Most of us don’t have our financial information reported in the New York Times, so I guess the circumstances on the events I am about to chronicle would not apply, but I do have questions as to how much of the following you or I would be allowed to get away with without seeing the inside of a jail cell.<\/p>\n
According to Right American Word Press<\/a> in October 2009:<\/p>\n “…The New York Times reported on September 5, 2008, that, “Representative Charles B. Rangel has earned more than $75,000 in rental income from a villa he has owned in the Dominican Republic since 1988, but never reported it on his federal or state tax returns, according to a lawyer for the congressman and documents from the resort.”;<\/em><\/p>\n “Whereas in an article in the September 5, 2008 edition of The New York Times, his attorney confirmed that Representative Rangel’s annual congressional Financial Disclosure statements failed to disclose the rental income from his resort villa;<\/em><\/p>\n “Whereas The New York Times reported on September 6, 2008 that, “Representative Charles B. Rangel paid no interest for more than a decade on a mortgage extended to him to buy a villa at a beachfront resort in the Dominican Republic, according to Mr. Rangel’s lawyer and records from the resort. The loan, which was extended to Mr. Rangel in 1988, was originally to be paid back over seven years at a rate of 10.5 percent. But within two years, interest on the loan was waived for Mr. Rangel.”;”<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n I understand that there are many other charges against Congressman Rangel, but it seems to me that the IRS generally takes the concept of unreported income rather seriously. The New York Times report is more than a year old.<\/p>\n Today, according to The Hill<\/a>, after Charlie Rangel walked out of his ethics trial, the House eithics panel decided to continue the trial. According to The Hill:<\/p>\n “Chisam (Blake Chisam, the staff director and chief counsel for the full ethics committee) moved forward with the case after the adjudicatory committee rejected a request by Rangel to delay the trial because he lacked counsel. Rangel’s team of attorneys told him they could no longer represent him in late October, and Rangel said he could not afford to hire a replacement right away after incurring almost $2 million in legal fees during the past two years.<\/em><\/p>\n “Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.), a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, offered a motion to continue the trial after Rangel opened his remarks by pleading for a delay and complaining about the unfairness of proceeding with the trial while he lacks counsel.”<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Charlie Rangel may be a dedicated public servant, but it is time for him to leave the stage. I don’t know if he thought tax evasion, using rent-controlled apartments as offices, etc. were acceptable behavior or not, but I do know that many Americans are now awake and planning to hold their elected officials to some sort of ethical standard. The days of a free lunch for the political class are rapidly coming to an end.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Most of us don’t have our financial information reported in the New York Times, so I guess the circumstances on the events I am about to chronicle would not apply, but I do have questions as to how much of … Continue reading \n
\n