Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Rep. Waters Ethics Trial Suspended Indefinitely - Congresswoman Says Case Is Weak And Unraveling

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 05:14 PM
Original message
Rep. Waters Ethics Trial Suspended Indefinitely - Congresswoman Says Case Is Weak And Unraveling
11/19/10 04:13 PM

According to a joint statement from Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), who chairs the ethics committee, and ranking member Jo Bonner (R-Ala.), the case is being referred back to the subcommittee investigating the matter. Waters's trial was set to begin on Nov. 29.

"The committee voted to recommit the matter regarding Representative Maxine Waters to the investigative subcommittee due to materials discovered that may have had an effect on the investigative subcommittee's transmittal to the committee," they wrote. "As a result, the adjudicatory subcommittee no longer has jurisdiction over this matter and the adjudicatory hearing previously scheduled for November 29, 2010 will not be held."

read: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/130161-ethics-committee-calls-off-waters-trial


Washington, Nov 19 -

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) released the following statement in response to the announcement today by the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct that it has cancelled the adjudicatory hearing the Committee had scheduled for Monday, November 29th:

“I am disappointed that the Committee is once again postponing my hearing and showing a complete disregard for due process and fairness. For over a year, I have cooperated with the investigation and I have consistently asked for a public hearing on this matter. I remain eager to present my case and demonstrate to my constituents and all Americans that I have not violated any House rules.

In October, after a lengthy delay, the Committee finally set a date for the hearing and explained that its purpose would be ‘to determine whether any counts in the Statement of Alleged Violation… have been proven by clear and convincing evidence.’ The Committee’s decision to cancel the hearing and put it off indefinitely demonstrates that the Committee does not have a strong case and would not be able to prove any violation has occurred.

The Committee is suggesting it needs more time to review newly discovered evidence that it claims may be material to its case. In fact, the Committee has had this ‘new’ document since October 29th, and it does not provide any new significant information. In fact, the document shows that my office was working to ensure that Emergency Economic Stabilization Act assisted small and minority institutions. The document does not reflect any action on behalf of any specific company. Although the Committee continues to insist that the ‘small bank language’ was drafted to benefit only one institution, the facts do not support that assertion; in fact, the documentary record directly contradicts it. As the highest ranking African-American and woman on the Financial Services Committee, my staff and I did what we said we did and what we have always done, which is provide a voice in the process for those who lack it.

Furthermore, since the fundamental purpose of a hearing is to evaluate evidence, I am puzzled at the Committee’s insistence on moving backwards instead of forwards. After beginning its investigation more than a year ago, working to prepare a case for months and realizing it cannot prove wrongdoing, they have resorted to a delay. If this evidence is so damning, the Committee should present its case before the public, as we asked them to do when I first learned of their desire to postpone the hearing. Apparently the Committee now recognizes, as I have maintained, that there was no benefit, no improper action, no failure to disclose, no one influenced, and there is no case.

Before the elections, the Republican Members of the Committee felt so strongly about holding the hearing that they were willing to break Committee rules to share their convictions. Their vote to delay this hearing is contradictory to their public pronouncements. Yet now once again, the Committee is dragging this matter on and denying my constituents the opportunity to hear my case.

Furthermore, the Committee appears to be once again violating its own rules, namely committee rule 20(a) which indicates that a Statement of Alleged Violation can only be amended BEFORE transmittal to the adjudicatory subcommittee.

There is no provision or authority for the Committee to take this action, but the same body which is charged with interpreting the rules now seems to be guilty of making them up as it goes along. Neither the letter sent to me nor the statement on the Committee website cites any rule or clear rationale for this decision.

The credibility of the House is reflected not only by Members accused of improper action, but also is reflected by the Members who sit in judgment. The public expects those who judge to hold themselves to their own rules. Today, the Committee has brought discredit upon itself and this institution by denying me, and more importantly my constituents, the right to set the record straight.”

read: http://waters.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=215550
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. I wonder how many hundreds of thousands of dollars the Hon Waters has
Been forced to spend so far.

These sham kangaroo courts need to be ended as soon as possible.

Perhaps, the House should hire Senator Feinstein to offer her recommendations on simply re-writing the Ethics laws for the House, as she has done for the Senate.

Over in the Senate you can vote for a measure without even thinking of recusing yourself due to conflict of interest concerns. And this is because of the spin Di Feinstein has placed on her defining "conflict of interest."

With her spin on this intact, she was able to vote in the Iraqi War II and then sit back and help her husband spend the twenty seven million bucks he received on war contracts within the first six weeks of the war.

Meanwhile Rangel has had to explain why he used some stamps for a charity he is promoting!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidDvorkin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
3. I wonder if it will become unsuspended next year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-20-10 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
4. They have nothing on her
It's that simple
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-21-10 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. They knew that when they started.
It is the money you are forced to spend defending yourself that is the punishment for being a good and ethical Democrat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-21-10 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. and punishment for responding to and supporting her constituents
Apparently, the administration could have the major banks in to the White House for tea and crumpets before they got their gift packages, but it's wrong for Rep. Waters to make a call to make sure smaller and minority banks got a fair share of the money that was being doled out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-21-10 12:51 AM
Response to Original message
7. I'm pulling for Maxine. K&R. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jan 13th 2025, 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC