Rep. Charles Rangel broke ethics rules

[Guest FroggyOne2]

Rep. Charles Rangel broke ethics rules, House panel finds

A House ethics subcommittee announced Thursday that it found that Rep. Charles B. Rangel violated congressional ethics rules and that it will prepare for a trial, probably beginning in September. The panel is expected to make the details of his alleged violations public next Thursday.

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.

In March, Rangel reluctantly stepped down as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee -- a week after the ethics panel ruled in a separate case that he had broken congressional gift rules by accepting trips to conferences in the Caribbean that were financed by corporate interests. The panel said that, at a minimum, Rangel's staff knew about the corporate backing for the 2007 and 2008 trips -- and that the congressman was therefore responsible.

(Jonathan Capehart: Charlie Rangel, ethics violator)

Rangel, 80, said he welcomed the opportunity to respond to the allegations. "At long last, sunshine has pierced through this cloud that has been over my head for more than two years," he said when asked about the panel's decision.

Sources familiar with the case said that Rangel could have avoided this showdown by accepting the subcommittee's findings. He was briefed on the allegations against him -- as required by House rules -- in recent weeks, and he rejected them.

It has been eight years since the House last opened such proceedings against a member. That happened when Jim Traficant (D-Ohio) rejected the ethics committee's findings that he violated rules. He was later expelled by his peers. Before that, the last member expelled was Michael Myers (D-Pa.), removed by his colleagues in 1980 as a result of the Abscam scandal.

(Harlem's rich political culture faces uncertain future after allegations)

The committee announcement came shortly after 4 p.m. Thursday as the House finished its votes for the week. About 3 p.m., Rangel and the ethics committee's chairman, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), huddled together in a lengthy conversation on the Republican side of the House floor, far away from their Democratic colleagues, according to a Republican who observed the conversation.

A judge-like panel will meet next Thursday and read the charges. That will happen just as the House is about to leave Washington for a 6 1/2 -week recess. The full trial is not likely to begin until the week of Sept. 13 -- right before Rangel faces what could be a difficult Sept. 14 primary challenge from New York State Assemblyman Adam Clayton Powell IV. Powell is the son of the late congressman Adam Clayton Powell Jr. (D-N.Y.), who faced his own ethics problems and was bested in 1970 by Rangel in a Democratic primary.

Rangel has several choices. He can resign, accept the charges and try to stay on, or defend himself. Pressure could build from Democratic members for him to resign rather than endure a public trial that would be humiliating for him and his party so soon before the November midterm elections.

Rangel has spent more than $2 million from his campaign treasury on his legal team, including more than $160,000 this spring, according to federal election reports.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) took some heart from the new development involving her longtime colleague, saying it suggested positive things about Congress's ability to police its own.

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

But Republicans used the news to try to make Democratic ethics woes a campaign issue, echoing what Pelosi did to Republicans in 2006, when a pair of GOP lawmakers pleaded guilty to federal felony charges and more than half a dozen others were caught up in their own corruption cases.

(Top ten Senate races that turned ugly)

"Today's announcement is a sad reminder of Speaker Pelosi's most glaring broken promise: to 'drain the swamp' in Washington instead of presiding over 'the most honest, most open and most ethical' Congress in history," said Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio).

Fred Wertheimer, president of the congressional ethics group Democracy 21 and a former president of Common Cause, said that Rangel may choose to defend himself but that he "appears to be walking into a very difficult situation."

"He faces the members of the investigative subcommittee who have been looking at this for two years, who have concluded there is substantial reason to believe he has violated the rules," Wertheimer said. "He faces a very tough road ahead."

Some watchdog groups that in the past have called on Rangel to resign made the same plea Thursday. Melanie Sloan, executive director of the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said it is striking that "the notoriously lax ethics committee" had found cause to believe that Rangel has broken the law, House rules or both.

"Representative Rangel has toughed it out as long as he could; the time clearly has come for him to resign," she said. "He can no longer effectively represent the citizens of New York."

[greenego]

Charley is a poster boy for whats wrong with Washington. They lie, cheat and steal and when they get caught, they act like it's just a big misunderstanding or someone else fault. By being on the Ways and Means Committee (writes tax law) for 30 years he has done a lot of damage to this country.

[Oh Shoot]

It's only a violation in the eyes of Congress if you are stupid enough to get caught and have your dirty laundry spread all over the news, so that they have to act on it to preserve their charade of decorum and honesty.

- OS

[Mike.357]

nothing NEW to see here

[Guest mosinon]

unethical member of congress? I, for one, am shocked.

I don't have any personal experience but I'll bet you have to do some pretty smarmy things to get elected in the first place so. I imagine campaigns are training grounds for this kind of stuff.

[greenego]

unethical member of congress? I, for one, am shocked.

I don't have any personal experience but I'll bet you have to do some pretty smarmy things to get elected in the first place so. I imagine campaigns are training grounds for this kind of stuff.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEsEdJRtLRc

[hipower]

Nancy Pelosi--Congess--Ethical???? Surely you jest.

[Guest mosinon]

Well if Nancy said it, I suppose it must be true. I was trying to think of something witty to say but I really can't stand her and I really don't think even she believes the things she says.

Just thinking about Pelosi makes me too mad to make a decent joke about her.

[Guest Sgt. Joe]

YouTube - Flashback: Pelosi Says Dems Will Have Most Honest and Most Ethical Congress

Now that is one big OOPS if I ever saw one, and these people do it with such straight faces.

They say that compulsive liars do it so much that they start believing their own lies, I do believe this lady has made it that far.

Dont worry Mosinon, she does a darn fine job of making a joke out of herself.

So if Ole Charlie resigns does he not still keep his lifetime salary?

What if they have to force him out, does he keep it then?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I'll bet with this bunch in the House he keeps everything. Race card will be played

and his age. The sad thing is that this is the tip of the iceberg in the House. all the

deals made during the health care bill etc, have got to be ethics violations of some

sort.

[Guest HvyMtl]

Not surprised.

Rangel is, hopefully, a member of a dying breed. Uses the race card to keep getting re-elected, uses his office to make huge $.

I believe the investigation will find a pattern to his behavior. A pattern used since he gained office.

Interesting thing is this: The Dems could have delayed this, like after the elections. Many think this will be detrimental to the Dem's during the election. Yet, the Dems did not delay...Why?

It would have been easy to delay, as there are multiple news "stories" to hide behind. This is not on the front burner of any news outlet.

So. Why?

(Side Note: Yeah, he will probably get to keep his "retirement benefits...")

[Guest SUNTZU]

What pisses me off is that every single person who reads or posts in this thread knows EXACTLY how Congress runs. We know EXACTLY what a Washington Elite is...and here we sit. Congress is overseeing itself, making deals with itself. Meanwhile, you and I better get our asses back out in the fields if we know what's good for us.