!! 
Posted on 12/02/2010 1:36:58 PM PST by Justaham
With a censure vote looming this afternoon, Rep. Charlie Rangel clashed with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) in a closed-door meeting this morning, as the New York Democrat and his supporters demanded the right to seek a lesser punishment for a series of ethics violations.
Reps. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) and Jo Bonner (R-Ala.) came to the floor shortly after 4 p.m. Thursday afternoon to offer the censure resolution against Rangel, who was found guilty of 11 ethics violations related to his personal finances. Lofgren and Bonner are taking one hour of floor time for the resolution, half of which will be given to Rangel to defend himself.
A vote could come some time after 5 p.m.
Censure is the most serious punishment the House can mete out to a member short of expulsion. The 80-yerd Rangel will be required to stand in the well of the House while Pelosi reads out a public rebuke of the veteran lawmaker. This will be the first time in 30 years that the House has considered censuring a lawmaker.
Lofgren read some of the basic charges against Rangel, and she acknowledged that some lawmakers have asked for a more gentle rebuke of Rangel. But she defended the process.
“For precedent to be followed, precedent must be set,” Lofgren said. “… The purpose of the ethics process is not punishment, but accountability and integrity.”
Members of the Congressional Black Caucus and other Rangel supporters have been lobbying their colleagues frantically throughout the day to support an amended resolution calling for a formal reprimand. That resolution would just be entered into the Congressional Record, and Rangel would not have to stand before his colleagues to be rebuked.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
POPCORN. . .get your POPCORN here!!!
He walked out of his ethics trial, he'd probably just walk out of this as well.
HANG ‘EM.
Censure is the most serious punishment the House can mete out to a member short of expulsion. The 80-yerd Rangel will be required to stand in the well of the House while Pelosi reads out a public rebuke of the veteran lawmaker.
Oh GOOD GRIEF! What is the freaking point? I’m sure that once she is finished with her “rebuke” she will give him a smile and a wink!
How much taxpayer money was wasted on this case when it all comes to this? Why didn’t they just say “Well, we could investigate Charlie cause he probably did a lot of bad stuff, but we’ve decided it would be pointless because no matter WHAT we discover, the worst that will happen is a ‘rebuke.’”
Rangel talking now.....WTF does getting injured in war have to do with stealing money?
Only in a liberla world does this make sense.
Rangel is a weasel redux.
He could be the gift that keeps on giving for 2 more years.
I am sure censure once meant something way back when.....but it is now meaningless as these vermin have no shame.
If he walks out, Boehner should rise and call for his expulsion.
The real intrigue is why isn't Maxine Waters getting the same slap on the wrist that Charlie is?
Spinchter of the Horse versus a horse’s ass.
He could avoid censure with a resignation.
Victim mentality, everyone is a victim.
He should count his blessings that he is not going to JAIL!
Actually, it's almost 30 years (1983) since the House censured (not "considered censuring") a member -- Gerry Studds, for getting pages drunk and having sex with them. Oddly enough, another Dem.
Ala Bud Dwyer?
!!
Cleave Rangel in half with a sword.
Censure one half, and declare the other half innocent of all charges.
Problem solved, justice served.
Update on Rangel hearing: He says he has made ‘serious mistakes,’ asks for fairness - NBC
4 minutes ago via breakingnews.com
This hyper-arrogant thief and tax evader should be prosecuted by the federal government. Fat chance of that, of course. Somehow I doubt any republicans will stand up and demand this happen or call Rangel the thief and criminal he is.
Duke Cunningham didn’t so anything worse than Rangel and he is in prison.
“This will be the first time in 30 years that the House has considered censuring a lawmaker.”
What irony to call this cheat “a lawmaker”, when he is actually a “lawbreaker”.
And this is not just any lawmaker. He is not a peon in Congress. He is one of the most senior representatives EVER and held what some describe as the most powerful post in the House, second only to the Speaker, in the Ways and Means Committee.
Disgrace and rebuke is justly deserved fro Charlie.
He will not take this with grace, but will probably blame most everybody else, as well as use the golden pass of our era, the Race Card.
Reminds me of a great political cartoon that I saw recently of some hapless taxpayer at his IRS audit, being presented with a massive tax bill saying to the auditor, 'Couldn't I just be censured in the well of the House, instead?'.
If there was any justice Rangel would have to stand in the well of the House chambers, in front of his colleagues, while one person placed handcuffs on him and another said, “You have the right to remain silent. If you give up this right anything you say can and will be used against you. You have the right to an attorney...”
Yerd? As in, "yerd me son, git yerself to the woooood shed!"? Or maybe, "yerdeception hazz beeen deetected"? "Yerd'a one in deep trouble?"
“yerd?” Must be one of those new texting abbreviations that I can’t keep up with!
Carlie, you’ve been a bad boy. For your punishment you’ll only get one scoop of ice cream instead of two.
CSPAN Live
Live to House: Rep Peter King (R-NY) recommends reprimand rather than censure.
We now have the publicity whore Peter King of NYC speaking on behalf of Rangel.
Crud if these people keep talking they will convince themselves that nothing ever happened!
The man should be JAILED.
Any one of us would be for committing the same crimes.
If we had an honest president and AG, Rangel would be the target of a fed investigation with charges be filed and him being prosecuted. But we don’t!
And I don't think he raised the "I'm a war hero defense" as did Rangel.
Whatever happened to tar and feathering?
HOLY CRUD... a reprimand amendment was floated and voice-voted, and CLEARLY the NAYs won, and the “speaker” called it as the YAYs winning. So, good thing that the voice vote was questioned, and now its in a 15-minute electronic vote.
I think it is because most of them in the House like Charlie and want his fate decided by the Democrats.
On the other hand, they want the Republican controlled house to deal with Maxine!
Who is this “speaker” clown that calls a NAY vote for the YAYs?
a GOP congressman would have already been forced to resign... just saying.
In the good old days they’d have sewn him into a sack with a pair of wildcats and thrown him into the Tiber. Just sayin’.
Nancy thinks she has the goods on a Republican. There can be no other reason.
If this was a Republican, he’d be packing up his office. He should be censured and then made to resign. Look what they did to Tom DeLay.
How about “Black Crows”?
Vote to censure seems to be
Dems 170 y 77 n 8 nv
GOP 162 y 2 n 15 nv
Totl 333 y 79 n
==
Pelosi is at the podium.
Rangel addressing the House body.
Oh brother!
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.