Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Looks like Torch will probably walk...
1 posted on 07/26/2002 6:38:00 AM PDT by mrs9x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: mrs9x
I just love how Democrats are always "too tired" to investigate one of their own...except for Traficant, of course.
2 posted on 07/26/2002 6:40:55 AM PDT by mrs9x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
If The Torch were Republican, it would be a completely different story.
3 posted on 07/26/2002 6:41:31 AM PDT by MotherSpector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x

Did Toricelli Accept Gifts from Chang?

If he didn't, how can Chang be in prison for giving them?

4 posted on 07/26/2002 6:42:13 AM PDT by BruceS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
Did he? Yeah, baby, ye-yeah...
5 posted on 07/26/2002 6:42:43 AM PDT by CreekerFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
I can't believe the arrogance of the Senate "ethics" committee in not calling other witnesses. On the face of it, it would appear that the Torch is absolutely guilty.
6 posted on 07/26/2002 6:44:10 AM PDT by jackbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
Yes, he did.

Panel Has Evidence of 2 Gifts to Torricelli, an Official Says

10 posted on 07/26/2002 6:55:12 AM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
Here are two simple "litmus" tests that will tell you if the Democraps are playing politics by not going after the Torch.....

1.) If a taxpayer had received income equivalent to a $1,600 - $1,800 TV and a $3,500+ clock, which totalled in the aggregate more than $5,000, would he or she be expected to declare that money as income for income tax purposes?

Answer = of course

2.) If this wsere a Republican, would the Dems be all over him or her?

Answer of course!

This whole process is a joke. Toricelli accepted this and probably more and all the Dems really want is to preserve their majority in the Senate

14 posted on 07/26/2002 7:16:21 AM PDT by irish guard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
Did Toricelli Accept Gifts from Chang?

Is the sky blue?
Is Torch a Democrat?

Kinda reminds me of another congressional "probe".

16 posted on 07/26/2002 7:34:37 AM PDT by Lil'freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
Inouye (D-HI) 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.


Riiiight! Let's not confuse the investigation with facts - just go with the self-serving "testimony" of the accused.

Not sure about this instance but in most hearings where a senator "testifies", as a "courtesy" he/she is not required to take an oath to tell the truth. Sigh.

17 posted on 07/26/2002 7:39:48 AM PDT by Tunehead54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
Law is for the little people...
20 posted on 07/26/2002 7:45:39 AM PDT by an amused spectator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
Thanks for posting. Posted earlier as Did Torricelli Accept Gifts From David Chang? ..

Walk away scott fee? Maybe.. I'd say with all that crotch padding in his trousers , he's more likely to waddle away.

We need to pound ethics into these idiots whether they like it or not. We Are Not BEing Served Well By Congre$$.
21 posted on 07/26/2002 7:50:55 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
Did Toricelli Accept Gifts from Chang?

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?

24 posted on 07/26/2002 7:58:03 AM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
Chang is serving a prison sentence for making illegal donations to Torricelli in 1996.

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!!

29 posted on 07/26/2002 8:42:23 AM PDT by Gritty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
"Sadly, it appears the ethics committee is determined to sweep the matter under the rug."

Standard operating procedure for this bunch. The fox is guarding the henhouse.

30 posted on 07/26/2002 9:01:06 AM PDT by b4its2late
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
bump
32 posted on 07/26/2002 10:56:55 AM PDT by rwfromkansas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
This is nonsense. We learned during the Clinton administration that only those making the bribe can be prosecuted -- never those accepting, the bribees.

33 posted on 07/26/2002 12:02:26 PM PDT by slowry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
This is a sickening whitewash. Comparing this with Traficant is enough to make me wonder why I bother caring about this stuff anyway. The spineless Repubs are worthless. The whole thing is a "good ole boys" club. The only reason I'll go to the polls this Nov. is to try and take the Senate so we can get some good judges in. Other than that the only thing I care about right now is term limits.

I'm starting to envy the ignorant sheeple that pay no attention and therefore are not constantly sickened.

34 posted on 07/26/2002 12:02:54 PM PDT by SoCar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: mrs9x
"i did not get stuck with a clock by that man, mr. chang." -- toricelli. sounds very familiar. where did i hear a similar phrase before?

must be okay.

36 posted on 07/26/2002 8:01:22 PM PDT by mlocher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson