguable one of the two premier African American critics of American society of the time. Could you imagine the premier African American politician of today, President Obama and Malcolm's direct successor Minister Farrakhan or even Reverend Jeremiah Wright appearing in a photo with them both smiling?
 
Re: Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry

<font size="5"><center>
Congresswoman Maxine Waters
Charged With Ethics Violations </font size>
<font size="4">

California Democratic Congresswoman
Allegedly Violated House Rules to Assist Bank</font size></center>


ap_maxine_waters_100802_mn.jpg

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., is seen on Capitol Hill
in Washington in this Oct. 2009 file photo. A House
investigative panel has charged California Democratic
Rep. Maxine Waters with violating ethics rules. Waters,
a senior member of the House Financial Services
Committee, would face a trial in the fall unless she
negotiates a settlement. The specific charges against
Waters were not made public in the announcement
Monday from the House ethics committee. (Charles
Dharapak/AP Photo)


byline_abcnews.gif

By MATTHEW JAFFE
August 2, 2010


<font size="3">"You don't use your chits for nothing. You call when there is an important issue." </font size>
- Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California,
quoted by Office of Congressional Ethics.​

The House Ethics Committee today charged Rep. Maxine Waters of California with unspecified violations, making her the second House Democrat in two weeks to face ethics problems as the November elections approach.

The committee said the board found "substantial reason" to believe that Waters may have violated House rules after assessing a report prepared by the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE).

The charges stem from a meeting that Waters requested at the onset of the financial crisis in September 2008 with then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson. Waters and Paulson did not attend the meeting, but Treasury officials and members of the National Bankers Association (NBA), a trade organization representing over 100 minority-owned firms, did.

At that meeting and in follow-up conversations, the report determined that "the discussion centered on a single bank – OneUnited," where Waters' husband was a board member from 2004 to 2008. According to her 2008 financial disclosure forms, Waters' husband owned two investments in OneUnited valued between $500,000 and $1 million.

When asked by the panel how often she called cabinet-level officials such as Paulson, Waters replied, "You don't use your chits for nothing. You call when there is an important issue."

According to the report, Waters told an unidentified congressman that she knew she should say no to the "OneUnited people" who were coming to her for help. "Stay out of it," the congressman told her, instructing her on several occasions not to get involved in the matter.

Shortly after the meeting, the Massachusetts bank received a $12 million in taxpayer aid from the $700 billion Wall Street bailout. It has yet pay it back.

Ultimately, concluded the House Ethics panel, Waters' conduct could have helped her financially and violated conflicts of interest rules.

Today Waters vowed to fight the charges.

"I have not violated any House rules," she said in a statement. "Therefore, I simply will not be forced to admit to something I did not do and instead have chosen to respond to charges made by the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct in a public hearing."

Waters said she was merely "advocating on behalf of minority banks," she never concealed her interests in OneUnited, and she did not benefit or act improperly in any way.

"In sum, the case against me has no merit," said Waters, who in 2008 was re-elected to her tenth term in Congress, winning 80 percent of the votes in her district of south-central Los Angeles. "No benefit, no improper action, no failure to disclose, no one influenced: no case."

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a non-profit legal watchdog, called for Waters to step down immediately from her post as chair of the House Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity.

Earlier this summer Rep. Charles Rangel of New York was charged by the ethics panel with 13 ethics violations. His trial is set to start in September.

The charges are a political headache for Democrats, who vowed to "drain the swamp" of political corruption in the House when they came to power four years ago. "Drain the swamp," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last Thursday. "We did it because this was a terrible place and we made a tremendous difference and I take great pride in that."

ABC News' Steven Portnoy contributed to this report.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rep-maxine-waters-charged-ethics-violations/story?id=11307872
 
Re: Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry

<font size="5"><center>
Congresswoman Maxine Waters
Charged With Ethics Violations </font size>
<font size="4">

California Democratic Congresswoman
Allegedly Violated House Rules to Assist Bank</font size></center>


ap_maxine_waters_100802_mn.jpg

Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., is seen on Capitol Hill
in Washington in this Oct. 2009 file photo. A House
investigative panel has charged California Democratic
Rep. Maxine Waters with violating ethics rules. Waters,
a senior member of the House Financial Services
Committee, would face a trial in the fall unless she
negotiates a settlement. The specific charges against
Waters were not made public in the announcement
Monday from the House ethics committee. (Charles
Dharapak/AP Photo)


byline_abcnews.gif

By MATTHEW JAFFE
August 2, 2010


<font size="5"><center>
Rep. Waters Ethics Hearing
Postponed Due To New Evidence</font size></center>



maxine-waters-presser2-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg



November 19, 2010


On the heels of a censure recommendation for Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY), the House ethics committee today announced that the upcoming ethics hearing for Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) is postponed indefinitely.

Unspecified new evidence has cropped up in the case, according to the committee, and the matter will go back to an investigative panel. The hearing had been set for Nov. 29.

A spokesman for Waters did not immediately have comment.

Waters was accused in July of committing three ethics violations. According to the committee, Waters improperly helped secure TARP funding for a bank, OneUnited, which her husband had stock in at the time.

She has maintained her innocence, saying she was legitimately helping an association of minority- and women-owned businesses get in touch with Treasury officials during the financial crisis.

Waters has been demanding a hearing since the allegations were announced in July.

The announcement takes the process back several steps. It is unclear what would happen to the investigation if it is pushed into the new Congress, which begins in January.

<font size="3">Late update:</font size>
In a statement, Waters accuses the committee of "showing a complete disregard for due process and fairness" and claims the delay proves that the committee didn't have a strong case to begin with.

She also provides some details about the new evidence, which she says is neither new nor material:

In fact, the Committee has had this 'new' document since October 29th, and it does not provide any new significant information. In fact, the document shows that my office was working to ensure that Emergency Economic Stabilization Act assisted small and minority institutions. The document does not reflect any action on behalf of any specific company. Although the Committee continues to insist that the 'small bank language' was drafted to benefit only one institution, the facts do not support that assertion; in fact, the documentary record directly contradicts it.​

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsme...s_ethics_hearing_postponed_case_going_bac.php
 
Re: Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry

Are their any whites under investigation or is it that only Black folk are corrupt?
 
Re: Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry

<font size="5"><center>
Rep. Waters Ethics Hearing
Postponed Due To New Evidence</font size></center>



maxine-waters-presser2-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg



November 19, 2010


On the heels of a censure recommendation for Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY), the House ethics committee today announced that the upcoming ethics hearing for Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) is postponed indefinitely.

Unspecified new evidence has cropped up in the case, according to the committee, and the matter will go back to an investigative panel. The hearing had been set for Nov. 29.

<font size="3">

AND now this:
</font size>
<font size="3">

December 1, 2010

House Ethics Committee Suspends Two Lawyers


The New York Times
By ASHLEY PARKER


The House ethics committee placed two of its attorneys on paid <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">administrative leave</span> last month <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">for reported problems with their handling of the committee’s investigation of Representative Maxine Waters</span>, a California Democrat accused of helping steer bailout money to a bank in which her husband owned shares.

Cindy Morgan Kim, the committee’s <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">deputy chief counsel</span> who was leading the probe against Ms. Waters, and Stacy Sovereign, a committee attorney assisting on the case, were placed on leave on Nov. 19, the same day that the committee announced it was delaying Ms. Waters’s trial, which was originally set to begin Monday.</font size>

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/...tee-suspends-two-lawyers/?partner=rss&emc=rss


<font size="3">

Thursday, December 2, 2010

2 sent on leave in Rep. Waters probe


Washington Post
By R. Jeffrey Smith

[N]either Kim nor Sovereign, who are former federal prosecutors, knows why the action was taken. "They have spotless records," Sauber said Wednesday. "They completely deny any impropriety." Kim has been the top deputy to chief counsel R. Blake Chisam, who Sauber said initiated the action against them.

Several Republican sources on Capitol Hill, speaking on the condition of anonymity, suggested that <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">Kim and Sovereign had ruffled feathers by continuing to investigate Waters even after the investigative subcommittee recommended in August that she be tried on ethics charges for intervening to help a troubled, minority-owned bank in Boston in which her husband held a substantial investment</span>.

<SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">"They were pushing too hard" to expand the investigation</span>, a Republican staff aide said, adding that <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">before being placed on leave, they had circulated a memo supporting the trial postponement and urging further inquiry. Sauber said "they are not partisan in any way" and had no ill motives. </span>

Waters, in a statement Wednesday, said that the lawyers' removal may have occurred because their conduct was "egregious." She said it suggests that "something has gone wrong in the ethics process," adding that "the committee must reveal immediately the circumstances that prompted its action."

"The longer the committee withholds the details of its actions, the more the public's confidence in the House ethics process is eroded," Waters said. </font size>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/01/AR2010120108348.html
 
Re: Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry

<font size="5"><Center>
Rangel Reaches Tentative Deal With Ethics Panel</font size></center>



OB-JK323_0729ra_G_20100729144145.jpg

Rep. Charles Rangel walks to his office after going for a vote on Capitol Hill in
Washington, Thursday


<font size="4">Rngel Censured</font size>

The House of Representatives voted 333-79 Thursday to censure Rep. Charles Rangel, the most severe punishment the House of Representatives can dole out to one of its own, short of expulsion.

But two Republicans, Reps. Don Young of Alaska and Peter King of New York voted against censuring Rangel, a 20-term New York Democrat who was found guilty by an ethics panel last month of faced 11 counts of financial and fundraising misconduct.

A special trial-like ethics subcommittee panel in the House last month found Rangel, 80, guilty of failing to report hundreds of thousands of dollars in income and assets, improper use of several rent-controlled apartments in his Harlem district, questionable fundraising efforts for a City College of New York center that bears his name, and failing to pay taxes on his Dominican Republic property.
 
Re: Dozens in Congress under ethics inquiry


Charles Rangel defeats fierce challenger Adriano
Espaillat, winning 23rd and final Congress term




usa-election.jpg





Rep. Charles Rangel, the Lion of Harlem, roared one last time Tuesday night, beating back a fierce challenge from state Sen. Adriano Espaillat to claim a 23rd and final term in Congress.

With 100% of the precincts reporting, Rangel had 47.4% of the vote to 43.6% for Espaillat, a margin of about 1,800 ballots in the 13th District Democratic Primary, unofficial returns showed.

The victory allows Rangel, 84, the face of Harlem politics for nearly a half century and at one time the most powerful elected black official in the country, to end his political career on his own terms.

He declared victory on his own terms as well.


For decades, Rangel never had a problem winning re-election. But then he was censured in 2010 for ethics violations, including failing to pay taxes and misusing congressional stationery — costing him the chairmanship of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee.

And his district was redrawn after the 2010 census to include parts of the Bronx, which along with Harlem’s gentrification transformed a heavily black district into one that’s majority Hispanic.

Tuesday’s race was a rematch of the 2012 primary between Rangel and Espaillat, a contest that Rangel pulled out by a little more than 1,000 votes. The replay was supposed to be just as challenging,



Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...congress-race-article-1.1842985#ixzz35euaR5mc


 
Been gone for awhile, recovering from another intentional car crash by another paid off loser...

It reminds me of Reals Sports when they were talking about the sport betting places (Koch Brother, Superpacs) that bribed players to throw the games. You watch the game and they are crashing into players on purpose to throw the game.

That is what the political system of North United States has become, completely corrupt.

I did something a couple of years ago that was stupid (provoking people is a good way to reveal someone true nature), next thing I know, I get some low IQ piece of shit attacking me with their vehicle, one was a student, a couple, a mother working at some hotel, and Al Qaeda student with his crew. I couldn't believe they could get people to participate so easily. The police did not do nothing as expected. Next thing I know, I am attacked with surveillance, with top notch gear, vehicle tracking and character assassinations. All of it unnecessary since I am planning to expatriate.

I knew shit was shady in North United States and was looking to leave long ago, but I did not know it was that bad. Where people can get away with murder and nothing is done about it. This is why you can't rely on the State to protect you, you need to arm and protect yourself.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top