Dem. Rep. Murtha Accused of Ethics Violation

We dont need no ethics. We're Dems.

Definitely uncalled for, and if true, should have repercussions for Rep Murtha.

Though I have to wonder...

It appears that Murtha threatened Rep Rogers because of an attempt to remove funding from Murtha's district. Vindictive revenge politics.

I've also read a few reports that Rep Rogers was pushing for the removal of specific funding because of Murtha's staunch anti-war stance. Vindictive revenge politics.

Now, if both were acting to extract damage to one's politics opponents via funding withdrawals, does one side really hold the high-ground?

Good points, Frostman. If this were a case of "I'll support your earmark if you support mine," it would be considered normal horsetrading. Having said that, a tip for Rep. Rogers: You are in the minority; get used to it. For the other guy: Murtha + Ethics = OXYMORON.

Roger that, FL next.

Remember how Bob Livingston almost became speaker of the House, but backed down. I'll bet you a case of Quaker State Oil, or Penzoil, that Murtha was the reason.

Jack the Stripper

An Democrat-passed ethics rule says House members are banned from blocking earmarks based on Member votes.

Murtha tried adorning an intelligence bill with $23 million for National Drug Intelligence Center in Johnstown, PA. Michigan Republican Mike Rogers questioned the earmark, proposed using that $23 million for other intelligence work.

Murtha: "I hope you don't have any earmarks in defense appropriations bills.... [T]hey are gone. [Y]ou will not get any earmarks now and forever."

Source: Wall Street Journal, May 22, 2007; Page A14

http://youtube.com/watch?v=q63_YGntnj0

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0Sky928j2nw

Democrats Find Ethics Overhaul Elusive in House

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
Published: May 23, 2007

WASHINGTON, May 22 —House Democratic leaders pushing a promised lobbying overhaul are facing lawmakers’ resistance....

Democratic leaders scrapped a promise to double current one-year lobbying ban after lawmakers leave office. Now, they’re struggling to require lobbyists to disclose campaign contributions they collect/deliver to lawmakers.

Other House rules changes appear to have done little.... House Democrats voted along party lines Tuesday to block censure of...Murtha.., accused of violating an ethics rule prohibiting lawmakers from swapping pork for votes.

source

It's interesting that Murtha's ethics only became an issue after he came out against the Bush wars.

People like this don't go bad all of a sudden. If he's corrupt, which he undoubtably is, he should have gone to jail long, long ago.

So why didn't Republicans put him in jail when they were in the majority?

Simple. Both Republicans and Democrats consider public corruption an entitlement for the ruling class. Republicans tolerate Murtha & Jackson and putting their loot 'on ice'. Democrats tolerate Boehner passing out tobacco graft on the House floor and Duke Cunningham circulating his 'bribe menu.

Meanwhile the party parrots on both sides just cheer the criminals on to bigger and better scams -- acting like mongrel dogs underneath the dinner table, waiting for some scraps to fall on the floor.

"It's interesting that Murtha's ethics only became an issue after he came out against the Bush wars.

People like this don't go bad all of a sudden..."

True.
Murtha's problem with "ethics" has been festering since the ABSCAM days of the late 70's/early 80's.

Frostie...

Well said. I have to agree.

Resolution to rebuke Murtha dies in House
By Christina Bellantoni
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
May 23, 2007

All but two House Democrats backed Rep. John P. Murtha yesterday, killing a resolution that suggested he be reprimanded for threatening a Republican member over earmarks.

The House voted 219-189 without debate to kill a privileged resolution offered by Rep. Mike Rogers....
    
Mr. Murtha sat in the back of the House chamber during the vote, laughing and accepting pats and handshakes from at least two dozen Democrats.

source

PAGE ONE

MURTHA INC.
How Lawmaker Rebuilt Hometown on Earmarks

JOHNSTOWN, Pa. -- If John Murtha were a businessman, he'd be the biggest employer in town. Murtha has used his clout to create thousands of jobs and steer billions of dollars in federal spending to help his hometown recover from floods and the flight of its steelmakers.

In the 2008 military-spending bill Murtha has steered more taxpayer funds to his congressional district than any other member.

Johnstown's good fortune has come at the expense of taxpayers everywhere else.

Source: Wall Street Journal, By JOHN R. WILKE, October 30, 2007; Page A1

source

Great article; I'm glad you posted it Scott.

I can vouch for this being the Jack Murtha I knew, and who used DRS, mentioned in the article, to take a product line of our away and move it to Johnstown. Paul Magliachetti is a one time staffer who used his connections to Murtha to get rich shoveling taxpayer dollars to Johnstown.

The vilest people I met in my years dealing with Washington are the semi-anonymous "staffers" in the bowels of the capital who do the dirty work for the "members." They have outrageous power and arrogance, and usually transition into get rich operations like PMA.

I have briefed Murtha and his henchmen, and been to Johnstown to do it. That was the period in my career that did more to sour me on government than anything else in my lifetime.

And don't make the charge that I'm just picking on democrats. Anyone who does this is a crook in one way or another. You should read some of the bill language and "reports" that go with them.

I have often said that Murtha was at one time the most powerful man in Congress because of the discretionary dollars he controlled with an iron fist. He lost that post in 94 and became even more bitter than he was before. Now he has it back.

Anyone who uses the war-hero label to blow this stuff away is complicit in the crime.

Murtha is an idiot. I'm still waiting for him to apologize to the Haditha Marines.