A House investigative committee on Thursday charged New York Rep. Charles Rangel with multiple ethics violations, a blow to the former Ways and Means chairman and an election-year headache for Democrats.
The committee did not immediately specify the charges against the Democrat, who has served in the House for some 40 years and is fourth in House seniority. The announcement by a four-member panel of the House ethics committee sends the case to a House trial, where a separate eight-member panel of Republicans and Democrats will decide whether the violations can be proved by clear and convincing evidence.
The timing of the announcement ensures that it 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.
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 sources 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. * Preserved 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. * Used 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 the 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. * 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.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
He'll get a pass! Nothing will happen to him short of a slap on the wrist. IMHO! It's the usual dog and pony show.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
WASHINGTON – The Associated Press has learned that New York Democrat Charles Rangel is making a last-minute effort to settle his ethics case. A settlement would mean that Rangel must agree that he committed some ethical misconduct.
The talks were confirmed by people familiar with the situation, but who were not authorized to be quoted by name.
Rangel stepped down earlier this year as chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee because of an earlier ethics charge. A settlement would spare him an embarrassing ethics trial. It also would be a relief for other Democrats, who fear that an dragged-out ethics proceeding during the fall election campaign would hurt their ability to maintain their House majority.
The ethics committee's trial phase has been scheduled to commence Thursday afternoon.
Rangel needs to be shown the door, this isn't the first time he has had questionable ethics dealings and a man who sits on the committee that writes tax law should certainly know what's legal and what's not legal when it comes to taxes, the ones he forgot to pay. Rangel is what's wrong with Congress and any Dem or Rep who are guilty of unethical behavior needs to be expelled from Congress. What happened to drain the swamp and the most transparent Congress ever my butt.
K Street goes to the defense of Charlie Rangel By: Timothy P. Carney Examiner Columnist July 28, 2010
Every person accused of a crime or an ethics violation deserves a competent defense. Charlie Rangel's legal defense, fittingly, comes from K Street.
Two of the three firms providing legal counsel to Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., in his pending ethics cases are lobbying firms. In fact, one firm, Oldaker, Belair & Wittie, conducts much of Rangel's political fundraising, while operating four different lobby shops.
But who's ultimately paying Rangel's legal bills? Mostly corporate and union political action committees along with individual lobbyists. Over the past six months, PACs and lobbyists have accounted for a majority of the money Rangel's campaign has raised this year, not counting transfers from Rangel's other fundraising operations (more on them below).
In turn, Rangel funnels his campaign cash into his legal defense. In 2009, three-fourths of Rangel's $2.16 million in campaign spending went to legal fees. The House Ethics Committee allows campaign funds for legal fees that are not "primarily personal in nature, such as a matrimonial action, or could result in a direct personal benefit for the Member." Otherwise, legal fees are a legitimate use of campaign cash because "the protection of a Member's presumption of innocence in such actions is a valid political purpose," the guidelines state.
That means any politically savvy donor who cut a check in 2010 to Rangel's reelection knew the donation was, in part, a contribution to Rangel's legal defense -- indeed, in the first two quarters of 2010, Rangel's campaign spent $655,232, with $230,749 (35 percent) going to legal fees. Zuckerman Spaeder LLP got biggest haul of Rangel cash -- $182,000. The firm had lobbying clients including one top drugmaker until last year, when the K Street legal shop de-registered as lobbyist.
Another lobbying firm defending Rangel is Oldaker, Belair & Wittie, pocketing $28,000 in legal fees so far this year. Oldaker's clients include Indian tribes, health care companies and financial organizations such as the Debt Buyers' Association. But the firm also houses two other lobbying firms: the Oldaker Group and the National Group.
The National Group's lobby clients include defense giant Lockheed Martin and other aerospace companies, as well as many universities and hospitals.
In the Oldaker orbit is lobbyist Michael Allen Andrews, a former Ways & Means staffer, now a Rangel donor. Andrews is registered to lobby for "National Health Advisors LLC," a lobbying operation launched by Oldaker and another K Street firm days before Obama's inauguration.
In a press release, Oldaker explained: "As the Obama Administration and the 111th Congress begin their work to reform America's health care system, the Washington DC-based joint venture offers lobbying and consulting services to companies needing to understand and impact the reform debate." Rangel's Ways & Means Committee was one of three with jurisdiction over the bill.
Charles Rangel AP – Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., leaves his office to go to a vote on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, … By LARRY MARGASAK and LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writers Larry Margasak And Laurie Kellman, Associated Press Writers – 4 mins ago
WASHINGTON – House investigators accused veteran New York Rep. Charles Rangel of 13 violations of congressional ethics standards on Thursday, throwing a cloud over his four-decade political career and raising worries for fellow Democrats about the fall elections.
The allegations — which include failure to report rental income from vacation property in the Dominican Republic and more than $600,000 in other income on his congressional financial disclosure statements — came as lawyers for Rangel and the House ethics committee worked on a plea deal.
One was struck, people familiar with the talks said, but Republicans indicated it was too late.
The deal between the lawyers will have little meaning if the committee members don't approve it, and Republicans said at the proceeding they were insisting on going forward with a trial. The panel is evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans.
"Mr. Rangel was given multiple opportunities to settle this matter. Instead, he chose to move forward to the public trial phase," said Rep. Jo Bonner of Alabama, the senior Republican on the ethics panel
Chairman Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., has made clear that she wants the committee to be unanimous — leaving little chance for agreement without Rangel capitulating on virtually all counts.
Many Democrats had urged Rangel to settle the case to avoid the prospect of televised hearings right before November congressional elections that will determine which party controls Congress next year.
However, as Friday's public airing of the charges drew nearer, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi seem resigned to the case proceeding.
"The chips will have to fall where they may politically," she told reporters. Pursuing ethics cases against House members is "a serious responsibility that we have," she said.
The alleged violations of House standards of conduct also include using congressional letterhead to solicit donations for a center for public service to bear Rangel's name on the New York campus of the City College of New York.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Rangel is trying to negotiate a deal right now and that's the problem keeping all the thieves in Congress, they think that they're above the law.
Where is Senator Kerry on this? lol. If any regular sheeple attempted this they would already be in prison. Try not reporting $75,000 in income or hogging several NYC rent controlled apartments using one for an office. So much for his concern for the people? His supporters are all hiding in the tall grass.
Obama: Time for Rangel to end career "with dignity"
President Barack Obama has kept mum on the fate of Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) for days -- but he tells CBS News that it's time for the embattled 80-year-old former Ways and Means Chairman to end his career "with dignity."
"I think Charlie Rangel served a very long time and served-- his constituents very well. But these-- allegations are very troubling," Obama told Harry Smith in an interview to be aired on the "Early Show." and first broadcast on the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric.
"And he'll-- he's somebody who's at the end of his career. Eighty years old. I'm sure that-- what he wants is to be able to-- end his career with dignity. And my hope is that-- it happens. "
Below is a summary, and excerpts, from the Statement of Alleged Violations.
1. Conduct in violation of the solicitation and gift ban
* "Between 2005 and 2008 Respondent engaged in a pattern of soliciting for donations and other things of value on behalf of the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Policy at the City College of New York." * "The entities solicited were seeking official action from the House..." * "Respondent's conduct was not within the parameters established by the Standards Committee for solicitations on behalf of charitable organizations."
2. Conduct in violations of Code of Ethics for Government Service (clause 5)
* A member is never supposed to give special favors or accept things that may make it look like it could sway the member in his official capacity. * "...Respondent made numerous requests for support for the Rangel Center. Those requests were directed at entities and individuals whose interests could be affected by the legislative and oversight activities of Respondent in his capacity as a member of congress." * "Contributions were made by persons with interests before the Ways and Means Committee..." * "Contributions to the Rangel Center provided a benefit to Respondent."
3. Conduct in violation of the House gift rule
* "Respondent solicited contributions for the Rangel Center and the Rangel Center did receive contributions." * "Respondent has a personal interest in the Rangel Center... will provide him with an office, and allows him to perpetuate his legacy, including the storing and archiving of his papers." * "Contributions to the Rangel Center constituted indirect gifts attributable to Respondent."
4. Conduct in violation of postal service laws and franking commission regulations
* A member is not allowed to use the frank for any association, committee or organization. Only for official congressional duties. * "Respondent used his frank for the benefit of a charitable organization and for solicitation of funds."
5. Conduct in violation of any franking statute
* "Respondent used his frank on materials that were not official business."
6. Conduct in violation of House Office Building Commission's Regulations
* Not allowed to use congressional staff to solicit contributions on House of Representatives property. * "Respondent and his staff drafted solicitation letters and performed other work related to solicitations on property of the U.S. Representatives."
7. Conduct in violation of the purpose law and the Member's Congressional Handbook
* Members' allowances include official mail costs/staff salaries. It is against the law to misuse federal funds. The members' handbook says the allowance can only be used for official purposes. * "Respondent used House employees and other official House resources for work related to the Rangel center." * "Those resources included the use of staff time, use of telephones and House email accounts, other office supplies, and of the frank. Those expenses were paid using the MRA." MRA is the Member's Representational Allowance.
8. Conduct in violation of the Letterhead Rules
* House rules do not allow anyone not under the direction and control of the House to use the words "Congress of the United States" or "House of Representatives" or "Official Business." * "...Respondent sent letters related to the Rangel Center on letterhead bearing the words 'Congress of the United States' and 'House of Representatives.'"
9. Conduct in violation of the Ethics in Government Act (EIGA) and House Rule 16
* EIGA requires members to file full and complete Financial Disclosure statements on income, rent on property, gifts and other financial assets. If a statement has to be amended, the committee says it's in good faith if done by the end of the year and an explanation as to why. Fail on one of those, and the amendment is not considered in good faith. * "Respondent engaged in a pattern of submitting Financial Disclosure statements that were incomplete and inaccurate." * "Respondent failed to report numerous items required to be reported... from 1998 through 2008." * "Respondent erroneously reported numerous required to be reported under the EIGA during the period 1998 through 2007." * "Respondent's amendments...1998 through 2007 were not filed within the close of the year...Respondent's amendments were not timely." * "Respondent's amendments...1998 through 2007 were filed after the committee...had established an investigative subcommittee with respect to Respondent's conduct, including his reporting of the Punta Cana villa on his Financial Disclosure Statements..." * "Respondent has failed to establish that the amendments to his Financial Disclosure statements for the calendar years 1998 through 2007 were submitted in good faith." * "Respondent's conduct violated the EIGA."
10. Conduct in violation of Code of ethics for Government Service (clause 5)
* Here's another case where a person in government is not supposed to give special privileges to anyone or accept favors or benefits that could look like it might influence his actions as a Representative. * "Respondent received a rent stabilized residential apartment at Lenox Terrace, which he used as office space for Rangel for Congress and National Leadership PAC." * "Terms of the lease for the rent stabilized apartment provided that the apartment was to be used 'for living purposes only.'" * "Respondent's acceptance of that rent-stabilized apartment for nonresidential purposes in contravention of the terms of the lease was a favor or benefit to him..." * "Respondent accepted the favor or benefit from Olnick under circumstances that might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of his governmental duties."
11. Conduct in violation of Code of Ethics for Government Service (clause 2)
* Code of ethics for government service states that people in government must uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States. * "Respondent's failure to report rental income related to Punta Cana on his Federal income tax returns violated the Internal Revenue Code." * As already stated above, Rangel also violated Franking Regulations, House Office Building Commission's Regulations, Member's Congressional Handbook, Ethics in Government Act and the Internal Revenue Code and other violations.
12. Conduct in Violation of the Code of Conduct: Letter and Spirit of House Rules
* House Rules state that a Member "shall adhere to the spirit and the letter of the Rules of the House..." * Respondent's conduct violated this rule.
13. Conduct in Violation of the Code of Conduct: Conduct Reflecting Discredibility on the House
* House Rules state that a Member "shall behave at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House." * Subcommittee finds Rangel violated this with the following offenses:
1. -Improper solicitations of potential donors to the Rangel Center
-Acceptance of favors and benefits from donors to the Rangel Center in a way that some might see as influence the job he does in Congress
-Knowingly accepting indirect gifts from donors to the Rangel Center
-Improperly using franking privileges to raise money for the Rangel Center
-Writing solicitations for the Rangel Center on House property
-Misusing House resources- staff, phones, e-mail and franking for work related to the Rangel Center. 2. -Misuse of Congressional letterhead to solicit donations to the Rangel Center
-Failing to disclose, from 1998 to 2007, full and complete financial statements 3. -Rangel's pattern of submitting Financial Disclosure statements that were incomplete and inaccurate
-Failing to make sure his Financial Disclosure statements were complete and accurate
-Violating the Ethics in Government Act
-Failing to report rental income from his villa in the Dominican Republic on his Federal income tax returns from 1998 to 2006 4. -Violating the Internal Revenue Code
5. -Receiving rent stabilized apartment, using it for campaign activities when the lease stated it should be used only for living purposes
6. -Accepting the rent stabilized apartment in a way that could look like he was influence in his government activities by the deal
7. -By breaking the law, Rangel violated the Code of Ethics for Government Service
8. -By not adhering to the letter and spirit of House Rules
-"Respondent's pattern of indifference or disregard for the laws, rules and regulations of the United States and the House of Representatives is a serious violation"
9. -"Respondent's actions and accumulation of actions reflected poorly on the institution of the House and, thereby, brought discredit to the House"
Logged
Where is Senator Kerry on this? lol. If any regular sheeple attempted this they would already be in prison. Try not reporting $75,000 in income or hogging several NYC rent controlled apartments using one for an office. So much for his concern for the people? His supporters are all hiding in the tall grass. 
