Back to Basics

Hastings is arguably the most corrupt man in the U.S. Congress. according to Beltway observers. Credits: Congressional Press Office Archive

A congressman who was impeached and removed from the federal bench in Florida,  and who is now under investigation by the House Ethics Committee, has been exposed by a Beltway watchdog group for yet another  transgression — nepotism.

Congressman Alcee Hastings (D-FL) is one of only six federal judges to be removed from the bench following an impeachment trial in which even members the group — the Congressional Black Caucus — condemned his corruption as a jurist when he claimed he was being targeted because he was an African American judge.

In addition, Hastings is under investigation for sexually harassing and molesting a female subordinate.

According to a report on the Judicial Watch blog, Hastings “is in a class of his own when it comes to nepotism.”  Hastings is also on the 2011 Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians list.

This month Congressman Hastings achieved the rank of No. 1 out of 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives for paying salaries and fees to family members. The sordid details are included in a government watchdog’s study of how members of Congress abuse their position to benefit themselves and their families.

The results were neatly packaged in a 300-plus-page report, titled “Family Affair.” Virtually every member of the House is mentioned and Hastings leads the pack for paying his girlfriend/deputy district director more than half a million dollars in salary and other expenses from 2007 to 2010.

Hasting’s girlfriend, Patricia Williams, draws a generous six-figure salary from his congressional office and gets reimbursed for “travel and event expenses,” according to the report. The ten-term congressman, who serves on several powerful committees, also owes his gal pal, who is a lawyer, up to $1 million for defending him during his impeachment trial, according to the Judicial Watch blogger.

Under House rules, members aren’t supposed to hire family but Hastings says that doesn’t apply to him because he’s not legally married to Williams and he’s not related to her. And so the reports are inaccurate  Hastings told a local newspaper in his south Florida district.

“I have never had any family members employed in my Congressional office,” Hastings stated, stressing an official dictionary definition of “family” to include spouses and blood relatives but not girlfriends.

The veteran Democrat lawmaker, who got impeached as a judge after being embroiled in a bribery scandal, has quite a history mixing work with romance. In fact, last spring Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against Hastings on behalf of a female employee named Winsome Packer, who was repeatedly subjected to “unwelcome sexual advances, unwelcome touching” and retaliation when Hastings chaired the United States Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe.

The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, led to a House Ethics Committee probe as well, according to Judicial Watch.

This probably isn’t enough to earn the censure-worthy Charlie Rangel yet another portrait in the halls of Congress, but the year ain’t over yet.

The New York Post outlines how Rangel has again been slapped on the wrist for being, quite literally, low rent:

Charlie Rangel is one lucky congressman: A federal panel is citing him for election-law violations but fining him a mere $23,000 — pocket change that likely won’t even come from his own pocket.

Average New Yorkers should be so lucky.

After all, this wasn’t over some minor technicality. No, the Federal Election Commission found that the Manhattan Democrat for years illegally used a rent-stabilized apartment as a campaign office.

Instead of paying $1,700 or more a month — the going rate in the W. 135th Street building, where he also lives — Rangel’s campaign committee paid a well-below-market $630 rent.

Rangel can’t claim ignorance, either; turns out he not only signed the original lease (which required him to use the unit “for living purposes only”) but renewal leases “and all other renewal forms.”

Which means, said the FEC, that he knowingly accepted what amounted to an illegal in-kind campaign gift from his landlord (who was fined $19,000).

And Rangel kept the deal even as the landlord vigorously moved to evict other tenants for violating rent-control rules.

Given what he got away with, the $23,000 fine isn’t much of a hit. No wonder an aide calls it basically a nuisance fee.

Chollie Rangel: Stark reminder of a swamp left woefully undrained.

Mmm, mmm, mmm. The culture of corruption.

When last we revisited the House ethics case of Maxine “OneUnited Bank” Waters…nothing and more nothing was happening.

Readers of this blog will recall that I pointed out some of the incestuous ties on the House Ethics committee that muddied the Waters case last June:

The House Ethics Committee suffers from dysfunction by design. It is chronically understaffed and underfunded. The panel most recently went without a staff director for four months. Its investigative backlog was compounded by the partisan-charged suspension of two staff attorneys last fall who were knee-deep in the Waters’ probe. And the panel’s ranking Democratic member, California Rep. Linda Sanchez, is bogged down with her own ethical conflicts of interest.

Sanchez’s chief of staff, Adam Brand, is the son of the lawyer handling Waters’ ethics defense. That lawyer, Stan Brand, also represented Sanchez and her sister, Democratic Rep. Loretta Sanchez, in a separate ethics case. The sisters engaged in smelly hiring shenanigans after an aide to Loretta embezzled money from the office account in 2006. Short of funds, Loretta “borrowed” three aides from Linda’s staff. House rules ban members from paying people to do work in offices other than their own. Miraculously, Loretta’s embezzling aide avoided jail time, and the Sanchez sisters escaped any sanctions for their payroll-sharing collusion. The House ethics opinion on the matter remains confidential.

Intended to boost voters’ confidence in Congress (now at an all-time low), the committee’s stubborn secrecy and predictable wrist-slap punishments (see “Rangel, Charlie”) only make matters worse. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: House-soilers can’t be cleaners. Voters, not Washington politicians, are the ultimate ethics committee.

Now, the Friday news dump brings us word that an unprecedented SIX House members have recused themselves from the case after nearly two years of doing nothing:

The House Ethics Committee announced today that six committee members have voluntary recused themselves from the matter involving Rep. Maxine Waters and that six alternates have been appointed to hear the California Democrat’s case.

The announcement, which was delivered as a letter from Ethics Chairman Jo Bonner (R-Ala.) to Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and read on the House floor, comes on the heels of an independent attorney’s six-month probe into whether the actions of current and former ethics panel members and staffers botched the Waters investigation by violating her due process rights.

The committee made no further statement about the status of the Waters probe or when it will continue.

…“Outside counsel has discovered no evidence indicating bias or partiality on the part of former Members or requiring the exclusion of any former Members of the Committee from serving as substitute Members. However, out of an abundance of caution and for the same reasons as the current Members volunteering their recusal, [outside counsel] Mr. [Billy] Martin has recommended that no Member who served in the 111th Congress should serve as a substitute Member in this matter,” the letter said.

Besides a congressional investigation, Rep. Hastings faces a lawsuit by a woman who says he sexually harassed her and then retaliated against her when she rebuffed his advances. Credit: Newsbusters

Impeached judge now U.S. lawmaker, Congressman Alcee Hastings (D-FL) received some bad news from his colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives as well as from a public-interest group that investigates and exposes government and political corruption in Washington, D.C., and throughout the 50 states.

“We are very pleased that the Office of Congressional Ethics report validated Ms. Packer’s allegations against Rep. Hastings. Now the House Ethics Committee needs to get its act together and punish Rep. Hastings for his reprehensible treatment of Ms. Packer. Given the grave nature of the allegations and the other laws he evidently violated, the Department of Justice ought to investigate the allegations against Rep. Hastings as well.

“In the meantime, Judicial Watch will proceed with its lawsuit on behalf of Ms. Packer.

“Rep. Hastings’ attacks against Winsome Packer are disgraceful and beneath the office he holds. His response calls to mind his corrupt behavior that resulted in his impeachment and removal from the federal bench.”

Hastings’ Legacy: Bribery, Perjury, Impeachment

Prior to his election to congress, Hastings worked as a private-practice attorney, a civil rights activist, and a Florida judge. Appointed by President Jimmy Carter in 1979, he became the first African-American federal judge in the state of Florida, and served in that position for ten years. He’s still called “Judge” by some of his colleagues, but one would think he’d rather forget his days on the federal bench.

In 1989, Judge Hastings was impeached by the US House of Representatives for bribery and perjury. The Democratic-controlled Senate convicted Hastings of accepting a $150,000 bribe in 1981 in exchange for a lenient sentence and of perjury in his testimony about the case. Hastings said the charges against him smacked of racism.

He distinguished himself by being only the sixth Judge in US history to be removed from office by the US Senate. So damning was the evidence against him that Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), a founding member of the CBC, favored impeaching him.

Conyers, who is also black, said he “found no trace of racism during the investigation.” He urged his colleagues to remove Hastings from the bench. He said, “[Hastings] is unfit to serve.”

His impeachment was remanded back to the Senate by Judge Stanley Sporkin after Hastings filed lawsuit claiming that his impeachment trial was invalid because he was tried by a Senate committee, not in front of the full Senate, and that he had been acquitted in a criminal trial.

But the US Supreme Court had ruled in a similar case, regarding Judge Walter Nixon, who had also been impeached and removed. The SCOTUS stated that the courts had no jurisdiction to review Senate impeachment procedures and Hastings’ impeachment and removal were reinstated.

So, the Office of Congressional Ethics joined in the Holiday Document Dump Spirit (ho, ho, ho!) on Friday and unloaded a two-year-old report on Jesse Jackson, Jr.’s cameo role in the Blago Senate seat trading scam.

The announcement is on the OCE site here, but you can read the 300-page report right here in case you missed it:

Review No 09-9812 Referral to Committee

The upshot: The toothless OCE found “probable cause” and “substantial reason to believe” that not only did Jackson conspire to trade campaign cash for the Senate appointment, but that Jackson also broke the law by using taxpayer-subsidized office resources to promote a “public campaign” for Barack Obama’s old seat. Straight from the report:

There is probable cause to believe that Representative Jackson either (1) directed a third-party, most likely Mr. Raghuveer Nayak, to offer to raise money for Governor Blagojevich in exchange for appointing Representative Jackson to the Senate seat, or (2) had knowledge that Nayak would likely make such an offer once Representative Jackson authorized him to advocate on his behalf with Governor Blagojevich. Because former Governor Blagojevich, Nayak and Mr. Rajinder Bedi have declined to cooperate with the OCE investigation, and because the OCE cannot compel their cooperation, the OCE is unable to determine whether there is a substantial reason to believe these allegations.

…There is substantial reason to believe that Representative Jackson violated federal law and rules promulgated by the Committee on House Administration concerning the proper use of the Member’s Representational Allowance. Specifically, the OCE learned from Representative Jackson and his staff that staff resources both in the Representative’s Washington, DC and Chicago, Illinois, offices were used to mount a “public campaign” to secure the Representative’s appointment to the Senate.

None of this is new news — most of the details emerged in the Chicago press and at trial — though the moldy oldy report includes a fresh, 17-page CYA letter from Jackson and his attorneys denying everything and invoking the see no corruption, hear no corruption defense.

The delayed disclosure of the 2009 OCE comes just as Blago is scheduled to be sentenced early this week following his June conviction in the pay-for-play corruption case.

And while OCE plays docu-dump reindeer games, the House Ethics Committee has decided to play more Kick the Can. Sporting its own holiday scandal muffler, the panel announced…it would have nothing to announce. It reneged on a do-something Friday deadline in Jackson’s ethics case and said it would continue to investigate:

Pursuant to House Rule XI, Clause 3(a)(8)(A) and Committee Rules 17A(b)(1)(A) and 17A(c)(1), the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee jointly decided on October 18, 2011 to extend the Committee’s review of the matter until December 2, 2011. In order to gather additional information necessary to complete its review, the Committee will continue to review the matter pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a). The Committee notes that the mere fact of conducting further review of a referral, and any mandatory disclosure of such further review, does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred, or reflect any judgment on behalf of the Committee.

As The Hill reports, Jackson faces a challenge from his left flank and has asked reverse Midas Touch pal Barack Obama for help.

Calling the civility police. Oh, never mind. It’s an uncivil corruptocrat with a “D” after her name. Go ahead, progs, and look the other way.

Via the LA Times:

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) came out swinging against Republicans in Congress on Saturday as she addressed the unemployed during a forum in Inglewood.

The event occurred a day after new statistics were released showing that California’s jobless rate last month went up to 12%, from 11.8%. California now has the second-highest rate of unemployment in the nation, trailing only Nevada at 12.9%, and its jobless rate is well above the U.S. average of 9.1%.

Waters vowed to push Congress to focus on creating more jobs. “I’m not afraid of anybody,” said Waters. “This is a tough game. You can’t be intimidated. You can’t be frightened. And as far as I’m concerned, the ‘tea party’ can go straight to hell.”

More than 1,000 people attended “Kitchen Table Summit,” which was designed to give the jobless an opportunity to vent to elected officials and share their struggles about finding a job.

Say, what’s the latest on the Swamp Queen’s stalled ethics trial?

It’s been punted to an outside counsel:

The House ethics committee is poised to pay a half-million dollars by year’s end to resolve the mess that remains of its three-year probe of Rep. Maxine Waters.

An outside counsel and private law firm will sort out how to handle the most substantive case on the committee’s plate this session, as the panel tackles more modest matters. Waters, a powerful California Democrat, and a former senior staffer on the committee have separately questioned the integrity of the panel’s investigation.

…Waters’s scheduled ethics trial in November 2010 was postponed amid the disputes. Both the staff director and the two investigators left the committee, with the case unresolved.

The new outside review of the Waters case is already underway and being led by respected defense lawyer Billy Martin. It aims to determine whether the committee so tainted the investigation that it must drop the charges. If Martin finds the case can proceed, and the ethics committee agrees, he and associates at his firm of Dorsey & Whitney would lead the revived probe.

When the committee’s new staff director, Dan Schwager, arrived in May he immediately reviewed the handling of the Waters case. In a private meeting the week of June 28, the committee agreed with Schwager’s proposal that the panel should hire outside counsel. Chief among the reasons was a lack of public trust in the process and Waters’s accusations that the committee had broken its own rules. Schwager, known as an even-handed counsel to the Senate ethics committee, has been well-received by committee members.

The committee announced Martin’s hiring July 20, and acknowledged that its conduct was the subject of “serious allegations.”

“The outside counsel’s review will . . . help assure all respondents and the entire House community of the integrity of the committee’s process for all matters,” the statement said.

Under his contract, Martin needs committee approval to release any information about the Waters probe and finish his initial review by Jan. 2.

So what, besides cronyism of color, do Water and her Congressional Black Caucus have in mind to reduce dismal job numbers for unemployed black Americans?

Hey, Nancy P., what happened to your promise to “drain the swamp” after foolish Americans gave Democrats majority status in the U.S. House back in 2006?

Say what? Your swamp-drain-machine was programmed to remove only those with an R next to their names?

Which is why the goofy leader from San Francisco overlooked (ignored?) the less than honorable Alcee Hastings, Democrat from Florida.

Did I mention that Hastings is a DEMOCRAT?

As reported, in part:

“The House’s independent ethics office is looking into sexual-harassment claims leveled months ago against Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., the Wall Street Journal is reporting.

Citing sources familiar with the inquiry, the Journal reported the investigation, which began at least a month ago, is being conducted by the independent Office of Congressional Ethics and not the House Ethics Committee.

A lawsuit, filed against Hastings on March 7 by the conservative group Judicial Watch on behalf of Helsinki Commission staffer Winsome Packer, alleged that the congressman sexually harassed Packer over the course of more than two years and threatened retaliation if she tried to report it.”

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told the Journal that his organization had been contacted by investigators and confirmed that Packer is cooperating with OCE.”

Welcome, Mr. Hastings, to the Pelosi House of Corruption!  Know that you are NOT alone. If fact you are a welcome upgrade to the House of Ill Repute roster which includes recent inductees Charles Rangel and Anthony Weiner!

Nancy Pelosi: The woman who ran the cleanest, least corrupt House in History!

NOT!

Capitol Hill’s Other Dirty Laundry
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2011

The same congressional panel that launched a preliminary inquiry into Weiner-gate this week has been diddling around with several other Democratic ethics scandals for years. These aren’t foxes guarding the henhouse. They’re sloths guarding the foxhole.

The House Ethics Committee is now reportedly probing into Twitter-holic Democratic New York Rep. Anthony Weiner’s possible abuse of government resources while sending pervy messages and photos to young women across the country. The latest batch of Weiner’s leaked social-media self-portraits — more cheesecake than beefcake — showed him in various states of undress at the congressional gym. From what other public buildings has Ick-arus tweeted his junk? And how much time on the public’s dime did his government staff spend coaching Weiner girls to assist with damage control?

Don’t expect an answer from the House ethics watchdogs until after Weiner’s first child enters kindergarten. The wheels of justice grind more slowly there than a dial-up modem.

Weiner’s dirty laundry is just the latest addition to a teeming heap of scandal. To wit: The committee still hasn’t issued a final report into last year’s reckless Capitol Hill predator du jour, former Democratic New York Rep. Eric Massa. He’s the notorious creep who serially groped male staffers and subjected interns to “tickle fights” for months while then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi looked the other way.

Then there’s Beltway swamp queen Democratic California Rep. Maxine Waters. Last summer, after a yearlong investigation, the House Ethics Committee charged her with three violations related to her crony intervention on behalf of minority-owned OneUnited Bank in Los Angeles. The panel accused Waters of bringing discredit to the House for using her influence to seek and secure taxpayer-subsidized special favors for the failing financial institution. Her Democratic guardians have successfully delayed a trial for 10 months.

Another California Democrat, Rep. Laura Richardson, has been under the House Ethics microscope since the fall of 2009. She defaulted six times on home loans, left a trail of unpaid bills in her wake and allegedly failed to report required information on her financial disclosure forms while receiving special treatment from a lender. While the panel cleared her of “knowingly” accepting favors, she is reportedly the subject of a second probe into using employees on government time to work on her political campaign.

The panel has also toyed for the past two years with Illinois Democratic Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr.’s pay-for-play scandal involving charges that he or his staff sought to buy President Barack Obama’s former Senate seat. A separate congressional ethics office referred the matter to the House ethics panel after it “learned that staff resources of the representative’s Washington, D.C., and Chicago, Ill., offices were used to mount a ‘public campaign’ to secure the representative’s appointment to the U.S. Senate.” But Jackson’s House ethics probe remains on ice while the feds chase former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who was at the center of the scheme and remains on trial.

The House Ethics Committee suffers from dysfunction by design.

It’s not going anywhere.

It hasn’t been going anywhere since April, when I last reported on stonewalling in the case.

Flashback:

Confirmed: “Drain the swamp” is Washington-speak for “Let it fester.” While House ethics watchdogs dither, it’s shady business as usual for ethics scandal-plagued Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters.

Last summer, the House Ethics Committee charged the entrenched California congresswoman with three violations related to her wheeling and dealing on behalf of minority-owned OneUnited Bank in Los Angeles. The panel accused Waters of bringing discredit to the House for using her influence to seek and secure taxpayer-subsidized special favors for the failing financial institution.

Eight months have passed since the House ethics panel charged Waters. But to date, there has been no action. No trial. No consequences.

Investor’s Business Daily follows up this week with the latest obstructionism by Democrat guardians for Maxine Waters — and aptly notes that these foxes stationed in front of the House ethics henhouse are the same ones Dems want to put in charge of a Weinergate probe.

Super:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has called for an ethics investigation of Rep. Anthony Weiner for possibly misusing official resources. But what about the probe of Rep. Maxine Waters for abusing her power?

The ethics trial of Waters, accused of swinging millions in federal bailout cash to her husband’s ailing bank, was set to begin last November.

But the Democrat leadership has delayed Waters’ trial by blocking subpoenas and firing the lead lawyer working on the two-year investigation. Also, the ranking Democrat on the House Ethics panel reportedly is holding up the hiring of a new staff director.

Cue Swamp Queen laughter here.