I'm sure I'Ie missed a few.It's getting more difficult by the day to keep track of which Democrats are involved with exactly what corrupt and/or ethically challenged activities.
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) and her husband own as much as $500,000 in stock of the troubled OneUnited Bank. In a direct conflict-of-interest, she intervened with regulators on behalf of the bank. Ed Morrissey asks the rhetorical question: "Did Americans go deep into debt to send bailout money to politically-connected banks and to prop up the investment portfolios of elected officials? Apparently, yes we did."
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) engaged in a relationship with a Fannie Mae executive while supposedly overseeing the GSE. Fannie's meltdown -- amid repeated financial scandals and Frank's fierce fight to shield them from regulators -- played a critical role in the financial crisis.
Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT), the powerful Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, threatened filibuster after filibuster over additional regulation of the mortgage market while accepting funds and sweetheart mortgages from the very organizations he was supposed to be regulating. In fact, Dodd has yet to disclose the nature of his personal loan deals, despite having promised to do so months ago.
Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY), the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, appears to be the subject of 32 simultaneous ethics issues or investigations including 28 mysterious asset transfers (prohibited by House rules); undisclosed income from his Costa Rican rental property; multiple violations of New York City rent control statutes; killing a tax increase that would have hurt a contributor; and more.
Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-WV), dubbed "the overnight millionaire," is in the news again. He received his nickname because in 2000 Mollohan had no portfolio to speak of while making less than $80K a year. By 2004, he reported having at least $6.3 million in assets that generated income of somewhere around $700K annually. Earlier this week, it was reported that a non-profit funded by Mollohan (with the taxpayers' money, of course) had provided his family with $75,000 in free rent and services.
Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), an unindicted co-conspirator from the Abscam days, has had several ethical clouds hanging over his head for decades. The latest theft of taxpayer money is especially disturbing: Over the course of the past decade, Rep. John P. Murtha has earmarked millions of dollars for the Electro-Optics Center at Penn State University — money that has, in turn, gone to clients of the PMA Group, the Murtha-linked lobbying shop that was raided in November as part of a federal criminal probe..
Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, helped award $3.7 billion to companies controlled by her hsuband. Despite an obvious conflict of interest, Feinstein voted for appropriations "worth billions to her husband's firms."
Sen. Harry "Land Deal" Reid (D-NV), the Senate Majority Leader, collected a $1.1 million windfall profit on a Las Vegas land sale even though he hadn't owned the property for at least three years. Reid also did not disclose to Congress an earlier sale in which he transferred his land to a company created by a friend and took a financial stake in that company. The AP learned of the land deal from a former Reid aide who was concerned that the deal had been "hidden from Congress."
Just remember, peons: these jamokes are all still serving in Congress -- without a care in the world -- because they are above the law. They are royalty, not rabble (like you and I). Sure, if any one of us normal folks had pulled this type of chicanery, we'd be serving ten years in the big house.
Oh come now Nancy ,,
Does this mean your not going to drain the swamp,release the memo or end the culture of corruption?
Boy am I disappointed.Just protecting the privalaged class of the politician as usual.I'm sure this will help all your problems with accountability and transparency go away .Those dam people who whatch FOX or read on the internet will just stop looking at your record of criminality now.Good for you girl.I just know that after you've pissed away the democratic control in the congress by 2010 the dirty repub's will not go back to the past (like you) and prosecute yours and your parties malfeasence.Bon Chance Madamme Speaker.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is working to buffer lawmakers from federal investigators. This is a bad idea. Special legal protections for politicians encourage unethical conduct.
Irvin B. Nathan, general counsel of the House of Representatives, sent a letter to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. about establishing a protocol on how to handle "hopefully rare searches and electronic surveillance involving members of Congress." Mr. Nathan previously failed to negotiate such an agreement with the George W. Bush administration when Republicans controlled the House. His return to this effort isn't surprising given the number of congressional Democrats facing accusations of ethical misconduct.
Democrats facing scrutiny include the chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, John P. Murtha of Pennsylvania, for his close ties to the defense lobby firm PMA Group, which is under federal investigation; House Ways and Means Chairman Charles B. Rangel of New York about a number of tax issues; Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. of Illinois over his reported effort to persuade ousted Illinois Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich to appoint him to fill President Obama's former Senate seat; and Rep. Jane Harman of California, who reportedly was taped in 2005 by the National Security Agency purportedly agreeing to help seek leniency for two accused Israeli spies in exchange for help in lobbying her appointment to chair the House Intelligence Committee.
Mrs. Pelosi, California Democrat, invoked the separation of powers as justification for the move. Mrs. Pelosi, who has acknowledged being aware previously of Mrs. Harman's controversial dialogue, claims the stance is a matter of principle. "Whether it's invading an office or wiretapping a conversation, it's important for us to have the separation of powers and the respect for individual liberties, again, while not harboring information that would be useful under the speech [or] debate clause," she said