In a tense exchange with members of a subcommittee of the House ethics panel, Rangel complained that the two-year investigation into whether he had failed to report sources of income, among the 13 alleged violations, caused him to rack up a legal tab of nearly $2 million. His lawyers warned the hearing could cost another $1 million. After he was unable to convince them that he would be able to pay, they withdrew as his representatives earlier this fall, Rangel said.
Rangel said he had not had time to raise money through a legal defense fund to hire new attorneys. He said it was not fair to ask him to continue without representation just so the committee could finish the hearing before the end of the current lame-duck session of Congress.
"Can you tell me under what theory of fairness would dictate that I be denied due process, that I be denied an attorney?" Rangel asked.
"I don't think it's fair that I participate in any type of proceeding if, in fact, what you are basically telling me, that the political calendar will not allow you enough time to allow me to get a lawyer at this crucial point in my life," he added. "Fifty years of public service is on the line. I truly believe that I'm not being treated fairly."
"There's a lot of pain that I feel. … I love this Congress. I love this country. I think I'm entitled to more than is being suggested."
After his statement, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), the chair of the ethics committee, noted that it was Rangel's responsibility to retain counsel and sought to proceed with the hearing. Blake Chisam, the panel's chief counsel, moved to introduce more than 500 exhibits collected over the course of the 21-month-old investigation.
Rangel then said he would have to leave.
"I object to the proceeding and, with all due respect, since I don't have counsel to advise me, I'm going to have to excuse myself," he said, "because I have no idea what this man has put together."
At that point, the panel then moved into executive session to consider a motion by Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.) to delay the proceeding. Rangel left, trailed by a crowd of camera-toting media.
After about 30 minutes, the subcommittee returned, and Lofgren said the proceedings would continue without the New York congressman.
Lofgren said the subcommittee had provided Rangel with advice about how to pay his legal fees on four different occasions over the last two years. Several members of the panel then chastised the law firm that had been representing Rangel, Zuckerman Spaeder, for withdrawing as his representatives.
"It's an astonishing display of professional irresponsibility, in my view," said Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.)
Rangel's absence from his own ethics hearing is the latest twist in what has been a humbling experience for the veteran lawmaker. After rising through Congress to assume the chairmanship of the powerful Ways and Means Committee, Rangel stepped down from that post earlier this year as the ethics committee examined his financial dealings.
In July, he was charged with 13 House ethics violations. He is accused of using one of his four rent-controlled apartments in New York as a campaign office, using his congressional office to solicit corporate contributions for a public-affairs school established in his name, failing to report rental and investment income on his disclosure forms and failing to pay property taxes on a Caribbean rental property.
Ethics staff were not certain he would show up Monday for the start of the hearing, but he arrived promptly at 9:01 a.m., dressed nattily in a dark gray suit accented by wide-striped tie and red pocket square. He shook hands with supporters and then took his place at the respondent's table, paging through a thick white binder.
Several minutes later, the eight-member adjudicatory subcommittee filed in, grim-faced. Rangel nodded somberly to his colleagues as they took their seats at the horseshoe-shaped desk behind him.
In an opening statement, Rep. Michael McCaul (R- Texas) noted the "rare and historic" nature of the hearing, the first of its kind since 2002.
"Let me be clear: No member of this committee asked for this assignment," he said. "Sitting in judgment of a fellow member and colleague is a very difficult thing for all of us to do."
This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.
Source: "Live Free Feed Top Stories" via Glen in Google Reader
No comments:
Post a Comment