Image via Wikipedia
This is the story of the day. Charlie Rangel has been censured by the House for his ethics violations. This is the man who walked out of his own trial because he didn’t have the time to get a proper defense together, then spent the next week waxing long and poetic about how he wasn’t guilty. Why could he not simply have done that at the trial instead of making it into a mockery?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censure#Explanation_and_use
Based on Rangel’s rather serious breaches of ethics (who forgets to pay almost a million dollars in income taxes over several years?), do you agree with this treatment? As a further question, do you believe he should be held to the same standard as Wesley Snipes, who was recently sentenced to 3 years in prison for almost the exact same thing?
Tell me in the comments!
Related Articles
- House Votes To Censure Charles Rangel (huffingtonpost.com)
Cricket's Chirps 