Originally Posted By DlandJB Is it OK for a political figure to use his position in congress to make personal gains for his family by helping people get legislation passed if they pay the politician off?>>> How come the Republicans haven't called for an investigation -- or have they?
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>How come the Republicans haven't called for an investigation -- or have they?<< For the last 12 years I doubt the GOP was particularly eager to start investigating members of Congress. Now that the new, ethical, Democratic leadership is in place, this may change. And heaven help all of them.
Originally Posted By friendofdd Some days I feel as though a boffo headline would be "Member of Congress has never used position to improve financial situation.
Originally Posted By No Waiting in Line If Trent Lott had this going on or Bill Frist it would have been front page news for a week. We all know this. But when the media all vote democrat and they have an agenda to push, a story like this gets swept under the rug. This is why the left hates Fox news and talk radio. They don't sweep these pesky stories under the rug. The new ethical Democrats? LOL!
Originally Posted By DAR <<Clair Haycock, a Las Vegas lubricant dealer and his friend for 50 years>> Well heck I might be friends with a guy like that too
Originally Posted By Dabob2 I don't think Reid should be given a pass for this. But I also don't think that, based on what I read, it's a given that he did something wrong. It should be investigated. If found to be unethical, he should lose his leadership position. If found to be actually illegal, he could lose his senate seat (depending on the violation) outright, or in the next Nevada election. There do seem to be some assumptions being made here on guilt or innocence, based on party affiliation rather than anything we actually know at this point.
Originally Posted By SuperDry I was going to start a separate thread, but why bother. Here it is: "FBI looking into U.S. [Republican] Rep. Miller's land deals" <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-ex-miller30jan31" target="_blank">http://www.latimes.com/news/lo cal/la-ex-miller30jan31</a>,0,3464161.story?coll=la-headlines-california This is clearly on par with the originally-posted story in this thread, in that they both involve members of Congress, both involve land deals which are now being investigated, and both are reported on in the LA Times. Yet one is mentioned by the OP and the other is not. I wonder why that is?
Originally Posted By friendofdd Ummm Because, unlike all other WE posters, he is partisan in his politics?
