He might not be anybody’s Congressman for much longer. From The NY Times:
A House panel on Tuesday found Representative Charles B. Rangel guilty of 11 counts of ethical violations, ruling that his failure to pay taxes, improper solicitation of fund-raising donations and failure to accurately report his personal income had brought dishonor on the House.
After a public hearing Monday that was truncated by Mr. Rangel walking out in protest, an adjudicatory subcommittee of the House ethics committee deliberated for four hours before finding him guilty of all but one of the 13 counts against him.
(Two other counts, involving Mr. Rangel’s misuse of House franking privileges, were merged into one.)…
…While the committee has the power to recommend expulsion, that is highly unlikely. Ethics experts and committee members have said that Mr. Rangel, 80, is more likely to face a letter of reprimand or a formal censure.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Republicans are Totally Not Terrified of Kamala Harris
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: “Vance Remorse” Shows How The Political Landscape Has Shifted Again
BY: Gilpin Guy
IN: “Vance Remorse” Shows How The Political Landscape Has Shifted Again
BY: spaceman2021
IN: “Vance Remorse” Shows How The Political Landscape Has Shifted Again
BY: harrydoby
IN: Tuesday Open Thread
BY: harrydoby
IN: Republicans are Totally Not Terrified of Kamala Harris
BY: itlduso
IN: Republicans are Totally Not Terrified of Kamala Harris
BY: davebarnes
IN: Republicans are Totally Not Terrified of Kamala Harris
BY: JohnNorthofDenver
IN: “Vance Remorse” Shows How The Political Landscape Has Shifted Again
BY: kwtree
IN: “Vance Remorse” Shows How The Political Landscape Has Shifted Again
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
he’s been judged and found guilty by his peers, what an embarrassment this man is. I wonder if he’ll resign and slink away into private life (hopefully) or if he’ll continue onward as if none of this happened (hope not but seems likely)
Censure at the worst.
But it’s not like anything has happened to him…
Because he didn’t do anything.
He’s on trial right now, and I’m sure he’ll be acquitted.
LB, I wouldn’t think you’d want to touch that sleazebag with a long pair of tongs.
And the DA, if I am remembering correctly had to call multiple Grand Juries before he could get an indictment.
It seemed pretty political to me at the time. We’ll see.
It feels like he’s been stuck on under indictment with nothing more happening forever.
The trial has been delayed for years. The initial indictment was, IIRC, ditched by the DA for some reason. (I can’t remember whether it was a Texas Supreme Court ruling or if there was a technical issue with the indictment.) And then the DA decided to try Delay’s buddies first. And Delay has been contesting things and slowing things down, for what reason I do not know (unless he was hoping that the DA would die before he got to trial…).
The whole “multiple grand juries” thing is mis-representing the proceedings.
and it isn’t some pesky nuisance charge, either.
to getting somewhere.
At least he’s quick to defend THAT sleazebag as long as he has an R after his name.
the party will demand, in exchange for a punishment no worse than censure, that he will need to voluntarily retire for the good of the party. He is 80, after all. It ought to be made clear to him that If he refuses, the party will need to look to its own interests and impose a much harsher punishment.
they’re not going to go as far as expulsion…this isn’t a Jim Trafficant case.
Besides, no one has even been officially censured since 1983.
He’s already been stripped of his chairmanship, won’t be the ranking member come January, he’ll probably get an official reprimand, Newt Gingrich/Barney Frank style, and that’ll be it.
If the Upper West side and Harlem want him as their Rep it’s up to them, not the Dem party.
But nobody’s faster whipping out the magnifying glass to thread the needle of responsibility if it’s an (R) in the title.
🙂
Hope to see you Saturday, but I understand the history behind your probable reticence.
But he would still be doing his party a big favor by going away. He’s an embarrassment and the offenses are considerable, not just forgot to dot an eye kind of stuff. I think he should do the right thing and fall on his sword.
to turn any attempt to get him to resign into martyrdom.
And martyring Charlie Rangel would likely have consequences for years among his base.
Crooked scumbag or not, the people of Harlem like the guy, as they liked crooked scumbag Adam Clayton Powell before him. Why? Both Rangel and Powell took care of them.
All politics is local.
I thought he’d do it. I agree he’s not a for the good of my party type. It’s really sad because he’s been a good Rep, a vet, I always liked his tough guy charm and gravelly voice. But he’s an old style New York pol who treated his congressional seat like a fiefdom. He’s 80. His time is past. His era is past. Too bad he won’t take this opportunity to retire.
It really doesn’t matter what you think. It only matters what they think. He represents them, not you.
All politics are local.
Got my long underwear and insulated boots all ready to go.
But with the moon in the sky I probably won’t be going out.
but all politics are not local. Politics is a two party team sport (even the few independent lawmakers choose to align with the R or D) with wider implications than merely local. But, as I said, I do realize that Rangel won’t go.
The investigator testified that he found no evidence that Rangel did this either for influence or to unduly enrich himself.
Without evidence of criminal wrongdoing, this is “merely” an ethical violation, and it will probably rate the reprimand or perhaps a censure. I’d suggest a retirement, too. It’s not like Rangel’s seat is in danger of going Republican if he retires, and he’ll be set for the rest of his life on his Congressional pension.
The committee voted 19-1 to recommend the full Congress vote on a censure resolution against Rangel.
Censure is the strongest measure the Congress can take short of expulsion; of course, Democrats already took their own measures in caucus by having him step down from his committee chairmanship positions; that could be considered a stronger punishment than the censure.
“Liberal Democrat” Representative Charles B. Rangel – you know they (and CP) wouldn’t hesitate to mention if it was a Conservative or Republican.
Once ensconced in his safe seat there is no way around the fact that he wasn’t just careless. He was personally corrupt in the usual petty ways and out of the usual sense of entitlement that characterize so many pols with much less distinguished backgrounds than his. That he is a real American hero doesn’t excuse his later shabby behavior, it just makes it very sad. It’s sad to see this old lion winding up his career as a rather pathetic figure and through no fault but his own.
it quoted from the NY Times. So I’m supposed to go search around for a positive and UNRELATED article (from Wikipedia no less) when referencing a CP diary? This guy is as dirty as they get, dishonorable, and unethical. I’m sure if he was a Republican you’d all be calling him a baby killer as well given his military record.
You come here at your pleasure. Nobody forces you.
If you don’t like things here, you can always delete the bookmark.
Or continue to whine. Which is what most of us expect you to do.
Man up and leave.
Please, “this guy is as dirty as they get” only exposes your bias and doesn’t disclose any additional relevant information.
We here at CP like to get down and into the details.
How is it that bringing to the readers attention some FACTS about Rangel are somehow unrelated….to an article about….Rangel?
Take Ralphies advice.