Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Censure: How the Other Half Punishes
Pajamas Media ^ | November 19, 2010 | Mychal Massie

Posted on 11/20/2010 7:18:07 AM PST by Kaslin

Leave it to Congress to create a punishment one is hard-pressed to identify. Rangel deserves much worse, as his crimes would put you or me behind bars.

Charles Rangel has been found guilty of 11 of the 13 charges filed against him, with two of the charges having been rolled into one. As punishment for his crimes/violations, the chief counsel of the House ethics committee, Blake Chisam, recommended a sentence of censure for the disgraced congressman to the full House, despite Rangel’s protestations for “a drop of fairness and mercy” in a prepared statement read prior to the start of the hearing.

Not only does the punishment not fit the crime, it is in fact no punishment at all.

According to AOL News:

Censure is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution — it falls under Congress’ right to adopt resolutions. … Censure is stronger than a rebuke, but not as strong as an expulsion. It is a formal, open reprimand given to a member of Congress for going against its standards of ethics and behavior.

In other words, Rangel must stand in the well of Congress and have the members tell him he behaved poorly. No, really.

Pursuant to the gravity of the charges he was found guilty of, this is beyond nonsense. One charge alone is that Rangel failed to pay taxes for 17 years on Punta Cana, his Dominican luxury beachfront villa that he keeps booked solid year round. With the battery of attorneys, accountants, and financial advisors that people like Rangel have, are we to honestly believe he had a luxury resort property and somehow forget to pay taxes on it, and no one remembered to remind him … for 17 years?

Regarding Obama, Pelosi, et al. banging the drum regarding how the rich aren’t paying their fair share, should we assume they had good old Charlie in mind?

Rep. Jo Bonner, R-AL, was concise in his opening statement to the committee:

For the small business woman who didn’t pay her taxes for 17 years and had the IRS breathing down her back, [we] can only imagine how she would have liked to have the chance to help write the tax code of this country and make it less burdensome and simpler for everyone else.

Rangel’s repeated fallback was that he was only guilty of “sloppy bookkeeping and disorganization.” Not altogether surprisingly, Chisam saw it exactly the same way — even though it sounded as if his tongue caught in his throat as he said it was his opinion that Rangel had not intentionally tried to make gains or use his position as influence.

Of course, that was exactly what he was trying to do. How else are we to interpret his targeting corporations having legislative business before his committee to make donations to a City College of New York building that bears his name? Rangel is about to get what appears to be a complete pass for actions that, as I have previously written, were they committed by you or me, we would be getting our affairs in order prior to a long jail sentence.

To suggest that Rangel “brought discredit” upon the House and that his actions served to “undermine the public confidence” we have in the institution, for him to receive a punishment of having to stand and listen to his colleagues (most of whom are possibly guilty of similar offenses) denigrate him? Its a public charade. We pay for the campaigns of the elected and we pay for their salaries and perks while they are in office. We pay their pensions. Asking them to behave with decorum and integrity, and to deliver justice to one of their own, is not too much to ask.

Even if Rangel were to resign, he would keep his full pension and all his ill-gotten gains. This episode is the face of everything awful in U.S. politics, from the White House to local government.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: charlesrangel; charlierangel; highcrimes; rangel; slaponthewrist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

1 posted on 11/20/2010 7:18:11 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Rangel should be expelled from the House and put in jail.


2 posted on 11/20/2010 7:24:04 AM PST by thethirddegree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
DemocRATS are what is wrong with politics.

"Censure". ROTFL! All the politicians get to stand up and call Charlie the crook a "gunky". They act just like a bunch of school kids.

3 posted on 11/20/2010 7:25:55 AM PST by FlingWingFlyer (He that casts the ballot decides nothing. He that counts the ballots decides everything. - Stalin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

There are one set of laws for the Nobles and another for the Serfs.

Pray for America


4 posted on 11/20/2010 7:26:34 AM PST by bray (A November to Remember)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If the Republicans had half of Hillary’s balls, they would make this a campaign issue. They would bring this up every time taxes are mentioned.


5 posted on 11/20/2010 7:28:56 AM PST by Jeff Chandler (Judas Iscariot - the first social justice advocate. John 12:3-6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

What a sham. James Trafficant committed lesser crimes and they booted him out ! Rangle ought to be booted out straight into jail !


6 posted on 11/20/2010 7:29:55 AM PST by CORedneck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
In the REAL world, out in public, it's called "Embezzlement", and you would be in jail. There's NOTHING in here about $$$$ penalties, paying money back, etc., nor is their a "criminal record", so to speak.

You just stand up and get called names by your "peers" (fellow travelers in the lobbyist/favored kickback schemes).

Is this a great Country, or what? (That is, if you're a politician or live on the public dole).

7 posted on 11/20/2010 7:30:05 AM PST by traditional1 ("Don't gotsta worry 'bout no mo'gage, don't gotsta worry 'bout no gas; Obama gonna take care o' me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

...and in the distance the sound of thunder....


8 posted on 11/20/2010 7:34:45 AM PST by freebilly (No wonder the left has a boner for Obama. There's CIALIS in soCIALISt....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traditional1

He didn’t embezzle anything. In the real world, it is called “influence-peddling,” “tax fraud” and “concealing assets” and you are fined and go to prison, especially if your have evaded paying taxes on certain income for 17 years. Proof positive that Americans are NOT equal under the law. Black politicians are held to a different, much lower standard.


9 posted on 11/20/2010 7:37:11 AM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Not only is he a crook, but he was a powerful one at that. More should be expected of him. I guess Dems grade on a curve.


10 posted on 11/20/2010 7:38:56 AM PST by PghBaldy (Like the Ft Hood Killer, James Earl Ray was just stressed when he killed MLK Jr.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
In other words, Rangel must stand in the well of Congress and have the members tell him he behaved poorly. No, really.

So, he's going to be scolded like a child??

Lock the tax cheating bustard up, one year for each one he "forgot" to pay his taxes.

11 posted on 11/20/2010 7:43:13 AM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Moderates manipulate, extremists use violence, but the goal is the same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
instead of a spank on the wrist, he gets a spank on the azz... feh
12 posted on 11/20/2010 7:46:47 AM PST by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia
"He didn’t embezzle anything"

Oops. Sorry; not a student of the legal definitions, but it seems converting certain monies (not your personal assets) to use for personal gain (getting elected/securing more "donations") would be similar to helping yourself to the bank's money drawer contents, if you were a teller.

13 posted on 11/20/2010 7:50:36 AM PST by traditional1 ("Don't gotsta worry 'bout no mo'gage, don't gotsta worry 'bout no gas; Obama gonna take care o' me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia
Black politicians are held to a different, much lower standard.

Particularly by their own black voters. Rangel will be reelected by his constituents in 2012 by a larger margin than in 2010.

14 posted on 11/20/2010 7:53:01 AM PST by Spartan79 (Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: traditional1

He simply isn’t smart enough to have embezzled anything. But he is profoundly dishonest and has an enormous sense of entitlement. What you describe is influence peddling.


15 posted on 11/20/2010 7:53:48 AM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Rangel is about to get what appears to be a complete pass for actions that, as I have previously written, were they committed by you or me, we would be getting our affairs in order prior to a long jail sentence.

Charlie Rangel got a pass only, I repeat, only because the electorate gives him a pass. There are two (2) sets of laws in America only, I repeat again, only because the electorate allows two (2) sets of laws to exist.

When and IF the electorate somehow manages to pry themselves away from the tee vee and phone, fax or write their elected representatives in the House and in the Senate, only then, will there be change.

There should be NO EXEMPTIONS whatsoever for any federal employee or any congressional or senate representative from any law or regulation. None. Zero. Ziltch. Zippo. Nada. Not a one.

And until there are NO EXEMPTIONS from any law or regulation for the RULING CLASS and their federal employee pets, America will have two (2) sets of laws. One set of laws and regulations for the electorate at large and one set of laws and regulations for the likes of Charlie Rangel.

Justice is NOT blind. Justice sees quite well, thank you very much.


16 posted on 11/20/2010 7:54:29 AM PST by pyx (Rule#1.The LEFT lies.Rule#2.See Rule#1. IF THE LEFT CONTROLS THE LANGUAGE, IT CONTROLS THE ARGUMENT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Is he immune from criminal charges? Does he have to make restitution of the money he stole with interest? What happens with his four illicit apartments?


17 posted on 11/20/2010 7:57:51 AM PST by Inwoodian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
It is a formal, open reprimand given to a member of Congress for going against its standards of ethics and behavior.

Why use this on Rangel, then? Since when did Congress have standards of ethics and behavior???

18 posted on 11/20/2010 7:59:59 AM PST by ssaftler ("Politically Correct" is neither!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; Arthur Wildfire! March; Berosus; bigheadfred; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; Delacon; ...

meanwhile:

$11,000 fine, arrest possible for some who refuse airport scans and pat downs
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2630452/posts


19 posted on 11/20/2010 8:00:32 AM PST by SunkenCiv (The 2nd Amendment follows right behind the 1st because some people are hard of hearing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Yeah Charlie loved being in power so much he tried to take much of it with him.
If life was fair he would get the following

1) Eviction from the rent controlled apartments he uses, Why this wasn’t done immediately defies logic. Those are for the poor

2) Removal from office today

3) Add up all Charlie’s indiscretions and the investigations and make him pay the taxpayers back with interest.

4) Stop all government benefits including Health care, retirement accounts, paychecks with the exception of anything earned while in the Armed Forces. He violated the public trust. In other words broke the contract with the American people, so we do not need to honor that contract.

5) Banned from any public service or government job or any private entity that accepts public funds.

6) Agree to the above terms unconditionally to avoid a 40 year (Time Severed) jail sentence.

Unfortunately life is not fair


20 posted on 11/20/2010 8:01:02 AM PST by shoff (Cuomo is going to change the NY state motto from Excelsior to elixir (cause we bought it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson