Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the Ethics category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘Ethics’ Category

Rep. Steve Drazkowski is one of my favorite state legislators in Minnesota because he’s a straight shooter and an honest man. In contrast, Ilhan Omar is my least favorite state legislator because she’s dishonest and she apparently thinks that the rules don’t apply to her. I’m basing my opinion on information contained in this article.

According to the article, “After learning that State Representative Ilhan Omar accepted payments from MNSCU campuses last year – a violation of Minnesota House rules – State Representative Steve Drazkowski (R-Mazeppa) is calling on Omar to return the thousands of dollars she received. ‘It’s clear to me that Representative Omar abused the power of her office and her committee assignment for personal financial gain, which is truly disappointing,’ Drazkowski said. ‘Despite being fully aware that accepting these payments violated the rules of the Minnesota House, she not only kept the money but failed to disclose it for as long as she could to avoid an ethics hearing and an endorsement headache.'”

The article also says “Minnesota House Rule 9.20, Acceptance of an Honorarium by a Member: A member must not accept an honorarium for a service performed for an individual or organization that has a direct interest in the business of the House, including, but not limited to, a registered lobbyist or an organization a lobbyist represents.” There’s no excuse for Ms. Omar’s behavior because “every newly-elected member attends an orientation where non-partisan House research staff explains potential conflicts of interest to incoming lawmakers, including gifts, travel and lodging, and honoraria.” Plus “Rep. Omar voted to adopt the Permanent Rules of the Minnesota House – which includes Rule 9.20 – on February 16, 2017, 12 days before her first paid MNSCU speaking engagement.”

Rep. Omar is a violations machine. Check out this video:

Scott Johnson has done the digging into Ms. Omar’s marital difficulties. He explains what he found in this article:

I originally checked out the SomaliSpot story online through the Minnesota Official Marriage System. Inputting Omar’s name, I found that the two marriages cited in the discussion board post checked out as indicated. The site reflected Omar’s 2002 marriage to her advertised husband, Ahmed Aden (later Ahmed Hirsi), and her 2009 marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi (identified in the SomaliSpot post as Omar’s brother). A few days after the primary, I submitted written questions to representatives of the Omar campaign, citing the SomaliSpot post, and asking whether Omar’s second marriage had been entered into with her brother for dishonest purposes.

Predictably, Omar deflected the questions Scott Johnson had to an attorney:

Dear Mr. Johnson:

I have been contacted by the Ilhan Omar campaign. Their response to your email from this morning is as follows:

“There are people who do not want an East African, Muslim woman elected to office and who will follow Donald Trump’s playbook to prevent it. Ilhan Omar’s campaign sees your superfluous contentions as one more in a series of attempts to discredit her candidacy. Ilhan Omar’s campaign will not be distracted by negative forces and will continue to focus its energy on creating positive engagement with community members to make the district and state more prosperous and equitable for everyone.”

If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please direct them to me in writing so we have a record of any further communications.

Sincerely,

Jean Brandl

Apparently, Rep. Omar is a complaint factory:

  • On May 17, 2017, Rep. Omar was fined $1,000 due to the late filing of her 24-hour notice reports.
  • On November 30, 2017, Rep. Omar was fined $150 due to the late filing of her campaign finance report. That 2016 report listed a non-campaign disbursement in the amount of $2,250 in legal fees to the Kjellberg Law Office, which specializes in divorce law, and is listed as her representative during her 2017 divorce case. It also noted that she paid her now current husband $3,100 for unspecified campaign services.
  • On June 20, 2018, Rep. Omar was fined the maximum $1,100 due to the late filing of her Statement of Economic Interest.

There’s more:

“Representative Omar’s willingness to accept money from institutions that are dependent on her committee and her vote for their funding is the textbook definition of unethical,” Drazkowski said. “Because of her decision to withhold disclosing this information until after the Legislature adjourned sine die, we are unable to formally file ethics charges against her.”

Drazkowski said Omar must return the MNSCU payments, and he said that she may not use campaign funds to make the repayment. “If the ethics committee were to find Representative Omar in violation of House Rule 9.20, and I have no doubt that it would, the end result would be a demand for her to return the payments,” Drazkowski said. “With that in mind, Representative Omar needs to return these payments to the MNSCU campuses immediately.”

For all of Omar’s complaints about being the victim of Islamophobia, etc., the truth is that she’s just a typical unethical politician who thinks that the rules don’t apply to her. There’s nothing Islamophobic about that. That’s just a long-held belief that people in positions of authority shouldn’t extort money from the people they regulate.

It either takes a friend or a biased partisan to defend Al Franken’s behavior. Wy Spano, a longtime DFL operative and liberal crank, might be both. His op-ed offers an insight into the DFL mindset about Franken. It isn’t pretty.

First, Spano said that “Franken got hosed.” Then he admitted that “the women of the Senate were complicit in the hosing.” Wy, they weren’t complicit in the hosing. They threw Franken under the bus because they put their presidential ambitions ahead of everything else. These were Democrats throwing Franken out. Further, they admitted that they planned the attack. If Spano is upset, he should tar and feather Democrats. Criticizing Democrats without calling them Democrats is the coward’s option.

Earlier in the op-ed, Spano said “Because I think Al Franken got a bum rap and was driven from office by members of his own party. We had the most effective Democratic senator on women’s issues and on helping to elect Democrats, and then we didn’t.” Later, he said that Franken “led on women’s issues.”

My only question about that last statement would be whether Franken led on women’s issues like Ted Kennedy, Harvey Weinstein and Bill Clinton led on women’s issues. What Spano doesn’t seem to understand is that Franken was a pervert through and through.

This statement jumps out:

Franken’s military escort on the tour said he was with Franken every minute and didn’t see what she described.

I question whether this statement is accurate. First, I wonder if Spano knows the name of Franken’s military escort. If he doesn’t, I’d question whether Spano is accepting Franken’s word or whether Spano confirmed it independently. I’m betting it’s the former. That isn’t true verification. That’s accepting gossip.

Then there’s this:

What about the other seven accusers? We’ll never know if their experience with Franken rose to the level of harassment. Individual women became victim, prosecutor, judge and jury.

It’s true these cases never got tried in court. That isn’t the accusers’ fault. That’s the fault of female Democrat senators with political ambitions. Spano is a slick operator in that he skillfully directs the accusations at Franken’s accusers even though they’ve done nothing wrong.

In Lindsay Menz’s case, was she supposed to let Franken put his hand on her ass? Finally, does this look like a guy telling the truth?

Minnesota’s story of the year isn’t difficult to find. It’s Al Franken’s resignation from the Senate. Pervy Al, as Harold Hamilton likes to call him, finally showed that he’s a total jerk. Thanks to Leeann Tweeden’s bravery, Franken’s career crashed as part of this year’s #MeToo movement.

The initial reaction was typified by Amy Klobuchar and Chuck Schumer. They both said that Sen. Franken should subject himself to a toothless investigation from the Senate Ethics Committee. The rules of the Ethics Committee are toothless because they’re written by the politicians they’re meant to protect. They do just enough to whitewash the situation without actually holding the corrupt politician accountable for his/her actions. Those rules also make sure that politicians can’t be punished for things they did before they were elected.

How convenient. Pervy Al groped Ms. Tweeden before getting elected:

What type of pervert does that to a woman? Better yet, what woman not named Hillary Clinton, lets her husband do something like that without divorcing him? The next stage of the Franken saga happened when other women stepped forward and spoke about Franken’s disgusting behavior. One of them, Lindsay Menz, accused him of grabbing her buttocks at the Minnesota State Fair.

Yet another stage in the Franken saga came when Democrats criticized Ms. Tweeden, essentially deploying the ‘she asked for it’ defense:

In response to the compromising photo of U.S. Sen. Al Franken, internet-aware readers can become a bit more informed about Franken’s ‘victim’ by Googling her and clicking on ‘images.’

At times, Democrats tried telling Americans that they were virtuous because they maintained a zero-tolerance policy towards perverts. Somewhere far outside the spotlight, Bill Clinton was heard laughing. Of course, Democrats called for Franken’s resignation after the eighth woman stepped forward. (Nothing says zero tolerance like waiting until the eighth victim steps forward.) People understood what was happening. Franken was forced to resign.

Good riddance.

Technorati: , , , , , , ,

Thus far, DFL politicians and activists have protected Sen. Franken. Despite the fact that he’s done some utterly despicable things, the DFL has defended him. There’s a method to their defense that’s worth exposing. Part of the DFL’s protection of Sen. Franken is to pretend that they’re doing something. That’s what Amy Klobuchar is doing. Sen. Klobuchar issued a statement that said “This should not have happened to Leeann Tweeden. I strongly condemn this behavior and the Senate Ethics Committee must open an investigation. This is another example of why we need to change work environments and reporting practices across the nation, including in Congress.”

Sen. Klobuchar, what’s to investigate? Wasn’t the picture of Sen. Franken groping Ms. Tweeden enough? Sen. Franken admitted that he’d groped her. The Senate Ethics Committee shouldn’t take more than an hour before recommending expulsion from the Senate. The vote should be unanimous, both in committee and on the Senate floor.

Another technique that the DFL has used is talking about all the times Groper Al has voted for pro-women legislation. Friday night, that’s how Ember Reichgott-Junge attempted to defend Groper Al. The other 3 women on the political panel tore that defense apart. Ms. Reichgott-Junge said that Groper Al had earned the trust of millions of voters. First, I’d seriously doubt that. I think people voted for Groper Al because he had a D behind his name on the ballot and because they didn’t care whether he was a tax cheat, a drug addict or a pervert. They just wanted someone who’d vote their way on their issues. Next, it isn’t difficult to find other DFL perverts that are willing to vote for such legislation.

Ultimately, the DFL is to blame. They’re the political party that didn’t care whether Sen. Franken was a pervert. They didn’t set a high standard in terms of ethics. The DFL was totally comfortable looking past Sen. Franken’s talk about raping Leslie Stahl. Democrats now profess to have adopted a zero tolerance policy. That’s odd. In the 1990s, Democrats only cared whether their candidates committed to voting for partial birth abortion legislation.

I won’t pretend that all Republicans are trustworthy. I will say, though, that the DFL hasn’t established a high standard of conduct for its elected officials. That’s why Sen. Franken’s gotten away with being a pervert.

Mike Rothman has announced his immediate resignation as commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Commerce. In a separate statement, Rothman announced that he will run for the job of Minnesota Attorney General.

MPR’s Tim Pugmire is reporting “Mike Rothman is stepping down as commissioner of the Minnesota Department Commerce and plans to run for state attorney general. Rothman announced his intentions Friday in a resignation letter to Gov. Mark Dayton.”

In his statement, Rothman said “Thank you for the incredible opportunity to serve the people of Minnesota. You placed great trust in me – and every day, I dedicated myself to fulfilling that trust by doing my very best to improve the lives of Minnesotans. I am very proud of what we have been able to accomplish together.”

Frankly, Rothman was a failure because he was anti-commerce and because he did his utmost to kill the Line 3 Pipeline replacement project. Simply put, he’s an environmental activist. Imagine the destruction he could cause as Minnesota’s Attorney General. That’s a frightening thought.

In his statement, Gov. Dayton said “For nearly seven years, Mike Rothman has devoted himself to protecting consumers, improving the lives of Minnesotans, and ensuring fair regulatory environments for Minnesota’s businesses.” Rep. Kelly Fenton wasn’t that kind, saying “Commissioner Rothman’s tenure was stained by his failure to protect Minnesota consumers and tax dollars. His poor judgment is well documented.”

This KSTP article contains information that Pugmire’s article doesn’t have:

The news comes as the Office of the Legislative Auditor confirmed it had been asked to investigate actions taken by various DOC officials in connection to an investigation into an auto glass company a federal judge ruled was ‘unjustified.’ “As you may know, the case has involved considerable litigation that continues in process,” legislative auditor James Nobles wrote in an email to KSTP. “The case is very complex, and we are reviewing all of the documents related to the legal proceedings at both the state and federal levels.

“In sum, we are at a preliminary stage, and our review will undoubtedly take us into next year. So, yes, we are investigating what happened in the Commerce/Safelight case.” In that case, federal judge Susan Nelson ruled the DOC carried out an “unjustified” investigation into Safelite Auto Glass for its billing practices with insurance companies.

Nelson also said the DOC “initiated a baseless investigation against Safelite based on financially-motivated complaints from competitors.” Further, Nelson said there was testimony from a DOC employees stating “an assistant commissioner made a ‘deal’ to provide information on Safelite in order to ‘get Safelite out of Minnesota.'”

The last thing Minnesota needs is a crooked AG. That being said, Rothman wouldn’t be the first crooked Minnesota AG. Mike Hatch blazed that trail long ago.

Gov. Dayton’s statement is predictable. It’s also BS. Here’s why:

In December 2011, Minnesota Commerce Commissioner Mike Rothman and Community Action of Minneapolis CEO Bill Davis stood side-by-side at a press conference to plead for more federal money to help low-income people pay their heating bills. As the pair made their case in front of the cameras, however, staffers inside the Commerce Department were struggling to figure out how Davis’ nonprofit had already misspent more than $1 million in energy funds.

Commerce analysts had grown increasingly alarmed that money meant to aid the poor was going to people who were not eligible to receive it. Those staffers, who requested anonymity because they aren’t authorized to speak, say the red flags raised in 2011 were the first alerting Rothman that Davis, his DFL political ally, was mismanaging money from the energy assistance fund run by Commerce. The warnings, they say, were repeated over the years but went nowhere. Rothman would not sever ties with Community Action. Several in the department say they were told the contracts would continue because “the political ramifications are greater than staff would understand,” a characterization Rothman does not dispute.

Gov. Dayton, how can you say that Commissioner Rothman protected consumers or improved Minnesotans’ lives while ignoring Community Action of Minneapolis’ outright corruption? These DFL thieves stole money meant to pay poor people’s heating bills.

Instead of paying poor people’s heating bills, Community Action paid for a trip to New York City for State Sen. Jeffrey Hayden and his wife. They’ve since repaid the money.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

It’s clear from Sen. Klobuchar’s statement that she wants nothing to do with Sen. Franken. Further, it’s apparent that she’s doing her best to sound like she’s doing something without actually doing anything. In her Facebook statement, St. Amy said “This should not have happened to Leeann Tweeden. I strongly condemn this behavior and the Senate Ethics Committee must open and conduct a thorough investigation.”

Actually, there isn’t a need to “conduct a thorough investigation” in Sen. Franken’s perverted behavior. Ms. Tweeden made serious and credible accusations against Franken. She included photographic proof of Franken’s disgusting behavior, too. It’s worth noting that Franken confirmed that the incident happened.

In his statement about the incidents (plural), Franken said “I certainly don’t remember the rehearsal for the skit in the same way, but I send my sincerest apologies to Leeann. As to the photo, it was clearly intended to be funny but wasn’t. I shouldn’t have done it.”

It’s obvious that Franken is a pervert. What other person thinks that groping a woman while she’s sleeping should be interpreted as being funny? Check out this picture and tell me whether a normal person would think it’s funny:

Here’s Franken’s pathetic statement on the matter:

Let’s be clear. It’s dishonest for Franken to say “I respect women. I don’t respect men who don’t. And the fact that my own actions have given people a good reason to doubt that makes me feel ashamed.” He’s a total pervert who deserves to be perp-walked out of Capitol Hill this afternoon.
UPDATE: Another accuser has stepped forward:

Democrats have a growing problem on their hands that’s impossible to walk away from. This story is about to get bigger.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

Kimberley Strassel’s latest Potomac Watch article is a devastating indictment of the Democratic Party and opposition research firm Fusion GPS. Strassel’s indictment starts with her writing “To read the headlines, a poor, beleaguered opposition-research firm was humiliated and constitutionally abused this week by partisan Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee. Fusion’s lawyers sent a 17-page letter to the committee’s chairman, Rep. Devin Nunes, accusing him of misdeeds, declaring his subpoenas invalid, and invoking a supposed First Amendment right to silence. Yet the firm’s founders, the story went, were hauled in nonetheless and forced to plead the Fifth. ‘No American should experience the indignity that occurred today,’ Fusion’s lawyer, Joshua Levy, declared.”

Saying that the Democrats are neck-deep in GPS troubles is understatement. What other explanation is there for the Democrats’ recent behavior? Ms. Strassel reported “But Fusion’s secret weapon in its latest operation is the Democratic Party, whose most powerful members have made protecting Fusion’s secrets their highest priority. Senate Democrats invoked a parliamentary maneuver in July to block temporarily Mr. Browder’s public testimony. Rep. Adam Schiff, the Democratic ranking member on the Intelligence Committee, has been engineering flaps to undercut and obstruct Mr. Nunes’s investigation. Democrats on the House Ethics Committee have deep-sixed what was meant to be a brief inquiry to clear Mr. Nunes so as to keep him sidelined.”

Those aren’t the actions of people wanting to find the truth. They’re the actions of people wishing to hide their evil actions.

This is telling:

The untold story is the Democrats’ unprecedented behavior. Mr. Rooney had barely started when committee staffers for Mr. Schiff interrupted, accused him of badgering witnesses, and suggested he was acting unethically. Staff do not interrupt congressmen. They do not accuse them of misbehavior. And they certainly do not act as defense attorneys for witnesses. No Democratic lawmakers had bothered to come to the hearing to police this circus.

It’s obvious that Democrats want to benefit from Fusion GPS’s nastiness but they don’t want to get tied to Fusion GPS’s tactics. Ethics charges should be brought against Schiff for not policing his staffers during the hearing. Rep. Schiff’s staffers were the ones that interrupted a sitting Republican congressman while he questioned the witnesses from Fusion GPS. Those staffers should be thrown out of that hearing if they pull another stunt like this.

Finally, there’s this:

Private-sector lawyers also tend not to accuse congressmen of unethical behavior, as Mr. Levy did in his letter to Mr. Nunes. But Fusion’s legal eagle must feel safe. He’s former general counsel to the Senate’s minority leader, Chuck Schumer. He has also, I’m told by people familiar with the committee’s activities, more than once possessed information that he would have had no earthly means of knowing, since it was secret committee business. Consider that: Democratic members of Congress or their staff providing sensitive details of an investigation to a company to which the committee has given subpoenas.

Democrats are acting unethically. It’s time that they get sanctioned for their actions. Finally, it’s time to put a tape together that highlights Fusion GPS’s and Rep. Schiff’s staffers’ actions.

Gregg Jarrett’s op-ed asks an interesting ethical question of former FBI Director Mueller. Jarrett first noted that the Hill reported that “Comey authored seven memorandums reflecting the contents of his conversations with President Trump and that four of the memos ‘have been determined to contain classified information.'”

Later, Jarrett made the observation that “If this is true and Comey kept these documents in his personal possession upon leaving government service and conveyed some of them to another individual without authorization, then it would appear that he committed multiple felonies under the Espionage Act.” Jarrett didn’t say that Comey had “committed multiple felonies under the Espionage Act.” Jarrett said Comey might’ve done that. In other words, he didn’t sound like a Democrat asserting that Trump had committed treason.

Another point Jarrett made was that “All of his memos are, unquestionably, government property under the Federal Records Act and the FBI’s own Records Management regulations. They were composed by him in the course and scope of his employment as the Director of the FBI. In meeting with President Trump, Comey was not acting as a private citizen. Both Congress and the FBI agree on this obvious point.”

What’s most interesting, though, is these questions:

How can Mueller discharge his responsibilities in a fair, objective and impartial manner? Will the mentor investigate and, if warranted, prosecute his protégé?

This is a charade that only DC insiders would think passes the smell test. Outsiders already think that the fix is in and that Comey will skate.

Let’s get serious about something. Comey’s documents weren’t private documents. They weren’t conversations about their grandchildren. They were work product. Comey let the cat out of the bag when he testified that it was important to get the information out. In fact, the fact that Comey took the documents with him after he was fired indicates that he stole government work product. Whether those documents contained classified information or not, they are work product subject to the Federal Records Act.

On the one hand, Comey is in deep dew-dew. On the other hand, he’s in serious trouble. That’s if Mueller doesn’t rescue him.

Technorati: , , , , , ,

Greg Jarrett’s op-ed highlights Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s hostility towards President Trump. It also explains why she must disqualify herself on President Trump’s’ travel ban lawsuit.

Jarrett first highlighted RBG’s comments about Trump last summer when she said “I can’t imagine what the country would be with Donald Trump as our president.  For the country, it could be four years.  For the court, it could be –I don’t even want to contemplate that.” Later, she said “He is a faker. He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego. How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns?”

Jarrett then makes the case that these statements Justice Ginsburg’s “words reflect a clear bias, if not personal animus, toward the man who would go on to become president.” Finally, Jarrett cites the federal statute that requires her disqualification from President Trump’s travel ban case if it’s heard by the SCOTUS. Jarrett notes that “28 USC 455” states that “Any justice…shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.  He shall also disqualify himself…where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party.”

Finally Jarrett puts a finer point on his argument, noting that “the language of the statute is mandatory: “Any Justice shall disqualify” him or herself.”

There’s no question that Justice Ginsburg’s statements highlight a strong anti-Trump political bias. RBG’s statements can’t be taken as anything except her distrust for President Trump.

Jarrett’s closing argument is stated quite eloquently:

The noble traditions of the Supreme Court will be compromised should Ruth Bader Ginsburg decide she is above the law and beyond the scruples it demands.

Technorati: , , , ,

Earlier this week, Sen. Chuck Schumer announced that Senate Democrats would be willing to filibuster President Trump’s SCOTUS pick if the pick is certified as mainstream by Sen. Schumer. This article highlights the fact that President Trump isn’t a typical Republican in that he’s willing to fight back.

During an interview with Sean Hannity, President Trump said that he’d encourage Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to deploy the nuclear option if Democrats filibuster President Trump’s pick to replace Justice Scalia. According to the article, “Trump said Thursday that he would encourage Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to deploy the ‘nuclear option’, changing Senate rules on a majority vote, if Democrats block his Supreme Court pick. The president’s stance could amplify pressure on McConnell, a Senate institutionalist who is reluctant to further erode the chamber’s supermajority rules, to barrel through Democratic resistance by any means necessary.”

In the past, senators’ word was trusted. Sen. Schumer ended that last week by reneging on an agreement to confirm Mike Pompeo to be President Trump’s CIA director. Sen. Schumer is a weasel who won’t hesitate in using any tactic to get his way. That includes reneging on agreements or playing fair.

The past 2 weeks, Sen. Schumer has talked about President Trump’s cabinet as the #SwampCabinet, filled with “millionaires and billionaires”. That’s funny considering the fact that Sen. Schumer has cozied up to most of those millionaires and billionaires. In fact, he’s accepted tons of contributions from those millionaires and billionaires.

Apparently, Sen. Schumer and Sen. Pocahontas think that situational ethics are the best ethics.

Because President Trump is willing to fight back and expose the Democrats’ hypocrisy, expect the Democrats to feel the pain of President Trump’s wrath if they continue their feeble resistance.