June 06, 2007
Why Hasn't William Jefferson Been Thrown Out of Congress?
A fair question, given the feeding frenzies of the Democrats, media and nutroots over Duke Cunningham, Bob Ney and Tom DeLay. In addition, the media silence on DiFi's " appearances of impropriety" and on Sandy Berger's refusal to testify under oath about what documents he destroyed, why and for whom (and his non-punishment) are just trees falling in the forest with nobody hearing them.
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
Apparently, "it takes a woman" from San Francisco to brush the filth in the House under the rug, and the "most ethical, most open, most transparent government in history" was nothing more than a bumper sticker used by Democrats.
Posted by: Good Lt. at
08:38 AM
| Comments (15)
| Add Comment
Post contains 112 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Duh, he's Democrat. Oops sorry that was a rhetorical question I was reply to. OK make my statement sarcastic and it should be appropriate.
Posted by: scaulen at June 06, 2007 09:43 AM (OZn2O)
2
Let me see. Could it perhaps have anything to do with the fact that 95% of people in the MSM are also Democrats? Just a thought.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at June 06, 2007 10:48 AM (8e/V4)
3
Well the Dukester didn't resign his seat until he was convicted.
Delay stayed on for quite a while also.
Ney stayed on also.
I haven't seen many Democrats stepping up to defend Jefferson, certainly not the top of his party unlike when the Republicans did for their crooks.
Delay stayed on for quite a while also.
Ney stayed on also.
I haven't seen many Democrats stepping up to defend Jefferson, certainly not the top of his party unlike when the Republicans did for their crooks.
Posted by: John Ryan at June 06, 2007 11:54 AM (Ax4MR)
4
Ney stayed on for a month AFTER his conviction, I think it was so he could get a fat pension and the Republicans allowed that ???
Posted by: John Ryan at June 06, 2007 11:56 AM (Ax4MR)
5
Why is he still there. (1)Because he's black (2) he's a democratic. (3) other black democrats are still supporting him.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 06, 2007 12:15 PM (1h1Tb)
6
John Ryan -
So why hasn't Jefferson been thrown out of Congress, and why are you defending him?
He's facing 16 counts and 230 years. That's not just shoplifting a candybar.
Go ahead - spin, spin, spin for the Democrat criminals you elected to run Congress. What's good for the goose...
Defending indicted Democrats is not the way to get people to vote Democrat.
So why hasn't Jefferson been thrown out of Congress, and why are you defending him?
He's facing 16 counts and 230 years. That's not just shoplifting a candybar.
Go ahead - spin, spin, spin for the Democrat criminals you elected to run Congress. What's good for the goose...
Defending indicted Democrats is not the way to get people to vote Democrat.
Posted by: Good Lt at June 06, 2007 12:51 PM (yMbfY)
7
John Ryan tripped over his burka and messed his brains up.
Posted by: greyrooster at June 06, 2007 04:46 PM (30TNB)
8
Well they dont call it CONgress for nothing its full of even more crooks
Posted by: sandpiper at June 06, 2007 04:58 PM (0eEOk)
9
Good Lt I am not defending him. I made no comment defending him My comment involved only Republicans that were mentioned by you.
The House has only thrown out 5 members. The Republican House did not throw out Republicans when they were indicted, in fact the Republican controlled House kept Ney in after he was convicted.
The Democratic controlled House has voted 373 to 26 to begin proceedings to have him removed from the House.
Good Lt wouldn't you agree that this was a better performance than when the House was Republican and Republican members Cunningham, and Delay were allowed to remain members after their indictments and Ney was even allowed to hold his seat for one month after his CONVICTION to assure that he would get a nice fat pension, including when he was serving his 30 months ?
I say ALL who are indicted should have to resign their seats, unlike the Republicans who got to keep their seats.
The House has only thrown out 5 members. The Republican House did not throw out Republicans when they were indicted, in fact the Republican controlled House kept Ney in after he was convicted.
The Democratic controlled House has voted 373 to 26 to begin proceedings to have him removed from the House.
Good Lt wouldn't you agree that this was a better performance than when the House was Republican and Republican members Cunningham, and Delay were allowed to remain members after their indictments and Ney was even allowed to hold his seat for one month after his CONVICTION to assure that he would get a nice fat pension, including when he was serving his 30 months ?
I say ALL who are indicted should have to resign their seats, unlike the Republicans who got to keep their seats.
Posted by: John Ryan at June 06, 2007 06:12 PM (TcoRJ)
10
Gray rooster insults from people who are afraid to use their real names are rather silly, much like your threat to have your friends from the Bronx pay me a visit.
Perhaps your next threat will be involving some television character.
Perhaps your next threat will be involving some television character.
Posted by: John Ryan at June 06, 2007 06:17 PM (TcoRJ)
11
Less than 24 hours after indictment the Democrats began proceedings to remove him. Show me that the Republicans did better with their own criminals.
Posted by: John Ryan at June 06, 2007 06:24 PM (TcoRJ)
12
Good Lt you might also note that the vote against Jefferson was not strictly along party lines. Why did any Republicans vote aginst the measure ??
Posted by: John Ryan at June 06, 2007 07:33 PM (TcoRJ)
13
If you want to talk about Ohio congressmen holding office after a conviction (Ney), then look at the democrat Traficant. He held his seat for several months after his conviction.
And re #12, there are several republican congressmen who are more interested in preserving congressional power over, than in cleaning house. Kicking Jefferson out sets a bad pattern, as far as the other bribe takers are concerned.
And re #12, there are several republican congressmen who are more interested in preserving congressional power over, than in cleaning house. Kicking Jefferson out sets a bad pattern, as far as the other bribe takers are concerned.
Posted by: wooga at June 06, 2007 08:38 PM (t9sT5)
14
Well, you really ought to give credit where credit is due. The Democraps HAVE done something about "the culture of corruption" in Washington: They've exponentially increased the level of it. The MSM is happy with this, because they benefit from more corruption by receiving bribes to sweep it under the carpet. Like, duh.
Posted by: Hucbald at June 06, 2007 09:00 PM (ktfJ2)
15
Apparently, "it takes a woman" from San Francisco to brush the filth in the House under the rug, and the "most ethical, most open, most transparent government in history" was nothing more than a bumper sticker used by Democrats.
And you are suprised by this why? The idiots that voted for the Dhimmi's in order to teach the Repub's a lesson just gave power to a bigger bunch of crooks, it's kinda like getting rid of Ali Babba and leaving the forty thieves in charge. The only way something is going to change is getting rid of every single incumbent both Dhimmi and Repub and passing a constitutional amendment setting term limits.
And you are suprised by this why? The idiots that voted for the Dhimmi's in order to teach the Repub's a lesson just gave power to a bigger bunch of crooks, it's kinda like getting rid of Ali Babba and leaving the forty thieves in charge. The only way something is going to change is getting rid of every single incumbent both Dhimmi and Repub and passing a constitutional amendment setting term limits.
Posted by: Oldcrow at June 07, 2007 10:02 AM (q7b5Y)
35kb generated in CPU 0.0931, elapsed 0.1214 seconds.
34 queries taking 0.0756 seconds, 170 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
34 queries taking 0.0756 seconds, 170 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
