It looks like alleged income tax evader Charlie Rangel has finally run out of time. The Wall Street Journal noted, in an article in today's online edition,
"Mr. Rangel faces a congressional ethics proceeding on 13 separate counts, including failing to report assets, failing to pay taxes on rental income from a vacation property and misusing congressional stationery to try to raise money for a college center named in his honor. The 80-year-old lawmaker has represented New York City's Harlem neighborhood in the House since 1971 and had been the chairman of the powerful Ways and Means Committee until he was forced to step down in March."
Rangel has been, well, wrangling over these charges for several years. As the Journal article notes,
"He has spent two years and more than $2 million in legal fees dealing with the investigation of his finances. His legal team left the case last month when his campaign fund ran out of money to pay them. Mr. Rangel could, if he wanted, pay for a lawyer out of his own funds, but as a member of Congress, he can't accept pro bono work from an attorney.
Mr. Rangel said he needed more time to do so.
"You tell me all of the things I could do, but you won't give me the time to do it,'' he said. "I truly believe I am not being treated fairly.'' "
So it would seem that Rangel made a choice two years ago to try to run out a clock on the House Ethics committee. But this month's elections made that a losing strategy, with Republicans set to take control of the House come January.
Thus, the Journal piece reported,
"Rep. Charles Rangel walked out on his trial before the House ethics committee as it began Monday, saying it was unfair to ask him to continue without a lawyer that he couldn't afford.
"I am being denied the right to have a lawyer right now because I don't have the opportunity to have a legal-defense fund set up,'' the New York Democrat said. "I truly believe I am not being treated fairly.''
Mr. Rangel left the hearing room less than a half-hour after the proceedings began and didn't return. The case has been an embarrassment for Democrats who took control of the House in 2007 pledging to run the most ethical Congress in history.
The panel's eight lawmakers appeared to be taken aback by Mr. Rangel's abrupt departure, huddling privately to consider his request for a delay in the trial while he continues to seek a lawyer. They soon decided they would continue without him. "He has indicated that he does not intend to participate, and it is his right not to participate,'' said committee Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren, (D., Calif.)."
That's rich, isn't it? Rangel got to use $2MM of campaign funds to pay for his defense. He chose to take two years to delay his trial. Now he claims to be ill-treated for being forced to continue with the case.
I hope he is treated justly in absentia. By that, I mean the same as any other private citizen would be treated in similar circumstances, for similar tax-related behavior.
Showing posts with label Rangel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rangel. Show all posts
Monday, November 15, 2010
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
The Charges Against Rangel
If you aren't sufficiently sick from reading about Maxine Waters' ethics problems, consider the affront that Charlie Rangel's birthday bash was to voters and taxpayers everywhere.
Rangel was heard to remark that it was hardly funereal or a wake. Well, time will tell.
But it was surely sad and disappointing to see the state's two Senators show up and fete such a corrupt House member.
You might be tempted to believe, like Rangel does, that he will be exonerated of the charges against hime. Ruth Marcus wrote this in the Washington Post recently,
"In Rangel's defense, his conduct appears less directly self-serving than Waters's. But to read the lengthy ethics report is to wonder how Rangel has refused to cop a plea -- especially when the recommended punishment took the relatively mild form of a reprimand.Rangel failed to pay taxes on rental income from his Caribbean villa. He neglected to report $600,000 in income on his financial disclosure forms. He hit up companies with business before the Ways and Means Committee for donations as high as $30 million to the Rangel Center -- improperly using official letterhead and directly soliciting corporate lobbyists."
I posted this passage because, when reading it, I was alarmed at how truly corrupt Rangel became. How financially large his transgressions actually are.
Can you imagine getting away with the tax evasion Rangel practiced? I can't.
Does he really believe it will all be casually swept away and he'll be free to return to the House? Incredible.
Friday, July 30, 2010
Charlie Rangel Assailed By Luke Russert
Last week, or thereabouts, ethically-challenged New York Democratic House power Charlie Rangel was assailed by MSNBC's Luke Russert. Here's the video.
I never liked Tim Russert. He was a liberal media lapdog. But his kid has potential. Note Rangel hoping to diss Luke Russert by alleging smarmy motives. I guess Charlie was projecting, eh?
Still, it's a priceless piece of raw evidence illustrating the contempt for and low regard in which Rangel holds voters, whom he allegedly serves. Basically ignoring media questions, impugning only base motives to what Jefferson held as a more valuable, necessary service than government- a free press' inquiry into government's actions.
Here's just one of many articles on Rangel's situation which you can find by Googling the topic 'Charlie Rangel ethics.'
What I find sad, yet predictable, is Rangel's continued insistence that his stark violations of tax law be seen as 'honest mistakes' or 'oversights.'
There's the abuse of a rent-controlled apartment as an office. The failure to pay taxes on the Dominican vacation home.
For these, Rangels pleads confusion and inadvertent, unintended non-payment of taxes, for which he should be forgiven and not penalized.
What Rangel fails to realize, as have his party's Congressional leaders for the several years that this travesty has been unfolding, is that this attitude infuriates voters everywhere.
Try Charlie's defense for yourself with the IRS, and you, or I, would be in jail. Charlie, on the other hand, is brazenly showing the contempt that so many in Congress feel for the rest of us.
They are different. They deserve exemption and blanket pardons for violations of the law.
First Geithner. Then Daschell. Now Rangel. They all plead 'honest mistakes.'
They all should be in jail. Now.
It's also a measure of the cynicism of Congressional Democrats that they now believe merely tossing Rangel to the wolves of public opinion will help them stave off defeat in November.
His transgressions were affordable until the Democrats' poll numbers became to awful. Now, he's got to go, because his sacrifice will, they calculate, have value.
Forget right and wrong. Forget being answerable to the law, like everyone else. Congressional members seem to have rejected these concepts long ago.
Thus the years-long fumbling by the so-called House Ethics Committee over Rangel's obvious law-breaking.
I never liked Tim Russert. He was a liberal media lapdog. But his kid has potential. Note Rangel hoping to diss Luke Russert by alleging smarmy motives. I guess Charlie was projecting, eh?
Still, it's a priceless piece of raw evidence illustrating the contempt for and low regard in which Rangel holds voters, whom he allegedly serves. Basically ignoring media questions, impugning only base motives to what Jefferson held as a more valuable, necessary service than government- a free press' inquiry into government's actions.
Here's just one of many articles on Rangel's situation which you can find by Googling the topic 'Charlie Rangel ethics.'
What I find sad, yet predictable, is Rangel's continued insistence that his stark violations of tax law be seen as 'honest mistakes' or 'oversights.'
There's the abuse of a rent-controlled apartment as an office. The failure to pay taxes on the Dominican vacation home.
For these, Rangels pleads confusion and inadvertent, unintended non-payment of taxes, for which he should be forgiven and not penalized.
What Rangel fails to realize, as have his party's Congressional leaders for the several years that this travesty has been unfolding, is that this attitude infuriates voters everywhere.
Try Charlie's defense for yourself with the IRS, and you, or I, would be in jail. Charlie, on the other hand, is brazenly showing the contempt that so many in Congress feel for the rest of us.
They are different. They deserve exemption and blanket pardons for violations of the law.
First Geithner. Then Daschell. Now Rangel. They all plead 'honest mistakes.'
They all should be in jail. Now.
It's also a measure of the cynicism of Congressional Democrats that they now believe merely tossing Rangel to the wolves of public opinion will help them stave off defeat in November.
His transgressions were affordable until the Democrats' poll numbers became to awful. Now, he's got to go, because his sacrifice will, they calculate, have value.
Forget right and wrong. Forget being answerable to the law, like everyone else. Congressional members seem to have rejected these concepts long ago.
Thus the years-long fumbling by the so-called House Ethics Committee over Rangel's obvious law-breaking.
Friday, March 5, 2010
Charlie Rangel Gives Up Chairmanship
Thank heavens for minor miracles. Serially corrupt Congressman (D-NY) Charlie Rangel finally stepped down from his chairmanship of the House Ways & Means Committee.
True, he couched it in terms of a 'temporary leave.' But GOP Minority Leader John Boehner immediately retorted that such terminology appears to be a non-starter. He contended that either one is, or is not, chairman of a committee. There is no 'temporary leave' category.
Republicans had been moving ahead to vote Rangel out, if only to force House Democrats to go on record as supporting the corrupt New Yorker.
Amazingly, Rangel actually admitted, in his press conference announcing his turnabout on resigning, given his steadfast denial of doing so only the prior evening, that he was doing this to avoid harm to fellow Democrats running for re-election.
That's a rare moment of candor and awareness of the public mood among Washington's Democratic mis-leaders these days.
True, he couched it in terms of a 'temporary leave.' But GOP Minority Leader John Boehner immediately retorted that such terminology appears to be a non-starter. He contended that either one is, or is not, chairman of a committee. There is no 'temporary leave' category.
Republicans had been moving ahead to vote Rangel out, if only to force House Democrats to go on record as supporting the corrupt New Yorker.
Amazingly, Rangel actually admitted, in his press conference announcing his turnabout on resigning, given his steadfast denial of doing so only the prior evening, that he was doing this to avoid harm to fellow Democrats running for re-election.
That's a rare moment of candor and awareness of the public mood among Washington's Democratic mis-leaders these days.
Monday, March 1, 2010
New York: US Capital of Corruption?
It's been quite a week for New York politicians.
First, tax cheat Charlie Rangel suffered yet another damaging disclosure. This time, in addition to revelations of his non-payment of taxes on various real estate properties, and misuse of rent-controlled apartments in New York City, the chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee, it was revealed that he took trips to the Caribbean which were paid for by corporations. This is a clear violation of ethics rules.
His, and Frisco Nan's reactions were both predictable and disappointing. Rangel essentially claimed that his aides' actions aren't his responsibility, so he was innocent of anything.
Of course, members of Congress are among the first to conduct public hearings accusing corporate CEOs of guilt when employees of their companies engage in misconduct.
The House Speaker, having recently alleged she runs 'the most ethical House' ever, refused to remove Rangel from his Ways & Means Committee post, claiming that there was no serious national damage involved, so she saw no reason to take disciplinary action.
Further, as the linked article notes, she was surprised a Democratically-controlled ethics panel even bothered to publicly admonish Rangel.
Suffice to say, all of this demonstrates just how hopelessly tone-deaf and out of touch with voters Rangel and Frisco Nan are. They may be re-elected in their safe districts in November, but I'm guessing neither will be in the majority when they are.
Then we come to New York governor David Paterson's decision not to run again, amidst two scandals. One is his misuse of his office to strong-arm and intimidate a woman from proceeding in her case of physical violence abuse against one of Paterson's aides.
Paterson unwisely got involved, rather than show some sense and tell the aide that, as governor, nothing he would do would be proper.
Paterson also evidently set the state police upon the complainant.
Then it has come to light that Paterson may have favored a political supporter in the choice of to whom to let a casino-related contract.
Lest you think Paterson's final capitulation to his party to not run again is good news, look who is waiting in the wings.
AG Andrew Cuomo, running for governor, was one of the major culprits in sparking the recent financial sector meltdown, as HUD secretary for Bubba Clinton.
Cuomo has behaved thuggishly, using the Martin Act to bully several financial executives and companies, including BofA, Merrill Lynch, John Thain and Ken Lewis. Oblivious, all the while, to his own culpability in the mess, due to his actions while HUD Secretary to provide more, riskier mortgages to poorer people who could not really afford home ownership.
It doesn't look like New York's governance nightmare is going to end anytime soon.
First, tax cheat Charlie Rangel suffered yet another damaging disclosure. This time, in addition to revelations of his non-payment of taxes on various real estate properties, and misuse of rent-controlled apartments in New York City, the chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee, it was revealed that he took trips to the Caribbean which were paid for by corporations. This is a clear violation of ethics rules.
His, and Frisco Nan's reactions were both predictable and disappointing. Rangel essentially claimed that his aides' actions aren't his responsibility, so he was innocent of anything.
Of course, members of Congress are among the first to conduct public hearings accusing corporate CEOs of guilt when employees of their companies engage in misconduct.
The House Speaker, having recently alleged she runs 'the most ethical House' ever, refused to remove Rangel from his Ways & Means Committee post, claiming that there was no serious national damage involved, so she saw no reason to take disciplinary action.
Further, as the linked article notes, she was surprised a Democratically-controlled ethics panel even bothered to publicly admonish Rangel.
Suffice to say, all of this demonstrates just how hopelessly tone-deaf and out of touch with voters Rangel and Frisco Nan are. They may be re-elected in their safe districts in November, but I'm guessing neither will be in the majority when they are.
Then we come to New York governor David Paterson's decision not to run again, amidst two scandals. One is his misuse of his office to strong-arm and intimidate a woman from proceeding in her case of physical violence abuse against one of Paterson's aides.
Paterson unwisely got involved, rather than show some sense and tell the aide that, as governor, nothing he would do would be proper.
Paterson also evidently set the state police upon the complainant.
Then it has come to light that Paterson may have favored a political supporter in the choice of to whom to let a casino-related contract.
Lest you think Paterson's final capitulation to his party to not run again is good news, look who is waiting in the wings.
AG Andrew Cuomo, running for governor, was one of the major culprits in sparking the recent financial sector meltdown, as HUD secretary for Bubba Clinton.
Cuomo has behaved thuggishly, using the Martin Act to bully several financial executives and companies, including BofA, Merrill Lynch, John Thain and Ken Lewis. Oblivious, all the while, to his own culpability in the mess, due to his actions while HUD Secretary to provide more, riskier mortgages to poorer people who could not really afford home ownership.
It doesn't look like New York's governance nightmare is going to end anytime soon.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Charlie Rangel's Shameful Criminal Tax Cheating
Monday's Wall Street Journal lead editorial concerned New York Democratic Congressman Charlie Rangel's nauseating tax cheating, and how his party and the federal government has repeatedly looked the other way. It was a compilation of the many sordid aspects of this veteran Democratic Congressional incumbent. The sort of Representative who is a walking advertisement for term limits.
The Journal editorial began,
"Ever notice that those who endorse high taxes and those who actually pay them aren’t the same people? Consider the curious case of Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel, who is leading the charge for a new 5.4-percentage point income tax surcharge and recently called it “the moral thing to do.” About his own tax liability he seems less, well, fervent.
Exhibit A concerns a rental property Mr. Rangel purchased in 1987 at the Punta Cana Yacht Club in the Dominican Republic. The rental income from that property ought to be substantial since it is a luxury beach-front villa and is more often than not rented out. But when the National Legal and Policy Center looked at Mr. Rangel’s House financial disclosure forms in August, it noted that his reported income looked suspiciously low. In 2004 and 2005, he reported no more than $5,000, and in 2006 and 2007 no income at all from the property.
The Congressman initially denied there was any unreported income. But reporters quickly showed that the villa is among the most desirable at Punta Cana and that it rents for $500 a night in the low season, and as much as $1,100 a night in peak season. Last year it was fully booked between December 15 and April 15.
Mr. Rangel soon admitted having failed to report rental income of $75,000 over the years. First he blamed his wife for the oversight because he said she was supposed to be managing the property. Then he blamed the language barrier. “Every time I thought I was getting somewhere, they’d start speaking Spanish,” Mr. Rangel explained.
Mr. Rangel promised last fall to amend his tax returns, pay what is due and correct the information on his annual financial disclosure form. But the deadline for the 2008 filing was May 15 and as of last week he still had not filed. His press spokesman declined to answer questions about anything related to his ethics problems."
Amazing, is it not? Were this you or I, we'd be slapped with huge penalties or taken to court and jailed for tax evasion and/or nonpayment of taxes. The Journal piece then turns to a possible motivation for Rangel's clear-cut tax evasion,
"Besides not paying those pesky taxes, Mr. Rangel had other reasons for wanting to hide income. As the tenant of four rent-stabilized apartments in Harlem, the Congressman needed to keep his annual reported income below $175,000, lest he be ineligible as a hardship case for rent control. (He also used one of the apartments as an office in violation of rent-control rules, but that’s another story.)
Mr. Rangel said last fall that “I never had any idea that I got any income’’ from the villa. Try using that one the next time the IRS comes after you. Equally interesting is his claim that he didn’t know that the developer of the Dominican Republic villa had converted his $52,000 mortgage to an interest-free loan in 1990. That would seem to violate House rules on gifts, which say Members may only accept loans on “terms that are generally available to the public.” Try getting an interest-free loan from your banker.
The National Legal and Policy Center also says it has confirmed that Mr. Rangel owned a home in Washington from 1971-2000 and during that time claimed a “homestead” exemption that allowed him to save on his District of Columbia property taxes. However, the homestead exemption only applies to a principal residence, and the Washington home could not have qualified as such since Mr. Rangel’s rent-stabilized apartments in New York have the same requirement."
Thus, Rangel has been deliberately been playing fast and loose with various residency rules in order to maintain rent-controlled apartments in New York, lower cost residential space in DC, and evading Congressional rules, not to mention, again, taxes, on the interest-free loan for his problematic Dominican Republic villa.
By the way, how, again, does such a long-serving Representative amass enough wealth to buy such a rental property?
The whole thing is stomach-turning. Ironic, isn't it, that Rangel has, if I'm not mistaken, the same seat as disgraced Harlem Representative Adam Clayton Powell.
So long as charlatans and crooks like Rangel not only sit in Congress, but chair committees, swagger around pompously, having buildings in New York college campuses named for them while sitting in Congress, the public will continue to distrust this body of legislators.
The low regard and contempt in which American voters hold Congress is due to the body allowing lawbreakers such as Rangel to continue serving there, instead of time behind bars. So long as Rangel sits in the House, voters will rightly suspect anything the chamber does.
The Journal editorial began,
"Ever notice that those who endorse high taxes and those who actually pay them aren’t the same people? Consider the curious case of Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel, who is leading the charge for a new 5.4-percentage point income tax surcharge and recently called it “the moral thing to do.” About his own tax liability he seems less, well, fervent.
Exhibit A concerns a rental property Mr. Rangel purchased in 1987 at the Punta Cana Yacht Club in the Dominican Republic. The rental income from that property ought to be substantial since it is a luxury beach-front villa and is more often than not rented out. But when the National Legal and Policy Center looked at Mr. Rangel’s House financial disclosure forms in August, it noted that his reported income looked suspiciously low. In 2004 and 2005, he reported no more than $5,000, and in 2006 and 2007 no income at all from the property.
The Congressman initially denied there was any unreported income. But reporters quickly showed that the villa is among the most desirable at Punta Cana and that it rents for $500 a night in the low season, and as much as $1,100 a night in peak season. Last year it was fully booked between December 15 and April 15.
Mr. Rangel soon admitted having failed to report rental income of $75,000 over the years. First he blamed his wife for the oversight because he said she was supposed to be managing the property. Then he blamed the language barrier. “Every time I thought I was getting somewhere, they’d start speaking Spanish,” Mr. Rangel explained.
Mr. Rangel promised last fall to amend his tax returns, pay what is due and correct the information on his annual financial disclosure form. But the deadline for the 2008 filing was May 15 and as of last week he still had not filed. His press spokesman declined to answer questions about anything related to his ethics problems."
Amazing, is it not? Were this you or I, we'd be slapped with huge penalties or taken to court and jailed for tax evasion and/or nonpayment of taxes. The Journal piece then turns to a possible motivation for Rangel's clear-cut tax evasion,
"Besides not paying those pesky taxes, Mr. Rangel had other reasons for wanting to hide income. As the tenant of four rent-stabilized apartments in Harlem, the Congressman needed to keep his annual reported income below $175,000, lest he be ineligible as a hardship case for rent control. (He also used one of the apartments as an office in violation of rent-control rules, but that’s another story.)
Mr. Rangel said last fall that “I never had any idea that I got any income’’ from the villa. Try using that one the next time the IRS comes after you. Equally interesting is his claim that he didn’t know that the developer of the Dominican Republic villa had converted his $52,000 mortgage to an interest-free loan in 1990. That would seem to violate House rules on gifts, which say Members may only accept loans on “terms that are generally available to the public.” Try getting an interest-free loan from your banker.
The National Legal and Policy Center also says it has confirmed that Mr. Rangel owned a home in Washington from 1971-2000 and during that time claimed a “homestead” exemption that allowed him to save on his District of Columbia property taxes. However, the homestead exemption only applies to a principal residence, and the Washington home could not have qualified as such since Mr. Rangel’s rent-stabilized apartments in New York have the same requirement."
Thus, Rangel has been deliberately been playing fast and loose with various residency rules in order to maintain rent-controlled apartments in New York, lower cost residential space in DC, and evading Congressional rules, not to mention, again, taxes, on the interest-free loan for his problematic Dominican Republic villa.
By the way, how, again, does such a long-serving Representative amass enough wealth to buy such a rental property?
The whole thing is stomach-turning. Ironic, isn't it, that Rangel has, if I'm not mistaken, the same seat as disgraced Harlem Representative Adam Clayton Powell.
So long as charlatans and crooks like Rangel not only sit in Congress, but chair committees, swagger around pompously, having buildings in New York college campuses named for them while sitting in Congress, the public will continue to distrust this body of legislators.
The low regard and contempt in which American voters hold Congress is due to the body allowing lawbreakers such as Rangel to continue serving there, instead of time behind bars. So long as Rangel sits in the House, voters will rightly suspect anything the chamber does.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Charlie Rangel (D-NY): Tax Evader
It's official. Charlie Rangel, Democrat and US Representative from NY, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, is a tax dodger.
He has admitted evading back taxes on $75,000 of income from a rental property over a period of 20 years.
For what it's worth, he is being represented by Democratic party fixer and Clinton confidant Lanny Davis.
Rangel blames his wife for the error, claiming that she handles finances, so he isn't really culpable. Nevermind that they file a joint return. Or that he must have signed the returns.
Now, if you know about filing taxes, you probably also know that penalties, at least for you, me, and other average Americans who don't belong to the ruling party's House delegation, are much stiffer and more serious for 'above the line' misstatements than they are for 'below the line' errors.
The 'line' in question is gross income. The IRS takes a much dimmer view of misstating income than it does for erroneously claiming deductions.
What Rangel committed was an 'above the line' infraction. He and his wife misrepresented their gross income.
If you or I were found to have done that, it could be a major issue. A criminal offense.
Do you think the sitting tax dodger from New York is worried about that? No way.
Or, maybe, 'no way or means.'
In a Presidential election year in which Rangel's party's own candidate is alleging to be above reproach, the Messiah of ethics and clean campaigning, the untimely revelation of Rangel's ethical and financial gaffe must be irritating to the freshman Senator from Illinois.
It might even give voters pause about just how 'new' the politics of the Democratic party really are.
Judging by Rangel's attempt to trivialize his crimes, hold onto his Chairmanship and seat in the face of Republican House leadership calls for him to step down, he knows he will get off without a penalty on this.
Surely, he knows he won't be treated as an ordinary citizen. After all, as a Democratic Congressman, he no doubt feels invincible and safe from all manner of penalties and punishments for illegal actions that lesser, non-office-holding Americans would suffer.
He has admitted evading back taxes on $75,000 of income from a rental property over a period of 20 years.
For what it's worth, he is being represented by Democratic party fixer and Clinton confidant Lanny Davis.
Rangel blames his wife for the error, claiming that she handles finances, so he isn't really culpable. Nevermind that they file a joint return. Or that he must have signed the returns.
Now, if you know about filing taxes, you probably also know that penalties, at least for you, me, and other average Americans who don't belong to the ruling party's House delegation, are much stiffer and more serious for 'above the line' misstatements than they are for 'below the line' errors.
The 'line' in question is gross income. The IRS takes a much dimmer view of misstating income than it does for erroneously claiming deductions.
What Rangel committed was an 'above the line' infraction. He and his wife misrepresented their gross income.
If you or I were found to have done that, it could be a major issue. A criminal offense.
Do you think the sitting tax dodger from New York is worried about that? No way.
Or, maybe, 'no way or means.'
In a Presidential election year in which Rangel's party's own candidate is alleging to be above reproach, the Messiah of ethics and clean campaigning, the untimely revelation of Rangel's ethical and financial gaffe must be irritating to the freshman Senator from Illinois.
It might even give voters pause about just how 'new' the politics of the Democratic party really are.
Judging by Rangel's attempt to trivialize his crimes, hold onto his Chairmanship and seat in the face of Republican House leadership calls for him to step down, he knows he will get off without a penalty on this.
Surely, he knows he won't be treated as an ordinary citizen. After all, as a Democratic Congressman, he no doubt feels invincible and safe from all manner of penalties and punishments for illegal actions that lesser, non-office-holding Americans would suffer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
