Skip to comments.
HOUSE COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE MCDERMOTT
WINS News ^
| 12/28/04
Posted on 12/28/2004 9:01:31 AM PST by areafiftyone
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-57 last
To: DustyMoment
NO! It's called accountability. Better to start with a person who was willing to cow-tow to Saddam - and totally destroy the guy's credibility.
41
posted on
12/28/2004 12:06:57 PM PST
by
CyberAnt
(Where are the dem supporters? - try the trash cans in back of the abortion clinics.)
To: areafiftyone
McDermott? Wasn't he one of the Slime-Ball Senators who went to Iraq before the war in support of Saddam, and slammed the US and Bush?
42
posted on
12/28/2004 12:51:00 PM PST
by
processing please hold
(Islam and Christianity do not mix ----9-11 taught us that)
To: pbrown
43
posted on
12/28/2004 12:53:01 PM PST
by
areafiftyone
(Democrats = the hamster is dead but the wheel is still spinning)
To: areafiftyone
44
posted on
12/28/2004 12:55:00 PM PST
by
processing please hold
(Islam and Christianity do not mix ----9-11 taught us that)
To: pbrown
Traitor that he is. (forgot to add that one!)
45
posted on
12/28/2004 12:57:13 PM PST
by
areafiftyone
(Democrats = the hamster is dead but the wheel is still spinning)
To: DustyMoment
Oh, please!!! It was 7 years ago. Leave it alone. Statute of limitations and all that rubbish. From the article:
U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan concluded earlier this year that McDermott was responsible for the leak...
Looks as though the House was, reasonably, waiting for the court system to issue a finding before proceeding with an 'internal House matter'. It would be unseemly, and honestly presumptious, to issue an ethics ruling with a case pending in Federal court. Now that there has been a finding of fault in this case, the House has grounds to pursue the ethics complaint.
46
posted on
12/28/2004 12:58:12 PM PST
by
BlueNgold
(Feed the Tree .....)
To: areafiftyone
Traitor....he wears the name well.
47
posted on
12/28/2004 12:59:12 PM PST
by
processing please hold
(Islam and Christianity do not mix ----9-11 taught us that)
To: BlueNgold
Now that there has been a finding of fault in this case, the House has grounds to pursue the ethics complaint.
Who gives a rats a$$? It's nothing but politics. We howl like stuck pigs when the Dems pull these cheap stunts on us, then we turn around and pull the same thing!? For what?
It's been seven freakin' years, nobody remembers or cares about the "leak" and an ethics committee investigation has no meaning. The worst thing they will do is embarrass MsDermott, get the Dems all riled up into a flurry of name-calling and finger pointing, stir up the MSM into running a slew of "see what we mean about Republicans being bad guy" articles just so they can issue him a slap on the wrist.
The don't take his pay check, they don't refuse him his seat in the House, they can't stop him from running for re-election; they have no power to do anything but drag his name through the mud.
If that's all our Congress Critters have to do on our time and our dime, let'em stay home and find real jobs and we can elect people who are more interested in the needs of the country. We already know that Dems are losers, we don't need this dog and pony show to prove it!
48
posted on
12/28/2004 1:49:12 PM PST
by
DustyMoment
(Repeal CFR NOW!!)
To: DustyMoment
Unfortunately, we have bought ourselves a pig in a poke.
The pay's the same, poke or not. ;-)
49
posted on
12/28/2004 6:16:29 PM PST
by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi ...... The War on Terrorism is the ultimate 'faith-based' initiative.)
To: areafiftyone
To: areafiftyone
"McDermott's conduct violated the House Code of Official conduct," which requires members to conduct themselves "at all times in a manner which shall reflect creditably on the House of Representatives." [Snicker] I can think of a few Congressmen who may be in violation of this policy.
To: areafiftyone
Setting up to go after DeLay.
Just watch.
52
posted on
12/28/2004 6:23:56 PM PST
by
mabelkitty
(Blackwell for Governor in 2006!!!)
To: BlueNgold
the House was, reasonably, waiting for the court system to issue a finding before proceeding with an 'internal House matter'.The US House or US Senate is certainly not required to wait for all court activity to expire prior to dealing with an ethics complaint for one of its members. There are numerous precidents for same. Many, many pending cases come before the House while still pending in court. Ask Enron execs. Perhaps the "pending court case" excuse was used but, in my view, it was ill-advised to hold up hearings until seven years after this clear violation of member trust and federal law. Recall that McDermott never has denied giving this tape/transcript of private phone conversations of House leadership to the media. You or I would have been in front of a judge within days or weeks, not years on a similar violation.
By the way, how come the DemocRAT activists who originally recorded these conversations (with sophisticated electronic surveilance equipment) have never been held accountable? Their excuse was that they just happened upon these conversations and began taping. Ha. There was something much more sinister in all of this and it was probably planned all along to record these private phone conversations of the US Congressional leadership....
53
posted on
12/28/2004 6:31:26 PM PST
by
vox_freedom
(Fear no evil)
To: NormsRevenge
The pay's the same, poke or not. ;-)
Too Funny!!
54
posted on
12/28/2004 7:08:28 PM PST
by
DustyMoment
(Repeal CFR NOW!!)
To: vox_freedom
I didn't say they were required to, I said that they waited, and that I thought it was reasonable. I still do. The House and Senate have no business meddling in matters currently before the bar.
55
posted on
12/29/2004 7:03:14 AM PST
by
BlueNgold
(Feed the Tree .....)
To: BlueNgold
I didn't say they were required to...I didn't say you did. :-]
Since McDermott is now appealing, and the case is still "before the bar" I suppose Congress could "reasonably" wait for the final decision by the courts. I disagree and evidently the House Ethics committee does as well since it is finally moving on the complaint and consideration of McDermott's illegal actions. Again, since McDermott admitted complicity in this matter years ago (while asserting it was his 1st amendment right to hand the tapes over to the NYT's and other media),the House could and should have dealt with him in a timely manner. BTW, McDermott resigned his position as the ranking member of the Ethics panel soon after this issue surfaced -- and didn't wait for a court to find him guilty.
56
posted on
12/29/2004 8:21:17 AM PST
by
vox_freedom
(Fear no evil)
To: Mo1
It took 7 years to go through the courts.
I'm sorry .. but if the ethic committee had problems with what McDermott did ... it should have been addressed years ago
I think they'll probably consider whether his "conviction" is a violation of house ethics ... nonetheless, it is a "high crime" and grounds for impeachment and removal ... but that would cut off his financial aid
57
posted on
04/20/2005 5:21:00 AM PDT
by
Mamie2010
("The wheel has turned, it is time for them to go" -- Vice-President Richard Cheney)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-57 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson