“I think most of us who really looked at all of the evidence of punishments meted out to others, we came to the conclusion that Charlie Rangel was put through an ordeal and not given a fair deal,” he said. “Barney Frank came up to me and said that what he had done was far worse than what Charlie did and he wasn’t censured.”
Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat, was reprimanded in 1990 over ethical violations related to his relationship with a male prostitute. An effort to censure him by then-Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) fell short.
Cleaver said he agreed with Rangel’s contention that political considerations were part of the reason for the votes against him, and Cleaver said that focus on politics is the kind of thing that keeps Congress from solving problems.
Two senior Democratic aides, meanwhile, said the votes of the Speaker’s top lieutenants helped doom the reprimand effort and exacerbated a rift between her and a key part of Pelosi’s liberal base of support.
“The negativity was palpable yesterday,” one aide said. “I’ve never felt that before.”
And while Pelosi did not vote or work votes — she passed the time staring up at the tote board — aides said that Members took cues based on how her lieutenants voted.
“The reality is the Caucus members know who the Speaker’s inner circle is, and when the Speaker’s lieutenants are voting early and against a reprimand, they are sending a message on behalf of Pelosi,” the aide said.
apparently, members of the ccbc are permitted to do whatever they want and never be accountable for their misdeeds.