What's wrong with Rangel and Waters? They're in Congress

WASHINGTON -- My favorite part of the ethics report on Charlie Rangel involves his efforts to "close" a $10 million gift "to create AIG Hall" as part of the Rangel Center at the City College of New York.

Yes, that AIG.

At a meeting in April 2008, the New York Democrat, then the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, "asked AIG, at least twice, what was necessary to get this done," according to the report. The insurance giant wasn't so sure about writing the check, citing the "potential headline risk."

When AIG -- the company that paid out hundreds of millions in bonuses after being rescued by a government bailout -- recognizes an appearance issue, you know you've got a problem.

Unless, that is, you're Charlie Rangel. Or, for that matter, Maxine Waters, the California Democrat who this week joined Rangel in being charged with ethics violations and awaiting a public trial by the House ethics committee.

Which gets to my favorite part of the ethics report on Waters. Fast forward a few months after Rangel's meeting with AIG, to the first weeks of September 2008. This was, to put it mildly, a rather busy time for then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson. The economy was tanking. Lehman Brothers was about to go down.

But when a senior member of the Financial Services Committee calls, the treasury secretary tends to listen. Waters said she had "some people in town who were important to her," Paulson recalled, and asked for a meeting with Treasury officials to discuss their concerns.

How important to her? As Waters told the Office of Congressional Ethics, which conducted the preliminary investigation of her activities, "You don't use your chits for nothing. You call when there is an important issue."

The issue broadly involved the government takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and its impact on minority-owned banks. But when Paulson's aides got to the meeting, they discovered that all but one of the banking industry participants were from one such institution: OneUnited.

On whose board Waters' husband had served until a few months earlier. In which he continued to have investments worth between $500,000 and $1 million. A fact Waters somehow neglected to mention to Paulson -- although she was most certainly aware of it. As the report notes, Waters mentioned to Congressman A -- better known as Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank -- that "Sydney's been on the board." Frank twice advised Waters to "stay out of it."

The obvious question is: What is wrong with these people? The tempting answer: They're members of Congress.

Eric Massa's real offense - a "no" vote on Obamacare

In an interesting turn of events this week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was forced by her caucus to pry Rep. Charlie Rangel’s (D-NY) Ways and Means gavel out of his hands and throw Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA) under the bus. Then, she cut Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY) loose late Friday afternoon, pressuring Massa to step down just days after allegations surfaced against the one-term Congressman. Rep. Massa will resign his House seat effective Monday, March 9 at 5pm.

Through all of the months of drama of Rangel’s ethics violations, tax evasion, and abuses, Pelosi has stood by Rangel–up to the very end–even being quoted as saying:

After huddling with Rangel for 45 minutes, Pelosi initially said, “No comment” when asked if Rangel remains panel chairman.

She later added, “I guess he is still chair of Ways and Means…”

Although Rep. Rangel has been forced to “temporarily” step down as chair, there have been just about no calls for him to resign his seat. So, what triggered Peolsi’s intolerance to Massa? It appears that she was capitalizing on an event to banish Massa from the House. Could it be that Massa had the audacity to actually represent his constituents and vote Nay on the House healthcare takeover bill?

Pelosi's choice: Dump a seedy clown for a crazy jerk?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is facing a new conundrum as the swell of voices calling for the removal of House Ways & Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) begins to build.

Sources on the Hill tell HUMAN EVENTS that the latest problem involves the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) and their objection to Rangel’s ouster as the first member of their caucus to hold the chairmanship of the very powerful tax writing committee.

To complicate matters, one source says the CBC is pressuring Pelosi to give the slot to another CBC member, Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.). The main problem with that scenario is she’d have to “reach down five people,” passing over three other committee members in line to do so: Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.), Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.) and Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.).

Stark is a 78-year-old bombastic Californian notorious for his lack of decorum. One source told me, “Pelosi really doesn’t want to see Stark in the chairmanship.”

Will Rangel get the DeLay, or delay, treatment?

The House Ethics Committee's decision to admonish New York Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel over improper corporate-sponsored trips to the Caribbean leaves both Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the ethics committee itself facing some difficult questions.

When then-Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) was admonished by the ethics committee in October 2004, Pelosi and other Democratic leaders went on the offensive against him.

“Mr. DeLay has proven himself to be ethically unfit to lead the party,” Pelosi said at a press conference the following day. “The burden falls upon his fellow House Republicans. Republicans must answer: Do they want an ethically unfit person to be their majority leader or do they want to remove the ethical cloud that hangs over the Capitol?”

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) — now the House majority leader — said DeLay "certainly ought to step aside as leader at this point in time because I think his credibility has been undermined by these findings."

Six years later, the shoe is on the other foot: Republicans have previously called for Rangel to lose his chairmanship over his ethical troubles, and some of them — including Indiana Rep. Mike Pence — renewed that call Thursday night.

How will Pelosi and Hoyer respond?