He’s been telling us for a while now that all this will be over soon and the Ethics Committee will absolve him from any wrongdoing. Just because he forgot “to report over $1 million in outside income and $3 million in business transactions as required by the House,” doesn’t mean he’s guilty of anything other than being an arrogant jerk:
"I recognize that all of you have an obligation to ask questions knowing that there’s none of you smart enough to frame it in such a way that I’m going to respond," Rangel said.
There may be a reason for Rangel’s arrogance. CBS 2 HD has discovered that since ethics probes began last year the 79-year-old congressman has given campaign donations to 119 members of Congress, including three of the five Democrats on the House Ethics Committee who are charged with investigating him.
Charlie’s "angels" on the committee include Congressmen Ben Chandler of Kentucky, G.K. Butterfield of North Carolina and Peter Welch of Vermont. All have received donations from Rangel.
Only Welch sees something wrong with being financial beholden to Charlie.
"In an abundance of caution, he has returned all campaign contributions from Mr. Rangel," said spokesman Bob Rogan, Welch’s Chief of Staff.It amounted to nearly 20 grand.
How could you take donations from the man you are investigating and not return them or recuse yourself?
If he were a defendant and donated to the judge, wouldn’t the judge have to step down?
And even if you return the money, shouldn’t you step down to avoid even the semblance on impropriety?
What do you think?
