I would like to know why some Democrats, including President Obama

[saracat]

are finding it righteous to demand or ask Charlie Rangel to step down but never speak out forcefully against the GOP violaters such as Vitter and Ensign? I understand it is an election year and we don't want to "look bad" but wouldn't we be better served by attacking the opposition? I realize some will say that I criticize Dems all the time, so why shouldn't elected officials excercise the same option, and while I think they certainly should, I find it somewhat jarring that our party leaders have NEVER called the opposition to account, and they are their opponents.

[janx]

1. President Obama demanded or asked (which is it?)

Rangel to step down?

When?

[Greyhound]

3. When it comes from the President there is no difference. n/t

[Cary]

136. There is a huge difference.

Where is the upside in your kind of thinking? Seriously, I can't find any.

[villager]

4. thought, out loud, Rangel should end his career in a "dignified" way -- the message was clear

A lot clearer, actually, than any such message given to a Republican...

[janx]

8. Context?

Link? Quotations?

[villager]

10. Link -- one of many-- right here:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5guL87z4PHsrubvj02ZL9F_bAKF2wD9HA69580

Staying away from headlines lately?

[janx]

17. Why should I stay away from headlines? n/t

[villager]

21. That's a damn good question.

n/t

[janx]

60. villager--

Please don't speak in circles. It sounds a little like a Marx Brothers joke. :rofl:

[janx]

41. This is a bit better than Politico, so thanks.

The quotations are the same:
______________________________

President Barack Obama says he hopes the 80-year-old lawmaker can end his career with dignity and some House Democrats want him to resign — now.

Obama, speaking on the issue for the first time, praised Rangel for serving his New York constituents over the years, but said he found the ethics charges "very troubling."

"He's somebody who's at the end of his career. I'm sure that what he wants is to be able to end his career with dignity. And my hope is that it happens," Obama said in an interview that aired Friday on "CBS Evening News with Katie Couric."

_____________________________

Thanks for the link.

[EFerrari]

11. Here's a link to LBN:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4486332&mesg_id=4486332

[janx]

15. ...which is linked to Ben Stein at Politico...

...and this is what it says:

President Barack Obama has kept mum on the fate of Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) for days -- but he tells CBS News that it's time for the embattled 80-year-old former Ways and Means Chairman to end his career "with dignity."

"I think Charlie Rangel served a very long time and served-- his constituents very well. But these-- allegations are very troubling," Obama told Harry Smith in an interview to be aired on the "Early Show." and first broadcast on the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric.

"And he'll-- he's somebody who's at the end of his career. Eighty years old. I'm sure that-- what he wants is to be able to-- end his career with dignity. And my hope is that-- it happens. "

________________________________________________________

The following words

but he tells CBS News that it's time for the embattled 80-year-old former Ways and Means Chairman to end his career "with dignity."


are Ben Stein's, not President Obama's.

[EFerrari]

26. That's right. The latter is a paraphrase.

Do you think it's wrong?

[janx]

31. There's no way of knowing that since we weren't there.

We don't know if it's a valid paraphrase or something (again) purported by Politico to garner sensation. Politico has been known to do that before.

I'd like to see the interview and get some context.

[EFerrari]

34. Yeah. The more info the better. But it looks like an accurate

paraphrase of the direct quote we have. Although, it's a given that Stein and Politico stir things up on purpose.

[janx]

46. I'm not fond of Stein's use of loaded language, either.

For instance, his reference to Rangel:

"it's time for the embattled 80-year-old former Ways and Means Chairman"

And that's part of his paraphrase! Do you understand why I'm skeptical? It's clear, though, that Obama sees the allegations as serious and hopes Rangel retains some respect.

[EFerrari]

49. Oh, I can't stand the guy. But, I'm not comfortable with Obama chiming in

at this stage. I wish he'd just have smiled and changed the subject.

[janx]

57. EFerrari, I think that would have been rather obvious...

;-)

He was asked about it directly. He couldn't just smile and change the subject. And would you really want him to? Is protecting another Democrat more important than addressing the problem?

He praised Rangel's service and wished him well.

[EFerrari]

59. Yeah, I would really want him to.

This "problem" is very small compared to real problems. :)

[janx]

82. Everything is relative, but the allegations being leveled at Rangel

aren't small. When we elect representatives and senators, we expect them to behave ethically about the public trust and especially regarding money and the rules regarding money.

So far, these are just allegations. I don't think we should make assumptions in any way.

[Kalun D]

124. Really Now

Obama is throwing another progressive under the bus, big surprise

What was the total dollar amount Rangel took?

Obama helped bush push through the $700 BIL "bailout" for the crooked bankers that intentionally caused the problem in the first place

they said they were going to use the money to lend in a tight market. Instead they used it for bonuses and to buy up smaller banks. After all we do need more effective monopoly consolidation in this so called "democracy".

Then Obama appointed the felony criminal banksters to positions of banking oversight, Geitner, Summers, Bernanke(R, bush appointee), and the lack of rules that caused the problem are still not present.

So stop with the lawyer weasel speak defending the chief lawyer weasel speaker, he doesn't like the competition.

[sabrina 1]

133. Similar and documented charges against Geithner,

charges of being a tax cheat which he confessed to, not paying SS on an employee eg, knowing he should have as he was advised to do so, deliberate evasion of paying his taxes which he could not deny once caught (in an IRS audit) all of this known to the President and Congress before he was confirmed, have not interrupted Geithner's career.

Seems to me it depends on who are with this Congress, not on what you've done. And since that is the real world we live in, then Rangel should stay exactly where he is if his constituency wants him there. Since he's one of the most popular members of Congress, getting nearly 90% of the vote many times, there's a good chance that he will.

He might even outlast the current administration if like Byrd, he remains healthy.

When the Rule of Law returns, if it ever does, then I guess we should worry about these matters, but we can't have different standards for Progressives, as well as the lawlessness we tolerate in our government. There should be some benefit for Progressives from putting all these crimes behind us.

[Kahuna]

97. In the real world, it doesn't work like that.

:eyes:

[EFerrari]

131. Maybe in your "real" world. nt

[hfojvt]

144. I don't think that paraphrase is accurate at all

it reads a lot into the statement that was not actually said.

[xocet]

68. Did you mean Ben Smith at Politico?

Here is a video of President Obama's Statement regarding Rep. Rangel: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20012286-503544.html?tag=stack

[janx]

79. Yes--my mistake.

Ben Smith.

I just tried to edit my post based on your correction, but the time had expired.

I've seen the video and posted that CBS link as well. I don't care for Politico and don't regard it as a serious news source. It was never meant to be a serious news source, granted, but I'm afraid people sometimes aren't aware of that.

[janx]

19. Thanks for the link. n/t

[sandnsea]

16. He didn't say Rangel "should" do anything

He said he thought Rangel would like to end his career in a dignified way. He didn't say what he thought that "way" should be at all.

[villager]

25. Are you always this willingly oblivious to political-speak?

:shrug:

[sandnsea]

35. I take political words seriously

He said what he said. It's up to Charlie Rangel to figure out how to salvage any dignity from this situation.

When I want to target Republicans, I just go ahead and do that. I don't use their bad behavior as an excuse to come out of my squirrel hole and organize yet another bash on Obama.

[villager]

36. I wish he'd say the same thing about Republicans politicians then. don't you?

n/t

[sandnsea]

44. Well he pretty much does

When they're having issues, he says the same kind of thing. He leaves it up to the law and their judgment.

And when he does that, you don't say he's called on a Republican to resign, instead you say he's not being hard enough on them.

[villager]

47. Well, he's generally not only not hard on them, he's giving them far too much power

..as we've from the types of legislative "compromises" we've been getting...

His latter day, sporadic rhetorical flourishes taking on the GOP in general, while welcome, will only mean something if it translates into new kinds of actions.

[saracat]

73. He has NEVER used those kind of words on Vitter or Ensign .

[janx]

85. He doesn't care about who is diddling whom?

Frankly, I don't either.

And as an important aside, Hillary Clinton didn't care either. She had a larger view of the world and no doubt still does.

[saracat]

105. Ensign is a lot more about payola than "diddling" and if you read , you might be aware of that.

Vittner is also allied with some very questionable sources.This isn't about "diddling.". This is about corruption and C street and a lot worse stuff than anything Charlie Rangel is accused of.

[laughingliberal]

108. +1 nt

[Whisp]

106. because they can't retire in dignity, maybe that's why?

:rofl:

[janx]

117. Good point!

:rofl:

[saracat]

74. Except for campaign promises.Those politcal words don't count.

:sarcasm: FOCA anyone?

[sandnsea]

81. Do you even know what's in that?

Freedom of Choice Act - Declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to: (1) bear a child; (2) terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or (3) terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect her life or her health.

In other words, it's exactly what is in the pre-existing insurance pool.

Has FOCA passed either house this year?

You would keep women from getting health coverage that would actually pay for the abortions provided for in FOCA.

[LWolf]

2. Good question.

:popcorn:

[JoePhilly]

89. I did ... but I did not make that demand on DU ...

I made it on USATODAY's website, and MSNBC's web sit ... and Fox's too.

[Jennicut]

5. Because he is a Dem. Why should Dems be just as bad as the Rethugs?

And because he was asked the question?

[EFerrari]

9. The Obama White House just made a blunder trying not to look "as bad", didn't it?

Wasn't that just a week ago?

And is he not capable of deflecting a question?

[Jennicut]

12. Why are ethics violations okay to begin with?

I don't why some here are trying so hard to defend Rangel, I thought we hated the type of stuff he did? If both Dems and Rethugs do it, isn't it still wrong? I am confused...

[EFerrari]

23. I don't think ethics violations are okay.

And do you hate the type of stuff he did? Do you know what he's being accused of? It looks like he's been singled out to me with the information I have, anyway. Maybe there's more?

I don't know why leading Democrats are so willing to throw anyone under the bus first, abdicating their leadership roles, and repent later. That seems like a very shortsighted political strategy to me, anyway.

[janx]

58. There could well be more, I agree.

But it's premature to assume that he is being singled out. What information do you have? Is it credible?

[EFerrari]

63. When I look at the breakdown of the four issues he's being charged with

they don't amount to very much. He didn't report income of $600k, he didn't pay taxes on a DR property, he solicited donations for a charity and he was using a rent controlled apt for offices.

If he corrects the disclosure and pays those taxes, then what? He solicited donations for a charity -- like everyone else on the hill. The rent controlled thing is just bizarre and looks like digging for problems.

It looks like making a mountain out of the very ordinary stuff that all of those people do every day. It's all very small. It's sure not Halliburton or sheltering money off shore or anything that could really stick to your ribs. :shrug:

[janx]

70. He is being charged with 13:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20012179-503544.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody

It's going to take some time to find out how much of this is true, but it doesn't sound good. Not reporting income of $600k...that in itself is awful. The IRS goes after people who owe 4k, 5k, etc. unintentionally, people who are in dire straits and have a tough time paying.

[EFerrari]

72. Yes, 13 but they boil down to those four, afaik.

And if you don't report income, you have to pay the taxes and a fine. Is he denying he owes those taxes? If he pays up, that should be it.

It looks like piling on to me. Like selective enforcement. I suppose we'll either hear more or we won't. The problem is, these allegations can never be deflated once they've been inflated.

[janx]

76. That's true. Once they've gone through the media wringer,

the judgment is in, for people who don't pay attention. We'll have to wait and see how this shakes out in the fall.

[sabrina 1]

69. They're not. So why is Timothy Geithner still a part of

this adminstraion? Why did Obama not let him retire with dignity?

Timothy Geithner's Tax Problems

Over several years, Treasury secretary nominee Timothy F. Geithner failed to pay Social Security taxes, even though he was advised by his employer to do so, signed an agreement indicating that he understood that such payments were his responsibility and received extra pay from his employer specifically for that purpose.

Mr. Geithner "came clean" only when he was caught, first by an IRS audit that found he owed Social Security taxes for 2003 and 2004 and then when additional tax liabilities for 2001 and 2002 were discovered after his nomination.

This is why people are questioning the pressure on Charlie Rangel. Different standards for Progressives, always.

[hfojvt]

145. some will defend Rangel because they see him as a friend

a friend they know from TV, but I remember seeing him on TV saying things during the whole Clinton-Lewinsky thing and I thought to myself "I like this guy" because I liked what he was saying. When your friends are in trouble, you defend your friends. You believe they are innocent until they are proven guilty.

[villager]

13. Why should Rethugs always be let off the hook -- especially by Dems?

n/t

[Jennicut]

20. Vitter was caught in 2004. Dems were not even in charge then. Ensign is still being investigated.

"In January 2010, The Politico reported that the Federal Bureau of Investigation was investigating possible criminal violations in connection with the affair.

In May 2010, investigators for the Senate Ethics Committee spent several days in Las Vegas interviewing witnesses who had knowledge of Ensign's dealings with the Hamptons.

It was reported in July 2010 that Senator Tom Coburn had assisted federal authorities in their investigation by turning over e-mails, seen as a sign that the official investigation is gathering steam."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ensign

[villager]

24. This would be the Vitter still serving as Senator?

n/t

[Jennicut]

27. Ensign is still being investigated. Vitter was never investigated by the Rethugs.

The Dems already called for Vitter to resign his leadership post.
"Following the June 2009 admission of Nevada Senator John Ensign that he had an affair with an employee of his Senate office, the Louisiana Democratic Party called on Senator Vitter to resign his leadership position (as a deputy whip) in the Senate, arguing that, because Ensign had resigned his position as Republican Policy Committee Chairman of the United States Senate, Vitter should do the same." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Vitter

The Repub leadership never called on Vitter to resign his post.
Once again, what did Dems do wrong here?

[villager]

32. How is Vitter's investigation by the Dems going? have they called for his resignation?

Or do they just let GOP stuff... slide?

(rhetorical question...)

[rucky]

66. How about we just hold everybody to the same ethical standards?

Of course, that would clear out half the House.

[scheming daemons]

6. The President neither demanded NOR asked for Rangel to step down

Re-read what he said.


Secondly, lots of prominent Democrats called for Vitter and Ensign to step down... the fact that neither decided to step down has nothing to do with whether there were calls for it.

[EFerrari]

7. Exactly. Thanks, saracat.

K&R

[villager]

14. The mere posing of the question has got unrec fingers a-twitch!

n/t

[Bobbie Jo]

95. No twitching here.

It was rather decisive and deliberate.

Unrec for disingenuous tripe.

[sandnsea]

18. Quote and Link please n/t

[villager]

22. upthread, as you can see

n/t

[sandnsea]

30. Saw no such thing

I saw a politico headline that misinterprets what the president said.

And I see a lot of people who give the President more shit for making a comment then they themselves gave Ensign, Vitter or Craig.

[villager]

33. Well, people tend to see what they want to see, yes? Mine didn't link to Politico

But then, you knew that...

[sandnsea]

37. It started with Politico

But then, you knew that...

And yes, precisely, people tend to see what they want to see. Interesting what you want to see.

[villager]

43. The quote in my link -- which you assiduously ignore -- is from the CBS evening news

Perhaps your confusing it with "Politico" is a general and necessary condemnation of the MSM on your part -- a kind of deliberate performance-art goof on sourcing in general?

[sandnsea]

50. Yes, but the misinterpretation, the headline, is from Politico

That's what I said. Pay Attention.

Do you know what important legislation was signed this week?

[villager]

55. Pay more attention, and get off the snark boat, yourself

My link has nothing to do with Politico. You're using that as a strawman in order to cling to your ever-crumbling thesis...

[sandnsea]

62. The crumbling thesis is that Obama said for Rangel to resign

He didn't.

Politico put out that crumbling thesis and the rest of the lapdog media picked it up.

And again, do you know what very important legislation was signed this week?

[janx]

71. Agreed.

He didn't.

[saracat]

75. Here:

Obama does not use the word resign, but he strongly insinuates it. He suggests(hopes) Rangel will "end his career with dignity". That means, "doesn't stand trial" which means "resign". There is no other possible meaning. The President has never diectly asked any GOP pol to end their career with dignity or said he even found their ethics violations"very troubling". he has never mentioned any of the GOP violaters by name or called them out.Anyone who believes that the president isn't calling for Charlie to step down likely also believes that Peter Orzog is quitting because he wants to plan his wedding and spend time with his family!


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5guL87z4PHsrubvj02ZL9F_bAKF2wD9HA69580

President Barack Obama says he hopes the 80-year-old lawmaker can end his career with dignity and some House Democrats want him to resign — now.

Obama, speaking on the issue for the first time, praised Rangel for serving his New York constituents over the years, but said he found the ethics charges "very troubling."

"He's somebody who's at the end of his career. I'm sure that what he wants is to be able to end his career with dignity. And my hope is that it happens," Obama said in an interview that aired Friday on "CBS Evening News with Katie Couric."

Even in Rangel's own state delegation, a base of staunch support, there was a crack. Democratic Rep. Michael Arcuri from central New York said Rangel "should think about stepping down because this situation is beginning to affect our ability to govern."

As House members headed home for the August recess, they wrestled with how to handle the ethics brouhaha three months before the midterm elections. Republicans already were eager to use Rangel's problems as a way to tar other Democrats on the issue of corruption.

Before Arcuri's statement Saturday, a half-dozen Democrats either conditionally or outright had called for Rangel to resign.

Rep. John Yarmuth, D-Ky., said the allegations against Rangel brought by the House ethics committee show a consistent disregard for House rules and that he should step down.

"It is our job as members of Congress to hold each other accountable to a higher standard regardless of party," said Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Ariz. "If the serious charges against (Rangel) are accurate, he needs to resign."

There was talk of Rangel's resignation as well from Democratic Reps. Walter Minnick of Idaho, Betty Sutton of Ohio, Zack Space of Ohio, and Mary Jo Kilroy of Ohio.

Rangel denies the charges announced Thursday by the ethics panel and says they contain factual errors.

In a meeting Friday with fellow New York lawmakers, Rangel "indicated there was some sloppiness" in his official papers, Rep. Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y., told reporters, "but, you know, there's no criminality here."

The delegation and the Congressional Black Caucus, which was co-founded by Rangel, urged their colleagues not to rush to judgment. House leaders were mum on what Rangel should do.

Rangel faces 13 charges of misusing his office as well as tax and disclosure violations. If Rangel and the ethics committee do not settle the case, it goes to a public trial this fall, at the height of an election season.

Further complicating matters for Democrats, a House investigative panel decided Friday to charge Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters of California with ethics violations, raising the possibility of a second trial. The alleged violations by Rangel and Waters are not related.

People familiar with the Waters investigation, who were not authorized to be quoted about charges that had not been announced, told the AP the allegations could be made public next week.

Republicans already were on the attack.

The GOP's campaign arm, the National Republican Campaign Committee, released a list of Democrats who have not returned campaign contributions they received from Rangel during their careers and said those lawmakers would face questions about the matter from constituents during the August break.

Rep. Gene Green, the Texas Democrat who led the four-member bipartisan panel of investigators, told reporters that his committee recommended a relatively mild punishment for Rangel: reprimand, a statement of wrongdoing voted by the whole House that carries no other penalty.

But that's not what some lawmakers, including Democrats, view as adequate.

"If at the trial's conclusion Mr. Rangel is found guilty by his peers, then he should incur the full punishment allowed by the House, including removal from office," said Rep. Bobby Bright, D-Ala.

AP writer Larry Margasak contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

[sandnsea]

78. He's sure RANGEL wants to end his career with dignity

"He's somebody who's at the end of his career. I'm sure that what he wants is to be able to end his career with dignity. And my hope is that it happens,"

That could mean a whole host of things, including ACQUITTAL at a trial. Whatever avenue "dignity" takes, Obama hopes it happens.

That's it.

That's your scandal du jour.

And btw, if you want a quote from him about Vitter or Ensign, go find them. Or find where anybody asked him about Vitter or Ensign or Rubio or the Florida GOP or whatever other Republicans the FBI is investigating. Note that - we're getting Republican FBI investigations.

[saracat]

80. Yeah, sorry, that doesn't do it. He didn't have to say anything about Rangel. He could have said

he wouldn't comment while the investigation was continuing. But he didn't.He sent a message. As far as the enemy is concerned, the GOP, why should he have to be asked? He could volunteer his opinions about the opposition but he doesn't. As for finding quotes, there aren't any. He has never singled out a GOP violator.

[sandnsea]

83. I don't think the investigation is continuing

I think he's getting ready to go to trial. In any event, he still didn't say Rangel should resign. If he wanted to make that implication, he could have found much better words to use.

As far as the GOP is concerned, he is fighting them on policy which is where it matters. Do you know a very important rape bill was signed this week?

[janx]

86. The GOP is not "the enemy." It is dangerous in the fact that

it is misguided and crazy, but let's keep the hyperbole under control, shall we? This exaggeration sounds like Freeperland, and I can't stand it.

[saracat]

103. So what are threy? Allies? I'll bet you still think bipartisanship exists too!

[janx]

113. False dilemma. n/t

[Sheepshank]

28. Republicans should take care of their own....as should Dems

Nasty little petty calls for immediate resignation (across the isle) does not help the harpy one iota. Makes them look petty, small, vindictive, close minded and hypocritical....can't think of one good adjective for that type of action.

[villager]

39. Not many sheep will be shanked, if we keep letting Republicans slide for their crimes

...and are too scared -- sheep-like -- to do/say anything about it....

I can't think of one good adjective for that type of enabling.

[Sheepshank]

45. you are discounting the media and the court system

and the general public demanding results.

Plenty of sheep shanked in the court of public opinion.

[villager]

48. Yes! *How could I forget the media!* Which holds Republican feet to the fire

...all the frakking time!

[janx]

87. The media are not ideological.

They are there to make money.

[villager]

109. And of course, no particular ideology helps them make that money!

Why, they could almost be socialists!

[janx]

114. You miss the point entirely. n/t

[villager]

128. And you, apparently, have "missed the media" entirely

here's a good OP on the subject from this morning's DU:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8859110

[EFerrari]

29. The real, honest to God, answer to your question is Halliburton.

:shrug:

[Whisp]

38. link for Obama 'demanding' Rangel to step down. please provide.

jesus

[janx]

42. I don't see it either. n/t

[sandnsea]

64. Or the appearance of the OP in this bash thread n/t

[saracat]

77. Here: Also see post 75

Here:
Edited on Sat Jul-31-10 10:10 PM by saracat
Obama does not use the word resign, but he strongly insinuates it. He suggests(hopes) Rangel will "end his career with dignity". That means, "doesn't stand trial" which means "resign". There is no other possible meaning. The President has never diectly asked any GOP pol to end their career with dignity or said he even found their ethics violations"very troubling". he has never mentioned any of the GOP violaters by name or called them out.Anyone who believes that the president isn't calling for Charlie to step down likely also believes that Peter Orzog is quitting because he wants to plan his wedding and spend time with his family!


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5guL87...






President Barack Obama says he hopes the 80-year-old lawmaker can end his career with dignity and some House Democrats want him to resign — now.

Obama, speaking on the issue for the first time, praised Rangel for serving his New York constituents over the years, but said he found the ethics charges "very troubling."

"He's somebody who's at the end of his career. I'm sure that what he wants is to be able to end his career with dignity. And my hope is that it happens," Obama said in an interview that aired Friday on "CBS Evening News with Katie Couric."

Even in Rangel's own state delegation, a base of staunch support, there was a crack. Democratic Rep. Michael Arcuri from central New York said Rangel "should think about stepping down because this situation is beginning to affect our ability to govern."

As House members headed home for the August recess, they wrestled with how to handle the ethics brouhaha three months before the midterm elections. Republicans already were eager to use Rangel's problems as a way to tar other Democrats on the issue of corruption.

Before Arcuri's statement Saturday, a half-dozen Democrats either conditionally or outright had called for Rangel to resign.

Rep. John Yarmuth, D-Ky., said the allegations against Rangel brought by the House ethics committee show a consistent disregard for House rules and that he should step down.

"It is our job as members of Congress to hold each other accountable to a higher standard regardless of party," said Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Ariz. "If the serious charges against (Rangel) are accurate, he needs to resign."

There was talk of Rangel's resignation as well from Democratic Reps. Walter Minnick of Idaho, Betty Sutton of Ohio, Zack Space of Ohio, and Mary Jo Kilroy of Ohio.

Rangel denies the charges announced Thursday by the ethics panel and says they contain factual errors.

In a meeting Friday with fellow New York lawmakers, Rangel "indicated there was some sloppiness" in his official papers, Rep. Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y., told reporters, "but, you know, there's no criminality here."

The delegation and the Congressional Black Caucus, which was co-founded by Rangel, urged their colleagues not to rush to judgment. House leaders were mum on what Rangel should do.

Rangel faces 13 charges of misusing his office as well as tax and disclosure violations. If Rangel and the ethics committee do not settle the case, it goes to a public trial this fall, at the height of an election season.

Further complicating matters for Democrats, a House investigative panel decided Friday to charge Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters of California with ethics violations, raising the possibility of a second trial. The alleged violations by Rangel and Waters are not related.

People familiar with the Waters investigation, who were not authorized to be quoted about charges that had not been announced, told the AP the allegations could be made public next week.

Republicans already were on the attack.

The GOP's campaign arm, the National Republican Campaign Committee, released a list of Democrats who have not returned campaign contributions they received from Rangel during their careers and said those lawmakers would face questions about the matter from constituents during the August break.

Rep. Gene Green, the Texas Democrat who led the four-member bipartisan panel of investigators, told reporters that his committee recommended a relatively mild punishment for Rangel: reprimand, a statement of wrongdoing voted by the whole House that carries no other penalty.

But that's not what some lawmakers, including Democrats, view as adequate.

"If at the trial's conclusion Mr. Rangel is found guilty by his peers, then he should incur the full punishment allowed by the House, including removal from office," said Rep. Bobby Bright, D-Ala.

AP writer Larry Margasak contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

[Whisp]

104. heheh. you made me laugh. ;)

Obama does not use the word resign, but he strongly insinuates it. He suggests(hopes) Rangel ....,


need I read more of what someone guesses what someone else may possible mean maybe perhaps?

:rofl:

[AtomicKitten]

132. lolsnort

Are you STRONGLY INSINUATING the OP's claim is horseshit?
:fistbump:

[Kahuna]

99. According to the OP, the president apparently said, "Resign right now, Charlie..

OR ELSE!!!! :crazy: :rofl:

[Whisp]

122. they way I heard it:

Obama said: Rangel you lousy scamming bastard, get your ass packed and push off before I eat your eye balls in public.

http://www.ThingsSomePeopleHopeObamaActuallyDidSayAndDo.com

[sabrina 1]

40. Rec'd for asking that question. But

Shhhh, we are not supposed to call out our hypocritical leaders.

I'd still like to know why War Crimes will not be prosecuted in this country and why few, other than people like Charlie Rangel ever spoke out against them.

Maybe that's why he has been singled out of a Congress so filled with corrupt members it would probably be impossible to prosecute them all?

[bvar22]

51. Rangel votes with "The Left" occasionally.

The Democratic Party Leadership would rather have a Centrist (1/2 Republican) Anti-LABOR Blue Dog in Rangel's seat.
Thats why they campaign for Anti-LABOR Blue Dogs like Blanche Lincoln, and REAL Republicans like Specter in Democratic Primaries.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans."
---Paul Wellstone

[EFerrari]

52. I think Management wants someone in that seat who is more manageable.

But, I'm an English teacher. lol

[bvar22]

65. Oh Yes.

They would prefer a Sensible, Pragmatic, Go Along with Republicans to Get Along "Centrist" to a (God Forbid) Liberal.

[AnArmyVeteran]

53. The LOG Syndrome: Lack Of Guts...

[Upsideout]

54. vitter and ensign

Because sexual indiscretions don't amount to abuse of office, generally.

[villager]

56. Well, not if you're Republican!

n/t

[Tansy_Gold]

118. Ensign isn't in trouble for his sexual indiscretions but for the

ethics violations committed in paying off his mistress and her husband.




TG, NTY

[newspeak]

126. well, how about Stevens and Frist

who were left off the hook.

[Stinky The Clown]

61. Vichy Dems singing Patriotic Songs

[deaniac21]

67. It's starting to look racial now that they are after Rep. Waters too.

[Kahuna]

101. Who is after Rep Waters? Who is "they?" And please cite a credible source. nt

[deaniac21]

129. Where have you been...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38497782/ns/politics-

[deaniac21]

130. Where have you been...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38497782/ns/politics-

[Kahuna]

135. I spend very little time on DU these days or watching the "news."

Thanks for the link. :hi:

[deaniac21]

146. U welcome

:hi:

[amborin]

84. Obama cow tows to rethugs, repeatedly, starting with the stimulus package

[janx]

88. Dude--

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/kowtowing

It has nothing to do with cows.

[amborin]

91. LOL!

thanks!

[janx]

94. You're welcome.

Overuse of the internets does that to us sometimes. :hug:

[Kahuna]

100. And I hear he picks his nose too.

:silly:

[ProSense]

90. Right, like if the President

was defending Rangel he wouldn't be called a hypocrite.

[RainDog]

92. ...and war crimes are okay

[Hekate]

93. Unrec for misreading of available information

... or mis-statement of same

[WonderGrunion]

96. A real response here. President Obama is the head

of the Democratic Party. If a member of a party engages in malfeasance, it is the responsibility of the head of that party to ask (privately, publicly or both) for that party member to step down from their elected position. Ensign and Vitter are members of the Republic Party. The head of that party is Rush Limbaugh Michael Steele. As such, he is the only one that has the authority to actually ask a Republic to step down and not just pontificate about it.

[IndianaGreen]

112. So why didn't Obama go after those that voted for the banks, Big Pharma, etc

against the people that elected them?

Something is rotten here!

[nashville_brook]

116. so we can expect him to ask for Geithners' and Summers' resignations for their Goldman malfeasance.

i'm so glad that's on the horizon...'bout damn time.

[Kahuna]

98. When did the president "demand" anything? It is very disingenuous to

suggest that the president said any such thing. Even if you can extract that his words suggest that he would wish that Rangel would resign, and I would agree that that is what the president was suggesting, that is far from him DEMANDING. :eyes:

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[laughingliberal]

107. K & R for good question. nm

[Raine]

140. Agree

Democratic politians should never turn on each other no matter what they have done, the repiggies sure don't.

[Greyhound]

110. The NewBlue3rdWayDlcDogs want that committee seat. Ways and Means is the cherry-on-top

of the Congressional sundae.
:kick:

[IndianaGreen]

111. Odd they are targeting the African-American members of Congress

Rangel and Waters, and not the people like Ben Nelson, Evan Bayh, Blanche Lincoln, and Chris Dodd, to name only a few, whose voting record is one of supporting Wall Street against the interests of the voters that elected them.

Something is cooking behind the curtain, but we aren't allowed to look.

[nashville_brook]

115. word. OneUnited Bank asked Waters for help for $12 million in bailout -- Goldman got $12 BILLion

so lets start INVESTIGATING who helped them, mmmkay?

at a time when we're in really deep shit b/c of real honest-to-god corporate CONTROL of congress, the administration via the TREASURY dept (Geithner) is going after the Congressional Black Caucus and the most progressive members of congress for these paltry, trumped-up bullshit. Waters' husband had a PREVIOUS relationship with the bank. Not a current relationship. Not current financial interest. And we're supposed to be outraged that this bank, OneUnited Bank, one of the nation's largest minority-owned institutions, received $12 million in bailout funds. how much did GOLDMAN receive? $12 BILLION, and then turns around and hands out $14 billion in bonuses. So, how many Goldman executives had private meetings with Geithner, Summers, et al? And when are their ETHICS TRIALS?

This is Whitewater all over again, only it's from within the party and it's designed to silence the Black Caucus and progressive members of Congress. Plain and simple.

[newspeak]

127. yeah, it looks like they are going after the black caucus

You know the black caucus who attempted to get support to fight Little Boots coronation. So, when do they start investigating Blanche Lincoln or Max Baucus for their ties with the health insurance industry? Or, we can go back and investigate a real stinker, Darth Cheney and Halliburton-KBR.

[Citizen Worker]

119. What happened to looking forward and not backward? Or, is this limited to the criminal

activity of the Cheney/Bush administration?

[Cary]

120. I'm a little confused.

I didn't think you considered yourself to actually be a Democrat. Now you're saying that you are one?

Which is it?

[laughingliberal]

123. I agree. You are a little confused.

The OP has never been anything but a Democrat and has been very active for many decades in her local Democratic party.

However, never let the facts get in the way of a good smear. Cary on.

[saracat]

125. I have NEVER been anything but a Democrat nor claimed to be.

Recently, I have been a disappointed Democrat but a Democrat. I still have an elected Party position. AND I still campaign for Democrats.

[Cary]

134. Interesting

I have NEVER been anything but a Democrat nor claimed to be. I have been disappointed in a lot of things, but a Democrat. I would never run for political office because I would never subject myself to the garbage that elected Party officials subject themselves to, and I make a lot more money doing what I really enjoy which often involves suing the government. AND I still campaign for Democrats.

You are more invested in the Democratic Party than I am, yet I have seen you say some of the most atrocious things and side with posters who have actually come out in favor of teabaggers.

This is a serious question here. I seriously don't understand what it is you think you're accomplishing. These "conservatives" absolutely have to be defeated. I know these people. I live in a liberal area. I have grown up in a liberal tradition, surrounded mostly by liberals. I was educated mostly by liberals.

I have done battle with "conservatives" on the internet for the past decade and they're intent upon destroying this country through their utter stupidity and irresponsibility, and they're liars. They're big time liars.

Moreover I don't understand how the radical left thinks it can get along with the radical right and even right leaning moderates if you can't get along with left leaning moderates. I see no logic in the notion that the radical right is going to reach anti-intellectual, knee jerk reactionary "conservatives". I know they despise the radical left. Again, I have been talking to these people. When I say they despise the radical left that is a gross understatement.

I don't know you, Saracat, but I sincerely hope IRL you're more of a team player than you seem to be here because we really do need to defeat these "conservatives". And it has to be "we". There's no other way.

[nashville_brook]

137. "radical left" -- seriously. people who want nothing more than what Obama PROMISED, campaigned on

presumably as a "democrat" and not a "leftist" or even "liberal" one at that.

it's shameful to use the same alienating language that a teabagger would use to marginalize democrats. you really need to take a step back and see how you present yourself to other people.

[Name removed]

138. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[laughingliberal]

141. Lol. I suppose the irony of this post while accusing others of ad hominems escapes you. Typical. nt

[laughingliberal]

139. I have never seen Saracat side with the teabaggers on any issue or take a conservative stand

on anything. I have, however, seen many Democrats, elected as well as rank and file voters, taking conservative positions and calling those who disagree, "teabaggers."

I don't care for the policies of Reagan and the damage they've done to this country and I'm going to disagree with them no matter whose selling them. I see Saracat as doing the same.

[saracat]

142. I have never aligned myself with tea baggers. Ever. And I am not a team player when it comes to

supporting those who are against my interests , no matter what party they are from. I will not support any anti gay or anti choice Democrats. I will not do it. My husband ran for office in a conservative district as liberal Democrat and almost won, but he refused to say he was against Gay Marriage. The Democratic Party did nothing to support those candidates who defended equality. Nothing. They left them to drown. Oddly , he actually received more support from moderate Repugs who believed he was a decent man. Much as some GOP perceive Alan Grayson, voters actually respect you if you stand for something.Often,our Democratic Apparacthcnicks have no such respect. They are totally invested in playing the "game".

Today, in another red district there is a female Democratic Candidate who is anti -choice.They are supporting her. They say she "has" to be anti-choice to win in her district. My husband was flat out told to "lie" by the PTB and say whatever he had to to win.

I guess I believe having a soul and standing for something is more important than "winning". I have said all along that "what you win" is as important than winning.I have no interest in the "game" for the "game" itself. I believe in putting people over politics and I will also put people over party every time. And as a Democrat, I expect the Democratic Party to share those values.

[laughingliberal]

143. Many years ago, my husband's father ran for state Senate here as a Democrat.

The party here tried to convince him to accede to the wishes of the mob in Vegas. He refused, got little support from the party after that but came very close to winning. I guess the more things change, the more they stay the same. A little support from the party and they could have won.

[butterfly77]

121. The republiCONS need to go..

and so does Charlie Rangel..

[Proud Liberal Dem]

147. I dunno.........We're NOT Republicans?

I imagine that it's easier to "police your own" and make sure that our own people are holding themselves up to the highest possible standards. I'm not saying that I believe that every single Democratic politician that's under a "cloud" should be forced to instantly resign, admit guilt, etc. but we have to at least acknowledge it and hold them accountable in whatever way that is deemed appropriate.
As for why we're not going after Republicans for their malfeasance, well............:shrug: Maybe we are just too busy working and actually trying to get things to suck up valuable floor time endlessly attacking Republicans for their personal legal and ethical troubles? Besides, it's not like they're not getting investigated by other entities- if their misconduct rises to a certain level. Furthermore, if the Republicans don't insist on policing their own, then, well, that should look bad on them, shouldn't it? Do we have the time to run a partisan witch-hunt against the Republicans? Do we WANT to be like how they were during the Clinton years when they apparently had nothing better to do than to investigate Clinton? Yeah, it'd be sweet to run down a few Republicans like Vitter, Ensign, et. al but then what have really accomplished for the public?