Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the Ethics category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘Ethics’ Category

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.

This article highlights Sen. Warren’s shameless interrogation of Dr. Ben Carson during his confirmation hearing. Dr. Carson is President-Elect Trump’s pick to be the HUD secretary. Sen. Warren apparently thought that her responsibility was to play gotcha games with Dr. Carson or to use the confirmation hearing to smear President-Elect Trump.

Sen. Warren asked Dr. Carson “If you are confirmed to lead HUD, you will be responsible for issuing billions of dollars in grants and loans to help develop housing and provide a lot of housing-related services. Now, housing development is an area in which President-elect Trump and his family have significant business interests. Can you assure me that not a single taxpayer dollar that you give out will financially benefit the president-elect or his family?” Carson said he would “absolutely not play favors for anyone” because he is “driven by a sense of morals and values.”

Not willing to accept Dr. Carson’s reply, Sen. Warren pressed on, asking “Can you just assure us that not one dollar will go to benefit either the president-elect or his family?” Again, Dr. Carson replied that “It will not be my intention to do anything to benefit any American.” He quickly realized the gaffe and fixed the answer in his subsequent statement, “It’s for all Americans, everything that we do.”
“I will manage things in a way that benefits the American people,” he further clarified. “That is going to be the goal.”

Still unsatisfied, Sen. Warren then said “The reason you can’t assure us of that is because the president-elect is hiding his family’s business interests from you, from me, from the rest of America. And this just highlights the absurdity and the danger of the president-elect’s refusal to put his assets in a true blind trust.”

This is sour grapes on Sen. Warren’s behalf. The American people weren’t surprised by the fact that President-Elect Trump is wealthy. They understood that it’d be impossible for him to put his assets in a blind trust the way less wealthy presidents could. It isn’t that they’re giving him a blank check to do whatever he wants. It’s that they’re willing to give him time to earn their trust. After watching this video, it’s pretty apparent that Sen. Warren is considering a presidential run in 2020:

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

It isn’t a secret that Steny Hoyer is a partisan hack who doesn’t have consistent principles. That’s apparent in Hoyer’s latest statement to the press. Monday morning, Hoyer issued a statement, saying “One of the basic principles that safeguards our democracy is the separation of the personal business interests of our leaders from the government business with which they are entrusted while in office.  That is why I am deeply concerned by reports over the past few days that Donald Trump is continuing to promote his personal business ventures as he prepares to assume the presidency.  Reports of his meeting with Indian business representatives and reports that he used a phone call with Argentinean President Mauricio Macri to lobby on behalf of a Trump-branded building project are, if accurate, unacceptable behavior for the incoming President of the United States.”

Don’t mistake my opinions with defending Donald Trump. I won’t defend the indefensible. Another thing I won’t do is tolerate political hacks that use situational principles. I define situational principles as principles that are used on political opponents but aren’t used on political allies.

I checked Hoyer’s Whip webpage to see if he’d issued any statements criticizing Hillary Clinton’s pay-for-play scheme through the Clinton Foundation. Thus far, I haven’t found anything resembling that. This statement, however, complains about the House Oversight Committee’s investigation of the Clinton Foundation. While Hoyer stopped short of defending the Foundation, that didn’t prevent him from launching a blistering political attack against Republicans:

With their barrage of unwarranted attacks through subpoenas and letters, House Republicans are engaged in a blatant and partisan campaign to discredit Secretary Clinton at the expense of American taxpayers and Congressional resources. Investigation after investigation has found no wrongdoing, and Director Comey made clear that there was no criminal activity. House Republicans’ attacks against Secretary Clinton have become an obsession, and they have been dragging the American people along with them on a political witch hunt while ignoring critical challenges that ought to be the focus of Congress’s attention instead.

Apparently, the American people thought the Clinton’s pay-to-play disturbing. First, every poll released in the final month noted that the American people didn’t trust Mrs. Clinton. Next, I think it’s interesting that Hoyer thinks investigating the Clinton Foundation’s self-enrichment plan isn’t using Mrs. Clinton’s official governmental responsibilities for personal enrichment.

Clearly, donors thought that donations to the Clinton Foundation bought them additional access to Mrs. Clinton. That’s what this article indicates:

Foundation officials delayed release of the quarterly report of its latest donors on its website until the after the Nov. 8 presidential election, which former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lost to Republican rival Donald Trump.

The low number of new donors may indicate potential contributors were frightened away by repeated news reports that the Clinton charity is under FBI investigation regarding multiple allegations of “pay-to-play” influence-peddling schemes involving both Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton, as well as their key political aides.

The thing that this election taught us is that people are tired of DC insiders being hypocrites. I suspect that people think of Hoyer as being a classic DC hypocrite. This video is proof of that:

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

After Marilyn Mosby dropped the remaining charges against the 6 Baltimore police officers, it didn’t take long for the other shoe to drop. 5 of those 6 officers have filed a civil lawsuit against Ms. Mosby.

According to the article, “In several lawsuits filed earlier this year, Officers William Porter, Edward Nero, Garrett Miller, Lt. Brian Rice, and Sgt. Alicia White alleged defamation, false arrest, false imprisonment, and violation of constitutional rights, among others.” Later in the article, Attorney Michael Glass explained that “These officers were humiliated. Our position is that the charges were brought for a reason other than prosecuting criminal conduct. There was a political motivation and the charges were not supported by evidence.”

The acquittal of these officers, coupled with Ms. Mosby’s attention-grabbing headline will make it easier for these officers to win their lawsuit. Throughout the process, lawyers questioned Ms. Mosby’s decision. Alan Dershowitz was among those that criticized her decision:

One of the key figures in this lawsuit will be Samuel Cogen of the Baltimore Sheriff’s Office. The reason he’ll be important is because Mosby’s prosecutors initially said that he’d conducted an independent investigation. He’s gone under oath since then in an attempt to clear his name:

However, in an affidavit unsealed in the course of Rice’s civil lawsuit, Cogen claimed he in fact did not conduct the investigation. He said he merely signed off on the investigation completed by the state’s attorney’s office which ultimately led to the charges filed against the officers.

The situation is perfect for the plaintiffs. They can approach Cogen and offer to drop his case in exchange for his truthful testimony.

Showing that Mosby’s prosecutorial team embellished the truth will strengthen these officers’ lawsuit.