Rangel charged with ethics violations


Well-Known Member
Hopefully, this darling of the Left will get his silly ass bounced out of the Congress.

Of course, his constituents are likely as stupid as those who reelected Marion Barry so he won't stay gone for long.

The Democrat culture of corruption continues unabated.


Rangel Charged With Ethics Violations

Published July 22, 2010 | FoxNews.com

WASHINGTON -- A House investigative panel on Thursday announced multiple ethics charges against Rep. Charles Rangel, the powerful New York Democrat who has been fending off accusations related to his business dealings and fund-raising, among other issues.

The case will go to trial before a separate ethics committee, and Rangel said Thursday he looks forward to the opportunity to explain himself to his constituents after two years of allegations.

Rangel was chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee until he stepped down in March following criticism from the House ethics committee in a separate case.

The announcement Thursday did not specify which alleged violations would be considered during this trial. The panel has focused on several issues, including Rangel's use of four rent-controlled apartments in New York City and his use of official stationery to raise money for a center bearing his name at City College of New York.

The timing of the announcement ensures that a public airing of Rangel's ethical woes will stretch into the fall campaign, and Republicans are certain to make it an issue as they try to capture majority control of the House. Speaker Nancy Pelosi had once promised to "drain the swamp" of ethical misdeeds by lawmakers in arguing that Democrats should be in charge.

Responding to the charges, Rangel said in a statement, "I was notified today, two years after I requested an investigation, that the Ethics Committee will refer the allegations reviewed by an investigations subcommittee to a subcommittee that will review the facts. I am pleased that, at long last, sunshine will pierce the cloud of serious allegations that have been raised against me in the media."

Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said, "The action today would indicate that the independent, bipartisan ethics committee process is moving forward."

Rangel led the tax-writing Ways and Means panel until he stepped aside last March after the ethics committee criticized him in a separate case -- finding that he should have known corporate money was paying for his trips to two Caribbean conferences.

Officials said that in the current case, the committee and Rangel's attorney tried unsuccessfully to negotiate a settlement. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private discussions. A settlement would have required Rangel to agree that he violated ethics rules.

The investigation of Rangel has focused on:

--His use of official stationery to raise money for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College of New York.

--Whether he had the Ways and Means Committee consider legislation that would benefit donors to the Rangel Center at the same time the congressman solicited donations or pledges.

--Preservation of a tax shelter for an oil drilling company, Nabors Industries, which has a chief executive who donated money to the center while Rangel's committee considered the loophole legislation.

--Use of four rent-controlled apartment units in New York City, when the city's rent stabilization program is supposed to apply to one's primary residence. This raises the question of how all the units could be primary residences. One was a campaign office, raising a separate question of whether the rent break was an improper gift.

--Whether Rangel, as required, publicly reported information on the financing and rental of his ownership interest in a unit within the Punta Cana Yacht Club in Punta Cana, Dominican Republic. Rangel also had to pay back taxes on the rental income.

--Whether he intentionally failed to report -- when required -- hundreds of thousands of dollars or more in assets. The amended disclosure reports added a credit union IRA, mutual fund accounts and stock.

Rangel had hoped to regain his chairmanship, but the allegations make that virtually impossible this year.

He announced a bid for a 21st term recently, days before his 80th birthday. One of his Sept. 14 primary opponents is Adam Clayton Powell IV, son of the former congressman whom Rangel defeated in 1970.

While the case will generate unfavorable headlines for Rangel, it may have little effect in his congressional district, New York's famed Harlem, where the congressman has been a political leader for decades and is known by older constituents as a Korean War hero.

The Associated Press contributed to this report

July 22, 2010 | 6:08 PM ET
The Hitchhiker's Guide to Understanding Today's Ethics Committee Action Involving Charlie Rangel

Read more: http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2...ction-involving-charlie-rangel/#ixzz0uTQLiATi

Let me try to explain in English what the Ethics Committee did today, what the consequences could be for Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., and give some historical context on this.

Key point: The ethics subcommittee investigating Rangel is accusing him of wrongdoing and wants to kick it to a special Adjudicative Subcommittee which could penalize him or ask the entire House to do so.

The Ethics Committee has been investigating Rangel since he took the extraordinary step of referring himself to the Ethics Committee in the summer of 2008. In fact, Rangel did a rare, on-camera interview with me the day he sent the ethics complaints to the panel, telling me he was “clean as the driven snow.”

In September of 2008, the Ethics Committee determined there was merit to the charges and took up a formal case against Rangel.

In short, after a two-year probe, the special investigative subcommittee studying Rangel has created a “Statement of Alleged Violation and Related Motions.”

What that means is the committee BELIEVES it has found ethical lapses by Rangel. But the committee, like all committees in Congress, must approve the report it has written.

It will not sign off on that. Yet. So, what happens, is the full panel has created a unique “Adjudicatory Subcommittee” which will convene an extremely rare, open session. The committee could debate and determine if the findings are accurate and factual on July 29 at 1:00 pm ET in 1310 Longworth.

The committee COULD also give Rangel himself the chance to defend himself, amplify and answer charges.

At that point, the Adjudicatory Subcommittee COULD then vote on whether to sanction Rangel. Remember, there are multiple alleged ethics lapses involving Rangel, ranging from a failure to pay taxes to improperly storing a broken-down, unregistered Mercedes Benz in the Rayburn Garage. Again, they COULD find that Rangel did wrong in some areas and clear him in others.

But the issue may not be done there.

In January, 1997, the full-House was asked to penalize then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA) for his book deal. It is entirely possible that the Adjudicatory Subcommittee could finish its action then. But we are in unchartered water here. So it’s unclear whether the Adjudicatory Subcommittee’s decision will be final or if this could be referred with a recommendation to the entire House.

Furthermore, I direct you to a cryptic line in the Ethics Committee Statement. The final line says that the July 29 meeting is “organizational meeting.” That implies that there could be other meetings and that next week’s session is just the start. Moreover, it also implies that not all such sessions would necessarily be open.


Bottom line: the investigative subcommittee probing Rangel has found something and believes there is enough “there, there.”

On-camera today, Rangel denied that the committee’s conclusion of its investigation and call for a hearing meant “bad news” for him.

Rangel: “Don’t you say that because you have no idea. Because you have no idea what is good news or bad news. I feel extraordinary. I don’t have any fear at all politically or personally what they came up with. So this is it And is what I’ve been waiting for. We’ll see what happens.”

It's important to note that the House formally recognizes three “official” forms of punishment for members who are found to have violated House Rules. Those forms of punishment are expulsion, centure or reprimand.

HOWEVER...It is rare that ANY of those sanctions are ever used to punish a member.

For instance, the House PROBABLY would have expelled Jim Traficant. But he resigned. Same with Mark Foley.

More often, lawmakers are sent a letter of admonition or fined. Conceivably, they could make a member “stand in the corner” or “send them to bed without supper.”

In other words, there is no defined punishment that MUST be meted out if Rangel is found to have done wrong. And frequently, Congress chooses an alternative route to discipline its members.

A few things to point out: when Rangel first referred himself to the Ethics Committee, there were three issues:

1) His use of rent-controlled apartments for political use in Harlem.

2) Failure to report rental income for tax purposes on a villa he owns in the Dominican Republic.

3) His use of Congressional stationary to help solicit funds for a School of Public Affairs named after him (which he did not ask for) at City College of New York.

A fourth and fifth issue was added later.

First, it was discovered that Rangel was violating House rules by storing his unregistered, broken-down Mercedes-Benz in the Rayburn Garage. That was towed from the garage in September, 2008.

The fifth issue evolved a few months later about his travel to the Caribbean that was paid for by an outside group.

In late February of this year, the Ethics Committee formally admonished Rangel for allowing a private corporation to pay for trips he and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) took to the Caribbean in 2007 and 2008.

A furor then bubbled up around Rangel as some called for him to step down as Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. After a late-night conclave in early March with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Rangel denied media reports Tuesday that he would step down as the head of the powerful tax writing committee. A defiant Rangel emerged from a half-hour meeting with Pelosi. When asked by reporters if he was still the chairman of the panel, Rangel gave an unequivocal “yes!” When further queried if he would still be the chair of the committee on Wednesday, Rangel responded, “well, I’m 79-years-old. I can’t make promises at my age.”A scrum of reporters continued pressing Rangel as he left the meeting and made his way toward a Capitol elevator. “You bet your life on it,” Rangel said when asked again if he would remain the head of the panel. “And I don’t lie to the press.”

The next morning, Rangel stepped aside as Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.

Important points…

In late November, 2008, Pelosi put out a statement asserting that she was confident the Ethics Committee would complete its work by early January, 2009. That didn’t happen.

Moreover, there is some precedent for having a larger, open panel (such as the Adjudicative Subcommittee) probe a high-profile Ethics case.

In January of 1997, the Ethics Committee met late on a Friday night in open session to debate and vote on whether then-Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., violated House rules by misusing tax-exempt fund to teach a politically-charged college course.

The House empanelled Special Counsel James Cole to investigate Gingrich and potentially bring a case against him. Cole found fault with Gingrich. Gingrich agreed to pay the House $300,000 and be formally reprimanded by the House.

The Ethics Committee then passed its decision along to the full House. The House voted 395 to 28 to penalize Gingrich.

Read more: http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2...ction-involving-charlie-rangel/#ixzz0uTQQ1R7Y
Nothing will be done with/to/about Rangle.
At least not until after the election, if then.
Hey now, he got censured. Nothign as bad as listening to the Speaker say "BAD BOY! Don't do it again" & smacking your nose with a newspaper.
did Delay actually get time yet?

James Traficant did, and....I could probably think of a few more, but yeah this is a new day.