Saturday, July 31, 2010

The 10 Dumbest Toys of All Time










Democrats scheming to give child rapists, arsonists and kidnappers the right to vote

Oh, and murderers. Can't forget murderers.

These convicted felons and parolees appear to be one of the Democrat Party's most valuable voting blocs -- along with illegal immigrants. Under the guise that prisons contain too many minorities, the liberal activists on the Supreme Court appear to have ordered the administration to review the policies of all 48 states that currently deny prisoners the right to vote.

Forty-eight states, all except Maine and Vermont, deny convicted felons the right to vote, a modern version of the old concept of “civil death” for those convicted of serious crimes. In some states, as in Massachusetts, the ban lasts for the duration of the prison sentence. More often, it extends for years longer, through the parole period, as in New York, where in 2006 the federal appeals court rejected a challenge over the dissent of four judges, including Sonia Sotomayor...

...In every state, the impact on the black community is disproportionate, hardly surprising given that one in nine black men aged 20 to 34 is in prison. Even so, the numbers are startling, with disturbing implications for civic life in a democracy. According to an analysis by the Sentencing Project, a research and advocacy organization in Washington, felony convictions have deprived 20 percent of African-Americans in Virginia of the right to vote, compared with a 6.8 percent disenfranchisement rate for Virginia residents as a whole. In Texas, a similar ratio applies: 9.3 percent for blacks compared with 3.3 percent for Texans as a whole. In New York, 80 percent of those who have lost the right to vote are black or Hispanic. Nationally, an estimated one in seven black men has lost the right to vote.

As an aside -- for the first "post-racial" presidency, there certainly appears to be record levels of race-baiting and Balkanization going on in Washington. But I digress.

What the utterly incompetent Linda Greenhouse, author of this particular DNC press release, fails to observe is as startling as it is simple.

Of 23 peer-reviewed U.S. studies since 2000, 20 found that family structure directly affects crime and/or delinquency. Most research "strongly suggests both that young adults and teens raised in single-parent homes are more likely to commit crimes, and that communities with high rates of family fragmentation (especially unwed childbearing) suffer higher crime rates as a result."

One study that ran more than two decades found that nearly 90% of the change in violent crime rates can be attributed to the change in percentages of out-of-wedlock births. Conversely, divorce rates had no relationship with crime.

In The Atlantic Monthly, Barbara Dafoe Whitehead noted that the "relationship [between single-parent families and crime] is so strong that controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime. This conclusion shows up time and again in the literature. The nation's mayors, as well as police officers, social workers, probation officers, and court officials, consistently point to family break up as the most important source of rising rates of crime."

Got that, Greenhouse? Control for single-parent families and there are no differences between the races when it comes to crime. Stop incentivizing single-parent families and you'll stop getting so many minority prisoners. But Democrats want blacks to head en masse to prison, it would appear -- as their policies have indisputably resulted in record numbers of single-parent families. Unchecked access to welfare, 99-week unemployment checks, bonus checks for kids born out of wedlock, you name it.

All that said, will the Democrat Party ever stop its despicable race-baiting practices?

That's a rhetorical question, of course.


Related: Dreams from My Single-Parent Family

Larwyn's Linx: Summer of corruption -- The enablers of Charlie Rangel

Have a great link you'd like me to review? Drop me an email. You can also install a Larwyn's Linx blog widget.

Nation

Summer of corruption: The enablers of Charlie Rangel: Malkin
9th Circuirt denies Arizona’s expedited appeal: Malkin
Congress passed law in 1996: contradicts pre-emption: Hot Air

Dems' $1.6B Tax Cut For Trial Lawyers: SAB
Trial Lawyers Poised to Destroy Health Care Company: GWP
Chicago: Where Criminals No Longer Fear the Police: PJM

Desperation never reeked so sweetly: Ace
SEIU attacks fellow union for concessions: RWN
Crist plumbs the depths of crackpottery: Malkin

Economy

Why Dems Need a $165B Union Pension Bailout: BigGovt
Clinton comptroller blasts public sector workers: Caller
GM's Free Advertising: CFB

Paul Ryan schools Ezra Klein: RWN
Illegal Immigration: the Truths We Dare Not Speak: Hanson
The Ruling Class Tosses Americans Overboard: AT

You’re Not Imagining It: America Really Is Less Free: RWN

Climate & Energy

'Global warming skeptics should commit suicide': RWN

Media

Strange Dream: R&R
A Paler Shade Of White – The Journolist Conspirators: iOTW
Gibbs takes on Rush Limbaugh... again: WSJ

No Bias Zone: ‘Journalist’ Calls Tea Parties ‘Right-Wing Bloodfeasts’: RWN
JournoList, Shame of a Nation: We Know What Ezra Klein Knew and When He Knew It: BigJournalism
Lobbyists Give Millions to Dems As Obama Smears ‘Special Interests’: GWP

World

Buying into Britain's Debacle: AT
The Multiplying Mysteries of Creating an Islamic Center Near Ground Zero: Rosett
Attaturk Tattoos on the Rise in Turkey: TAB

The Two Faces of the Ground Zero Mosque: Ibrahim
Taliban Spokesman says They Will Hunt Down and Kill Afghan Informants Outed in WikiLeaks Documents: GWP
Berntsen: Cordoba mosque is a security risk: Times-Union

SciTech

The Web's New Gold Mine: Your Secrets : WSJ
Apple tries to patent travel, hotel, shopping apps: CNet
Dell Responds To Crazy Story Of Nudie Pic-Stealing Tech Support Guy: Consumerist

Cornucopia

Play this while watching Anthony Weiner's rant: YouTube
North Korean football team shamed in six-hour public inquiry over World Cup: GWP
The Funny Papers: Hope n' Change: AmDigest

Images: CNet
Today's Larwyn's Linx sponsored by: drop a few bucks on J.D. Hayworth for U.S. Senate


Friday, July 30, 2010

Worst Toy Awards




Hat tip: R-Lo.

Ramirez on SB1070 and an Activist Federal Judge

Brilliant, as usual.


Darrell Issa's ObamaCare Caption Contest!

One of the few patriots in Congress, Rep. @DarrellIssa, named his top four caption contest winners. The challenge: come up with an appropriate description for the vast, new bureaucracies called ObamaCare.

Tied for second runner-up:

Joyce Ciotti, for Twister, Obama Edition

Also tied for second runner-up: Michelle Ray, for ObamaCare: Any Questions?

Our first runner-up: Mitchell Rosen for If you can read this, you're too close to the Obama administration!

And our winner is... ... ...Steven G. O'Dell for Do I cut the red wire -- or the green wire?

Congratulations to all of our contestants: in your own way, you're all winners. Except for those of you who are losers.


Anthony Weiner (D-NY) performs groundbreaking interpretative dance routine on House floor expressing concern for fragmented Democrat Party

Anthony Weiner performed an expressive pantomime routine on the House floor last night. He received more applause for his heartfelt performance than any similar interpretive dance since 1996, when Charlie Rangel pretended to shovel dollar bills into his Mercedes.

Despite a huge majority, Weiner was unable to convince his fellow Democrats to vote for the Mime Protection Act of 2010. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Next time, Anthony: use Jazz hands!


Apparently Maxine Waters Hasn't Done Enough Damage to This Society: She Moves From Racial Quotas in Housing to Racial Quotas in Finance

The disgraceful left-wing career politician named Maxine Waters (D-CA) made quite a name for herself about a decade ago defending the Clinton-era policies that led to the mortgage meltdown. Put simply, she supported underwriting vast swaths of mortgage loans to anyone: the poor, the real estate-flippers, the scam-artists, the illegal immigrants. In other words, she believed that loaning money to those who had no ability or intent to pay it back was the responsibility of you, the taxpayer.

Say, remember this golden oldie?

In 2003, the effort to rein in Fannie began in earnest with a Republican bill ("H.R. 2575—THE SECONDARY MORTGAGE MARKET ENTERPRISES REGULATORY IMPROVEMENT ACT"). The bill would have strengthened an independent regulator that did not have to kowtow to the political establishment. Like most efforts aimed at reformation of Fannie, the committee votes were typically on the straight party line -- with the Democrats blocking any oversight of Fannie and Freddie.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA): I think it is clear that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are sufficiently secure so they are in no great danger... I don't think we face a crisis; I don't think that we have an impending disaster. ...Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac do very good work, and they are not endangering the fiscal health of this country.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA): I have sat through nearly a dozen hearings where, frankly, we were trying to fix something that wasn't broke. [sic] ...These GSEs have more than adequate capital for the business they are in: providing affordable housing. As I mentioned, we should not be making radical or fundamental change... If there is anything to fix or improve, it is the [regulators].

The result, of course, was the sinkhole-like implosion of the GSEs that leveled the economy in 2008 and for which the taxpayer is still on the hook for the tidy sum of one or two trillion dollars.

Amidst various ethics allegations comes word that Waters hasn't quite finished destroying the American economy. Her latest masterpiece involves more wealth redistribution based upon race, ethnicity, gender, you name it.

A little-noticed section of the Wall Street reform law grants the federal government broad new powers to compel financial firms to hire more women and minorities... Deep inside the massive overhaul bill, Congress gives the federal government authority to terminate contracts with any financial firm that fails to ensure the “fair inclusion” of women and minorities, forcing every kind of company from a Wall Street giant to a mom-and-pop law office to account for the composition of its work force.

Employment law experts say the language goes further than any previous attempt by the U.S. government to promote diversity in the financial sector — putting muscle behind federal efforts to help minority- and women-owned firms gain access to billions in federal contracts.

...to opponents, the provision signifies a brazen government intrusion into corporate practices, with language written so vaguely that some believe it could lead to an unofficial quota system.

“This expands exponentially the reach of the federal government in terms of auditing,” said Peter Kirsanow, an attorney and Republican appointee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. “This is an expansion of racial engineering that we haven’t seen in a long time."

The bill is so broad that even Susan Collins (RINO-ME) has complained about its scope. It doesn't just impact federal offices and agencies, but hits contractors, subcontractors and other entities with as yet unknown dictates, regulations and -- likely -- quotas.

Maxine Waters authored a 1,261-word section that establishes "at least 20 new Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion across the Treasury Department, Federal Reserve, Securities and Exchange Commission and other finance-related agencies."

Waters found time to destroy the financial industry with her racial engineering efforts despite the fact that she's under a House ethics investigation that threatens to pull her wig off and plant her ample derriere in a federal lockup near Baltimore.

A House ethics subcommittee has completed its investigation into allegations of wrongdoing by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), and could announce its next steps before lawmakers leave town for the August recess Friday, according to sources familiar with the process.

The committee is in discussions with Waters about the case, in which investigators looked at whether she broke House rules by improperly intervening with federal officials on behalf of a local bank, OneUnited Bank, that her husband owned stock in and once sat on the board of directors.

Maxine Waters appears to be a one-woman wrecking crew -- a female version of Andrew Cuomo perhaps, only with more conflicts-of-interest.


Larwyn's Linx: USCIS memo describes passing amnesty without legislation

Have a great link you'd like me to review? Drop me an email. You can also install a Larwyn's Linx blog widget.

Nation

USCIS memo describes passing amnesty without legislation: GWP
Quislings Sacrifice Arizona to Goal of One-Party Rule: RWN
Leahy on PantherGate: Blame Bush, Twiddle Thumbs: Malkin

Real Sherrod Story Still Untold: Cashill
Minute 16 of her 15 minutes of fame: Sherrod sues Breitbart: RWN
Dem fires aide after 'Jewish Money' list made public: TPMDC

Obama's Mean Streak: AT
Confirmed: MI Tea Party a Hoax: BlogProf

Economy

First in the Nation Referendum on Obamacare: GWP
Organized labor is the antithesis of worker freedom: Caller
NEA removes article celebrating Mao's revolution: GWP

Sun Could Set Suddenly on Superpower as Debt Bites: RCW
Lindsey Grahamnesty Ending "Birthright" Citizenship?: Ace
"Instant Refi"? Watch The Consequences...: Denninger

Climate & Energy

Save the World, Kill a Kid: Tackett
Great news: New electric car costs only slightly more than average annual per capita income: Hot Air
IFL shreds 'Clean Energy Works' and the Gray Lady: IFL

Media

Joy Behar receives kneepads via rush delivery for O interview: Malkin
Why the Electoral College Matters: AT
Bloggers: Link This Post Today and Win 4 Days In NY, a $3,000 Shopping Spree, and a Meeting With Bill O’Reilly: RWN

The Essay Read Round the World: Belmont
ACORN Whistleblower Anita MonCrief’s New Venture: EmergingCorruption.com: RWN
Keith Olbermann Spends Vacation Talking To His Fans On Twitter: NewsBusters

World

The Nakba Obsession: Stern
Rasmussen: Support For Border Fence Up To 68%: Ace
Jackassery On Display (Frank/Dodd): Denninger

SciTech

Bunker-busting ATM attacks show security holes: Yahoo!
Saving Suborbital: Will Congress Kill NASA's Reusable Space Program?: PJM
My iPad Makes Me An Elitist And I’m Proud Of It…Wait: RWN

Cornucopia

Keep on Truckin': iOTW
A Modern Fable: Sargen
Top Ten Things Women Can Do (That Men Can't): Ranker (NSFW)

Images: iOwnTheWorld
Today's Larwyn's Linx sponsored by: Help Keep OpenCongress.org Alive!


Thursday, July 29, 2010

Consumer Metrics Institute: Dude -- Brace for Impact

Runner-up headline: The unbridled success of the Obamaconomy continues to delight President Axelrod

The magenta (that's purple for you liberals) line represents the Bureau of Economic Analysis number that trails consumer data on a quarterly basis. The blue (that's the color of some ink pens for you liberals) line depicts the Consumer Metrics Institute's Daily Growth Index.

The green line represents the 2006 contraction; the red line 2008; and the blue line illustrates our current situation. In short: have you ever seen the movie Journey to the Center of the Earth?

The current weighted composite sector index -- which measures activity in various sectors of the economy like retail, housing, etc. -- appears to have the following reading: "ICEBERG, DEAD AHEAD!!"

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Gee, a massive tax hike in the form of the expiration of the evil Bush tax cuts ought to really spur some growth. Right, Vladimir?


Democrats hit the post-racial Exacta: Obama calls African-Americans 'mongrels' while New York Congressman decries GOP challenger's 'Jew money'

Thank heavens Barack Obama isn't a cop in Arizona -- he could have gotten in big trouble today with one of the ethnic front groups.

President Obama waded into the national race debate in an unlikely setting and with an unusual choice of words: telling daytime talk show hosts that African-Americans are “sort of a mongrel people.”

The president appeared on ABC’s morning talk show “The View” Thursday, where he talked about the forced resignation of Agriculture Department official Shirley Sherrod, his experience with race and his roots...

Obama said of African-Americans: "We are sort of a mongrel people."

"I mean we're all kinds of mixed up," Obama said. "That's actually true of white people as well, but we just know more about it."

And to think that this unfortunate situation could have been avoided: there's a teleprompter app for the iPhone.

Meanwhile, on Long Island, Democrat Congressman Mike McMahon is steamed over the amount of money his GOP challenger has raised.

Mike Grimm, a G.O.P challenger for Mike McMahon's Congressional seat, took in over $200,000 in his last filing.

But in an effort to show that Grimm lacks support among voters in the district, which covers Staten Island and parts of Brooklyn, the McMahon campaign compiled a list of Jewish donors to Grimm and provided it to The Politicker.

The file, labeled "Grimm Jewish Money Q2," for the second quarter fundraising period, shows a list of over 80 names, a half-dozen of which in fact do hail from Staten Island, and a handful of others that list Brooklyn as home...

"Where is Grimm's money coming from," said Jennifer Nelson, McMahon's campaign spokeman. "There is a lot of Jewish money, a lot of money from people in Florida and Manhattan, retirees."

And be sure not to miss our feature story at 11pm, when Oliver Stone and Helen Thomas mudwrestle for the chance to face off against Hillary Clinton in the finals next week.


Hat tip: Matt Drudge. Linked by: Michelle Malkin. Thanks!

Charlie Rangel -- 'Statement of Facts in Support of Alleged Violations' -- the Compleat Text (Part I)

I. SOLICITATION OF POTENTIAL DONORS TO THE CHARLES B. RANGEL CENTER FOR PUBLIC SERVICE AT THE CITY COLLEGE OF NEW YORK.

1. In 2004, Respondent became interested in creating an institution, similar to the Clinton Presidential Center, in part, to preserve Respondent's legacy.

2. Respondent discussed the idea with Gregory Williams, the president of City College of New York ("CCNY").

3. In December 2004, Respondent wrote Williams and stated:

As I informed you, during our participation in the dedication of the William J. Clinton Presidential Center several colleagues encouraged me to begin to think of the creation of an institution that would preserve the work of my public life and make it available to the public, especially to students and scholars. I am receptive to this idea if it pennits me to locate these aspects of my legacy in my home Harlem community at the City College. The creation of a Rangel Center at the City College of New York would pennit me to continue my career long interest in the promotion of education and the motivation of young people towards careers in public service.

1. In the December 2004 letter to Williams, Respondent further stated that "I will be exploring with my Congressional colleagues how best to move this idea through the appropriations process ...."

2. In early 2005, fundraising efforts for the Charles B. Rangel Center at the City College of New York ("Rangel Center") began.

3. CCNY prepared a 20-page glossy brochure for use in fundraising for the Rangel Center. That brochure includes a description of the Rangel Center Building. It described the Rangel Center Building as including a library to house and archive the Respondent's congressional papers, an archivist/librarian, and a "well-furnished office for Congressman Rangel."

7. The brochure estimated the cost ofthe archivist/librarian to be $46,550 per year.

8. In April 2005, a memo to Respondent was prepared by Jim Capel, his district director, regarding the proposal prepared by CCNY for the Rangel Center. The memo states,

"[iln the proposal, the last page is a request for $30 million or $6 million each year for the next

five years. Do we need more to advance to our Appropriations process?"

1. In May 2005, Respondent sent letters to members of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury and Housing and Urban Development requesting eannarks in the amount of $6 million "to help establish a Center for Public Service at the City College of New York in my Congressional District."

2. An eannark in the amount of approximately $445,000 to the City College of New York for the planning, design, and construction of the Center for Public Service was included in the Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006, Pub. L. No. 109-115, 119 Stat. 2397 (2006). That bill became law on November 30, 2005.

3. In May 2005, Respondent sent letters regarding the Rangel Center to individuals who served as co-trustees of the Am1 S. Kheel Charitable Trust ("Kheel Trust"). Each of the letters states, "Since we are developing a relationship between the Ann Kheel Charitable Trust and the City College and City University of New York, I want to make you aware, tlu'ough this letter and the enclosed proposal, of the Rangel Center for Public Service as another promising development at the City College."

4. The May 2005 Kheel Trust letters were sent on congressional letterhead, bearing the words "Congress of the United States" and "House ofRepresentatives."

5. Respondent has been a trustee of the Atm S. Kheel Charitable Trust since its inception in February 2004. The Kheel Trust is a private foundation as defined by 26 U.S.c. § 509(a).

14. The trustee agreement for Kheel Trust contains a prohibition against self-dealing.

Respondent signed that agreement.

1. Members of Respondent's congressional staff worked with CCNY officials to obtain the grant from the Kheel Trust for the Ann S. Kheel Scholars Program.

2. Respondent knew his staff was working with CCNY officials to obtain funds fi'om the Kheel Trust.

3. Respondent was present at all meetings of the Kheel Trust Board of Trustees from its first meeting on February 19, 2004, tlu'ough June 3,2005.

4. At various board meetings, the trustees of the Kheel Trust discussed tile CCNY proposal and the Rangel Center.

5. The Kheel Trust Board of Trustees approved a grant to CCNY to fund the AIm S. Kheel Scholars on June 3, 2005.

6. The Ann S. Kheel Scholars Program has consistently been listed under the "Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service" section of the CCNY web site.

7. CCNY officials consistently represented to Respondent and his staff, potential donors, and tile public the donation from the Kheel Trust as a grant to the Rangel Center in its fimdraising for the Rangel Center.

8. In 2005, Respondent directed that his congressional staff develop a list of potential donors to the Rangel Center. This work was done on property of the House of Representatives, on official House time, and with the use of official House resources.

9. In June 2005, Respondent's staff prepared a fonnletter (the "June 2005 letter") to be sent under Respondent's signature to potential donors to the Rangel Center. This work was done on property of the House of Representatives, on official House time, and with the use of official House resources.

1. In the June 2005 letter Respondent stated, "I will be exploring with my Congressional colleagues how best to move this idea through the appropriations process and am optimistic about securing funds for the plmming phase of the creation of the Center. I request your advice mId assistance conceming how to approach the donor community, particularly private and corporate foundations interested in education. I look fOlward to entering into a dialogue with you on the funding of the Rangel Center concept in the coming weeks atld months."

2. The June 2005 letter was sent to over 100 foundations, including, inter alia, the Verizon Foundation, New Yor1e Life Foundation, The Starr Foundation, Ford Foundation, AT&T Foundation, Citi Foundation, JPMorgml Chase Foundation, Merrill Lynch & Co. Foundation, MetLife Foundation, Bristol-Meyers Squibb Foundation, Goldman Sachs Foundation, and Wachovia Foundation.

3. The ltme 2005 letter was sent to several foundations that serve as the philanthropic arm of related corporations, including, inter alia, Verizon COlllinunications, Inc. and New York Life Insurance CompmlY.

27. Respondent personally signed each of the June 2005 letters.

28. The June 2005 letters were written on congressional letterhead bearing the words "United States Congress" and "House of Representatives." Enclosed with each of the letters was a 20-page glossy brochure that requested a gift of "$30,000,000 or $6,000,000/year for five years."

29. The June 2005 letters, with enclosed brochures, were sent through the United

States mail using Respondent's frank.

1. In June 2005, the Ford Foundation expressed to Respondent its interest in leanling more about the Rangel Center.

2. In August 2005, Respondent sent a letter to Roger Balmik of The Balmik Foundation regarding the Rangel Center (the "Bahnik letter").

3. The Bahnik letter was written on congressional letterhead. The letter stated, "[ w ]hile I am disappointed that you will not be able to fund the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service, I thank you for consideration ofmy request."

4. In August 2005, Respondent sent another round of letters (the "August 2005 letters") to foundations, which were similar in content to the June 2005 letters.

5. The August 2005 letters were written on congressional letterhead bearing the words "United States Congress" and "House of Representatives." Enclosed with each letter was a "presentation."

6. In September 2005, Respondent sent a letter to Senator Robert Byrd seeking an earmark in the amount of $3 million in order "to launch the Charles B. Rangel Center at the City College of the City University of New York."

7. In September 2005, Respondent sent a letter to Donald Trump (the "Trump letter") requesting a meeting to discuss the Rangel Center.

8. The Trump letter was sent on congressional letterhead bearing a substantial portion ofthe Great Seal ofthe United States and the words "House of Representatives."

38. In September 2005, Respondent sent letters to the Carnegie Corporation of New

York and the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation (the "September 2005 letters"), which were similar in content to the June 2005 letters.

1. The September 2005 letters were sent on congressional letterhead bearing a substantial portion of the Great Seal of the United States and the words "House of Representatives." Enclosed with each letter was a "presentation."

2. In September 2005, a meeting occUlTed between Respondent, representatives of the Ford Foundation, and CCNY officials.

3. In December 2005, CCNY submitted a proposal to the Ford Foundation (the "December 2005 Ford Foundation proposal") regarding a potential contribution to the Rangel Center.

4. The December 2005 Ford FOUlldation proposal stated that "City College anticipates that the United States Congress will suppOli this initiative with a seed grant."

5. The Ford Foundation tentatively scheduled a lUllcheon for other foundations regarding the Rangel Center for May 5, 2006.

6. In March 2006, the Ford Foundation postponed the luncheon due to concerns about the lack of funding, including congressional appropriations, for the Rangel Center.

7. In March 2006, Respondent sent letters to members of the Subcommittee on Transpoliation, Treasury and Housing and Urban Development requesting earmarks in the amoUllt of $6 million "to help establish a Center for Public Service at the City College of New York in my Congressional District."

8. In March 2006, Respondent sent letters to members of the SubcOlmnittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education requesting earmarks in the amount of $6

million to "help establish a Center for Public Service at the City College of New York in my

Congressional District."

1. In March 2006, Respondent sent letters to members of the Senate seeking support for an earmark in the amount of $6 million "to help establish a Center for Public Service at the City College of New York in my Congressional District."

2. In early 2006, Respondent suggested that CCNY officials contact AIG regarding the Rangel Center.

3. In July 2006, Respondent sent another letter (the "July 2006 letters") to approximately 47 ofthe foundations he previously solicited, including the Ford Foundation.

4. The July 2006 letters were prepared by Respondent's staff. This work was done on property of the House of Representatives, on official House time, and with the use of official House resources.

5. The July 2006 letters were also written on congressional letterhead bearing the words "United States Congress" and "House of Representatives." The letters infonned potential donors that Respondent had secured eannarks of $3.6 million for the Charles B. Rangel Center project.

52. Respondent personally signed each of the July 2006 letters.

1. As of July 2006, Respondent had secured, in 2005, one eannark in the amount of $445,000 for the Rangel Center.

2. As of July 2006, earmarks in the total amount of $3,150,000 for the Rangel Center for fiscal year 2007 were included in appropriations bills coming out of the respective subcommittees of jurisdiction. Those eannarks were ultimately not included in any appropriations bills for fiscal year 2007.

3. In September 2006, Respondent met with CCNY officials and Eugene Isenberg, CEO of Nabors Industries, in the offices of Robert Morgenthau, then District Attomey for New York County to discuss the Rangel Center.

4. In November 2006, Isenberg pledged a personal contribution of $500,000 to the Rangel Center. Nabors Industries pledged a matching contribution of $500,000.

5. In February 2007, Respondent met with Eugene Isenberg and KelU1eth Kies, a federally-registered lobbyist, at the Carlyle Hotel in New York. They discussed tile issue of retroactivity of tax provisions related to inverted companies.

6. In June 2007, Respondent met with Eugene Isenberg at Respondent's office to again discuss the issue ofretroactivity of tax provisions related to inverted companies.

7. In October 2006, CCNY officials represented to the Ford Fonndation that tiley had obtained "the seed money the Congressman promised."

8. In October 2006, the Ford Foundation encouraged CCNY to submit a proposal for $1 million to fund academic programs at the Rangel Center.

9. In January 2007, the Ford Foundation hosted a luncheon (the "Ford Foundation lunch") to bring together Respondent and CCNY officials with other potential donors to tile Rangel Center.

10. Respondent made a presentation about the Rangel Center at the Ford Foundation lunch.

11. Other potential donors that attended the Ford Foundation lunch included, inter alia, Verizon Foundation, New York Community Trust, and Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

12. In March 2007, the Ford Foundation approved a grant in the amount of $1,000,000 for the Rangel Center.

13. In March 2007, Respondent sent letters to Donald Trump, David Rockefeller, and Maurice "Hank" Greenberg (the "March 2007 letters") requesting meetings to discuss the Rangel Center.

14. The March 2007 letters were sent on congressional letterhead bearing a substantial portion of the Great Seal of the United States and the words "House of Representatives. "

67. Respondent personally signed each of the March 2007 letters.

1. The March 2007 letters were prepared by Respondent's staff. This work was done on property of the House of Representatives, on official House time, and with the use of official House resources.

2. In March 2007, Respondent wrote a letter to the Chair of the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education requesting earmarks in the amount of $6 million "to help establish a Center for Public Service at the City College of New York in my Congressional District."

3. In March 2007, Respondent wrote a letter to the Chair of the Subconnnittee on TranspOliation and Housing and Urban Development requesting an eannark "to make structural and rehabilitation work a [sic] Center for Public Service."

4. An eannark in the amount of approximately $245,000 for the City College of New York for "the planning, design, construction, renovation and buildout of a multipurpose educational facility" was included in the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-161, 121 Stat 1844 (2007).

5. An eannark in the amount of approximately $1.915 million for "the City College of New York for the Charles B. Rangel Center to prepare individuals for careers in public

service, which may include establishing an endowment, library, and archives for such center" was included in the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-161, 121 Stat. 1844 (2007).

1. In May 2007, Respondent spoke with Melvin NOlTis, a fonner House employee in Respondent's district office. NOlTis was then working as a New York state lobbyist for Verizon Communications, Inc. Respondent requested an update on the status of the Verizon Foundation donation to the Rangel Center.

2. In June 2007, Respondent spoke with George Nichols, a federally-registered lobbyist for New York Life Insurance Corporation, at a breakfast campaign fundraiser. Respondent requested that New York Life consider contributing to the Rangel Center.

3. On June 4,2007, Respondent met with Hank Greenberg, Chainnan of the Board ofthe StalT Foundation regarding a possible donation to the Rangel Center.

4. On June 12, 2007, the StalT Foundation approved a grant to the Rangel Center in the amount of $5,000,000.

5. In August 2007, Verizon Foundation approved a grant to the Rangel Center in the amount of $500,000. NOlTis infonned Respondent that the grallt had been approved.

6. In APlil 2008, Respondent met with CCNY officials and AIG officials (the "AIG meeting"), including Edward "Ned" Cloonan, a federally-registered lobbyist, regarding the Rangel Center. The briefing memo prepared for Respondent by CCNY stated the objective of the meeting was to "close $1 OM gift for the Rangel Center to create AIG Hal1."

7. At the AIG meeting, a potential donation to the Rangel Center was discussed. AIG raised concems about a potential donation, including the potential headline risk. Respondent asked AIG, at least twice, what was necessary to get this done.

8. On numerous occasions during 2005 through 2008, Respondent attended several meetings with CCNY officials and potential donors. These potential donors included Eugene Isenberg, Hank Greenberg, David Rockefeller, Donald Trump, the Ford Foundation, and AIG.

81. In addition to the contributions noted above, the following entities and individuals

solicited by Respondent made pledges and contlibutions to the Rangel Center:

1) Rhodebeck Chalitable Fund ($25,000); 2) David Rockefeller ($100,000); 3) New York Community Trust ($130,000); and 4) Rockefeller Brothers Fund ($50,000).

1. On numerous occasions during 2005 through 2008, Respondent and his staff used official House resources, including telephones, emails, and facsimile machines, to communicate with CCNY and others regarding fundraising for the Rangel Center.

2. During the relevant period, George Dalley, Jim Capel, and Dan Berger were House employees on Respondent's personal staff. Jon Sheiner was a House employee on the Ways and Means Committee staff.

3. During the relevant period, pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, the duties of the Joint COimnittee on Taxation were the following: (1) to investigate the operation and effects of internal revenue taxes and the administration of such taxes; (2) to investigate measures and methods for the simplification of such taxes; (3) to malce reports to the House Committee on Ways and Means and the Senate Committee on Finance (or to the House and the Senate) on the results of such investigations and studies and to make recommendations; and (4) to review any proposed refund or credit of income or estate and gift taxes or certain other taxes in excess of $2,000,000, as set forth in § 6405 of the Internal Revenue Code.



Click here for Part II
Click here for Part III