Skip to comments.Maxine Waters Ethics Case: 6 Committee Members Recuse Themselves
Posted on 02/17/2012 12:05:05 PM PST by AnTiw1
The tumultuous ethics case against Rep. Maxine Waters, one of Los Angeles most enduring politicians, took another strange turn Friday as six members of the House Ethics Committee recused themselves from considering the charges against her.
Committee Chairman Jo Bonner (R-Ala.) said that all five of the panels Republicans, including himself, and one Democrat were taking the unusual action of recusing themselves from further involvement in the long-running Waters case "out of an abundance of caution and to avoid even an appearance of unfairness." Six new House members immediately were named to the bipartisan panel to consider all matters related to the Waters case.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
The investigation against Waters has been anything but usual. It has been sidetracked twice -- once by the committee's decision to put off a trial to conduct further investigation and then by allegations of misconduct against the ethics staff.
All that other is just eyewash. They’re terrified of her because she’s of sub-Saharan African descent and every creep in the media will fly to her defense, especially if she’s guilty as sin.
“Committee Chairman Jo Bonner (R-Ala.) said that all five of the panels Republicans, including himself, and one Democrat were taking the unusual action of recusing themselves from further involvement in the long-running Waters case “out of an abundance of caution and to avoid even an appearance of unfairness.”
You vile filthy, stinking, treacherous, traitorous, loathsome, reptilian RINO enemies of the Constitution and of humanity.
May demons gnaw your skulls in Hell for all eternity.
A chance to strike a blow against evil was dropped in your Ken-doll antitesticularian laps, and you pussied out.
Swine! Dogs! Maggots! Limp-wristed, pansy-assed, chicken-choking, globalist, metrosexual, John-McCain-channeling Republican in Name Only/conservative in no way whatsoever nitwits.
I would like to apologize for the way in which RINOS are represented in this post. It was never my intention to imply that RINOs are weak-kneed political time servers who are more concerned with their personal vendettas and private power struggles than with preserving our constitution and our liberties, nor to suggest at any point that they sacrifice their credibility by compromising with evil on vital matters in the mistaken impression that bipartisanship comes before the well-being of the people they supposedly represent, nor to imply at any stage that they are squabbling little toadies without an ounce of concern for the desperate situation of our republic. Nor, indeed, do I intend that readers should consider them as crabby, ulcerous little self-seeking vermin with furry legs and an excessive addiction to alcohol and certain explicit sexual practices which some people might find offensive.
I am sorry if this impression has come across.
Didn’t she just say that as the most senior member of the finance comittee she wants to take Barney Franks place as head. I doubt she could have done that with ethics charges hanging over her. They are merely clearing the way.
I don’t understand how the very people chosen from within Congress to investigate and JUDGE ethics violations, have to bow out of a given case to avoid an appearance of impropriety.
There is nothing particularly partisan about the Waters case. It’s about greed and financial conflict of interest, not (say) an improper effort to beat a Republican challenger.
Someone help me out here?
I honestly don’t know why this is still going on. The Constitution says it’s OK to be corrupt if you’re a democrat.
Very well said - the question being do we or do we not have a Republican majority in the House of Representatives? What in the bloody hell is going on? Anyone with half a brain knows that Maxine Waters is a vile racist criminal and should be in Federal prison.
Simple, they didn’t want to be called racists.
“What in the bloody hell is going on?”
It’s looking more and more like blackmail to me. With the FBI and CIA totally politicized, the demonrats probably have access to every scrap of unfavorable information—or rumor—on every pubby.
I’m not so sure this is cowardice. They may be so certain of a conviction that they can afford the move.
Nothing but a bunch of frightened little weasels.
What was that? The sound of six offshore accounts being padded. So... who earned the largest hush money.. and how does that work exactly?
Gimme a 'C'
Gimme an 'O'
Gimme a 'W'
Gimme an 'A'
Gimme an 'R'
Gimme a 'D'
Gimme an 'S'
What's that spell?
What's that spell?
One more time:
They be blue eyed devils?
The missing, if crucial bit of information, is what did the ethics staff do that was not illegal or unethical that would yet cause everyone to recuse themselves. May we not have any of the facts the underpin the shenanigans?
Of course not...secrecy rules at the Court of King Obama.
It’s time for another party at the White House...
It’s the Republican way.
Waters will die of old age before they do anything to her.
We need a panel of experts to take over and decide the fate of jowls Waters and save our precious congresscritters from any undue ridicule.
The ONLY thing that will SAVE this country is a MASSIVE ZYKLON-B gas discharge at a “State of the Union” “Speech”!
She’s one of the Black Caucus members who testified in support of the heads of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac at the height of the corruption.
Maxine Waters Ethics Trial Stalls. Again. (Who Is Surprised?) | July 23, 2011 | Patrick Richadson
Waters threatens to sue the House Ethics Committee for mishandling her case.
Its notable that Waters is not asking for the case to be dismissed on the merits, but only because she claims she can no longer get a fair trial.
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the Financial Services Committee, said in an interview that he inserted the provision for minority banks to protect OneUnited because it is based in his state.
The provision sought by Waters and inserted by Frank told the Treasury Department that it should consider for bailout money banks that had an asset size of $1 billion or less, and whose size dropped to a lower range because they owned devalued preferred stock in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
The only bank that language would affect was OneUnited.
Waters is accused of using her influence to gain special treatment for Massachusetts-based bank OneUnited, which received $12 million in bailout funds. Changing a law was required in order to get them the money. Her husband, former Ambassador Sidney Williams, owned more than $350,000 in stock in the bank, and had also been a board member.
Citing gross misconduct, the lawyer representing Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) is asking the House Ethics Committee to dismiss all charges against his client.
In a letter addressed to the chairman of the House Ethics Committee, Republican Jo Bonner of Alabama, and the committee's top Democrat, Linda Sanchez, Waters' attorney Stanley Brand cited internal documents showing a close relationship between two former committee lawyers in the case and Republican committee members, saying any further action by the committee would be irremediably tainted and without legal foundation.
Rep. Waters is a senior member of the House Financial Services Committee. The committee alleges that she tried to obtain a federal bailout for a minority-owned bank where her husband is an investor.
Based on the facts of the case and the record of committee misconduct, the only remedy that vindicates the principals of the quasi-judicial functions of the committee is immediate dismissal with prejudice. No other remedy exists to cure this misconduct, Atty. Brand wrote.
Rep. Waters has repeatedly denied wrongdoing, saying she had no role in the Obama administration's decision to bail out Boston-based OneUnited Bank. The congresswoman's husband, Sidney Williams, owns stock in the bank, and his investment was in danger of becoming worthless during the near-financial collapse of late 2008.
OneUnited received $12 million in bailout money in December 2008. But Treasury Department officials have told House investigators that Rep. Waters was not involved in that decision.
Rep. Waters contended she had supported legislation to help all troubled, minority-owned banks like OneUnitedand specifically those, like OneUnited, that were hurt by their investments in the then-collapsing mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Atty. Brand said internal documents showed that the two former lawyers regularly corresponded exclusively last year with Rep. Bonner, then the ranking Republican and now the ethics chairman.
The two lawyers, C. Morgan Kim and Stacy Sovereign, were suspended last year by the previous Democratic chairman, Zoe Lofgren of California. Neither accepted Atty. Bonner's offer earlier this year to reinstate them.
The committee had charged Rep. Waters with violating House rules and was ready to begin a proceeding on her conduct late last year, but the case was sent back for further investigation after the controversy erupted over the conduct of the two lawyers.
Atty. Brand said in his statement that if there is prosecutorial misconduct in a criminal case, a judge would usually dismiss the charges. He also said the case was flawed.
Given that both current members and staff are implicated in these documents, any other suggested remedy would lack legal credibility and would confirm an unprecedented level of bias against my client, Atty. Brand added.
Meanwhile ethics watchdogs are calling on Rep. Bonner to step down as chairman of the House Ethics Committeeat least temporarilyfor his role in the ongoing turmoil over Rep. Waters' case.
I think there needs to be an investigation into the whole matter, including Mr. Bonner's role and that Mr. Bonner should step aside during the course of that investigation, said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
If Mr. Bonner is found to have broken the committee's rules, he should be sanctioned by the full House.
Blake Chisam, the chief counsel and staff director for the ethics panel, initially sought to fire Kim and Sovereign on Nov. 19, but was unable to do so.
It is unclear if the decision to place Kim and Sovereign on paid leave was related to the Waters case or another matter, although they were placed in that status on the same day that Reps. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) and Jo Bonner (R-Ala.), the chairwoman and ranking member of the committee, announced the Waters trial was delayed. The committee announced that it had new information, including e-mails from Mikael Moore, Waters' chief of staff, that would have an impact on the Waters matter.
Let’s be honest, Waters will never be convicted, or even tried. The entire DemocRat party would be implicated by doing so.
And I laugh for a full ten minutes.
Kudos to both of you.
How come the replacements aren't named?
Are the replacements all black so that she passes Go and collects $200?
Maybe she shouldn’t have called Republicans ‘demons’.
“Im not so sure this is cowardice. They may be so certain of a conviction that they can afford the move.”
I’m inclined to believe you are correct. New members,,,, new trial. Conviction.
Only the people who keep electing Maxine Waters are more idiotic than her.
Sounds like at least 6 other members of Congress need an investigation.
Are these cowards afraid of Mad Maxine pulling the inevitable race card?
She gives me a big headache. She is one of those Democratic politicians who plays “musical chair” politics.
Awww c'mon! Tell us how you REALLY feel! LOL
I have voted against RINO Jo Bonner in the last two elections and intend to do so again this time.
Waters is an old commie, but a greedy one also. Her voters don’t give a damn if she killed the Pope because they are “more idiotic” than she is.
The Oakland voter’s lament: 6 years of education gone down the drain.
To put this idiot in front of an ethics committee makes the mistake of assuming that she has any.
“I have voted against RINO Jo Bonner in the last two elections and intend to do so again this time.”
Good. I wish I had a chance to vote against him.
Shame! you have slandered doorknobs everywhere.
so....I suppose Kagan will recuse herself on the Obamacare case...
...BIG FRIGGIN NOT!
I hope this a maneuver designed to create a new slate, and thus the ethics case goes forward and cannot be deflected by baseless charges by Waters.
Of course, that would mean that John Boehner actually had a strategy, and a spine to go forward worth it.Sure he does./s
Wow, all she had to do was call the GOP “DEMONS!” and they collapsed like a house of cards.
Oh, and did The GOP House members say ANYTHING in response?
This is what bothers me so much about the establishment repubs, they will go along with it just so when it’s their turn she won’t say anything about them. If the new congress does not impose term limits nothing in D.C. will ever change, they’ll just find sneekier ways to do things behind our backs.
Just protecting their own as usual.
Well, that explains Barbara Lee. I think the Left Reverend Maxine "Don't Drink the" Waters represents a district about 400 miles to the south and about 3 years fewer of edumacation on average.
Were I a committee member, I’d not recuse myself. I’d be proud to be part of the prosecution of this imbecile. Hell, you could call it a Kangaroo Court, a Monkey Trial, whatever the hell you want - screw the media, screw the appearance, screw her constituents. I’m done with guilt - I’m done with propriety and appearances.
As long as the result was the severest punishment possible that could be doled out by that 435 member collection of Eunichs.
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.