Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Charles Rangel is Found to have violated House ethics rules

Charles Rangle was found guilty of 11 ethics violations today by a House Panel , the ruling said that the violations have brought dishonor to the House of Representatives. On Monday Charles walked out of the House Ethics committee hearing declaring he could not afford a attorney to represent him. Charles said due to all of the attorney fees he has been paying over the last two years to defend himself against these ethics charges he no longer can afford an attorney he told the committee. The Ethics Committee took a total of four hours to conclude that Charles was guilty of 12 of the 13 counts against him.

These accusations started with a news report about Charles Rangle accepting four rent stabilized apartments below cost over two years ago. They also included a $60,000 accounting error on property he owns in the Dominican Republic among other things. In Charles's defense about the accounting error he said that he does not speak Spanish well so that's what created the the misunderstanding. I mean, that could happen right ? :) The Committee did clear him of trying to to build a school in his name because the donations to build the school could of been considered a gift.

The Problem I have with Charles Rangle is that he was the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. One of the most powerful Committees in all of Congress. Charles out of everyone should of known the rules and followed them to lead by example. Instead he claims he does not understand Spanish? Come on, Charles Rangle is a legend in New York specifically Harlem and for him to make these claims of a language barrier and so on is embarrassing. I have always liked Charles Rangle and maybe I don't know the entire story, but I expect more from a man of his stature.

Ny Times - Charles Rangle is found to Violated House Ethics Rules


  1. Hello friend,

    It seems that politicians everywhere are just the same, they tend to abuse their authority.

  2. Rangel should have been in JAIL 20 years ago!

  3. Why should he of been in jail 20 years ago?

  4. politics as usual