Posted on 07/26/2002 6:37:59 AM PDT by mrs9x
WASHINGTON -- The Senate ethics panel investigating Sen. Robert Torricelli is nearing the end of its work, and will not interview the New Jersey Democrat's chief accuser, its chairman said.
The ethics committee -- three Republican and three Democratic senators -- met with Torricelli and his lawyer for nearly three hours before adjourning for the night.
"We're too tired -- I'll be honest with you -- to make any decisions tonight," the committee chairman, Democratic Sen. Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, said Thursday as the meeting broke up.
Earlier in the week, Torricelli spent more than four hours testifying before ethics committee staff.
The committee is exploring allegations that Torricelli accepted gifts and cash from a campaign contributor, David Chang, and, in return, helped Chang with business dealings overseas.
Inouye said a conclusion could come next week, before the Senate breaks for its August recess. The committee's options include disciplining Torricelli or closing the case with no action.
Inouye said the committee does not plan to call any other witnesses, including Chang, who has indicated he wants to present his case to the panel.
NewsChannel 4's Jonathan Dienst reported Thursday evening that WNBC-TV had found an invoice indicating a $1,695 big screen television that was purchased by Chang at a store in Englewood, N.J., was delivered to Torricelli's home in 1998.
Those records, which are now in the hands of the Justice Department and the Senate Ethics Committee, show that Chang paid for the television on Nov. 4, 1998 - and that the expensive TV was delivered to the then-home of Sen. Robert Torricelli, the records show.
However, Torricelli insists he never took any gifts from Chang. In a statement, Torricelli said: "We have said from the beginning that when this concludes it will answer these questions and we remain confident that this is the case... We will not respond to unfounded and irresponsible leaks and rumors."
The ethics committee also has financial records and witness testimony suggesting Chang gave Torricelli cash to pay for a $3,816 Scottish grandfather clock, NewsChannel 4 also reported.
Torricelli denies taking anything from Chang and says the assistance he gave Chang was within the normal boundaries of what a lawmaker does for a constituent.
So who should the investigators believe?
"Could Sen. Torricelli explain how he paid $3,600 in cash for an antique clock in Lambertville, N.J., with Mr. Chang present, when Torricelli had not made a cash withdrawal from his own accounts totaling that amount for the last six months?" asks a Justice Department official who insisted on anonymity. "But Mr. Chang made that exact withdrawal that very Wednesday."
At the New Jersey stores where some of the gifts in question were bought, merchants said they have not heard from the ethics panel. One store owner said Chang bought a $450 diamond pendant at his shop. The owner said that he cooperated with the Federal Bureau of Investigations a couple of years ago, but he does not know if Chang's purchase wound up going to Torricelli or any of his girlfriends.
"It's definitely not something that you give a senator to bribe him or turn his opinion in your favor," the storeowner said.
Chang is serving a prison sentence for making illegal donations to Torricelli in 1996. He has said Torricelli demanded donations and expensive gifts in exchange for assisting him in business ventures in North and South Korea.
Chang's lawyer, Bradley Simon, wrote Inouye this week to urge that the committee seek his client's testimony.
"It is impossible to conduct a thorough probe of this matter without hearing from David Chang, who is the one witness with firsthand knowledge of these matters," Simon said Thursday night.
"Sadly, it appears the ethics committee is determined to sweep the matter under the rug."
After the hearing, Torricelli said he remains confident the case will end in his favor.
"I want this process to end with a complete understanding that Mr. Chang's allegations are false," he said.
He denied taking any gifts and said he is guilty only of bad judgment in making friends with Chang.
The case has become an issue in Torricelli's effort to win a second term. The campaign manager of his Republican opponent, businessman Douglas Forrester, renewed his call Thursday for Torricelli to release the transcript of his testimony to the committee. Torricelli has said that is a decision for the committee.
The Justice Department spent three years investigating Torricelli's relationship with Chang. No charges were brought against Torricelli, but the lead prosecutor, Mary Jo White, referred materials to the ethics committee for review.
the senate (lack of) ethics committee is kinda like that out-of-town aunt that babysits once or twice a year -- not much discipline at all if really needed.
i wonder if the (lack of) ethics committee cares more about Torch or their next free meal or exotic trip somewhere.
Ah, Democrats.....HYPOCRACY is they name!
Ah yes, Lieberman, the "conscience of the Senate." How laughable.
BTW, a "hypocracy" is the government that results from Democrat control or participation; "hypocrisy" is what they routinely practice! (Sorry, but I could not pass that up!)
Idiotic title, in light of the following statement:
Chang is serving a prison sentence for making illegal donations to Torricelli in 1996.
Am I missing something here?
Yeah, he would have resigned in disgrace by now.
Don't worry too much about a running back, Ryan Grant will prove more than worthy a replacement. Look more for how well they can adjust to the west coast offense. The offensive line is really solid....all 5 starters are returning.
I heard a short interview on the radio a few weeks ago, and the host made the point that the U.S. Senate ceased to be an institution worthy of respect once the Senators were elected by the voters of each state. Before the 17th Amendment was ratified (I believe it was the 17th), U.S. Senators were appointed by each state in the manner it saw fit. Some states may have elected them, but I think in most states the Senators were appointed by the state legislature.
I think this point needs to pounded over and over!
Either Torricelli is guily also of accepting donations, or this is a huge miscarriage of justice against Chang.
"Senate" and "ethics" should never be in the same sentence togther after the sham of Clinton's impeachment. They are as guilty as Torricelli if they refuse to listen to the evidence, the same as they were as guilty as Clinton,... not that that would bother the majority of them a whit. They would just go on collecting their paychecks, making themselves rich through insider deals, and passing laws restricting the rest of us.
Scumbags!!
Standard operating procedure for this bunch. The fox is guarding the henhouse.
Forgive my senior moment for not remembering the man's name......sheesh.
I'm starting to envy the ignorant sheeple that pay no attention and therefore are not constantly sickened.
If he didn't, how can Chang be in prison for giving them?
You forget where this occured -- Washington DC.
By DC logic, the donor of illegal gifts is guilty and is punished, but the recipient of illegal gifts is not guily and is untouched. See? It's all quite logical.
must be okay.
on the other hand, when you are winning the approval ratings by doing something constructive (defending the united states) that was left undone, why go after a past president and his unethical lackeys to score political points. you don't need them and besides, the country's resources can be better deployed elsewhere protecting people.
not that i necessarily agree with moral judgements that would have to be made to get this far; this is merely my analysis.
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.