Obama Suggests It’s Time for Rangel to End His Career “With Dignity”…Update: Rangel Doesn’t Give a Damn What Obama Thinks…
Calling Dr. Kevorkian…
(Politico) — 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.”
Update:
We have disabled pinging on this post. | Weasel Zippers(Politico) — Frankly, President Obama, Charlie doesn’t give a damn.
From my story on the Obama-Rangel drama:
[A] person close to the Rangel tells POLITICO the embattled Democrat “doesn’t give a damn about what the president thinks about this” and won’t step down.
“[Obama’s] statement comes as no surprise to us,” said a person close to Rangel, speaking on condition of anonymity because he wasn’t authorized to speak publicly for the congressman. “We’re not surprised by this, we’ve known the people in the White House have felt this way for a while, but this doesn’t change anything for us.”
I guess he has the inside scoop, and it ain’t pretty.
Of course, the comment means” Shit, just what I need. Calling Baghdad Bobby for his spin”
If that was the case ,he should have ended it 40 years ago
Nancy doesn’t want this to be an issue during the November campaigns.
it’s a set-up.
they have someone they “really” want waiting in the wings.
scary stuff…..
Its a sham. He can say this now that the “punishment” has been recommended. All smoke and mirrors.
Rangel and dignity are two words that shouldn’t be used together.
If the repubpuks had half a nut they would do what the dems do and delay delay delay and make the old prick suffer but NO they will be nice and let him have his dignity because you know they don’t want to be treated like that if they have a problem. Minority party for ever no matter how many seats they win the do not know now to play the game and never have.
“Very troubling.” Good description of your administration O’Carter. Rangle is just one of your star sychophants. You can’t throw ol Chuckles under the bus now.
Oh forgot, Obama likes to use people and then toss them aside when it suits his agenda.
And we already predicted that Chucky’s good ol boyz would pull his ass out of the kimshie.
Hate to spoil your party.
Not really. I actually like pointing out the stupidity of your posts.
Rangel, though wrong, is small potatoes compared to the CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION of REPUBLICAN Senator Ensign.
Rangel is going to get a strong rebuke. Ensign is going to jail.
God you people are stupid.
So Rangel gets away with it. Now we have Maxine Waters going before the “ethics” committee.
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/30/wow-maxine-waters-chooses-to-face-house-ethics-trial-too/
We’ve got two black members of congress who screwed up so bad that they have to get “punished” for ethics violations (but I bet 433 other members of the house of lords…eh…reps…could also be “punished” for the same damn things), and they are going to walk almost scot-free.
Something’s up. I do not trust these people, any of them. There’s a reason that this is happening right now, and I have a feeling it is going to come down to race somehow or another.
Great pic, FreeThinker!
“With dignity”.
Is Obama suggesting an “end-of-life” scenario for the old man?
anon:
Who fucking cares. First Rangle and now Waters. Whose next? Nancy the witch maybe?
Rangle is small potatoes if you are a Dhimirat. If he were a Republican he’d be walking the plank.
Leftist hypocracy is so entertaining.
“Rangle is small potatoes if you are a Dhimirat. If he were a Republican he’d be walking the plank.”
Let’s see.
Ensign. Criminal investigation. Crickets.
Rangel. Ethics charges. Get the rope.
Go fuck yourself. Idiot.
anon:
Wow. LOL. You’re too funny. Is that the best you got?
Who’s BO kidding? Himself I guess. Dimocrats never retire. They die in office like Kennedy and Byrd.
This is all very interesting. Last year Pelousy dragged her feet on Rangel and every other corrupt D.. Now with midterms coming up they are willing to drop the dime on the career grifter for what? Prove to voters how ethical they are? Sick joke there.
To anon: Me thinks you have soaked too long in the cool-aid hot tub. As far as Ensign goes, if he needs to go to jail, can I put in my order for a license plate now?
You see anon, when you are a true patriot, you don’t care which party their from, just get them OUT. But between Waters and Rangel here comes the race card in 3…2…1… It doesn’t matter what color you are, crooks and cheats come in every color.
I heard ‘O’s BS early this morning…obvious what the leftist dems are doing.
Nothing is going to happen to Rangel or Waters.
I just pray with time some of these arrogant law-breakers are voted out, seem to be an impossibility though with their districts and the idiots that vote for them.
Diamond Girl says: “Nothing is going to happen to Rangel or Waters.
I just pray with time some of these arrogant law-breakers are voted out”
Just what law are they accused of breaking? Not to mention they haven’t been been convicted of anything.
God you people are stupid.
anon:
If we’re so stupid as you say we are, why bother stopping in? Its not like you are changing anyone’s mind about anything. And you never will. So why waste your time here making an elitist ass out of yourself? You can do that just as well somewhere else.
9-11 infidel says:
July 31, 2010 at 4:39 PM
anon:
“If we’re so stupid as you say we are, why bother stopping in?”
Because I care about our country and we’re perilously close to enough idiots believing the rubbish you publish that it’s necessary to set the record straight.
40 years of conservatism has failed. Miserably. It didn’t work. The worst economy since the depression.
And you crybaby losers whine because Obama didn’t fix everything in his first 18 months. Good grief.
anon:
I’m not a lawyer, but with regards to your question about what laws were broken: Rangel failed to disclose nearly $600,000 in income and assets. He is also being accused of accepting benefits and favors from donors that potentially influenced his congressional actions. You are the smart one here, so you can check out which specific laws were broken by Mr. Rangel, a member of “the most honest, open & ethical congress in history”
One last thing: SCREW!
James,
Diamond Girl says: “I just pray with time some of these arrogant law-breakers are voted out”
Diamond Girl, not me, claimed they are law breakers. I claim they are not.
The burden of proof is on you and Diamond Girl. Let’s see it, jackass.
Idiot.
anon:
Love your elitist remarks…as if your remarks were superior to anyone else’s.
LOL. They’re not. And your clever use of the words idiot and jackass…are just so entertaining.
You crack me up.
Anon: There are liberals that visit this site that try to have an intelligent debate about the issues we don’t agree on and they contribute to the discussion of the problems facing us today. Then there are individuals like you.
James and 9-11,
Just as I thought. You’ve got nothing.
They haven’t been convicted nor even charged with any crimes.
God you people are stupid.
Anon: Go run along now, your mother needs help with the dishes
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”
anon:
“Just as I thought. You’ve got nothing.” Arrogant with a hint of contempt. The issue has already been decided as far as we’re concerned. Whether you agree with our position or not is of no consequence.
“God you people are stupid” An elitist assumption. A little on the strawman side.
Got anymore talking points?
Those were good.
end his career with dignity
Or rinse his mouth out with a .45 cal. pistol. Whatever
James T. Kirk says:
Are you really that fucking ignorant James? Really?
You don’t know the difference between an ethics violation and law breaking?
Seriously?
God help us with imbeciles like you voting.
God you people are stupid.
Anon:……..”-By breaking the law, Rangel violated the Code of Ethics for Government Service”. Yes, I do know the difference. I think we are aware that you think we are stupid. I would rather be considered stupid by the likes of you than to be considered a useful idiot. And I did vote, but not for the people that are now in charge. I will let you take the credit for that wonderful choice.
James T. Kirk says:
July 31, 2010 at 7:58 PM
Anon:……..”-By breaking the law, Rangel violated the Code of Ethics for Government Service”. Yes, I do know the difference.
All right. Then I’ll ask one last time.
What law(s) did he break? Dumb ass. He’s ACCUSED of ethics violations you fucking retard. Nothing more.
Good God you people are stupid.
“The pot calling the kettle… (no pun intended).
Integrity, who’s got integrity?