I thought that the Dem leadership should have done everything possible to push Jefferson out as soon as this hit the news. That’s not 100% fair to Jefferson, since one is innocent until proven guilty and all, but appearance of impropriety matters. If you don’t want to get pushed out, don’t keep 90 large in cash in the damn freezer.
They did strip him of as much power as they could.
Actually they could have expelled him from the Congress. Each House of Congress has the power to expel its own members.
Although usually history suggests you actually need a criminal conviction before the other congresspeople will actually vote to expel (as was the case with Traficant.)
In Louisiana not having a hint of scandal around you is a problem. When I lived there Dave Treen, a Republican and an honest guy, was governor. He was widely considered to be boring, and didn’t get reelected.
Pelosi has pretty much done that. When the allegations became clear she stripped Jefferson of as much power in Congress as possible, called for a full investigation, and publicly stated the charges being made were serious offenses if true. She’s pretty much done everything short of declaring him guilty and having him thrown out of Congress before he was even indicted.
But appearance matters.
As for the other poster in this thread, he’s trying to establish some equivalence between Jefferson and one of the boys he slavishly defends.
-Joe
True, but I thought they should have leaned on him harder to resign. What they did was appropriate, but I thought they should have gone over the top and really made an example out of him. My guess is that they didn’t because there are plenty of other Democratic Congressmen who don’t want the FBI looking in their freezers.
Also, the national Dem establishment should have denied him any support in his re-election bid. They may have, for all I know–I didn’t follow the story that closely after it broke–but he did manage to get re-elected.
Come to think up it, under these circumstances, how did he manage to get re-elected?!
More importantly, the good people of Louisianan should have not reelected him. Beyond that fact that he has zero juice in the house, especially at a time when the gulf coast is trying to get back on their feet, his reelection just makes them look stupid. Reminds me of DC and continued election of Marion Barry.
Why are they going after Rep. Jefferson? because he’s blac! The mostly white members of the levve boards (whose failre due to massive corruption in the construction contracts) was never investigated-mostly because the levee boards are controlled by powerful , white politicians.
Congratulatins ralph you provved it conclusively!
-Joe
ralph124c.
Just so I’m clear on the concept. Do you think that:
a) The Congressman is not guilty, but just likes to keep $90,000 in “cold cash” around the house, or
b) They all do it, so it’s no big deal.
I don’t know which option I think is more scary for you to believe.
It wasn’t just 90 in cash, it was 90k in marked bills that were allegedly given as bribery money from an undercover agent.
If it wasn’t for that, I’d simply say that Jefferson wanted to have a lavish weekend in Las Vegas.
Reverse about a year and if the GOP had done exactly what Pelosi did with Jefferson every one here would be talking about GOP cronyism and how we are soft on corruption. I agree that Pelosi and the Dem leadership did everything that was appropriate, and they shouldn’t vote to expel him unless he’s convicted.
But I also know beyond any certainty that most of the Democratic posters on this forum would be tearing the GOP leadership a new one if this situation were reversed, saying the GOP was “soft on corruption.”
If the Republican leadership in Congress had taken any similar actions against its own members who were suspected of criminal acts in recent years, it would now be in a position to express some righteous indignation. But the facts are that the Republicans didn’t do what Pelosi has done. So now Republicans have no choice except to sit still and take it while the Democrats proclaim their ethical superiority.
Oh, like above where I said
it must have been just in my head. Certainly not there on the screen where everyone can see it. As a GOP hater I certainly wouldn’t say anything against My Boys In Blue Donkeys. Party before Country and all that.
Or, maybe that’s the way you operate. I don’t. I don’t feel the need to reflexively defend someone on My Side does just because they’re on my side.
You want to play some game where the Dems and GOP are equally evil and horrible? Fine, do that. Just stop bitching about actions of Democrats when you’ve already defended the GOP’s actions in what you consider to be the exact same situation.
But certainly there isn’t a waft of total bullshit from those who defended such totally excusable actions in the past now condemning those heinous acts of malfeasance!
-Joe
Hypotheticals sure are fun, aren’t they? If this situation had happened a year ago, I know beyond any certainty that Republicans would have been storming the local animal shelter and stomping on puppies, I guarantee it.
Fortunately, we don’t need to rely on unproveable hypotheticals to compare. Look at how this situation is going down, and compare it to Tom Delay’s indictment and how the Republican leadership handled it. Don’t traffic in fantasy: traffic in history.
Daniel
Maybe you misread, I suggest rereading my post, you will note I said, “most Dems would” not “all Dems would.” Subtle (well, not really) difference.
In the past the GOP has shown that it pretty much handles people who are under indictment the same way. It removes them from positions of power. I think that’s the reasonable course of action, I don’t think either the Dems or the GOP is evil so I don’t believe they are “equally evil.” Why wouldn’t I defend the GOP’s actions in the exact same situation? I think the Dems acted in a reasonable manner I never said otherwise, not sure why you seem to be operating as though I did.
Which was my whole point, the Democrats acted reasonably here, it’d be way overblown to vote on expulsion when he’s not been convicted of a crime. But it’s my assertion that most people only view this as “reasonable” when it is their side doing it. I think most Dems would say the GOP was playing with “kid’s gloves” if they treated a shamed congressman like this.
You on the other and are an equal opportunity unreasonable person, expecting both Democrats and Republicans to kick someone to the curb anytime they’re accused of something.
You remember that Gary Condit guy? He was under all kinds of scrutiny for extra-marital affairs and possibly withholding important information during a murder investigation. He was never charged with anything, and was never sanctioned by the Democratic party. Nor should he have been. Mere suspicion shouldn’t be enough to ruin someone, an indictment should bring some level of censure and a conviction should bring expulsion.
That appears to be the level of behavior traditionally seen from Congressional Democratic and Republican leadership. However as is often the case, here on the Dope anytime a Republican congressman is under any hint of suspicion, the GOP is blasted for not taking action. Anytime a Congressman is under serious suspicion and the GOP does act, it’s criticised as not being harsh enough.
These acts are perfectly excusable whether taken by Democrats of Republicans. Impose some moderate sanction on a member who is “apparently” involved in corruption. When the facts substantiate that he was definitely involved in corruption, you kick him to the curb, like the Democrats did with Traficant in 2002.
Yep, remember what happened when DeLay was indicted? He had to give up his leadership position.
Thanks for proving my point.
Yeahhh…not so much.
He was eventually dropped from leadership, but not before the GOP changed the ethics rules specifically to spare Delay from that fate. And THAT is what they were criticized for. When he was dropped from leadership, liberals generally agreed that what was done was proper, although they remained irritated that the rules were changed.
This only proves your point if your point is that the two cases are nothing alike, in which case I apologize for misunderstanding your point.
Daniel