Oh well, so much for Nancy Pelosi's "most ethical congress, ever" legacy.
House ethics panel convicts Rep. Rangel on 11 of 13 counts
By Susan Crabtree and Jordan Fabian
The Hill
11/16/10 11:55 AM ET
A House ethics panel has convicted Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) on 11 of 13 counts of violating House ethics rules.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), the chairwoman of the adjudicatory subcommittee and the full House ethics committee, announced the decision late Tuesday morning following an abbreviated public trial of the 20-term lawmaker and nearly six hours of deliberations...*snip*
Despite being under investigation for all these ethics violations, this guy was able to be reelected just weeks ago by an overwhelming margin in his district of Harlem NYC. But now that he's been convicted, doesn't that mean he'll be punished?
...The full ethics panel will now convene a sanctions hearing to recommend a punishment. Serious sanctions — including formal reprimand, censure or expulsion — require a vote on the House floor. Expulsion requires a two-thirds vote, while a reprimand, which Rangel refused to agree to in July, or a censure would need just a simple majority. The ethics panel could also impose a fine and diminish some of Rangel’s privileges...*snip*
Oh, I forgot, he's a Democrat career politician and a minority. He'll receive a slap on the wrist and get sent on his merry way. Isn't that nice.
Censure recommended for NY congressman Rangel
By LARRY MARGASAK
Associated Press
November 18, 2010
WASHINGTON – The House ethics committee's chief counsel recommended Thursday that veteran Rep. Charles Rangel of New York be censured for financial and fundraising misconduct as lawmakers neared closure on a 2 1/2-year-long scandal.
The committee deliberated behind closed doors Thursday after counsel Blake Chisam made his recommendation and Rangel pleaded for fairness, telling the panel he was not a crooked politician.
Chisam's recommendation was that Rangel receive the most serious congressional discipline short of expulsion. A censure resolution would require a vote by the House disapproving Rangel's conduct and the speaker would orally administer an embarrassing rebuke to the 20-term Democrat in front of his colleagues.
The ethics committee, made up of five Democrats and five Republicans, could opt for lighter punishments, such as a reprimand, fine or a report deploring Rangel's behavior.
The full House would have to vote on a reprimand or fine, but Rangel would be spared the embarrassment of being rebuked at the front of the chamber, called the well. The House also could change the recommended discipline by making it more serious or less serious...*snip*
Well, the House still has to vote on the censure, but so far, ol' Charlie is getting a serious tongue lashing which was more than I originally expected him to get.
No comments:
Post a Comment