A Trial For Charlie

[Lord Jim]

WASHINGTON — A House investigative committee on Thursday charged New York Rep. Charles Rangel with multiple ethics violations, dealing a serious blow to the former Ways and Means chairman and complicating Democrats' election-year outlook.

The House ethics committee won't reveal the specific charges until next Thursday in a public meeting. However, sources familiar with the allegations, who were not authorized to discuss them publicly, said the charges against the 40-year Democrat were related to:

_Rangel's use of official stationery to raise money for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College of New York.

_His use of four rent-subsidized apartment units in New York City. The city's rent stabilization program is supposed to apply to one's primary residence. One had been used as a campaign office, raising a separate question of whether the rent break was an improper gift.

_Rangel's failure to report income as required on his annual financial disclosure forms. The committee had investigated his failure to report income from the lawmaker's rental unit at the Punta Cana Yacht Club in the Dominican Republic. Rangel also belatedly disclosed hundreds of thousands of dollars in investment assets.

The charges by a four-member panel of the House ethics committee sends the case to a House trial. A separate panel of four Republicans and four Democrats will decide whether the violations can be proved by clear and convincing evidence.

Sanctions can range from a damaging committee report to censure by the House and even expulsion, a punishment reserved for only the most egregious violations.

The timing of the announcement ensures that a public airing of Rangel's ethical woes 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, who is tied for fourth in House seniority, told reporters that he believes the allegations have no substance and said, "I look forward to airing this thing."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/2 ... 56277.html

The evidence against Rangel must really be damning for the Dems to pursue this against a senior African American member of Congress in the middle of an election season.

Pelosi and Co. must either have made the political calculation that they're better off getting in front on this despite all the damage it will cause because the alternative would leave them open to charges of a cover up....

Or they miscalculated and figured if they threatened a trial, Rangel would go quietly... Instead he called their bluff....

[Gob]

Why should the fact he is black make any difference?

[Lord Jim]

Objectively it shouldn't...

But politically it does...

African Americans are the Democratic Party's most reliable voting group...they vote 90% Democratic in most elections...

This election cycle, the Dems have a huge problem already with the motivation level of their voters...

There's currently a 15% gap between Democratic voters who say they are "very motivated" to vote this year versus Republicans on the same question....

The level of interest of base voters to turn out is critical, especially in midterm elections with no Presidential race on the ballot.

[Sue U]

I heard a pretty lengthy interview with Rangel on WNYC about a month or so ago, and I gotta say, the way he ducked questions and blustered on, even *I* would vote against him based solely on the attitude displayed. However, there is more than attitude at issue, and I doubt the people of Harlem would be so willing to give him up over what are largely personal financial issues. And I very much doubt the House committee will go any further than wagging a finger and issuing a stern warning. Especially since the standard for conviction is evidently "clear and covincing evidence," which is significantly higher than "preponderance of the evidence" but not quite as high as "beyond a reasonable doubt."

[Lord Jim]

Yesterday I saw Rangel conduct a press conference apparently for the sole purpose of answering no questions. (He did apologize for a boneheaded move he made the day before...he was receiving very pointed questions from a young reporter, that he dealt with in a very high-handed and condescending manner...he apparently thought the guy was either from some right wing blog or FOX...At one point he said, "Well I guess you need to make a name for yourself". Just to show you how Charlie's luck has been going, this was one young reporter who didn't need to make a "name" for himself...He already had one...The reporter was none other than Luke Russert , Capitol Hill reporter for MSNBC...son of the late long time NBC Washington Bureau Chief and Meet The Press host, Tim Russert.... )

I doubt the people of Harlem would be so willing to give him up over what are largely personal financial issues.

The voters in Harlem are the least of the Democrats worries; Rangel or no Rangel they have about the same chance of losing that seat that I have of taking the Gold Medal in The Decathlon at he 2012 Olympic Games...(interesting political footnote on that...the Congressman that Rangel replaced 40 years ago was none other than Adam Clayton Powell, who also fell from power as a result of charges of financial corruption)

But with numbers like this:

The national survey shows that 29 percent of Americans now say they are inclined to support their House representative in November, even lower than in 1994, when voters swept the Democrats out of power in the that chamber after 40 years in the majority.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00016.html

The Dems are between a rock and a hard place on this. The voters in Harlem may not care, but if the Congressional Dems are seen as going too easy on him (and his hearing on Thursday is going to be televised BTW) given the ferocity of the anti-Washington mood in the country, they risk infuriating millions of voters in close districts all over the country, the very last thing they need.

Remember, the core issue in the Rangel case is the charge that the man who chaired the committee responsible for writing the tax laws for everyone else, wasn't paying them himself....A very simple concept to grasp and one that serves as an elegant metaphor for Washington hypocrisy in general....And an easy concept to turn into a potent campaign issue. And his comportment compounds this problem; he makes himself a perfect poster boy for the stereo type of the longtime Washington pol; arrogant and condescending, with deep sense of personal "entitlement". (The Demo Congressional leadership is terrified of the prospect of the Republicans using him to beat the them over the head in the campaign the way they Used Foley on the GOP in 2006)

On the other hand, if they come down hard on Charlie, they risk public condemnation from organizations like the Congressional Black Caucus, (which Rangel helped found) and the NAACP, etc. which as I mentioned before could seriously damage African American voter turn out.

My understanding is that there's still a game of "chicken" going on between Charlie and Pelosi and Co.,...with the Dems hoping that Rangel will either resign or make admissions and accept a censure without a fight, before the hearing next week.

The problem is that some of the things they want him to admit to are crimes, for which he could be prosecuted....

Stay tuned...

[Long Run]

Rangel or no Rangel they have about the same chance of losing that seat that I have of taking the Gold Medal in The Decathlon at he 2012 Olympic Games...(...

My man from Oregon -- Ashton Eaton -- will make sure of that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashton_Eaton