By GottaLaff
Again, Roll Call is subscription only, so this is all we have:
A government watchdog group asked the Senate Ethics Committee on Wednesday to investigate the ongoing use of secret legislative “holds,” asserting lawmakers are bucking ethics reform law banning the practice.Now on to stories that give us more than one sentence.
By GottaLaff
In a three-page "public letter of qualified admonition" issued Friday, the committee formally reprimanded Burris for statements -- some made under oath to an Illinois legislative committee -- in which he denied trying to raise any campaign contributions for indicted former governor Rod Blagojevich for his political committees. [...]More here.
A letter of admonition is the mildest form of rebuke that the ethics committee can administer.
By GottaLaff
Wow! You know what this means, don't you?!
Nothing!
The Senate Ethics Committee is investigating Sen. John Ensign, and allegations of improper conduct stemming from an affair with the wife of a former aide."Whenever allegations of improper conduct are brought to the attention of the Senate Ethics Committee, we open a preliminary inquiry," committee spokeswoman Natalie Ravitz told CNN.
No. Thing. Or as Kent Jones of The Rachel Maddow Show says, "Weak!"
Because of the tight lipped nature of the ethics panel, it is unclear exactly what the Ethics Committee is probing. [...]
In July, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a left-leaning watchdog group, formally asked the Senate Ethics Committee to investigate potential violations of ethics rules. [...]
Senate GOP sources, who did not want to be quoted on the record about the Ensign controversy, said they worried the efforts described in the article appear to show that Ensign may have facilitated relationships and work for Hampton that violate a ban on lobbying for one year after a Senator or aide leaves office.
Well, okay, maybe a little something.... maybe.
By GottaLaff
Ever since political opponents started making false accusations about my mortgages, I've said that Jackie and I did nothing wrong.
Today, I'm pleased to report that the Senate Ethics Committee has agreed, officially clearing me of any wrongdoing.
Here is a portion of the statement that I gave to reporters this afternoon. I hope you'll read it and share with other supporters.
After a year-long investigation in which it deposed witnesses and pored over 18,000 pages of documents, the bipartisan Ethics Committee has concluded that we violated no rules when refinancing our mortgages. There was no "sweetheart" or special deal; the allegations are and have always been false.
...
I hope that today's dismissal will go a long way towards restoring the bond of trust and confidence that I've worked long and hard to build with the people of our state. I want you to know it's a relationship I have never, and would never, take for granted.
And now that the facts have been aired and the lessons learned, it's time to move on. I'm going to continue fighting for you - humbled, wiser, and always proud to serve the people of Connecticut.
I'm looking forward to continuing my fight on behalf of the people of Connecticut - and to a campaign based on real issues, not political smears.
I can't tell you how much I appreciate your support - and I hope I can continue to count on it going forward.
Sincerely,
Chris Dodd
By GottaLaff
The Senate Ethics Committee has opened a preliminary inquiry into Sen. Roland Burris’s (D-Ill.) conflicting testimony on the circumstances surrounding his appointment while Senate Democrats and Republicans take a wait-and-see approach to the potential impact on the 2010 election. [...]
“We know the Republicans are salivating, but I’m not sure they should be,” said the Democratic source. “This is far from the ‘Apocalypse of the Illinois Senate seat.’ “
A senior GOP aide dismissed that as “pure spin,” noting that Burris stridently insisted on being seated and has resisted any efforts to remove him ever since. And as investigations become possible at the state and federal levels, the aide said Burris will inevitably become more weakened.
“He’s not going anywhere, at least voluntarily, and any investigation won’t happen overnight,” said the GOP aide. “You can’t just remove a U.S. senator like they impeached the governor. This will take a while, and if anything, the Democratic infighting will further the divide over him. Look at what happened the first time he tried to enter the Senate.”
But several Democrats have expressed interest in the seat, even before news of Burris’ conflicting testimony on his contact with Blagojevich emerged. [...]
Two prominent Republicans are also weighing getting into the race. [...]
But first Burris will have to deal with potential state and federal investigations.
By GottaLaff
More here.The New Republic published an explosive story Saturday evening detailing how John McCain, in all likelihood, leaked information to investigators of the Keating Five scandal that was designed to help his image at the expense of the other four Senators involved.
If the allegation is true -- and TNR makes a healthy case as to its veracity -- it would mean that McCain violated Senate rules and could have been expelled from that body.
"All five senators -- including McCain -- had testified under oath and under the U.S. penal code that the leaks did not come from their camps," Sahil Mahtani reports. "The leaks were also prohibited by rules of the Senate Ethics Committee; according to the rules of the Senate, anyone caught leaking such information could face expulsion from the body."
But this is not be the only instance in which McCain defied the rules of the Senate when seeking to absolve himself of any wronging in the Keating affair. Public records in Arizona reveal that the Senator was also dishonest in discussing the extent of financial transactions he and his family had with the disgraced Savings and Loans chief.
In a three-and-a-half hour interview with investigators on February 13, 1990, McCain told the Ethics Committee that "other than the Fountain Square project [a property deal in which Keating and McCain's family were jointly invested] there were no other financial dealings between him or his family and ACC [American Continental Corporation]."
This, it seems, was not true.
By GottaLaff
According to CNN, Gramm-pa's campaign is convinced their tax talk is working. But, of course, that's not dirty enough for them:
The wrong people are being reported to the ethics committee.In what appears to be an attempt to gin up an “October Surprise,” the McCain campaign teamed up with the American Conservative Union today to make a campaign issue of Sen. Barack Obama’s ties to convicted Chicago real estate developer Tony Rezko.
The ACU quietly filed a formal complaint with the Senate Ethics Committee — the group’s Website features no mention of the action — against the Democratic presidential nominee. From The Boston Globe:
Rezko was convicted in June on federal corruption charges not involving Obama. [...]
[I]ndependent fact-checking groups have concluded that there’s no proof that Obama was involved in any wrongdoing.
Still, the American Conservative Union filed a formal complaint with the Senate Ethics Committee today alleging that Obama’s home purchase violated the Senate’s gift ban. In the letter to the Ethics Committee, ACU Chairman David Keene said that “sufficient information exists to demonstrate that Sen. Obama solicited, received, and accepted a gift greater than $50 from Mr. and Mrs. Rezko, and Sen. Obama failed to disclose this gift.”
Right on cue, the McCain campaign held a conference call with reporters that featured former Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R-Ill.), who was a colleague of Obama’s for two years in the Illinois Senate, and Ed O’Callahan, a former federal prosecutor in New York.
During the call, the participants wanted to know why Obama has never answered questions from the media about the matter, while acknowledging Obama did answer questions about the matter from The Chicago Tribune and The Chicago Sun-Times in March.
O’Callahan, clearly reading a script, veered off-topic into McCain campaign talking points:
“Obama needs to come clean on this deal before the election, so that voters can judge whether Obama received monetary benefits from these Rezko favors.
Since the Democrats took control of Congress only two years ago, they have driven our economy into the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. What’s their solution to the problem? To spread more of our wealth around by giving it to those who don’t pay a single penny of federal income tax. With friends and priorities like these, Barack Obama and his Democrat allies lack the judgment to lead our country.”
Fitzgerald and O’Callahan had taken just one question from the reporters before the call was abruptly ended.
I’ve sat in on dozens of these conference calls, and I’m pretty sure this is a record for fewest questions allowed from reporters.
The obvious question is: If this is such an important controversy, why did the ACU wait until five days before the presidential election to file its complaint?
With no new information being offered, the complaint appears to be a stunt aimed at influencing the election. However, if this is what the McCain campaign has been holding up its sleeve, to be sprung at the last moment, it doesn’t look like Obama has much to fear from this year’s October surprise.
.jpg)
