« | »

Facts In Rangel Case Ruled ‘Uncontested’

Tucked away in the ‘NY Region’ section of the New York Times:

Rangel Inquiry Finds Evidence Beyond Dispute

By DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI
November 15, 2010

The House ethics committee ruled on Monday that there was evidence to support 13 counts of misconduct by Representative Charles B. Rangel, and began considering whether to formally convict and recommend punishment against him.

Most of the evidence being supported by Mr. Rangel’s own admissions.

The ruling came after a dramatic and puzzling appearance by Mr. Rangel, 80, in which he protested that he could no longer afford to pay his lawyers, and indignantly walked out of the proceedings, calling them unfair.

Maybe Mr. Rangel is angling for an insanity plea?

Committee members were unmoved. Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California, noted dryly that Mr. Rangel, a Harlem Democrat, was responsible for paying his lawyers and that he had been advised by the committee beginning in 2008 to form a legal defense fund to do so.

Mr. Rangel has so much money he forgets to declare hundreds of thousands of dollars in assets on his taxes. He surely can afford to pay for legal representation.

Of course he wants us to pay for it, instead.

With Mr. Rangel absent, the panel listened to its chief counsel as he methodically presented the evidence against Mr. Rangel, which was based on 549 exhibits, dozens of witness interviews and thousands of pages of financial documents. Members then met in executive session and later announced they had found the facts in the charges against Mr. Rangel to be “uncontested.”

Again, Mr. Rangel gladly admitted to most if not all of the charges. He doesn’t seem to think they are all that damning.

Mr. Rangel’s decision not to mount a public defense startled some members of the committee; he has been publicly expressing his eagerness to tell his side of the story for more than a year, and promising his constituents that he could disprove the accusations.

Mr. Rangel’s constituents appear to enjoy being lied to. In fact, the bigger the lie, the more they like it.

But the walkout spared Mr. Rangel the embarrassment of being publicly confronted with the unsavory details of the case.

And, given that he has not sufficiently challenged the accusations against him, his strategy allowed him instead to plead his case in the court of public opinion by questioning the legitimacy of the process

And he is counting on the news media to help him. As they always have in the past. And as they surely will again. 

An ethics subcommittee is scheduled to reconvene Tuesday morning and consider whether to formally find Mr. Rangel guilty on each of the 13 counts. If he is found guilty on any of the charges, the entire ethics committee would deliberate on a suitable punishment, which ethics experts say would most likely be a letter of reprimand or a formal censure. While the committee has the power to expel, that has happened only rarely and is considered highly unlikely

Mr. Rangel will get the lightest tap upon his heavily bejeweled wrist. The honorable Adam Clayton Powell must be spinning like a top in his (bejeweled) grave.

Mr. Rangel’s complaint on Monday that he could no longer pay for a lawyer frustrated some members of the committee, and underscored the way the case has dragged on…

Ms. Lofgren pointed out that Mr. Rangel, who has significant assets according to his amended financial disclosure report, could find another way to pay for his defense.

“There is no prohibition on an individual using their own funds to pay for counsel,” she said

Who says Ms. Lofgren doesn’t have a sense of humor?

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, November 16th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

6 Responses to “Facts In Rangel Case Ruled ‘Uncontested’”

  1. Liberals Demise says:

    As the media will see it, “Mr. Rangel is just a po’ black man coping a plea in a white mans world.”

    I, Liberals Demise, stand accused and will take the blame so Chuckles the Clown won’t be embarrassed by having to admit to anything. This way the bamboozled and hoodwinked constitutes of Harlem can go on running numbers, selling drugs, pimpin’ and ho’in, just so they can have a clear transparent view of fatso when they vote for him again.
    Criminal Justice…………..or something like it.
    Serves them!!

  2. oldpuppydixie says:

    Rather than dip into the millions he has stolen over his decades in congress, Charlie wants taxpayers or donors to foot the bill for his “defense.” (Although it is thoroughly unnecessary as Rangel knows.) Not much arrogance or corruption in DC, huh!?

  3. proreason says:

    Facts and Rangle in the same sentence. You don’t see that every day.

    But let’s take this opportunity to list most of sthe most successful Black politicians in US history. The list should be pretty enlightening:

    Charlie Rangel
    Jesse Jackson
    Maxime Waters
    Marion Berry
    Al Sharpton
    Emanuel Cleaver
    Sheila Jackson Lee
    Jim Clyburn
    John Conyers
    Keith Ellison
    John Lewis

    These people have power over your life.

  4. GL0120 says:

    Why bother with a trial; can’t a guilty verdict be “Deemed” rendered?

  5. Mithrandir says:

    I have to agree with Rangel on this one.

    1. Any government action which causes you to need legal counsel, should be provided at government cost. Tickets, charges of any kind.

    2. Any private person or entity that causes you to need legal counsel, should be paid for by them if they lose the case, loser pays.

    BUT NO….the legal system is a tool for harassment in which you must pay out of pocket for counsel whether the charges are true or not.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »