Comments on: Maxine Waters will have what Charlie Rangel’s having.

By: tara2009

tara2009 — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 20:01:25 +0000

Anyone caught with his or her hand where it shouldn’t be should be thoroughly investigated by the opposite party and if they get together and make a deal
then a law must be made, that if caught in and proven that they are guilty
it’s an automatic dismissle, no if’s and or buts in other words 0 tolerance. They would sign on to this when taking office and would have no excuse. It’s used in our schools so what is good for the goose, is good for the gander or ganderetts.
mehpensacola,fl

By: Xasteius

Xasteius — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 22:49:05 +0000

Matt Drudge asks the question “What’s going on here?” My question is “What are they (the establishment) trying to hide by throwing this bone to the media?” I’d like to think that justice is making a comeback in America, but I get a sneaky suspicion that something’s getting slipped past the people.

/tin foil

By: hunter

hunter — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 00:39:23 +0000

The election is in NOVEMBER. This is AUGUST. Nothing. Not one little election, not one little vote, is for sure.
In fact, the over confidence of many on the Conservative side is one of my chief concerns that the Obamanation could fester past this election cycle.
We need to think of GOTV. Of making sure we have appealing candidates that will attract unhappy voters.
Of making sure that blatant democrat corruption is not simply allowed to retire in dignity, but is held up as the danger to the Republic and the offense to hard working honest people that it is.

By: hunter

hunter — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 00:35:39 +0000

But since there is no actual Republican leadership willing to force the MSM to pay attention, the question is this:
Will we have yet another missed opportunity to point out that Republicans, when confronted with corruption do something about it that involves cleaning up, while democrats see corruption as a failure in message control?
We have Chicago machine political hacks running the country.
Why is that so unworthy of outrage?

By: The_Rebel

The_Rebel — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 00:21:49 +0000

I will make one prediction- that they will both be re-elected by their constituents. The more things change, the more they remain the same.

By: jazzycmk

jazzycmk — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 17:45:35 +0000

“DEMOCRATS DO NOT DRAIN SWAMPS. That’s because swamps are wetlands, and thus must be protected by the full power of the federal government,”

Love it.

That would be a great advertisement, except that the non-political wonks (most people) wouldn’t get the “swamp” reference.

By: swami7774

swami7774 — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 16:48:15 +0000

It’s Sheila Jackson-Lee, not Shirley.

By: msctex

msctex — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 16:40:12 +0000

Would you rather be tried by your friends or your enemies? They know the Republicans are about to take power, and they know they will be eager to dig into the dirt. I wouldn’t be surprised if Rangel initiated his own “investigation,” one way or another, knowing a slap on the wrist is inevitable and preferable to what a true investigation and trial might yield.

By: swami7774

swami7774 — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 16:03:48 +0000

Weezy was hot!

By: throwback59

throwback59 — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 15:41:34 +0000

I have a better question:
Why is this women in Congress?

By: doncorleone

doncorleone — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 15:13:04 +0000

The national association for the advancement (absolution) of corrupt politicians.

By: Tbone

Tbone — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 14:32:23 +0000

to marry Maxine Waters. He makes George Jefferson look like a lucky guy.

In fact, the only dumber guy in the world is the putz signed up to marry Chelsea Clinton.

By: SoFiMil

SoFiMil — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 10:30:27 +0000

It’s not as bad as I thought. It was Maxine Waters’ husband who served on a board of a bank, not Maxine Waters’ herself.

However, this doesn’t lessen in any way the ethics (and possible legal) charges against her.

By: Joliphant

Joliphant — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 09:07:05 +0000

But Rangel’s were always ecstatic when he got away with something

By: wannabeanncoulter

wannabeanncoulter — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 08:24:54 +0000

I thought ethics violations were resolved via hearings, not trials. In past ethics investigations, I can’t recall anything resembling a trial with a “judge,” a “prosecutor,” an advocate for the defendant, and a jury.

Once the ethics subcommittee decides to proceed to a full committee ethics investigation, doesn’t the full ethics committee review the evidence and then issue a recommendation (censure, reprimand, etc), which the full House then votes on?

By: proudgop

proudgop — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 05:54:34 +0000

You have to think as bad as you can and then u see their side.

Their goal is to get high African American turnout what better way then to show big bad Republicans going after them

By: logus

logus — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 03:34:25 +0000

Her birth home. The irony of it all was not lost on me when I discovered that she was from a neighborhood “town” not too far from where I live. You see, this old town has lost a lot of its apparent former glory. It is a literal shell of a place. Cut up and given to surrounding communities and the St. Louis Airport, what’s left is mostly vacant lots, a corrupt “city hall” and police department – if it can be called that – and a few homes along with a fenced in apartment complex where most of the 3~400 residents live.

I’ll tell you what this Democrat would do, I’d be socia… soc… putting myself behind bars! lol

I’m not surprised at all that Waters would chose the same route as Rangel. I’d noted in a prior thread that Rangel wouldn’t get anything serious if he was found guilty by his peers. What needs to happen is civil charges need to be brought up so that both of the crooks can go to jail and get their just rewards.

By: SoFiMil

SoFiMil — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 03:32:28 +0000

Love your headline titles, Moe!

I watched the clip of Ms. Waters regarding her “knowledge” of mortgage interest principles. In that light, the link to the Politco.article detailing her sitting on the board of a bank is even more enlightening:

“Waters’ case revolves around allegations that she improperly intervened with federal regulators to help a bank that her husband owned stock in and on whose board he once served.”

By: dontell

dontell — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 02:36:48 +0000

By: creditman

creditman — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 02:24:20 +0000

Yes, Democrats don’t drain swamps. The just let festering puss build up until the voters have to cut it out. Democrats are too ignorant and overreaching to understand the public. They essentially are a group of special interests gathered together to sway political power. This is why they are so bad at governing. They have no core conscience or beliefs other than power. Very often they are at odds with each other but are too dumb to realize it.

Let’s hear it Maxine. You are just a poor black being set upon by whitey. The problem Max is that this is your party. They tend to eat the weak.

Yes, you will have the Democrat finger shook at you. The problem is that those that get the shaken finger generally don’t stay around long after that. Notice the abandonment of Obama? Well it will begin to split the Democrats even further.