OK, so the House Ethics Committee today convicted Charlie Rangel of 11 of 13 counts of ethics violations. We're sure the right-wingers like Michelle Malkin who make careers out of painting Democrats as ineluctably corrupt while blithely pretending Jack Abramoff and Halliburton didn't happen will be delighted.

However, it's actually pretty close to meaningless:

The full ethics panel will now convene a sanctions hearing to recommend a punishment, which ethics experts say will most likely be a reprimand or formal censure.

... Either reprimand or formal censure carry no immediate, tangible consequence for Rangel, who easily won reelection this month, but the sweeping guilty verdict delivers a damaging blow to his reputation and 40-year political legacy.

As Alex Parene at Salon observes, the offenses for which they eventually convicted Rangel are actually pretty minor, and the whole affair pretty damned lame:

Rangel's arrogance and self-pity have won him little support in the press, with cable news regularly treating him as the picture of congressional corruption and the schoolmarms at the New York Times editorial page regularly tut-tutting about how serious we must all pretend this is. The New York Post -- which has dedicated itself, thus far unsuccessfully, to hounding Rangel out of office -- has for years now featured various embarrassing stories of his fecklessness, accompanied by that hilarious photo of the congressman dozing off at his Dominican villa. But after years of this, the best the House ethics committee could do was to find that Rangel violated New York building code, failed to file his taxes correctly, and improperly used government letterhead.

The worst you can say about Rangel is that he's grown too entrenched to care if he abuses rent control, and he hired a crappy accountant. Casting donations to City College as improper gifts to Rangel is a bit much.

Rangel is probably done in terms of any real influence on the Hill, and retirement would be a wise option. But this whole affair was petty -- typical of the kinds of "investigations" we're probably going to be seeing from the new Republicans waiting to take over.

Never a dull moment...

Denied his plea for a delay, Rep. Charles Rangel walked out of his ethics trial Monday, leaving the ethics committee's top lawyer to cite Rangel's past statements in arguing that the 20-term New York Democrat violated House rules.

Chief House ethics counsel Blake Chisam, assuming the role of prosecutor at the rare public airing of in-House issues, played a video of a Rangel speech on the House floor in August. Rangel, former chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, acknowledged in that presentation that he'd used House stationery to raise money for a college center named after him.

Rangel also said in the August speech that he had been tardy in filing taxes and financial disclosure statements, but that he had no intention of breaking any rules.

Chisam told an ethics panel of four Republicans and four Democrats, "There are no ... issues as to any material facts in this case. As a result the case is ripe for a decision."

Rangel stalked out of the proceeding after imploring the panel for a delay until he could obtain a new lawyer. The panel declined his request after a closed session and the proceeding - rare in the annals of the House - went forward without Rangel's participation.

While I think it's a good thing that we stand up for integrity and ethics, I'm sure that Rangel feels it's a shame he couldn't delay until the Republicans regain control of the House in January. Because I'm sure it comes as no surprise that the Republicans are working to weaken the Ethics Committee.

Ruh roh:

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) will stand trial on ethics charges after a House panel accused him Thursday of multiple violations.

The veteran lawmaker will challenge the findings in an open hearing.

The news of Rangel’s trial comes at a bad time for Democrats, who are hoping to retain control of Congress this fall.[..]

A visibly frustrated Rangel on Thursday afternoon told The Hill that he did not know what the “alleged violations are finally going to be.”[..]

Rangel is facing a competitive and crowded primary on Sept. 14. In a poll released this week, Rangel attracted 39 percent of the vote, followed by State Assemblyman Adam Clayton Powell IV with 21 percent.

In all likelihood, Rangel’s trial will not start before his primary.

House ethics committee rules prohibit the committee from acting 30 days before a primary and 60 days before an election.

The House ethics rules also ensure that Rangel and his team of lawyers will have at least 15 days to review the allegations against him before the trial begins. [..]

In order for the committee to move forward with the trial, Rangel had to waive his rights to settle and accept the ethics committee punishment, according to ethics committee rules governing the trial process. Sources told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity that Rangel's attorney and the committee had failed to reach a settlement, which would have required an admission from Rangel that he broke ethics rules.

Public trials for ethics violations are rare and usually involve serious allegations against members, including censure and removal from office.

Rangel's characteristic bravado notwithstanding, there are reports that vulnerable Democratic congresspeople have already petitioned Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer to put pressure on Rangel to resign, rather than taint the entire party. Interesting that when you get the same kind of scandals on the other side, you don't see this same desire to get rid of the scandalized member; rather, they circle the wagons around them (see Vitter, DeLay, et al.). I'm not sure exactly what Rangel has done, but Jonathan Capehart at WaPo says good riddance:

The committee has had a lot to look into. But my favorite, hands down, is his amended financial disclosure forms that revealed not one but two checking accounts -- CHECKING -- with up to $500,000 in them. How that slips the mind of the man who at the time was the powerful chief of the tax-writing committee is beyond me.

"At long last, sunshine has pierced through this cloud that has been over my head for more than two years," Rangel said. This is classic Rangel. Trying to make a walk over hot coals look like a stroll on the Mall. I look forward to hearing whatever explanations he has for his violations. And I look forward to whatever penalties befall him.

Good. This was a distraction we don't need. He'll be replaced by Pete Stark:

WASHINGTON - After being admonished by an ethics panel for accepting corporate-sponsored trips to the Caribbean, Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., said Wednesday that he will take a leave of absence from his chairmanship of the powerful House Ways and Means committee.

Rangel made the announcement to reporters on Capitol Hill, saying he would not answer any questions.

"I hope you don't mind. I don't take questions," he said.

He added that "from the very, very beginning, I had offered" to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to step down from the post. He said he was leaving now "to avoid my colleagues having to defend me" during the campaign season.

I've interviewed LO for C&L before and he speaks his mind for sure. Following up on O'Donnell's appearance on Scarborough Country, Lawrence keeps up the pace.

Advocating war is easier when you and your family are not endangered by it. I've reached a Rangel-like breaking point with my TV pundit colleagues who championed the Iraq war and now say we can't leave even if we went there for the wrong reasons. For every one of them, I have a simple question: Why aren't you in Iraq? Or why did you avoid combat in your generation's war? The one unifying characteristic that all of us men in make-up on political chat shows share is fear of combat. Every one of us has done everything we can to avoid combat or even being fitted for a military uniform. Just like George Bush, Bill Clinton, and Dick Cheney, we are all combat cowards. It takes a very special kind of combat coward to advocate combat for others. It's the kind of thing that can get you as angry as Charlie Rangel.

Blah3: Poor Poppy gets an earful from some Arabs about how Junior inspires zero trust around the world. 

AlterNet: Scott Ritter, one of the only experts seen on scream TV who was right about the Iraq invasion, debunks Iran myths

Talk To Action: More about Eric Keroack, who seems to oppose birth control and sexual relationships outside of marriage largely because God wants him to do it.

NPR : Audio of the secret Gitmo tribunals in which the government produces no evidence of any sort, and relies on secret evidence which the accused is not allowed to see or even know about. The detainees are given the opportunity to rebut the secret evidence. But they are never told what the secret evidence is.  The Pentagon dismisses such criticisms, arguing that the tribunals are fair.

The Vanity Press: More thoughts on Charlie Rangel's notion of reinstating the draft .  We're sure all those chickenhawk, warflogging, mommie men are wetting themselves at the thought that they might someday have to walk their tough talk, but...

GRAB BAG: Proof that Tom DeLay is now officially just a rusty spot on the underpants of history...Right wing campus outreach...CBS owes Ed Bradley an apology...Fittingly, Lieberman hired an ideological contortionist as his communications director

Charlie Rangel has caused quite a stir by bringing up his pet issue: The draft. The wingnuts are flopping around trying to attack Democrats over it, but most of them seem to miss his point. The Poorman has more. Here are just a few of our more prominent members of the CH club.

Download | play -WMP Download | play -QT

It's always fun to see Lawrence O'Donnell get his blood boiling.

Say what you will about Charlie Rangel, but the guy's willing to put his career where his mouth is.

Rep. Charles Rangel, a powerful senior Democrat in Congress and the dean of New York's congressional delegation, said Wednesday that he'll quit Congress if the Democrats don't retake control of the House this year.

"I'm a poker player and I've had good hands all night long. This is all in," Rangel said in an interview with The Associated Press. "I would not put everything on the table if I thought for one minute we would lose." [...]

"Hell, if we don't take back the House, then the Democrats would go down in history, saying that there's no group in the world that can grab defeat from the jaws of victory," Rangel said. "It just seems like America is so frustrated and fed up like I am and if she's not then I may have to say maybe it's me."

It's quite a risk for a guy who's the ranking member on the powerful House Ways & Means Committee, but I love Rangel's attitude.

--Guest Post by Steve Benen, The Carpetbagger Report

Charlie Rangel calls Republicans out on their blatant attempt to hijack a minimum wage increase. God fobid they should actually help the least of us.

Download | play -WMP Download | play -QT

Ezra Klein:

Oh, those Republicans. Tired of being such grinches on the minimum wage, they flipped on the bill, crafting a proposal to raise the wage and rollback the estate tax. The Democrats, it seems to me, have precisely the right response to this gambit...read on

TMV:

How many workers who are cynical about whether the GOP really cares about them will want to vote for a GOPer who voted for an increase in the minimum wage that was shoved through under threat of defeat unless an inheritance tax break was grafted onto it?...read on

< Sen. Chuck Grassley, Rep. Charlie Rangel appeared on MTP

Video

via TPM

Rangel: ...there is no Democrat in the House of Representatives, or on my committee, that this president has reached out for. I'm telling you now, Social Security reform by the president is dead, and he killed it.

Does the word "Bi-partisan-ship" have any meaning?