The following article was originally published in the Politico, on November 15, 2010.
It has been a tough morning for Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), who walked out of his ethics trial earlier when he wasn't allowed to more time to get a lawyer.
Yet Rangel did have a good moment, of sorts, when the top ethics committee lawyer said he wasn't corrupt. Sloppy, but not corrupt.
"I see no evidence of corruption," said Blake Chisam, the top ethics committee lawyer, about Rangel. Chisam's statement was in response to questioning by Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.). Butterfield is serving on the eight-member panel hearing the Rangel case.
"It's hard to answer the question of personal financial benefit," Chisam added. " I think the short answer is probably no. Do I believe that based on the record that Congressman Rangel took steps to benefit himself based on his position in Congress? No. I believe that the congressman, quite frankly, was overzealous in many of the things he did. And sloppy in his personal finances."
The most serious allegations against Rangel surround his fundraising on behalf of the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Policy at City College in New York. Rangel sought as much as $30 million in public and private funds for the center, and he was charged for setting dozens of letters on official letterhead to official donors.
Chisam said that Rangel could have avoided any problems "if he had only followed the rules" laid out for such fundraising in the House ethics manual.
Return to Articles
