Monday, August 17, 2009
Dodd and Conrad May Not Have Provided Sworn Testimony to Senate Ethics - WSJ.com
Wanna hear a good joke? - "The Senate Ethics Committee"
It's a clear case of the fox guarding the henhouse.
I wonder what their definition of "substantial" is?...
It's a clear case of the fox guarding the henhouse.
I wonder what their definition of "substantial" is?...
The Wall Street Journal editorializes about it:
"As the old Irish toast goes, may your sins be judged by the Senate ethics committee. Actually that's not an Irish toast but it must be the fervent hope of every politician who received a 'Friend of Angelo' loan from former Countrywide Financial CEO Angelo Mozilo. Late last week the six Senators on the ethics panel dismissed complaints against Senators Kent Conrad and Chris Dodd with a mere admonishment about the appearance of impropriety.
The three Republican and three Democratic Senators say they conducted an exhaustive probe and inspected 18,000 pages of documents. They say they found 'no substantial credible evidence as required by Committee rules' that the Senators received mortgage rates or services that weren't commonly available to the public, and thus did not violate the Senate gift ban.
We'll have to take their word that the evidence wasn't 'substantial,' because they didn't release those documents, nor did they encourage Mr. Dodd to release any of his records."
