Ethics committee determined Rangel broke House rules by accepting trips to the Caribbean.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100226/ap_on_go_co/us_ethics_rangel
I's ask that Pelosi drain the swamp, but this fata$$ would probably clog the drain.
Guilty until proven innocent. Love ya gweed, but thats not the law of the land in the US of A. Innocent until proven guilty is the rule of law here the last time I checked, and until you are found guilty by a jury of your peers, you are innocent. So if you want to have your witch trial tribunals, and demand that they are burned at the stake, just remember that you live somewhere that you can voice your opinion, and be challenged by others as to your thoughts and beliefs.
And as for the trial by a jury of your peers, you best be careful on what you speak, for you never know that you may be in that place called the witness stand, and you be judged on what you say.
Quote from: dbacks fan on February 26, 2010, 12:33:36 AM
Guilty until proven innocent. Love ya gweed, but thats not the law of the land in the US of A. Innocent until proven guilty is the rule of law here the last time I checked, and until you are found guilty by a jury of your peers, you are innocent. So if you want to have your witch trial tribunals, and demand that they are burned at the stake, just remember that you live somewhere that you can voice your opinion, and be challenged by others as to your thoughts and beliefs.
And as for the trial by a jury of your peers, you best be careful on what you speak, for you never know that you may be in that place called the witness stand, and you be judged on what you say.
WTH are you rambling about? I said that Rangel was found to have broken House rules by its own Ethics committee and you go off on some BS rant that really channels aox or usruf. And note to dbacks, I am a lawyer so do not ever, and I mean ever, lecture me on what the law is.
Do us a favor and stay away from your keyboard after midnight...
"Ethics Committee" yeah right...
"Democrats took over the House in 2006 on a campaign promise to "end a culture of corruption" in Congress that they blamed on 12 years of Republican rule.
The ethics panel also ended another widespread investigation Thursday, saying it found no violations of House rules by seven lawmakers who steered government money and projects and contracts to favored companies that donated to their re-election campaigns.
A copy of the letters and an accompanying report on them were obtained by The Associated Press. All seven — five Democrats and two Republicans — are or were senior members of the House Appropriations Committee."
This is the big laugher here:
"...The House committee's report said its investigators "found no evidence" that members or their official staffs considered or sought contributions in return for appropriations."
Makes you think conan how bad Rangel must have f'd up to get the ethics panel to do something.
Quote from: guido911 on February 26, 2010, 09:35:56 AM
Makes you think conan how bad Rangel must have f'd up to get the ethics panel to do something.
This is just one of the complaints against him. It's about corporate money paying for a trip when the congressmen on the trip all thought it was foundation money. The committee found that while none of the congressmen knew about the money, two of Rangel's staffers did, so he was censured for his staff's error.
But he has several more unresolved complaints.
Quote from: swake on February 26, 2010, 10:20:51 AM
But he has several more unresolved complaints.
That will probably result in a *GASP* censure...
Quote from: guido911 on February 25, 2010, 07:43:47 PM
Ethics committee determined Rangel broke House rules by accepting trips to the Caribbean.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100226/ap_on_go_co/us_ethics_rangel
I's ask that Pelosi drain the swamp, but this fata$$ would probably clog the drain.
The hilarious part is that that this might in fact count as "draining the swamp." Democratic leadership censuring a prominent and powerful Democratic Rep for abuse of his position. How bout that!
Quote from: we vs us on February 26, 2010, 10:48:11 AM
The hilarious part is that that this might in fact count as "draining the swamp." Democratic leadership censuring a prominent and powerful Democratic Rep for abuse of his position. How bout that!
Draining the swamp to me would be kicking unethical members completely out of the House or Senate. But then again, if that happened, it would look like the rapture in Congress come Monday morning. ;)
Here's the awesome part: as soon as we vote the bums out, our corporate friends will fill the place up with a new crop of even more compromised legislators, courtesy of the Roberts Court and Citizens United.
The good times are really just beginning!
Quote from: we vs us on February 26, 2010, 12:14:41 PM
Here's the awesome part: as soon as we vote the bums out, our corporate friends will fill the place up with a new crop of even more compromised legislators, courtesy of the Roberts Court and Citizens United.
The good times are really just beginning!
Meh. Roberts was just leveling the playing field. ;) We got a large share of our dem bums in with union and trial lawyer money. Oh snap.
Rangel requests leave of absence from his chairmanship. (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/rangel-press-conference-ways-and-means-chair.php?ref=fpa)
I'd say the swamp just abated a tad.
We need a replacement saying for "drain the swamp". Swamps are now the green thing to have. Good for trees and other CO2 absorbing things.
Quote from: Red Arrow on March 03, 2010, 12:38:00 PM
We need a replacement saying for "drain the swamp". Swamps are now the green thing to have. Good for trees and other CO2 absorbing things.
Ok, how about "Fire Congress!"
Quote from: Gaspar on March 03, 2010, 04:05:24 PM
Ok, how about "Fire Congress!"
Nope, combustion releases CO2 into the atmosphere.
Rangel get is @ss handed to him by Huckabee.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/huckabee-responds-to-rep-rangels-what-would-jesus-do-budget-query-with-scripture/
The absolute gall of some people just blows me away sometimes. And for Nate, how many times have you called Rangel a deadbeat for not paying his taxes? Just askin.
Quote from: guido911 on July 09, 2011, 05:20:23 PM
Rangel get is @ss handed to him by Huckabee.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/huckabee-responds-to-rep-rangels-what-would-jesus-do-budget-query-with-scripture/
The absolute gall of some people just blows me away sometimes. And for Nate, how many times have you called Rangel a deadbeat for not paying his taxes? Just askin.
I don't feel the need to search for people to berate individually.
Quote from: nathanm on July 09, 2011, 09:16:21 PM
I don't feel the need to search for people to berate individually.
I think Gweed's still not clear of the effects of his pain meds. He's like our own local Limbaugh now.
Quote from: nathanm on July 09, 2011, 09:16:21 PM
I don't feel the need to search for people to berate individually.
Because your politics would not allow you to do so. I have at least tried to give props to Obama in here. Have you or the cop? And for your own edification, when the cop weighs in on your side, rethink your point. That guy is a hopeless Obama spooner/gravy trainer (who must be the same person is T). At least you try to make an argument. I would like for you to hail ANYTHING GWB did as president.
My liberal leanings don't translate to one-sided support for Obama or the Democrats. I've mentioned disappointment with how the health care bill turned out, although I still think it's better than the nothing we had before. I've mentioned disappointment with finreg, although again it's still far better than what we had before.
If I'm not disappointed with a bill, that probably means it's a bad bill. Similarly, if you're not disappointed with a bill, it's probably also a bad bill. Politics is the art of compromise (or should be). Compromise is the art of pissing everyone off.
Quote from: nathanm on July 10, 2011, 11:49:31 PM
My liberal leanings don't translate to one-sided support for Obama or the Democrats. I've mentioned disappointment with how the health care bill turned out, although I still think it's better than the nothing we had before. I've mentioned disappointment with finreg, although again it's still far better than what we had before.
If I'm not disappointed with a bill, that probably means it's a bad bill. Similarly, if you're not disappointed with a bill, it's probably also a bad bill. Politics is the art of compromise (or should be). Compromise is the art of pissing everyone off.
Nothing about GWB?
Quote from: guido911 on July 12, 2011, 12:53:40 PM
Nothing about GWB?
I've said my piece about his installation of people who don't believe in enforcing the rules on many occasions in the past, so I don't really need to bring it up again, do I?