Posted on 05/24/2006 9:46:51 AM PDT by areafiftyone
But the thing is they DIDN'T.
Yes, they did, in November of 2004. And then changed it back in January 2005 (sorry, might have put the wrong years in my earlier answer.) And I'm not comparing it to the Dems - Jefferson ought to resign his seat - but simply taking issue with the statement that DeLay immediately stepped down.
Democrats always have a problem distinguishing the differences in things, they always attempt to say one thing is the same as another. It's sort of like saying taking an ink pen home from work is the same as embezzeling $1 million of taxpayers money. Yes, both are thefts, but come on, even THEY have to see the difference. It's almost like they are missing something important inside, don't you think?
No, that is backwards. Republicans have a rule that if you are indicted for a felony, you must step down from chairs or other leadership positions.
The democrats have no such rule. That was what Jefferson was pointing out in his letter -- Democrats have been indicted, gone to trial, and never been asked to step down unless they were convicted.
BTW, to others, Tom Delay DID step down from his leadership positions as soon as he was indicted. In January he made it PERMANENT -- before that it was still his job to have when the indictment was dismissed or he won his case.
DeLay immediately stepped down when he was officially indicted. At the time, it was a temporary move, and Blunt took over for him.
In January, when it was clear he couldn't get a speedy trial, or get all the charges dismissed, he gave up the position permanently so the republicans could elect a new majority leader.
In November of 2004, realising that a state/local prosecuter could pretty much indict anybody just by asking a grand jury to do so, changed their rule to be JUST LIKE the democrats rule -- which is no rule at all.
The Democrats screamed about it, the newspapers screamed about it, and they immediately reversed themseles (BEFORE January 2005).
In January, they passed the new rules regarding the ethics committee. By April, the democrats had managed to play THAT into a MSM barrage on the republicans, and the republicans allowed a NEW vote in the house, which restored the old ethics committee rules.
However, at that time the democrats came up with ANOTHER excuse not to allow the ethics committee to meet -- so that they could "accuse" republicans of ethical violations, and there would be no committee to prove their charges wrong.
The ethics committee went 16 months with the democrats blocking it from meeting. The democrats could do that because the committee is bi-partisan, split 50/50, and you need a majority of committee members for a quorum.
Of course, Jefferson has not been indicted yet, so under the republican rule he would not have to step down.
Pelosi has been trying to force her bad apples out BEFORE they are indicted, so she can claime the "high ground" on her culture of corruption.
Ney, for example, is under investigation, but has not been charged with a crime. I don't think he should step down, investigations can often find a person is NOT guilty.
We think Jefferson is a special case because the evidence against him sounds very convincing. And if this was a state crime, and he was a republican, and there was a democratic attorney general, that prosecuter probably would have indicted LONG AGO to force him out of his position.
I hope he gets indicted really soon, and still refuses to leave. Because at THAT time, the republicans will be able to point out that under THEIR rules, he would have been forced to leave his leadership position, while under DEMOCRAT rules he would not be.
They could then remind people that THIS was one of the reasons for the Contract with America, and shows that the Republicans are better trusted on the matter of ethics, because they have rules which the democrats refuse to adopt.
The only thing Pelosi "gets" is that this whole deal is messing up their "Republican Culture of Corruption" mantra.
What a bunch of sharks.
Jeffereson also could have been doing the step and fetch for the DNC , and she wants him away from the microphones and cameras, cause he gonna tell all!
Ron Brown was likely assasinated for the same type of conduct, (treat me right or I'm going to tell.).
"Justice Department officials said the decision to search Jefferson’s office was made in part because he refused to comply with a subpoena for documents last summer. Jefferson reported the subpoena to the House on Sept. 15, 2005."
This is why they did what they did.
He'll claim it's unconstitutional.
You're right, he hasn't been indicted yet (I can't help but wonder why a man who has been caught with $90,000 in his freezer, and on tape accepting $100,000 as a bribe, hasn't been indicted yet.
With respect, Pelosi does not "get" jack s**t.
If Jefferson were not black she would not have said a word. She should ask him e oto resign his seat, but will engineer this so that it is tied up in the "ETHICS" committee for years.
Please remember that the clown from Washington State, McDermott is still in Congress and he was judged as guilty in Boener's lawsuit.
Please see my tagline.
".. pelosi gets it, how come FatAss Hastert doesn't????"
it's the Ole Congressional You Scratch My Back Game. Hastert stands up, at least theoretically, for the special rights and privileges of the House as a whole; Nancy applauds Hastert, and her part is to ask Jefferson to give up his committee seat, which, in turn, Hastert will applaud.
Unless Jefferson resigns, it takes away from Nancy's "Culture of Corruption" hand, YET, she can say she tried to strip him of a very highly prized committee seat.
This Round Winner: Pelosi
Scrub that. There is something up here and Jefferson has the ability to talk about who the money was really being collected for. He is likely just a step and fetch bagman for someone else, which is why Pelossi wants him off the committee and into the shadows.
Stay in your seat Jefferson, and look to the party of Lincoln to save tour a$$.
Check out the latest headline on Fox. Call it "the gift that keeps on giving".
Maybe he should go visit Cunningham and check out the new Congressional wing at the Federal Pen....
so much for ethics and standards in the RAT party...
"I would like to see what is in Pelosi's freezer."
Well, one thing we DO know is there are no Union jobs in her freezer. She and her husband own a ritzy hotel in the San Fransissysko area but refuse to hire Union people. Not exactly a Democrat position, is it? OTOH, we've got ours, so f*** off does sound like your typical Democrat, doesn't it?
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.