[UPDATE: The preliminary steps of removing Peter Gleick from positions of authority and respect have begun: he’s ‘resigned’ from his position with the National Center for Science Education, and his scientific ethics task force chairmanship(!) for the American Geophysical Union. One wonders whether groups like the MacArthur Fellows Program and NAS will insist that Gleick cut all ties from them, as well. Nobody’s really expecting the Pacific Institute to join in, of course: it’s a well-known reliable quote machine for the American Left.]
OK, quick background: last week there was a bit of fuss when a variety of documents appeared that purported to show that there was some sort of nefarious global warming ‘denialist’ (that’s what a Lefty calls somebody who has noticed that, hey, the temperature’s not actually rising the way that people told us it would) conspiracy centered around the Heartland Institute. The Heartland Institute was not amused by this, and has been making it clear that at least one document was a pathetic forgery. This latter point has generally been conceded by all the players, if tacitly, and the great walkback is beginning. I recommend Watts Up With That for those looking to monitor further developments: that site has been all over this story.
But let’s go back to what got revealed, for a moment. The documents can be grouped into two categories: a variety of materials that global warming advocate (and lecturer on ethics*) Peter Gleick admitted stealing from Heartland**; and the aforementioned pathetically faked document. Since we now know that not even Gleick is standing by the provenance of said document, let us ignore it completely. What it says is irrelevant. It has no bearing. I did not even read it before my summary below of the documents that Gleick stole, solely to keep it from contaminating my assessment. Continue reading What are the depths of Peter Gleick’s depravity in the Heartland global warming smear attack? [UPDATED]
(Via Instapundit) That’s the rather bombshell allegation being made today; the gist is that Rodney Young (a retiring psychologist for the Department of Juvenile Justice has reported that his colleagues were the target of an attempt to extort $500 contributions to Steve Beshear’s re-election campaign, with the threat that they could lose their jobs if they did not so contribute. The major argument against this happening is that it would be EXTREMELY STUPID of anyone affiliated with the Governor to make this kind of threat; particularly considering the video found below.
For those without video access, that’s Steve Beshear promising that accountability begins at the top, and that he’s expecting all of his top staffers will be trained in ethics.
Well. All right, then. Continue reading Is Gov. Steve Beshear (D, KY) extorting campaign contributions?
Background: back over Thanksgiving weekend John Conyers III (the son of Rep. John Conyers) reported a theft of computers and concert tickets from the car that he was using. The problem? John Conyers III was using the car unlawfully: it was leased to his father’s Congressional office as an official vehicle, and Conyers was not using it in an official capacity. And it wasn’t anything like an one-time event, either: John Conyers III also got a speeding ticket on the car back in September. The behavior was so egregious that Rep. Conyers isn’t even trying to fight it: he’s just swiftly reimbursing the government as comprehensively as possible before the 112th Congress gets sworn in.
None of this is the true scandal. The true scandal is that we’re only hearing about this now. Rep. Conyers – who is, by the way, still the JUDICIARY CHAIR – has a history of abusing official resources. His wife is in jail for bribery. There is thus zero excuse for the media not to jump on this with both feet… and if the man had an R after his name, they would have. Then again, if Rep. Conyers had had an R after his name the media would have destroyed him years ago.
Moe Lane (crosspost)
PS: I think that the new Ethics Committee leadership should look into this – and that they should not give this the same wrist slap in 2011 that their Democratic counterparts did in 2007. I am tired of Democratic politicians thinking that they can get a pass on not even having to care about propriety; I am even more tired of them having any practical justification for thinking that way.
…either that, or he’s just as cynical as I am in calling Charlie Rangel’s likely punishment a ‘wrist-slap.’ Sure, he was convicted on 11 of 13 ethics charges, but who here really expects expulsion? Censure? We’ll be lucky to see a reprimand… and, given the skeptical nature of the Hill article, it’s actually unlikely that the Democrats will either actually fine Rangel, or reduce his privileges. And forget Rangel resigning, of course: if he was seriously considering it, the reliably Democratic shills over at CREW wouldn’t dare to offer the suggestion. The Democratic Establishment: can’t live with them, pass the beer nuts.
Ach, well. At least Rangel couldn’t bankroll candidates this election cycle. That was something, at least.
Yes, “steal.” Rep. Charles Rangel was not allowed to use money from his leadership PAC to pay his legal bills, it beggars belief that he did not know that he was not allowed to use money from his leadership PAC to pay his legal bills, and yet he did it anyway. If we can’t call the deliberate diversion of money that was raised and allocated for other people’s use ‘theft’ then we might as well give up the entire civilization thing now and go back to living in caves.
It doesn’t really matter anyway, of course. The Democratic panelists on the ethics trial that’s supposed to start tomorrow will not sign off on any sort of meaningful punishment for the Congressman: he’ll be slapped on the wrist in any Democratic-controlled Congress, and everybody knows it. That’s why current Speaker Pelosi delayed these proceedings in the first place, after all. On the (marginally) bright side, at least Rangel’s been drained personally dry by these proceedings, to the point where he’ll be representing himself because he can’t afford a new legal team. It’s hardly justice, but then, again: it’s still a Democratic-controlled Congress. You work with what you have.
Moe Lane (crosspost)
(Via @vermontaigne) Three of them. Need I add that Charlie Rangel is currently under investigation by that committee?
Charlie’s “angels” on the committee include Congressmen Ben Chandler of Kentucky, G.K. Butterfield of North Carolina and Peter Welch of Vermont. All have received donations from Rangel.
Two of them – Chandler (KY-06, R+9*) & Butterfield (NC-01, D+9) – are apparently keeping it, too. Considering that Rep. Rangel has given money to 119 Congressmen since the ethics probe began last year, you could almost not blame them. Or almost not blame Rangel for acting as if he was above the laws that he writes:
Congressman Rangel has been arrogant in refusing to discuss how, as the man who writes this country’s tax laws, he failed to report over $1 million in outside income and $3 million in business transactions as required by the House, lapses under investigation by the House Ethics Committee.
“I recognize that all of you have an obligation to ask questions knowing that there’s none of you smart enough to frame it in such a way that I’m going to respond,” Rangel said.
Almost. But trust me, Charlie: the GOP takes back the House in 2010, we’re going to find it really easy to make you respond to the question.
*Ben Chandler has already acquired a Republican challenger: Matt Lockett.
Crossposted to RedState.
“It’s a new day, and Mr. Rangel is part of that new day,” Levin said.
The Democrats have made it clear that they don’t give a tinker’s dam about Rep Rangel’s numerous ethical lapses, as even this Politico article makes clear (via Instapundit):
Continue reading What? In what alternate universe is there a “cloud” over Rangel?