It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


1: House Votes to Censure NY Rep. Rangel 2: Rangel: Censure Vote Was 'Very Political'

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 05:47 AM

WASHINGTON – Veteran Rep. Charles Rangel, the raspy-voiced, backslapping former chairman of one of Congress' most powerful committees, was censured by his House colleagues for financial misconduct Thursday in a solemn moment of humiliation in the sunset of his career. After the 333-79 vote, the Democrat from New York's Harlem stood at the front of the House and faced Speaker Nancy Pelosi as she read him the formal resolution of censure.

Responding, he admitted he had made mistakes and said he was sorry he had put fellow House members in an embarrassing position. But he suggested the winds of politics were involved as well. "In my heart I truly feel good," Rangel said. "A lot of it has to do with the fact that I know in my heart that I am not going to be judged by this Congress, but I am going to be judged by my life."



WASHINGTON (AP) — New York Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel says the House's overwhelming vote to censure him for financial misdeeds was political. A relieved and defiant Rangel told reporters that he is at peace with himself and convinced that when history is written, people will recognize that the 333-79 censure vote Thursday was in his words "very, very very political." The 20-term congressman insisted that he did not intend to violate House rules.


Very typical of the entire problem with the folks in Wash D.C. They just don't get it. They believe they are above the law in some way. Even when slapped in the face with the truth and the review of the evidence. But, the bigger problem is that he will probably get picked up by some law firm or lobbying firm and make double the money.

I know many of you make fun of the Tea Partiers, Palin and others but think just for a minute. Try to understand what is at the base of thier gripes and I think you will see that they just want leaders who are like them. Not ones that pretended to be etc.

I think this political season will be a turning page in American voting history.

Can't wait until the Maxine Waters case comes up. Make this one look like Junior High compared to what she has done. IMO.

edit on 12/3/2010 by anon72 because: error correction

posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 10:43 AM
Doesn't look like I am going to get any Rangel defenders/supporters.

What up with the Liberal ATSers today? Must be a holiday or something.

Or, they just don't have a leg to stand on-on the particular topic.

posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 11:05 AM
You can't defend Rangel's actions, frankly I believe he should have been kicked out of office. It completely amazes me that he was re elected. The amount of corruption that Rangel employed is astonishing.

His Censure to me is a complete joke. It's like he was slapped on the wrist for something that he should have been removed from office for.

posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 12:09 PM
reply to post by whatukno

Ijust heard the sound bite of the Democrates giving him a round of applause after Pelosi read ONE charge (and not the other 10-as she was suppose to do!)

Now I will start calling them Dumbocrates. They just don't get it. Keep it coming dummies. Come 2012. That's that big election. And I am not talking about Obama get his butt beat badly. I am talking the Senate. I think there are 25 Dumocrates up for election. Maybe 33. I can't remember off hand. hehehe.

The 2012 election just may turn out to make the 2010 one a footnote.

posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 12:14 PM
Removed from office? He should have been thrown in prison.........if a regular citizen did half the stuff that he got away with , they would have been locked up in the pokey for YEARS......

And all he gets is this?

Exactly the reason we need to be holding people accountable, this whole thing is a farce

posted on Dec, 3 2010 @ 06:52 PM
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

Actually no, most of the time, what Rangel did would have the IRS garnishing his wages and confiscating his assets. IRS things like this are a civil matter.

Rangel did pay up what he owed. It doesn't excuse what he did, but he wouldn't have ended up in jail unless he purposely refused to pay up. Then it would go from being a civil matter to being a criminal matter.

edit on 12/3/2010 by whatukno because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 02:36 PM
reply to post by anon72

He violated the law. Had this been done by a citizen who is not in congress and we would be looking at a lenghty jail sentence.

Did his actions warrant a censure? Good question.. This is most likely where the politics came in to play. Since the cool thing right now in America is fiscal responsibility and accountibility. Its hard to lecture the American people from the well of the Capital when members are being investigated for tax evasion / fraud etc.

To argue your defense as I didnt mean to do it does not really work either, since ignorance of the law in most cases is irrelevant.

Long term it will most likely help the DEmocrats because its only a matter of time before the next Republican scandal hits. Congress will make the argument they held their member accountible, now you have to.

It could have been worse - they could have expelled him.
edit on 4-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 4 2010 @ 02:44 PM
reply to post by Xcathdra

It could have been worse - they could have expelled him.

I say expel the crooked bunch..I don't agree with career politics..
This guy has been in office for 20 terms??
They should set a limit..Three terms at most..
These career pollies just get lazy and start feathering their own nest..

top topics


log in