Jump to content

How much longer is this crook going to stay in office?


flaps15

Recommended Posts

Politico

 

 

"This is no longer just a problem for Rangel. It’s a problem for Pelosi and all House Democrats, including Brian Higgins of Buffalo and Louise Slaughter of Fairport. It’s a management problem now because Rangel’s shortcomings can— and will—be used to undermine the Democratic majority’s claim to power." - Glenn Thrush

Link to post
Share on other sites
Politico

 

 

"This is no longer just a problem for Rangel. It’s a problem for Pelosi and all House Democrats, including Brian Higgins of Buffalo and Louise Slaughter of Fairport. It’s a management problem now because Rangel’s shortcomings can— and will—be used to undermine the Democratic majority’s claim to power." - Glenn Thrush

 

He'll step down about 2 minutes after Barney does.

 

 

Rhymes with Lever..................

Link to post
Share on other sites

But that's the rub, isn't it? What makes him "my people" (or not) to his constituents? To so many, it's his party choice. I'd bet that if Tom Delay ran again, he'd win...and that is entirely up to the people in his district. In 2006 and 2008, I voted against my incumbent Congressman. In 06, it was a 20 something year incumbent ® and in 2008 it was against a spineless one term (D). The reason was the same: their votes indicated that they were not representing me as I wished. Now, I wish I had my 2006 vote back, but we can't have that....

 

So my question is, what makes your Congressman "your people"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

dude! not even a total fucking moron misses half thier assets on a return! which means, yes you guessed it, the only rational conclusion is deliberate tax evasion........

 

That said, I bet if the IRS audited every single one of the memebers of Congress, way more than half would fail with egregious issues like Rangel....that place is a cess pool....

Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's the rub, isn't it? What makes him "my people" (or not) to his constituents? To so many, it's his party choice. I'd bet that if Tom Delay ran again, he'd win...and that is entirely up to the people in his district. In 2006 and 2008, I voted against my incumbent Congressman. In 06, it was a 20 something year incumbent ® and in 2008 it was against a spineless one term (D). The reason was the same: their votes indicated that they were not representing me as I wished. Now, I wish I had my 2006 vote back, but we can't have that....

 

So my question is, what makes your Congressman "your people"?

 

I disagree - I could care less if he resigns as a representative, but he should NOT be in a leadership position for ALL citizens. Certainly not in charge of the House Ways and Means committee with tax issues of this nature. I agree if his people want to keep on re electing him that is their choice. Funny that you bring up Delay, because he did step down from his leadership position and later withdrew from running, yet I do not believe he was ever convicted of any wrong doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The guy definitely was sleazy with his eponymous charity and might be guilty of anything, but, as I understand it, this was a government financial disclosure form, not a tax return--you don't report assets on a tax return. Has anyone identified a COI in regard to these holdings?

Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's the rub, isn't it? What makes him "my people" (or not) to his constituents? To so many, it's his party choice. I'd bet that if Tom Delay ran again, he'd win...and that is entirely up to the people in his district. In 2006 and 2008, I voted against my incumbent Congressman. In 06, it was a 20 something year incumbent ® and in 2008 it was against a spineless one term (D). The reason was the same: their votes indicated that they were not representing me as I wished. Now, I wish I had my 2006 vote back, but we can't have that....

 

So my question is, what makes your Congressman "your people"?

 

I disagree - I could care less if he resigns as a representative, but he should NOT be in a leadership position for ALL citizens. Certainly not in charge of the House Ways and Means committee with tax issues of this nature. I agree if his people want to keep on re electing him that is their choice. Funny that you bring up Delay, because he did step down from his leadership position and later withdrew from running, yet I do not believe he was ever convicted of any wrong doing.

So what makes a congressman "your people"?

Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's the rub, isn't it? What makes him "my people" (or not) to his constituents? To so many, it's his party choice. I'd bet that if Tom Delay ran again, he'd win...and that is entirely up to the people in his district. In 2006 and 2008, I voted against my incumbent Congressman. In 06, it was a 20 something year incumbent ® and in 2008 it was against a spineless one term (D). The reason was the same: their votes indicated that they were not representing me as I wished. Now, I wish I had my 2006 vote back, but we can't have that....

 

So my question is, what makes your Congressman "your people"?

 

I disagree - I could care less if he resigns as a representative, but he should NOT be in a leadership position for ALL citizens. Certainly not in charge of the House Ways and Means committee with tax issues of this nature. I agree if his people want to keep on re electing him that is their choice. Funny that you bring up Delay, because he did step down from his leadership position and later withdrew from running, yet I do not believe he was ever convicted of any wrong doing.

So what makes a congressman "your people"?

I stated "his people" meaning those that live in his district and vote for him. But you knew that so try addressing the leadership issue instead of being cute.

Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's the rub, isn't it? What makes him "my people" (or not) to his constituents? To so many, it's his party choice. I'd bet that if Tom Delay ran again, he'd win...and that is entirely up to the people in his district. In 2006 and 2008, I voted against my incumbent Congressman. In 06, it was a 20 something year incumbent ® and in 2008 it was against a spineless one term (D). The reason was the same: their votes indicated that they were not representing me as I wished. Now, I wish I had my 2006 vote back, but we can't have that....

 

So my question is, what makes your Congressman "your people"?

 

I disagree - I could care less if he resigns as a representative, but he should NOT be in a leadership position for ALL citizens. Certainly not in charge of the House Ways and Means committee with tax issues of this nature. I agree if his people want to keep on re electing him that is their choice. Funny that you bring up Delay, because he did step down from his leadership position and later withdrew from running, yet I do not believe he was ever convicted of any wrong doing.

So what makes a congressman "your people"?

 

Sex tapes with farm animals, crime scene DNA and my favorite - a copy of their tax return

Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's the rub, isn't it? What makes him "my people" (or not) to his constituents? To so many, it's his party choice. I'd bet that if Tom Delay ran again, he'd win...and that is entirely up to the people in his district. In 2006 and 2008, I voted against my incumbent Congressman. In 06, it was a 20 something year incumbent ® and in 2008 it was against a spineless one term (D). The reason was the same: their votes indicated that they were not representing me as I wished. Now, I wish I had my 2006 vote back, but we can't have that....

 

So my question is, what makes your Congressman "your people"?

 

I disagree - I could care less if he resigns as a representative, but he should NOT be in a leadership position for ALL citizens. Certainly not in charge of the House Ways and Means committee with tax issues of this nature. I agree if his people want to keep on re electing him that is their choice. Funny that you bring up Delay, because he did step down from his leadership position and later withdrew from running, yet I do not believe he was ever convicted of any wrong doing.

So what makes a congressman "your people"?

I stated "his people" meaning those that live in his district and vote for him. But you knew that so try addressing the leadership issue instead of being cute.

 

Careful here - the thought police are watching and might tag you as a racist......

Link to post
Share on other sites
The guy definitely was sleazy with his eponymous charity and might be guilty of anything, but, as I understand it, this was a government financial disclosure form, not a tax return--you don't report assets on a tax return. Has anyone identified a COI in regard to these holdings?

 

Well, your assets do indirectly affect return with respect to interest, dividends, gain or loss on disposal of the assets, etc right?Also there are a lot of people that use family limited partnerships, and other similar sturctures, which I think can affect personal returns with respect to depcreciation of assets...

 

So if rangel is ignoring effectively half his net worth some of which would be interest accruing accounts, equities, etc. (and I believe the the initial bust was around some investment property that was generating rental income right? could be wrong here though, but seem to remember that being the first faux-pas). Then he is de-facto falsefying his returns.

 

When E&Y was doing personal returns for me and the biz at my previous company, they were very explicit about requiring a separate document that I was required to execute that laid out every sheltering scheme, approach, etc that had been deemed out of bounds by IRS adn I had to certify I was not using or particpatiing in, and that I had to specifically certify that I had disclosed all assets, holdings, etc.. If I did not sign off on that doc, they would not sign off on the returns, period.

 

Just no way in hell this is anything other than total attempt to evade taxes, sorry. That's before you get to any ethical considerations with respect to government service, standards, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The guy definitely was sleazy with his eponymous charity and might be guilty of anything, but, as I understand it, this was a government financial disclosure form, not a tax return--you don't report assets on a tax return. Has anyone identified a COI in regard to these holdings?

Give me a break here is a break down:

 

New records revealed this week that embattled Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., failed to report up to $1.3 million in outside income on financial-disclosure forms he filed between 2002 and 2006. Rangel, who is chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which writes tax code, also failed to reveal $3 million in various business transactions over the same period, according to the documents.

 

While Rangel's office says he did not conceal any outside income from the IRS and is paid up on his taxes, the New York Post reported on Thursday that he is in arrears on property taxes on two plots of land he owns in New Jersey

 

Tack on the original hiding of income was from the IRS : http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washingt...r_villa_income/

Link to post
Share on other sites
The guy definitely was sleazy with his eponymous charity and might be guilty of anything, but, as I understand it, this was a government financial disclosure form, not a tax return--you don't report assets on a tax return. Has anyone identified a COI in regard to these holdings?

Give me a break here is a break down:

 

New records revealed this week that embattled Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., failed to report up to $1.3 million in outside income on financial-disclosure forms he filed between 2002 and 2006. Rangel, who is chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which writes tax code, also failed to reveal $3 million in various business transactions over the same period, according to the documents.

 

While Rangel's office says he did not conceal any outside income from the IRS and is paid up on his taxes, the New York Post reported on Thursday that he is in arrears on property taxes on two plots of land he owns in New Jersey

 

Tack on the original hiding of income was from the IRS : http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washingt...r_villa_income/

These guys are allowed as much outside income as they want, as long as they don't appear to be using their offices to enrich themselves. The absence of any specifics in that regards speaks for itself, in my opinion. If there's a COI or criminal activity, let's hear about it.

 

I don't like the him, but he doesn't appear to be a Jefferson or a Cunningham, or even a Murtha, yet. Nondisclosure gets guys like me fired, but I don't think you're going to get very far with him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The guy definitely was sleazy with his eponymous charity and might be guilty of anything, but, as I understand it, this was a government financial disclosure form, not a tax return--you don't report assets on a tax return. Has anyone identified a COI in regard to these holdings?

Refresh my memory, Wasn’t Ted Stevens found guilty of failing to report gifts on financial disclosure forms? (charges later dropped for prosecutorial misconduct). Didn't work out well for Ted but I suspect forgetful Charlie will never be charged with anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The guy definitely was sleazy with his eponymous charity and might be guilty of anything, but, as I understand it, this was a government financial disclosure form, not a tax return--you don't report assets on a tax return. Has anyone identified a COI in regard to these holdings?

Refresh my memory, Wasn’t Ted Stevens found guilty of failing to report gifts on financial disclosure forms? (charges later dropped for prosecutorial misconduct). Didn't work out well for Ted but I suspect forgetful Charlie will never be charged with anything.

The gifts were held to create a COI. All I'm asking, in complete ignorance, is what the alleged COI is?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As x racer noted Rangels problems are from his own blatent dishonesty --tax evasion issues are among them along {false claims of residency in NY and illegal write offs based on false info } ] along with the congressional disclosure of finances {usually based on tax returns } . Somehow negligence and Charlie just not remembering villas and huge sums of money just doesn't ring true .

 

Others here in typical deflection tactic mode from corrupt D party politicians try to ignore the corrupt acts and asks 'WHAT ARE YOUR PEOPLE"

 

All people should be concerned when the leading congressman that oversees the IRS and writes tax legislation cheats on his own taxes and congressional disclosure forms then claims ignorance of those laws .

 

The hypocrisy and double standards of the left are really something --imagine how many would be screaming if this were a politician with an R party affiliation . Instead the deflect and make excuses and obfuscate the issue .

 

Do the nation a favor and go after corrupt politicians regardless of party and maybe someday we will no longer have the worst political class in outr nations history trying to foul up and intrude ino every aspect of our lives .

 

BUFFALO NEWS: Rangel Should Resign. “Charlie Rangel always has been an entertaining congressman. And not to damn him with faint praise, an effective one, too. But the New York City representative, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, is having a problem with his numbers as they relate to the truth. He now can be neither entertaining nor effective. He needs to go. If he won’t, Speaker Nancy Pelosi needs to push him.”

http://www.buffalonews.com/149/story/780022.html

 

Wall Street Journal: The Absent-Minded Chairman. “When normal people happen to ‘find’ their own money, it might mean a twenty left in a winter coat, or discovering change beneath the sofa cushions. But if you’re Charlie Rangel, it means doubling your net worth.”

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB4000142405...0192072820.html

 

Plus, Jail Time For Rangel?

 

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2009/08/29/9780/

 

rangel.jpg

 

you better not cheat on YOUR taxes because we just hired 1000 more IRS agents to go after you --

 

taxes are for the little people --not polis like me .

Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's the rub, isn't it? What makes him "my people" (or not) to his constituents? To so many, it's his party choice. I'd bet that if Tom Delay ran again, he'd win...and that is entirely up to the people in his district. In 2006 and 2008, I voted against my incumbent Congressman. In 06, it was a 20 something year incumbent ® and in 2008 it was against a spineless one term (D). The reason was the same: their votes indicated that they were not representing me as I wished. Now, I wish I had my 2006 vote back, but we can't have that....

 

So my question is, what makes your Congressman "your people"?

 

I disagree - I could care less if he resigns as a representative, but he should NOT be in a leadership position for ALL citizens. Certainly not in charge of the House Ways and Means committee with tax issues of this nature. I agree if his people want to keep on re electing him that is their choice. Funny that you bring up Delay, because he did step down from his leadership position and later withdrew from running, yet I do not believe he was ever convicted of any wrong doing.

So what makes a congressman "your people"?

I stated "his people" meaning those that live in his district and vote for him. But you knew that so try addressing the leadership issue instead of being cute.

I am not trying to be cute. I am trying to understand what motivates someone other than myself. Sorry I bothered.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The guy definitely was sleazy with his eponymous charity and might be guilty of anything, but, as I understand it, this was a government financial disclosure form, not a tax return--you don't report assets on a tax return. Has anyone identified a COI in regard to these holdings?

Give me a break here is a break down:

 

New records revealed this week that embattled Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., failed to report up to $1.3 million in outside income on financial-disclosure forms he filed between 2002 and 2006. Rangel, who is chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which writes tax code, also failed to reveal $3 million in various business transactions over the same period, according to the documents.

 

While Rangel's office says he did not conceal any outside income from the IRS and is paid up on his taxes, the New York Post reported on Thursday that he is in arrears on property taxes on two plots of land he owns in New Jersey

 

Tack on the original hiding of income was from the IRS : http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washingt...r_villa_income/

These guys are allowed as much outside income as they want, as long as they don't appear to be using their offices to enrich themselves. The absence of any specifics in that regards speaks for itself, in my opinion. If there's a COI or criminal activity, let's hear about it.

 

I don't like the him, but he doesn't appear to be a Jefferson or a Cunningham, or even a Murtha, yet. Nondisclosure gets guys like me fired, but I don't think you're going to get very far with him.

 

Well that is the hypocrisy of the left (not throwing this at you personally) Do as I say not as I do. When a republican is accused of anything illegal or unethical the howls erupt from the media and the left for their proverbial head on a platter. When it is one of their own you need a conviction with jail time to get then out of office.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well that is the hypocrisy of the left (not throwing this at you personally) Do as I say not as I do. When a republican is accused of anything illegal or unethical the howls erupt from the media and the left for their proverbial head on a platter. When it is one of their own you need a conviction with jail time to get then out of office.

I appreciate being left out of those generalizations. Which R legislators have been canned for nondisclosure?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well that is the hypocrisy of the left (not throwing this at you personally) Do as I say not as I do. When a republican is accused of anything illegal or unethical the howls erupt from the media and the left for their proverbial head on a platter. When it is one of their own you need a conviction with jail time to get then out of office.

I appreciate being left out of those generalizations. Which R legislators have been canned for nondisclosure?

Not limiting it to disclosure although he was found to owe the IRS $5000 on undisclosed income.

Ok lets cover a few Bill Clinton holds a rally after being impeached Nixon resigned over the call to impeach ; Senator Robert Byrd refers to White Niggers no action Senator Trent Lott makes a positive statement about Strum Thurman at his 100th birthday major uproar ; Foley is forced to resign over gay letters Barney Franks live in lover runs a prostitution ring out of Barney's house No action

Link to post
Share on other sites
Politico

 

 

"This is no longer just a problem for Rangel. It’s a problem for Pelosi and all House Democrats, including Brian Higgins of Buffalo and Louise Slaughter of Fairport. It’s a management problem now because Rangel’s shortcomings can— and will—be used to undermine the Democratic majority’s claim to power." - Glenn Thrush

 

He'll step down about 2 minutes after Barney does.

 

 

Rhymes with Lever..................

 

 

 

 

Its a good thing these scumballs can't be hanged for blatent lies, else Chris Dodd's rotting corpse would be swinging from the capital bldg archway.

 

You talkin' about me, Thrush an Booth, or Barney, Rangel and Pelosi? <_<:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's the rub, isn't it? What makes him "my people" (or not) to his constituents? To so many, it's his party choice. I'd bet that if Tom Delay ran again, he'd win...and that is entirely up to the people in his district. In 2006 and 2008, I voted against my incumbent Congressman. In 06, it was a 20 something year incumbent ® and in 2008 it was against a spineless one term (D). The reason was the same: their votes indicated that they were not representing me as I wished. Now, I wish I had my 2006 vote back, but we can't have that....

 

So my question is, what makes your Congressman "your people"?

 

Except Delay stepped down and isn't running again. This is the difference between Republicans and Democrats.

 

The Democrat party is run like a union. No matter how bad the apple is the the union shop protects them. This is why the likes of Murtha, Clinton and Frank are still around.

 

Maybe if they could dance they would follow Delay's example.

Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's the rub, isn't it? What makes him "my people" (or not) to his constituents? To so many, it's his party choice. I'd bet that if Tom Delay ran again, he'd win...and that is entirely up to the people in his district. In 2006 and 2008, I voted against my incumbent Congressman. In 06, it was a 20 something year incumbent ® and in 2008 it was against a spineless one term (D). The reason was the same: their votes indicated that they were not representing me as I wished. Now, I wish I had my 2006 vote back, but we can't have that....

 

So my question is, what makes your Congressman "your people"?

 

Except Delay stepped down and isn't running again. This is the difference between Republicans and Democrats.

 

The Democrat party is run like a union. No matter how bad the apple is the the union shop protects them. This is why the likes of Murtha, Clinton and Frank are still around.

 

Maybe if they could dance they would follow Delay's example.

Like TM, you completely miss the point. Next time I'll translate it into partisan terms that you can understand.

 

So what makes a congressman "your people"?

Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's the rub, isn't it? What makes him "my people" (or not) to his constituents? To so many, it's his party choice. I'd bet that if Tom Delay ran again, he'd win...and that is entirely up to the people in his district. In 2006 and 2008, I voted against my incumbent Congressman. In 06, it was a 20 something year incumbent ® and in 2008 it was against a spineless one term (D). The reason was the same: their votes indicated that they were not representing me as I wished. Now, I wish I had my 2006 vote back, but we can't have that....

 

So my question is, what makes your Congressman "your people"?

 

Except Delay stepped down and isn't running again. This is the difference between Republicans and Democrats.

 

The Democrat party is run like a union. No matter how bad the apple is the the union shop protects them. This is why the likes of Murtha, Clinton and Frank are still around.

 

Maybe if they could dance they would follow Delay's example.

Like TM, you completely miss the point. Next time I'll translate it into partisan terms that you can understand.

 

So what makes a congressman "your people"?

 

Dredging up Delay wasn't partisan? My bad.

 

I don't have a people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
But that's the rub, isn't it? What makes him "my people" (or not) to his constituents? To so many, it's his party choice. I'd bet that if Tom Delay ran again, he'd win...and that is entirely up to the people in his district. In 2006 and 2008, I voted against my incumbent Congressman. In 06, it was a 20 something year incumbent ® and in 2008 it was against a spineless one term (D). The reason was the same: their votes indicated that they were not representing me as I wished. Now, I wish I had my 2006 vote back, but we can't have that....

 

So my question is, what makes your Congressman "your people"?

 

Except Delay stepped down and isn't running again. This is the difference between Republicans and Democrats.

 

The Democrat party is run like a union. No matter how bad the apple is the the union shop protects them. This is why the likes of Murtha, Clinton and Frank are still around.

 

Maybe if they could dance they would follow Delay's example.

Like TM, you completely miss the point. Next time I'll translate it into partisan terms that you can understand.

 

So what makes a congressman "your people"?

 

Dredging up Delay wasn't partisan? My bad.

 

I don't have a people.

No. It wasn't. Perhaps you should read the post (and the conversation leading up to it) before jumping off the handle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The guy definitely was sleazy with his eponymous charity and might be guilty of anything, but, as I understand it, this was a government financial disclosure form, not a tax return--you don't report assets on a tax return. Has anyone identified a COI in regard to these holdings?

Refresh my memory, Wasn't Ted Stevens found guilty of failing to report gifts on financial disclosure forms? (charges later dropped for prosecutorial misconduct). Didn't work out well for Ted but I suspect forgetful Charlie will never be charged with anything.

 

Ted Stevens = guilty before a trial, while Charlie Rangel is just forgetful.

 

Sandy Burger goes to the National Archives and tries to steal incriminating documents, hiding them in his socks, and he is said to be "sloppy."

 

Bill Clinton is impeached for lying and is hailed as a hero. Bob Livingston resigns for admitting an affair. Both occur within weeks, yet two totally different outcomes.

 

The Barney Frank ticket fixing and gay prostitution ring story is an "old story", we are told.

 

Murtha and Abscam? Oh, that's old news too.

 

Dodd gets preferential loan treatment from a company regulated by the senate? No big deal. Ditto for the campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie directed to Chris, Barney, and Obama.

 

I know, this reply will get jumped on by those with their looong list of Republican wrongdoers. But rightly so those people resigned immediately or did not run again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keeping pressure up on corruption and corrupt politicians is the only way to get a better political class --we currently have the worst political class in our nations history and we are all suffering the results of their corrupt acts .

 

As poll numbers drop for Ds and Obama one would think they would address corruption but instead offer cute deflection as they habitually always have and the corruption gets worse .

 

Barney Frank most noted for having a prostitution ring out of his Washington DC apt as head of banking and finances { training gay prostitutes was his prerequisit }

 

Dodds who wrote the secretive stimulus bill pushed through full of bonuses and billions for cronies now holds the health care bill senate version secret and hopes nothing changes --Dodds was given 75,000 off his morgage by countrywide --A F-MAE morgage giant bailout SUB } and is head of banking and oversight of F MAE and those he pased out huge bonuses to then lied about and after caught in his lies said }I don't know how it got in there" {the bill he wrote} .

 

Charlie Rangel --head of the ways and means comm that writes tax laws --a blatent tax cheat --his excuse ? --I am ignorant of the law and "forgot" .

 

The clock is ticking on tax cheat Charlie Rangel.

 

 

It hasn’t gotten much attention amid news of Ted Kennedy, Obamacare and the worsening outlook in Afghanistan, but an extraordinary situation is developing in the House of Representatives. With each passing day, it’s becoming more clear that the powerful committee chairman in charge of writing America’s tax laws is a financial wheeler-dealer, a serial asset-hider, and a tax offender. . . . Last week, we learned that Rangel filed a grossly misleading financial disclosure report for 2007 — failing to report at least half a million dollars in assets.

 

It turns out Rangel had a credit union account worth at least $250,000 and maybe as much as $500,000 — and didn’t report it. He had investment accounts worth about the same, which he also didn’t report. Ditto for three pieces of property in New Jersey.

 

Beyond that, we’ve learned that Rangel has failed to report assets totaling more than $1 million on legally required financial disclosure forms going back to at least 2001.

 

The news comes on top of revelations last year that Rangel didn’t report — and didn’t pay taxes on — income from a villa in the Caribbean. In that matter, the Internal Revenue Service gave him sweetheart treatment; Rangel paid about $10,000 in back taxes but was not required to pay any penalty or interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ted Stevens = guilty before a trial, while Charlie Rangel is just forgetful.

 

Sandy Burger goes to the National Archives and tries to steal incriminating documents, hiding them in his socks, and he is said to be "sloppy."

 

Bill Clinton is impeached for lying and is hailed as a hero. Bob Livingston resigns for admitting an affair. Both occur within weeks, yet two totally different outcomes.

 

The Barney Frank ticket fixing and gay prostitution ring story is an "old story", we are told.

 

Murtha and Abscam? Oh, that's old news too.

 

Dodd gets preferential loan treatment from a company regulated by the senate? No big deal. Ditto for the campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie directed to Chris, Barney, and Obama.

 

I know, this reply will get jumped on by those with their looong list of Republican wrongdoers. But rightly so those people resigned immediately or did not run again.

Ted Stevens ran and was defeated. Got anything else? I mean other than Republicans are Good, Democrats are Bad?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ted Stevens = guilty before a trial, while Charlie Rangel is just forgetful.

 

Sandy Burger goes to the National Archives and tries to steal incriminating documents, hiding them in his socks, and he is said to be "sloppy."

 

Bill Clinton is impeached for lying and is hailed as a hero. Bob Livingston resigns for admitting an affair. Both occur within weeks, yet two totally different outcomes.

 

The Barney Frank ticket fixing and gay prostitution ring story is an "old story", we are told.

 

Murtha and Abscam? Oh, that's old news too.

 

Dodd gets preferential loan treatment from a company regulated by the senate? No big deal. Ditto for the campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie directed to Chris, Barney, and Obama.

 

I know, this reply will get jumped on by those with their looong list of Republican wrongdoers. But rightly so those people resigned immediately or did not run again.

Ted Stevens ran and was defeated. Got anything else? I mean other than Republicans are Good, Democrats are Bad?

 

 

 

Sort of the yin to your yang that Democrats are Good and Conservatives are monkey hurlings

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ted Stevens = guilty before a trial, while Charlie Rangel is just forgetful.

 

Sandy Burger goes to the National Archives and tries to steal incriminating documents, hiding them in his socks, and he is said to be "sloppy."

 

Bill Clinton is impeached for lying and is hailed as a hero. Bob Livingston resigns for admitting an affair. Both occur within weeks, yet two totally different outcomes.

 

The Barney Frank ticket fixing and gay prostitution ring story is an "old story", we are told.

 

Murtha and Abscam? Oh, that's old news too.

 

Dodd gets preferential loan treatment from a company regulated by the senate? No big deal. Ditto for the campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie directed to Chris, Barney, and Obama.

 

I know, this reply will get jumped on by those with their looong list of Republican wrongdoers. But rightly so those people resigned immediately or did not run again.

Ted Stevens ran and was defeated. Got anything else? I mean other than Republicans are Good, Democrats are Bad?

 

 

 

Sort of the yin to your yang that Democrats are Good and Conservatives are monkey hurlings

He said "Republicans" not "Conservatives." They are very different things.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ted Stevens = guilty before a trial, while Charlie Rangel is just forgetful.

 

Sandy Burger goes to the National Archives and tries to steal incriminating documents, hiding them in his socks, and he is said to be "sloppy."

 

Bill Clinton is impeached for lying and is hailed as a hero. Bob Livingston resigns for admitting an affair. Both occur within weeks, yet two totally different outcomes.

 

The Barney Frank ticket fixing and gay prostitution ring story is an "old story", we are told.

 

Murtha and Abscam? Oh, that's old news too.

 

Dodd gets preferential loan treatment from a company regulated by the senate? No big deal. Ditto for the campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie directed to Chris, Barney, and Obama.

 

I know, this reply will get jumped on by those with their looong list of Republican wrongdoers. But rightly so those people resigned immediately or did not run again.

Ted Stevens ran and was defeated. Got anything else? I mean other than Republicans are Good, Democrats are Bad?

Maybe appropriately defeated, but the fact that he was found guilty of corruption didn't help his electoral prospects, even if charges were later dropped. But all of that is beside the point. Do you think the system is applying the same standard to Rangel as Stevens?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Harlem Congressman Gave Campaign Contributions To 3 Dems On Ethics Committee Charged With Investigating Him

 

"I recognize that all of you have an obligation to ask questions knowing that there's none of you smart enough to frame it in such a way that I'm going to respond," Rangel said.

 

There may be a reason for Rangel's arrogance. CBS 2 HD has discovered that since ethics probes began last year the 79-year-old congressman has given campaign donations to 119 members of Congress, including three of the five Democrats on the House Ethics Committee who are charged with investigating him.

 

 

http://wcbstv.com/local/charles.rangel.ethics.2.1160326.html

 

There is no end to the sleeze in Washington! ;)

 

Cheers,

 

KG

Link to post
Share on other sites

CHARLES RANGEL UPDATE: Staff as “Forgetful” as the Boss.

 

 

Charlie Rangel

 

Two of his top aides are among about a dozen highly paid staffers on the powerful tax-writing Ways and Means Committee who have filed a flurry of amendments correcting their financial-disclosure statements since 2002.

 

Jim Capel, chief of staff for Rangel’s personal office, failed to file any such statements for six years.

 

 

 

BYRON YORK:

 

Health care reform means more power for the IRS. “If the plan envisioned by President Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats is enacted, the primary federal bureaucracy responsible for implementing and enforcing national health care will be an old and familiar one: the Internal Revenue Service. Under the Democrats’ health care proposals, the already powerful — and already feared — IRS would wield even more power and extend its reach even farther into the lives of ordinary Americans, and the presidentially-appointed head of the new health care bureaucracy would have access to confidential IRS information about millions of individual taxpayers.”

 

Well, what could go wrong?

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124260113149028331.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets get some perspective people.

 

We have a Sec. of the Treasury, responsible for the IRS, who was empowered AFTER the revelations of him being a blatant tax cheat were made. A fine example to set. Nobody should be surprised about old Charlie. Now he's holed up and will not even answer simplest straightforward non partisan questions put up to him by any local media.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SOME UPDATES on our Charley

 

CHARLES RANGEL UPDATE: “Ethics” For Sale. “Is Charlie Rangel worried that the House Ethics Committee — notorious for handing out little more than a slap on the wrist for even the most egregious congressional misconduct — might make an exception in his case? Maybe that’s why the embattled Harlem Democrat has been playing Santa Claus with his House colleagues, doling out more campaign cash from his own re-election kitty than almost any other member of Congress. . . . One member of the panel, Peter Welch of Vermont, wisely decided to return his $20,000 gift from Rangel, citing the need for ‘an abundance of caution.’ But the other two — Ben Chandler of Kentucky and G.K. Butterfield of North Carolina — are holding on to Rangel’s largesse, claiming it in no way interferes with their ability to sit in judgment on their benefactor.”

 

 

and

 

POLITICO: Pelosi Loath to Drop The Hammer On Rangel.

 

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/26783.html

 

 

also if you unfamiliar with our dear Charlie as head of ways and means in congress {they write tax law and enforcement }

 

EDITORIAL: Rep. Rangel pushes the envelope of arrogance.

 

 

Rep. Charles Rangel has been in the House, representing Harlem and neighboring environs, since 1971. He chairs the powerful Ways and Means Committee — the outfit that writes our tax laws.

 

It was recently disclosed that Rep. Rangel filed a grossly misleading financial-disclosure report for 2007 — failing to report at least $500,000 in assets.

 

It turns out Rep. Rangel had a credit-union account worth at least $250,000 and maybe as much as $500,000 — and didn’t report it. He had investment accounts worth about the same, which he also didn’t report. Ditto for three pieces of property in New Jersey.

 

Beyond that, it turns out Rep. Rangel failed to report assets totaling more than $1 million on legally required financial-disclosure forms going back to at least 2001.

 

The news comes on top of revelations last year that Rep. Rangel didn’t report — and didn’t pay taxes on — income from a villa in the Caribbean. In that matter, the IRS gave him a sweetheart deal; the congressman paid about $10,000 in back taxes but was not assessed any penalty or interest.

 

Can we have the guy who audited him?

 

 

rangel.jpg

 

"I got 20k in my pocket for you too ! "

Link to post
Share on other sites
Could be a long, long time. Dickface Cheney served 27 years before retiring last year.

 

 

That's just a fuking brilliant comparison there honey................

 

What else do you expect from Saylourbuttboy? Intelligence? Honesty? Yeah....right! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...