That said, is it no wonder that the party of clinton is defined by corruption?
Posted on 01/01/2007 9:02:47 PM PST by george76
Here's a great way to ring another new year of the culture of corruption in Washington.
Jason Smith notes: Incoming Judiciary Committee Chair Admits Breaking Ethics Rules...
Conyers is a slimeball, but he cooperated with us, so we'll issue this public statement we hope no one will see and trust him to "monitor" his staff so all that bad stuff doesn't happen again under his vigilant watch.
Business. As. Usual.
The back story: As The Hill newspaper reported last spring, "two former Conyers’ aides alleged that he repeatedly violated House ethics rules by requiring aides to work on local and state campaigns, and babysit and chauffeur his children.
Deanna Maher, a former deputy chief of staff in the Detroit office, and Sydney Rooks, a former legal counsel in his district office, shared numerous letters, memos, e-mails, handwritten notes and expense reports with The Hill.
They also sent the same materials to the House ethics panel, the FBI and the U.S. attorney’s office."
(Excerpt) Read more at michellemalkin.com ...
.
John Conyers (D-Mich.) “accepted responsibility” for breaking House Ethics rules (and possibly some laws) for requiring “his official staffers to work on campaigns, babysit his children, and run personal errands.”
So what does the House Ethics Committee do to punish him? They quietly released a public statement, perfectly timed to minimize coverage in the press, that simply says Conyers ought to refrain from breaking ethics rules and laws in the future.
http://www.texasrainmaker.com/2006/12/30/incoming-judiciary-committee-chair-admits-breaking-ethics-rules/
" not even a slap on the wrist.
And this for the man who will soon be Chairman of the House Committee that has jurisdiction over the civil and criminal justice system. "
Why can't Malkin give the guy a break? I mean, he's only had 41 years to get acquainted with the rules governing this stuff, so why the rush to judgement by Michelle?
Hey Malkin, the guy apologized, OK? < /S >
Conyers will remain chairman of the Judiciary Committee in Nancy Pelosi's "most honest, most open, and most ethical Congress in history.”
Didn't the incoming Clintonistas also promise us the "most ethical" administration in the history of the U.S.?
His congressional staff ( paid by us taxpayers ) is not supposed to work on campaigns .
That seems a very serious charge.
The FBI should be looking at it.
Yes
The House ethics panel at least responded. And the FBI and the U.S. attorney’s office said/did...
{{ crickets }}
Is it not a Federal crime for a staffer to work on a campaign without taking leave?
This has GOT to stop!
The Rule of Law means nothing any more!!
A federal staffer is supposed to leave the congressional job, stop taking pay checks from the taxpayers ( us ), and only then work for a campaign.
There should be a cooling off period, too ?
Nancy Pelosi is hard at work on ethical "issues"...
With one exception. The scheduler is allowed to work for both the congressional office and the campaign, for the practical reason that the candidate/congressman is just one guy and can only have one schedule.
There should be a cooling off period, too ?
I don't see the need. Presumably, anyone working in support of a congressman is working in support of his positions, so there's no real conflict of interest.
There is and must be a bright line between congressional staffs and campaign staffs, because otherwise incumbents would have a taxpayer-funded advantage, and would be like spammers, selling to you on your own dime -- but both sides of that line serve the same interest. The question is who pays. It's not comparable to going from a government office to a lobbying gig, where there are and should be cooling-off periods.
" They quietly released a public statement, perfectly timed to minimize coverage in the press..."
Thanks.
He also required “his official staffers to work on campaigns, babysit his children, and run personal errands.”
It's not like Conyers is a lawyer and should understand the laws.
Nice of Conyers to not pursue impeachment of the President.
Conyers accepts responsibility for possible ethics violations
The Hill | December 30, 2006 | Jonathan E. Kaplan, Jackie Kucinich
Posted on 12/30/2006 7:41:45 PM EST by rightwingintelligentsia
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1760452/posts
And that's clearly way over the line. Jim Traficant is doing federal time for that sort of thing. Congrescritters make enough money to hire their own errand boys and babysitters, and the campaigns shouldn't have taxpayer subsidies (within reason -- if it takes a few seconds for a Capitol Hill staffer to transfer a call to the campaign office, tracking that is more trouble than it's worth).
If the congrescritter pressured his taxpayer-paid staffers to support his political ambitions or his personal lifestyle, he needs the book thrown at him hard enough to leave a mark. On the other hand, if he offered a staffer money to babysit the kids during his off-hours, that would be trickier.
When I worked on the Hill as a summer intern, most of the staffers were under-30 and making under-$30K. There was a lot of dorm-style living, and most folks scaled back their lifestyles, worked second and third jobs waiting tables, or relied on parental subsidies to make ends meet.
In time, some folks worked their way up to leadership or committee staffs, where the money was a little better. Others got jobs with the parties, where the money was much better. Others went to work for lobbying firms, where the money was mind-bogglingly better. Most went back to the real world or back to school, with the House stint as a nice little feather on the resume.
I know there's a popular belief that life on the Hill is all champagne and caviar, but it ain't so. Most of it is a lot of work for meager reward, and the most ambitious move up while the others move out. Most of the staffers are motivated by a desire to make a difference, a desire to make contacts, or parental pressure, and that's true of both parties and every conceivable ideology.
My last comment was based on a couple of narrow points -- one, that there's some inevitable overlap between the office and the campaign. The scheduler works for both, but more importantly, so does the guy at the top of the pyramid, the Congressman/candidate his own self. He can't forget what his XA (executive assistant) told him when he's talking to his campaign manager, or vise versa, because the human brain doesn't work like that.
The second narrow point was that I don't see the need for a cooling-off period between working in the office and working for the campaign. I don't see a conflict of interest or divided loyalties in going from office to campaign and back again, and it's done by both parties with complete abandon.
Neither of those narrow points takes away from the fact that I agree with you that anyone who's working on the people's dime should be doing the people's work.
The 2007 version of the culture of corruption is comming to your town . Nancy Pelosi endorses the new version along with such greats as Ted (the swimmer) Kennedy , Chas.(race bateing) Rangles , Bill (cold cash)Jefferson , Jerry (had a little page) Studds and don't forget a tax evading Hillary Roddam . Wow what a great new year to look forward to . . .
And note the date...
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.