Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Have you ever stopped to think that if he had done no wrong doing, we wouldn't even be discussing him?
Okay..
Aside from the fact this is a completely unique situation..
What's your recommendation for punishment?
Something else completely unique and unprecendented?
He abused his power. As a consequence? he gets re-elected...take some solace in that...albiet it speaks volumes for his constituients. Sad.
Do you mean the tax code in which he was chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee?He should have been either contacted by the IRS or charged in a court of law.
Or do you think our tax code is simple and easy to understand?
Again..do you think he was doing his own taxes?
And..I am not saying that nothing should happen to him.
Like someone else said earlier, you're pretty transparent. Or maybe it's just that your posts really make no point at all. Have to consider that.
Do you mean the tax code in which he was chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee?
Again..do you think he was doing his own taxes?
And..I am not saying that nothing should happen to him.
I don't think that he used H&R Block, I'm thinking a CPA. Garbage in, garbage out..... Sheesh
So I will put you down for the completely unique and unprecedented solution..
1979 Charles Diggs Democratic Michigan Payroll fraud, mail fraud.
1980 Charles H. Wilson Democratic California Improper use of campaign funds.
Link
Funny how they get all sentimental about veterans when one of their own is in dutch.Taxes are the dude's job. Are you saying he's incompetent?
His military record excuses it...didn't you get the memo? One of the first places a Statist wants to cut is the military versus what the real problem is in the budget.
Do you mean the tax code in which he was chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee?
Again..do you think he was doing his own taxes?
And..I am not saying that nothing should happen to him.
I don't think that he used H&R Block, I'm thinking a CPA. Garbage in, garbage out..... Sheesh
Really? You really can't remember your own post from a couple pages back?
And it says "life time exemption" where?
Really.
Lets lay out the facts here.
Rangel got caught up in accounting errors. Real estate is the most complex and ridiculous part of the tax code. I know that first hand. I don't even pretend to understand it..I leave it to accountants. And the reason I use H&R block is they guarantee their work. They fuck up..they pay..not me.
That's what happened with Rangel..and the use of stationary for charitable causes..not to enrich himself..as in Newt Gingrich's case.
This is the first time..a congress person..has been tossed into a hearing with no charges pending..or not caught red handed in violating the rules of congress..like having sex with pages. First.
Rangel's got an extremely long and, on the whole, very positive career in Congress. I personally like the guy..he's in the mold of old salts like Daniel Moynihan or Hugh Carey. He's extremely pragmatic and works well with others.
He's already stepped down from a committee he really cared about. And he's been drug through the mud.
I'm not putting out there..that if someone is charged or found to be involved in wrong doing they be absolved.
What I am putting out there..is that the system of justice practiced in the country calls for precendence, protocol and proportionality.
The personal attacks against Rangel in this thread are really to much. As are the remedies for his "crimes".
Like someone else said earlier, you're pretty transparent. Or maybe it's just that your posts really make no point at all. Have to consider that.
Keep making excuses fr Rangel, but he hasn't suffered a damn thing. He still has his cushy taxpayer funded job, and whenever he finally leaves, he'll get a nice, fat taxpayer funded pension. Poor, poor Charlie. He should be thankful that Eric Holder is such an incompetent boob and partisan hack or he might actually face federal charges for tax evasion.
Like someone else said earlier, you're pretty transparent. Or maybe it's just that your posts really make no point at all. Have to consider that.
So this basically means that I didn't post it..and your assigning a meaning to it..that is not found in the post..or my posting history at all.
That's a pretty neat trick.
So I will put you down for the completely unique and unprecedented solution..
What exactly is unprecedented or unique? House members have been censured before for financial wrongdoing.
1979 Charles Diggs Democratic Michigan Payroll fraud, mail fraud.
1980 Charles H. Wilson Democratic California Improper use of campaign funds.
Link
So I will put you down for the completely unique and unprecedented solution..
What exactly is unprecedented or unique? House members have been censured before for financial wrongdoing.
1979 Charles Diggs Democratic Michigan Payroll fraud, mail fraud.
1980 Charles H. Wilson Democratic California Improper use of campaign funds.
Link
Like someone else said earlier, you're pretty transparent. Or maybe it's just that your posts really make no point at all. Have to consider that.
So this basically means that I didn't post it..and your assigning a meaning to it..that is not found in the post..or my posting history at all.
That's a pretty neat trick.
Not at all, it means you posted it, and based on your commentary others derived meaning from it. Since you now say that that meaning is incorrect, and you have not bothered to provide any clarification, it is perfectly logical to assume that you really didn't to make any point with your post whatsoever. Of course, you're certainly free to provide clarification of your post.
Have you ever stopped to think that if he had done no wrong doing, we wouldn't even be discussing him?
Okay..
Aside from the fact this is a completely unique situation..
What's your recommendation for punishment?
Something else completely unique and unprecendented?
So I will put you down for the completely unique and unprecedented solution..
What exactly is unprecedented or unique? House members have been censured before for financial wrongdoing.
1979 Charles Diggs Democratic Michigan Payroll fraud, mail fraud.
1980 Charles H. Wilson Democratic California Improper use of campaign funds.
Link
They were under indictment first or caught red handed.
And they were censured. That's pretty serious. It usually comes with a fine.
People here are calling for removal and jail time.
So this basically means that I didn't post it..and your assigning a meaning to it..that is not found in the post..or my posting history at all.
That's a pretty neat trick.
Not at all, it means you posted it, and based on your commentary others derived meaning from it. Since you now say that that meaning is incorrect, and you have not bothered to provide any clarification, it is perfectly logical to assume that you really didn't to make any point with your post whatsoever. Of course, you're certainly free to provide clarification of your post.
No.
I didn't post it.
Find the quote.
Verbatim.
So I will put you down for the completely unique and unprecedented solution..
What exactly is unprecedented or unique? House members have been censured before for financial wrongdoing.
1979 Charles Diggs Democratic Michigan Payroll fraud, mail fraud.
1980 Charles H. Wilson Democratic California Improper use of campaign funds.
Link
They were under indictment first or caught red handed.
And they were censured. That's pretty serious. It usually comes with a fine.
People here are calling for removal and jail time.
What exactly is unprecedented or unique? House members have been censured before for financial wrongdoing.
They were under indictment first or caught red handed.
And they were censured. That's pretty serious. It usually comes with a fine.
People here are calling for removal and jail time.
And you are making excuses for aborant behaviour from a Congresscritter that should be above board and an example.
Some example.
Not at all, it means you posted it, and based on your commentary others derived meaning from it. Since you now say that that meaning is incorrect, and you have not bothered to provide any clarification, it is perfectly logical to assume that you really didn't to make any point with your post whatsoever. Of course, you're certainly free to provide clarification of your post.
No.
I didn't post it.
Find the quote.
Verbatim.
Nope. I've posted it twice already. If you wish to clarify your own post, feel free to go find it, but I'm not playing your little game. It's pretty obvious to me and others that your intent from your own post was to give Rangel a pass based on actions in the military 60 years ago. Refute that.
They were under indictment first or caught red handed.
And they were censured. That's pretty serious. It usually comes with a fine.
People here are calling for removal and jail time.
And you are making excuses for aborant behaviour from a Congresscritter that should be above board and an example.
Some example.
Not making any "excuses" at all.
Just pointing out the facts.
If you want to find a case prior to this one where the circumstances line up and the congress person was expelled..feel free.
There have been under 10 people that have had this sort of thing bubble up so far..and their cases were far worse.
So..if you find one..post it.
Have at it.
