Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters investigations seems too convenient.

[Carl]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8866471

bobburgster  (1000+ posts)          Mon Aug-02-10 05:30 PM
Original message
Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters investigations seems too convenient.
      

It seems awfully interesting that two top African-American Democrats in the House of Representatives are facing ethics allegations at this time. Maybe I'm wearing a tinfoil hat on this one, but does anyone else wonder about the timing?

BrklynLiberal  (1000+ posts)          Mon Aug-02-10 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. Just a co-winkydink..no doubt...   
   

Lefty-leaning Black folks? I think the repukes/teabaggers would give their eyeteeth to be rid of as many of them as possible.

BrklynLiberal  (1000+ posts)          Mon Aug-02-10 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. Just a co-winkydink..no doubt...   
   

Lefty-leaning Black folks? I think the repukes/teabaggers would give their eyeteeth to be rid of as many of them as possible.

pettypace (482 posts)        Mon Aug-02-10 05:36 PM
Response to Original message
6. can you be more specific?
   I mean, what does "this time" refer to? The mid terms are 4 months away, and no republican could win either of those two's districts.

Didn't Barack ask Rangel to step down --- Why bring race into this?

bobburgster  (1000+ posts)          Mon Aug-02-10 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. I'll try...
   two black representatives + ethics scandal + black president = subliminal message....all democrats are unethical

 
You could have just written the last statement and it would have been as true as anything ever posted at the DUmp

lob1  (1000+ posts)          Mon Aug-02-10 05:36 PM
Response to Original message
7. If you're black, you're under attack.
   Breitbart seems to single out blacks, too. Racism has become mainstream on the republican side.

Damn Republican Congress!!!!

Raspberry (334 posts)        Mon Aug-02-10 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
8. What I'm wondering is . . .
   couldn't Nancy Pelosi, or the ethics committee, or whomever, just shut this whole thing down?? I mean, Democrats run everything in the House. If there wasn't anything to these charges, I would think the whole thing would just go away.
   

Nice try.

Liberal_Stalwart71  (1000+ posts)       Mon Aug-02-10 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. You're a brave soul, BB. And you're 100% correct. I don't think it's merely
   coincidental at all. Not at all!!

Oh good God 

femrap  (1000+ posts)          Mon Aug-02-10 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
11. No shit....
   ****ing racist repugnants. Yet Vitter is still in the Senate.

Raspberry (334 posts)        Mon Aug-02-10 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. What do Republicans have to do with anything??
   They are the minority. There isn't even a filibuster in the House that they can use to get around their minority status. I still think the Dems could shut this down in the blink of an eye. So-------why don't they.

Didn`t you learn the first time you are not supposed to post rational questions at the DUmp?

femrap  (1000+ posts)          Mon Aug-02-10 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Money from
   TPTB

That explains it all.

old mark  (1000+ posts)        Mon Aug-02-10 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
19. Both black, both Dems, elections coming...I see a trend! rec. nt

Damn Republican Congress!!

Good Lord it is hard to believe this stuff actually gets posted and it isn`t intended to be satire.

[Mike220]

pettypace (482 posts)        Mon Aug-02-10 05:36 PM
Response to Original message
6. can you be more specific?
   I mean, what does "this time" refer to? The mid terms are 4 months away, and no republican could win either of those two's districts.

Didn't Barack ask Rangel to step down --- Why bring race into this?

Umm... Because it's the DUmp and it's all you have left.

[thundley4]

I seem to recall that some time back I posted an article about the Congressional Black Caucus wanting to disband the Ethics Committee because they unfairly target black members of congress, or something to that effect.

[Chris_]

Good Lord it is hard to believe this stuff actually gets posted and it isn`t intended to be satire.

This is your brain.

This is your brain on drugs.

[Randy]

The answer to the DUmmies question is simple. It's the racist President and his racist Department of Justice unfairly targeting po Black Congress critters. 

[miskie]

I just love the way the thread pretty much ignores Raspberry - Dems run it all - if this were a Republican witch hunt, they could shut it down.

[formerlurker]

The spin:

Gleeful Republicans, of course, are having a field day, accusing Speaker Nancy Pelosi of failing in her campaign promise to “drain the swamp” if Democrats were to take control of the House. Which makes for predictable, good-sound-bite politics — but on which point Republicans are dead wrong.

By promising to “drain the swamp,” Pelosi did not mean there would never again be any Democrat who broke the rules. Of course not. She meant that, unlike Republicans during their long “culture of corruption,” Democrats would not simply look the other way when one of their party did wrong. They would investigate and prosecute any allegations of wrongdoing, by Republicans or Democrats.

Which is exactly what Speaker Pelosi is now allowing to happen. The charges against Charlie Rangel were leveled by Democrats. He was forced to step down as Ways and Means Committee chairman by Democrats. He is being marched into a public trial by fellow Democrats. And whatever punishment he receives will be meted out by Democrats.

And, when it comes to public corruption, that’s the big difference between the two parties in the House: Democrats are cleaning up their own mess; Republicans simply wallowed in theirs.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/national-party-news/112103-pelosi-drains-the-swamp-as-promised

 

[Mike220]

Wow, the stupid, it burns.

Revisionist history is fun, isn't it?

[NHSparky]

The spin:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/national-party-news/112103-pelosi-drains-the-swamp-as-promised

 

Bill Press wrote that, eh?

What a shocker... 

[thundley4]

I'm not going to be celebrating the travails of Rangel and Waters, yet.  I don't trust the DemonRats.  What if a finding of innocence is found for both before the middle of October?  The DemonRats fall back on their claims that this was caused by pressure from an evil Rethuglican witch hunt.

[Ballygrl]

The spin:

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/national-party-news/112103-pelosi-drains-the-swamp-as-promised

From the comments section

BY from where i sit on 08/02/2010 at 12:42

Oh, Bill you delusional syncophant. If the Dems weren't so unpopular these days, and if the mid-terms weren't around the corner, do you really, really, really think this would have happend? You do, don't you?

BY TruthfulTerry on 08/02/2010 at 14:56

Bill Press, The history you've forgotten is that the Republicans renounced their misbehavors and they were forced out of office while the Democrats have tended to suddenly discover "innocent until proven guilty" and encouraged their members to fight in the face of all evidence, (as these two are doing now). It was Republican's aknowledgement of wrong-doers and Democrat control of Congress since 2006 that enabled Pelosi to make political hay with her "Culture of Corruption" line. They denounced Republicans right and left including ones that were exhonerated, while most of these same Democrats skated bye on party supported denial.

[Karin]

There are many more in this "swamp" that need to go including the old booze hag Pelosi.
BY JRS on 08/02/2010 at 11:09

Poor Bill Press hasn't received any "thumbs up" comments. 

There was about as much meat behind that noble promise as behind her statement that jobless benefits are one the fastest ways to create jobs. Never trust a fox to guard the chicken coop and never trust an alligator to drain the swamp.
BY JERRY on 08/03/2010 at 00:13

[AllosaursRus]

Rush brought up fact I doubt the DUmbasses are aware of........They both campaigned for Hitlery in the primaries!

Must not go against "the One, and only, Lord Zero Messiah"!

[TheSarge]

bobburgster  (1000+ posts)          Mon Aug-02-10 05:30 PM
Original message
Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters investigations seems too convenient.

You mean like holding onto info about a Republican texting male House pages until just weeks before the elections?

Or do you mean convenient like releasing someone's DUI stop info form 20 years before less than 48 hours before the polls opened?

MAYBE...you mean "too convenient" like releasing "fake but accurate" documents about a sitting President allegedly being AWOL from his military unit 6 weeks before an election.

Is that what you're talking about DUmmie?

[Ballygrl]

Rush brought up fact I doubt the DUmbasses are aware of........They both campaigned for Hitlery in the primaries!

Must not go against "the One, and only, Lord Zero Messiah"!

Yep! when he said that I went hmmmmm, it totally makes sense.

[Carl]

You mean like holding onto info about a Republican texting male House pages until just weeks before the elections?

Or do you mean convenient like releasing someone's DUI stop info form 20 years before less than 48 hours before the polls opened?

MAYBE...you mean "too convenient" like releasing "fake but accurate" documents about a sitting President allegedly being AWOL from his military unit 6 weeks before an election via a nationally televised MSM news show that was made exclusively for that purpose.

Is that what you're talking about DUmmie?

Just to flesh it out a bit.

[AllosaursRus]

Just to flesh it out a bit.

Heh! Danny Boy really paid for not pullin' that one off! Ever heard Rush parodies on that one?

Memos, memos, I gots lots of memos! hahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!111

[zeitgeist]

Sometimes words come back to bite you:

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/program/ID/53643&start=2987&end=3062

I believe dummies call this Karma

"What is good for the goose is good for the gander"  MMM MM MMMM. 

[Airwolf]

You mean like holding onto info about a Republican texting male House pages until just weeks before the elections?

Or do you mean convenient like releasing someone's DUI stop info form 20 years before less than 48 hours before the polls opened?

MAYBE...you mean "too convenient" like releasing "fake but accurate" documents about a sitting President allegedly being AWOL from his military unit 6 weeks before an election.

Is that what you're talking about DUmmie?

That should leave a mark bad enough to burn.