Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ethics Committee Can't Find Anything Wrong With Secret Loan From Fraudster to Rep. Gregory Meeks
National Legal & Policy Center ^ | December 20, 2012 | Ken Boehm

Posted on 12/20/2012 3:15:13 PM PST by jazusamo

Meeks photo Ahmad photo Today the House Ethics Committee announced that it was taking no action against Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) who secretly took a $40,000 payment from an individual who subsequently pled guilty in a multi-million-dollar mortgage scam.

In 2007, Meeks received $40,000 from a "businessman," Edul Ahmad. Under the Ethics in Government Act, Congressmen are required to disclose such financial transactions on their annual Financial Disclosure Reports. Meeks failed to disclose the transaction on his reports for 2007, 2008 and 2009.

In 2010, the New York Daily News reported, "Queens Congressman Gregory Meeks made no payments for three years on a secret $40,000 personal loan - and repaid the cash only when the FBI started asking questions, the Daily News has learned."

The Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) investigated the matter and found that the claim by Meeks that the $40,000 was a loan was questionable since there was no indication of a set interest rate, a note or repayment terms that normally would accompany a loan. There was also no payment by Meeks to Ahmad of either principal or interest.

OCE concluded, "Therefore, this $40,000 transferred to Representative Meeks in 2007 appears to have been a gift."

OCE reported that during its investigation Meeks refused to consent to an interview with OCE and "...he refused to provide requested documents concerning the $40,000 he received in 2007 from Mr. Ahmad."

OCE reported that Mr. Ahmad refused to cooperate at all with the OCE investigation.

In 2011, OCE voted unanimously to refer the case to the House Ethics Committee.

In July 2011, the FBI arrested Edul Ahmad as he sought to leave the country. He was charged in connection with a $50 million mortgage scam. In October 2012, Ahmad pleaded guilty and according to federal sentencing guidelines, he could face ten to thirteen years in prison.

When the House Ethics Committee reported today that they would take no action against Congressman Meeks, they also stated that Ahmad through his attorney stated that he would invoke his Fifth Amendment rights in refusing to cooperate with the Meeks investigation unless the Ethics Committee granted him immunity from criminal prosecution.

Even the accounts of the so-called loan raise questions with Meeks' position that he lost the loan document and the Ahmad position, according to Ahmad's lawyer, that "there was no loan document signed by Meeks and there was no fixed interest rate."

The determination by the House Ethics Committee was that "the evidence did not establish that the Ahmad loan was an impermissible gift."

This decision makes a mockery of any notion of common sense in the enforcement of Congressional ethics. A Congressman gets a secret payment of $40,000 by a man who subsequently pleads guilty in connection with a multi-million-dollar mortgage scam. The Congressman then fails to disclose the $40,000 payment on three successive Financial Disclosure reports, as required by federal law. And the Congressman makes no payments of any kind on the "loan" for three years. In the real world, the loan terms supposedly applicable in this case are laughable.

Add to all this, the fact that the Congressman refused to be interviewed by the Office of Congressional Ethics and the felon benefactor planned to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights if questioned about his "loan" to the Congressman and you have a case that smells even by the "Hear no evil, See no evil, Speak no evil" standards of the House Ethics Committee.

TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; US: New York
KEYWORDS: 112th; corruption; cultureofcorruption; democrats; edulahmad; ethics; gregorymeeks; houseethicscommittee; meeks; oce
Being Gregory Meeks is a Democrat and black it seems he's entitled.
1 posted on 12/20/2012 3:15:21 PM PST by jazusamo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Yep, Democrat Immunity

2 posted on 12/20/2012 3:19:08 PM PST by GeronL (
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

It must be nice to be born with protective immunity.

3 posted on 12/20/2012 3:49:11 PM PST by I want the USA back
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Last I heard, we still have a majority in the House. I understand Boehner is busy but that ethics committee needs a housecleaning, First, Maxine Waters, now Meeks? Call me madcap...but there’s a pattern here.. duh.

4 posted on 12/20/2012 4:44:28 PM PST by SueRae (It isn't over. In God We Trust.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

I wonder what the (lack of) Ethics committee would have done had that been an “R” instead of a “D”???

5 posted on 12/20/2012 4:46:29 PM PST by DustyMoment (Congress - another name for anti-American criminals!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SueRae
Yep, there's definitely a pattern and that pattern is the people on the Ethics Committee don't want to deal with or dish out penalties to their fellow Reps.

In my view the Repubs are just as guilty as the Dems.

6 posted on 12/20/2012 4:54:02 PM PST by jazusamo ("Intellect is not wisdom" -- Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DustyMoment

That’s a valid question but I believe they’re all a bunch of weak sisters on the committe and it may not have been any different.

7 posted on 12/20/2012 4:56:25 PM PST by jazusamo ("Intellect is not wisdom" -- Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Well , you are right.

Republicans appear to just vote for whatever the Dems want at the ethics Committee, and the Dems will not find a black or a Dem guilty of anything.

It’s a joke of a Committee.

8 posted on 12/20/2012 5:03:46 PM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Henceforth, I move that it is forbidden to refer to that particular committee without using scare quotes, viz., “Ethics” Committee.

9 posted on 12/20/2012 5:28:54 PM PST by NonValueAdded (If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, you've likely misread the situation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

Seconded without further debate.

10 posted on 12/20/2012 5:43:37 PM PST by jazusamo ("Intellect is not wisdom" -- Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

I’ll bet a few taxpayers showing up with ropes, tar and feathers could make them all a lot more inquisitive!!!

11 posted on 12/20/2012 5:49:04 PM PST by mo (If you understand, no explanation is needed. If you don't understand, no explanation is possible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
I'm sorry. Why should I be upset about this? Since when did weasels find something, anything, wrong with other weasels. It's amazing, no, on second thought it's not amazing at all, that his constituents would not have a problem voting for this slimeball. He can now use this as a resume’ enhancer. He will win again because the morons in his district like the way he stuck it to whitey.
12 posted on 12/20/2012 6:30:14 PM PST by cashless (Obama told us he would side with Muslims if the political winds shifted in an ugly direction. Ready?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

I doubt that a group of whores discussing the virtue of chastity would deem any of their number less virtuous ...

13 posted on 12/20/2012 6:47:01 PM PST by RetiredTexasVet (Save the nation, have your family's progressives spayed or neutered.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
"Office of Congressional Ethics"

aka Anosmiacs Anonymous, DC Chapter

14 posted on 12/20/2012 6:51:05 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

It takes serious public outrage for anything to be done to a Democrat, like William Jefferson.

15 posted on 12/20/2012 8:38:20 PM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

this type of self-policing reminds me of O.J. looking for the real killers...

16 posted on 12/20/2012 8:42:23 PM PST by BookmanTheJanitor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BookmanTheJanitor
Agreed, that's a pretty good analogy.
17 posted on 12/21/2012 8:10:05 AM PST by jazusamo ("Intellect is not wisdom" -- Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

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
Topics · Post Article

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