Will Rush Talk About Charlie Rangel Today?

I know he's talked about him - or at least mentioned him - many times in the past.

Rangel is facing ethics questions... again.

The man is 80 years old - long past what in any other profession would be mandatory retirement age. But politicians and judges apparently can continue to serve - senile or not (Robert Byrd apparently was not all there at the end), until they die.

Charlie Rangel has demonstrably been a crook and a tax cheet for decades, although the news only came out in 2008. But with all the knowledge of his past unethical behavior, it seems the sole concern of his fellow politicians was not to get him kicked out of office complete - or sent to jail - but just to make him give up his chairmanship of the Ways and Means committee.

Here's what Wikipedia has to say about the 2008-2010 investigation.

2008–2010 ethics investigations and tax controversies
1) In July 2008, Rangel asked the United States House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to determine if his use of a Congressional letterhead while seeking to arrange meetings in which recipients of the letters would be solicited for contributions for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at the City College of New York had violated any House rules.

2) The New York Times reported on July 10, 2008 that Rangel rents four apartments in the Lenox Terrace complex in Harlem at below-market rates. The newspaper reported that Rangel paid $3,894 monthly for all four apartments in 2007, but that the going rate for similar apartments offered by the landlord in that building would be as high as $8,125 monthly. Three adjacent apartments on the 16th floor were combined to make up his 2,500-square-foot (230 m2) home; a fourth unit on the 10th floor is used as a campaign office, even though that violates city and state regulations that require rent-stabilized apartments to be used as a primary residence. The apartments are in a building owned by the Olnick Organization. Rangel received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from one of the company’s owners, according to The Times. Rangel told the newspaper his rent does not affect his representation of his constituents.

A Congressional ethics experts cited by The Times indicated that the difference in rent between what Rangel was paying and market rates on the second, third and fourth apartments he rented, an estimated $30,000 per year, could be construed as a gift as the savings is granted at the discretion of the landlord and is not offered to the public at large; if this should be treated as a gift, it would exceed the $100 limit established by the House of Representatives.[45] In late July, the House voted 254 to 138 to table a resolution submitted by Minority Leader John Boehner that would have censured Rangel for having "dishonored himself and brought discredit to the House" by occupying the four apartments.

3) Rangel was also accused of failing to report income from the rental of a villa he owns in Punta Cana in the Dominican Republic, a three-bedroom, three-bath unit that has been rented out for as much as $1,100 per night in the busiest tourist season, from mid-December to mid-April. Labor lawyer Theodore Kheel, one of the principal investors in the resort development company and a frequent campaign contributor to Rangel, had encouraged the congressman to purchase the beachside villa. Rangel had purchased the unit in 1988 for $82,750 and financed $53,737.50 of the purchase price for seven years at a rate of 10.5 percent, but was one of several early investors who had interest payments waived in 1990.

4) In September 2008, Lanny Davis, Rangel's attorney, disclosed that Rangel had failed to report $75,000 in income he had received for renting the condo on his tax returns or in congressional disclosure forms. His accountants were calculating the amounts owed and would be filing amended city, state and federal tax returns to cover the liability for back taxes.

5) A September 14, 2008 editorial in The New York Times called for Rangel to temporarily step down from his chairmanship, stating that "Mounting embarrassment for taxpayers and Congress makes it imperative that Representative Charles Rangel step aside as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee while his ethical problems are investigated."

6) Additional accounting discrepancies were disclosed on September 15, 2008, including omission in Rangel's financial reports of details regarding the sale of a home he once owned on Colorado Avenue in Washington, DC, discrepancies in the value listed for a property he owns in Sunny Isles, Florida (varying from $50,000 to $100,000 all the way up to $500,000), and inconsistencies in investment fund reporting. While Republican leaders have called for his removal from his role as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee which plays a pivotal role in shaping tax law, Rangel has stated that there is no justification for his removal. "I owed my colleagues and the public adherence to a higher standard of care not only as a member of Congress but even more as the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee," he said. He also stated that the mistakes were errors of omission that would not justify loss of his position.

7) An article in the September 18, 2008 New York Post states, "Rep. Charles Rangel has been using a House of Representatives parking garage for years as free storage space for his old Mercedes-Benz - a violation of congressional rules and a potential new tax woe for the embattled lawmaker... House rules forbid use of the garage for long-term storage more than 45 days - and congressional aides told The Post that Rangel's car has been sitting there for years. A House Web site on parking regulations informs anyone with a space that, under IRS regulations, the benefit of the free parking is considered 'imputed income' and must be declared to the government. The spaces are valued by the House at $290 per month. In addition to the storage issue, the vehicle... runs afoul of other rules set forth on the House Web site because it does not have license plates and does not display a current House parking permit."

8) In September 2008 Rangel paid back taxes of $10,800, owed from rental income on his Dominican villa. Rangel acknowledged that he had failed to declare $75,000 in rental income from his beachfront villa on his tax returns; he had owed back taxes for at least three years. Rangel is the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which writes the United States tax code and as such his failure to pay taxes himself came under heavy criticism.

9) On September 24, 2008, the House Ethics Committee announced that it would start an investigation to determine whether Rangel "violated the Code of Official Conduct, or any law, rule, regulation or other standard of conduct applicable to his conduct in the performance of his duties." CBS 2 News reported that the investigation would also explore "Rangel's use of four rent-stabilized apartments leased in the Lenox Terrace apartment complex in Harlem, the financing of the beachfront villa leased in the Dominican Republic, and his questionable storage of a late-model Mercedes Benz in the House garage."

10) On November 23, 2008, the New York Post reported that Rangel took a "homestead" tax break on his Washington, DC house for years while simultaneously occupying multiple New York City rent-stabilized apartments, "possibly violating laws and regulations in both cases."

11) In late November 2008, following relevations from another New York Times story, Republican members of Congress asked the House Ethics Committee to look into Rangel's defense of a tax shelter loophole that allows tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks for a company which has donated $1 million to the City College of New York school named after Rangel; under the loophole approved by Rangel's Ways and Means Committee, Nabors Industries has been allowed to open a small outlet in Bermuda and call itself a foreign corporation. Rangel denied the charges. In 2004, he had led the opposition to the tax breaks. Nabors' CEO, Eugene Isenberg, said that the company's September 2006 donation was unrelated to what he calls Rangel's promise to him to oppose the closing of the loophole after a meeting in February 2007. Isenberg gave a further $100,000 to the Rangel Center five days prior to that meeting. Nabors was one of four companies which benefited from the loophole.

12) The House Ethics Committee voted on December 9, 2008 to expand its investigation of Rangel to examine his role in the Isenberg matter. Isenberg subsequently denied there was any quid pro quo and called the Times article about it "full of malarkey". The steady stream of revelations and ethics issues led to some loss of standing for Rangel in the House, to Republicans trying to tie Rangel to all Democrats, and to some Democrats privately indicating that it would be best if Rangel stepped down from his Ways and Means post. Rangel launched a counterattack on the Times, saying it had ignored facts and explanations offered by experts. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied Republican charges that she was trying to force the Ethics Committee investigation to an early conclusion, and Rangel indicated that he had no intention of relinquishing his Ways and Means chair. [How about his bloody position as a politician in general!!!!]

13) In December 2008, it surfaced that Rangel paid $80,000 in campaign funds to an Internet company run by his son for the creation of his PAC website. Screenshots of the website have circulated showing grave misspellings and other errors on the site, and its normal cost of creation might have been more like $100. A representative for the non-profit Campaign Legal Center assessed Rangel's actions in saying, “This is probably legal but is definitely wrong.”

14) In January 2009, Representative John R. Carter introduced the Rangel Rule Act of 2009 (H.R. 735), a tongue-in-cheek proposal that would allow all taxpayers to not pay penalties and interest on back taxes, in reference to Rangel not yet having paid them.

15) During a 2009 visit to Hamilton, Bermuda, Congressman Rangel receives a book written by U.S. Consul General Gregory W. Slayton. n May 2009, the National Legal and Policy Center filed an ethics complaint against Rangel and several other members of Congress for trips taken in 2007 and 2008 to Caribbean islands that were sponsored by New York non-profit organization Carib News Foundation. The foundation funded by a number of large corporations with major interests before Congress and the Ways and Means Committee; this combined with the duration of the trips seemed to violate House rules, and the Ethics Committee agreed the following month to investigate the matter.

16) In August 2009, Rangel amended his 2007 financial disclosure form to report more than $500,000 in previously unreported assets and income, which effectively doubles his reported net worth. On September 3, 2009 the Washington Post called on Rangel to resign his chairmanship. Unreported assets included a federal credit union checking account of between $250,000 and $500,000, several investment accounts, stock in Yum! Brands and PepsiCo, and property in Glassboro, New Jersey. Rangel also did not pay property taxes on two of his New Jersey properties.

17) On June 26, 2009, Bloomberg News reported on Chairman Rangel's role in the Diageo Rum Bailout. On September 1, 2009, the Chicago Tribune reported on Chairman Rangel's lack of action on pending legislation that would prevent $2.9 billion of U.S. Tax dollars from going to British concern Diageo. On September 2, 2009, the L.A. Times reported on Chairman Rangel's association with a deal to give $2.8 billion of U.S. Tax dollars to Diageo to make rum in the U.S. Virgin Islands. On October 6, 2009, the Washington Times reported on the campaign contributions Chairman Rangel received related to the $2.8 billion rum deal he supports. On November 12, 2009, The Hill reported on Chairman Rangel's involvement in stopping legislation (H.R. 2122) that prevents $3.9 billion in rum bailouts from being voted on in the Ways and Means Committee.

18) As 2009 wore on, there was speculation that Rangel would be forced out of Ways and Means chair position, and another Republican resolution was put forth towards that end, but Rangel stayed in place and mostly maintained his role in House leadership and policy discussions, including the Obama health care reform plan. Nevertheless, his influence was diminished by the questions surrounding him, and the political difficulties surrounding the health care legislation hampered his efforts to bring about what would be one of his greatest legislative accomplishments.

Media pieces compared Rangel's woes with those of ethically challenged past Ways and Means chairs Wilbur Mills and Dan Rostenkowski. Speaker Pelosi, a longtime friend of Rangel's, withheld any possible action against Rangel pending the House Ethics Committee report. Rangel evinced impatience with that body, saying "I don't have a complaint now, except that it's taking too goddam long to review this thing and report back."

19) On February 26, 2010, the House Ethics Committee issued its report on the matter of Rangel's Caribbean trips. It determined that Rangel had violated House gift rules by accepting payment from corporations for reimbursement for travel to the 2007 and 2008 conferences. It concluded that Rangel had not known of the contributions in question, but was still responsible for them and would be required to repay their cost.

Five other members who made the trip were cleared of having violated rules but also had to repay their trips.

Rangel disagreed with the committee's finding, saying "Because they were my staff members who knew, one of whom has been discharged, [the committee has decided] that I should have known. Common sense dictates that members of Congress should not be held responsible for what could be the wrongdoing, or mistakes or errors of staff."

The White House backed off its prior support of Rangel a bit, and within days fourteen Democratic members of Congress publicly called on Rangel to step aside as Ways and Means chair. Other Democrats were concerned that Rangel would be a drag on Democrats' efforts to maintain their majority in the 2010 House elections, but did not want to say anything publicly out of respect and personal affection for Rangel. Pelosi said she would take no action against Rangel now, saying that his staff had been more at fault and that Rangel had not broken any law in this matter, and that she awaited the results of further committee findings. The ethics committee continued to investigate the three more serious charges against Rangel, those dealing with obtaining the rent-stabilized apartments, the fundraising for the Rangel Center, and the failure to disclose rental income from the Dominican Republic apartment.

20) Momentum quickly built against Rangel, with up to 30 or more Democrats planning to oppose his continued chairmanship in a full House vote being pushed by Republicans. Representative Paul Hodes of New Hampshire said, "I think we're in a zero-tolerance atmosphere, and I think ... Washington should be held to the highest ethical standards. I have the greatest admiration for Mr. Rangel's service to this country. He's been a great public servant. This is very, very unfortunate, but I think it's necessary."

On March 3, 2010, Rangel that he would take a leave of absence as chair, pending the issuing of the Ethics Committee's reports. Pelosi granted the request, but whether such a leave was possible was unclear, and when asked, the Speaker pro Tempore of the House said that a resignation had taken place and that Rangel was no longer chair. Most observers said it was unlikely that Rangel would ever be able to regain the position. Several Democrats said they would return or donate to charity campaign contributions given to them by Rangel. Representative Sander M. Levin of Michigan will serve as Rangel's replacement. When asked about his well-known autobiographical phrase, Rangel said, "I haven't had a bad day yet, but it's been close."

21) By 2010, Rangel's continuing difficulties, together with the death a few months prior of Percy Sutton and the scandal around, and abandoned election campaign of, Governor David Paterson (Basil Paterson's son), marked the end of the era of Harlem's "Gang of Four". Furthermore, Rangel faced a Democratic primary challenger for his seat, Vincent Morgan, whose grassroots campaign bore many resemblances to Rangel's own against the scandal-plagued Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. back in 1970.

Adam Clayton Powell IV was also challenging Rangel again, as was labor activist and past primary candidate for statewide office Jonathan Tasini. On June 6, 2010, Rangel officially announced the start of his re-election campaign. While Rangel's fund-raising was down from previous years, and he had paid over $1 million in legal fees, he still had far more cash available for the campaign than any of his challengers.[This is scary. The guy's a demonstrable crook, but his constituents will still vote for him.]

On July 22, 2010, an investigative subcommittee of the House Ethics Committee indicated that Rangel probably violated a range of ethics rules in the cases involving the more serious charges. The matter was referred to another, newly created, special subcommittee to rule on the findings, and Rangel will face a trial-like, formal hearing in due course.