The Barber Shoppe Gazette: Democrat

Showing posts with label Democrat. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

Illegals Become Repeat Criminals

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION & POLITICAL CORRUPTION / DEMOCRAT & REPUBLICAN IMMIGRATION POLICIES PERPETUATE INCREASED CRIME BY ILLEGALS IN U.S. CITIES

Washington Times

Smiley Flag Waver Of the 100 selected aliens, 73 had an average of six arrests each after being released from custody. They were arrested, collectively, 429 times on 878 charges, ranging from traffic violations and trespassing to drug crimes, burglary, robbery, assault and weapons violations.

Investigators identified an official "sanctuary" policy for two jurisdictions that received at least $1 million in SCAAP funding: Oregon, which received $3.4 million, and the city and county of San Francisco, which received $1.1 million and has designated itself a "city and county of refuge."

The audit defined "sanctuary" as a jurisdiction that may have state laws, local ordinances or departmental policies limiting the role of local authorities in the enforcement of immigration laws.

Nation / Politics

Illegals Become Repeat Criminals

~ By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
January 9, 2007

Criminal aliens set free on the streets of America -- instead of being deported after serving their time -- are being rearrested as many as six more times by U.S. authorities, according to a government audit released yesterday.

But the Justice Department's Office of Inspector General said it did not know how many of 262,105 illegals in the audit, who had been charged with a crime and then released, had been rearrested.

All logos, trademarks and postings on this site are property of their respective owner(s).

Send A Link For This Article To A Friend

Send an e-mail message with a link to this article to anyone/everyone in your address book. Click on e-mail [envelope] icon, below

Monday, January 08, 2007

Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians

POLITICS / TEN MOST WANTED CORRUPT POLITICIANS IN 2006

Judicial watch

Smiley Flag Waver “This list shows public corruption is endemic to our nation’s capital and that the anti-corruption work of Judicial Watch is needed more than ever,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The list could be much longer, as there are far too many politicians who abuse the public trust and place themselves above the law.”

For Immediate Release

Dec 21, 2006

Contact: Press Office
202-646-5188

Judicial Watch Announces List of Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians” for 2006

List Also Includes 6 "Dishonorable Mentions"

(Washington, DC) -- Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released its 2006 list of Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians.” The list, in alphabetical order, includes:

1. Jack Abramoff, Former Lobbyist -- Abramoff is at the center of a massive public corruption investigation by the Department of Justice that, in the end, could involve as many as a dozen members of Congress. Abramoff pleaded guilty to conspiracy, fraud and a host of other charges on January 3, 2006, and was sent to prison in November to serve a five-year, 10-month sentence for defrauding banks of $23 million in Florida in 2000.

2. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) -- In January 2006, Hillary Clinton’s fundraising operation was fined $35,000 by the Federal Election Commission for failing to accurately report more than $700,000 in contributions to Clinton’s Senate 2000 campaign. New information also surfaced in 2006 raising more questions about Hillary and her brother Anthony Rodham’s connection to the Clinton Pardongate scandal, where presidential pardons were allegedly traded in exchange for cash and other favors.

3. Former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-CA) -- In November 2005, Cunningham pleaded guilty to federal charges of conspiracy to commit bribery, mail fraud, wire fraud, and tax evasion. He was sentenced to 8 years, four months in prison and ordered to pay $1.8 million in restitution in March 2006.

4. Former Rep. Tom Delay (R-TX) -- Tom DeLay, who was forced to step down from his position as House Majority Leader and then resign from Congress, decided in 2006 not to run for re-election. Congressman DeLay has been embroiled in a series of scandals from bribery to influence peddling, and was indicted twice by grand juries in Texas.

5. Former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) -- Foley left the House in disgrace after news broke that he had been sending predatory homosexual emails to a House page. A recent House Ethics Committee report indicated that Republican leaders knew about Foley’s dangerous behavior, but failed to take action. Democrats, meanwhile, shopped the story to the press to influence the elections. Outrageously, the Committee recommended no punishment for those involved.

6. Rep. Denny Hastert (R-IL) -- In addition to mishandling the Foley scandal, outgoing House Speaker Dennis Hastert allowed House ethics process to grind to a halt on his watch. Gary Condit, Cynthia McKinney, William Jefferson, John Conyers, Tom Delay, Duke Cunningham, Jim McDermott, Patrick Kennedy are examples of alleged wrongdoers who faced little-to-no ethics enforcement in the House.

7. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) -- Hastings is one of only six federal judges to be removed from office through impeachment and has accumulated staggering liabilities ranging from $2,130,006 to $7,350,000. Hastings was “next in line” for Chairmanship of the House Select Committee on Intelligence until a wave of protest forced Nancy Pelosi to select another candidate. Nonetheless, Hastings is expected to continue to serve on the Intelligence Committee.

8. Rep. William “Dollar Bill” Jefferson (D-LA) -- Jefferson is alleged to have accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes to help broker high-tech business deals in Nigeria. According to press reports, he was also caught on tape discussing the deals, while an FBI search of his home uncovered $90,000 in cash stuffed in his freezer.

9. Former Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) -- Ohio Republican Congressman Bob Ney resigned in early November 2006, three weeks after pleading guilty for accepting bribes from an Indian casino in exchange for legislative favors. Ney was the first congressman to be convicted of a crime in the web of scandals involving former lobbyist Jack Abramoff and is expected to serve a jail sentence.

10. Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) -- Senator Reid came under fire in 2006 for failing to properly report to Congress a $700,000 land deal. Reid also accepted more than $30,000 of Abramoff-tainted money allegedly in return for his ''cooperation'' in matters related Nevada Indian gaming.

Dishonorable Mentions Include:

1. Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) -- According to complaints released by the House Ethics Committee recently, aides to Representative John Conyers (D-MI) alleged their former boss repeatedly violated House ethics rules, forcing them to serve as his personal servants, valets, and as campaign staff while on the government payroll.

2. Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) -- In May 2006, Kennedy crashed his car into a Capitol Hill barricade at nearly 3 a.m. in the morning. Kennedy blamed the incident on a reaction to prescription pills, but officers at the scene said he smelled of alcohol. Nonetheless, they escorted him home rather than arresting him.

3. Former Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) -- McKinney assaulted a Capitol Hill police officer in April after refusing to go through a metal detector. While McKinney was never forced to answer in a court of law for her behavior, she lost her bid for re-election in 2006.

4. Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) -- Iraq war critic John Murtha was incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s first choice for House Majority Leader despite the ethical skeletons in his closet. Murtha is an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1980 “Abscam” scandal, which included the arrest and convictions of a senator and six congressmen. Murtha, whose current ethics continue to be questioned, lost his bid for Majority Leader to Maryland Democrat Steny Hoyer.

5. Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) -- News reports surfaced in 2006 that Illinois Senator Barak Obama entered into an unusual land deal with a now-indicted political fundraiser, Tony Rezko. The complicated real estate transaction occurred when it was widely known that Rezko was under federal investigation in a political corruption scandal.

6. David Safavian, Former Bush Administration Official -- Safavian, the former White House Chief of Procurement and former Chief of Staff for the General Services Administration, was indicted on September 19, 2006 on five counts of lying about his dealings with former lobbyist Jack Abramoff and obstructing a Senate investigation of his dealings. Safavian resigned from his White House position three days prior to his arrest.

“This list shows public corruption is endemic to our nation’s capital and that the anti-corruption work of Judicial Watch is needed more than ever,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The list could be much longer, as there are far too many politicians who abuse the public trust and place themselves above the law.”

Judicial Watch, Inc.

Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. Through its educational endeavors, Judicial Watch advocates high standards of ethics and morality in our nation’s public life and seeks to ensure that political and judicial officials do not abuse the powers entrusted to them by the American people. Judicial Watch fulfills its educational mission through litigation, investigations and public outreach.

All logos, trademarks and postings on this site are property of their respective owner(s).

Send A Link For This Article To A Friend

Send an e-mail message with a link to this article to anyone/everyone in your address book. Click on e-mail [envelope] icon, below

Saturday, January 06, 2007

Will Proposed Ethics Reforms Make A Difference?

POLITICS / PROMISES OF ETHICS REFORMS

Judicial Watch

Smiley Flag Waver Can we really trust members of Congress to enforce these new rules when they openly flouted the old ones without consequence?

January 5, 2007

From the Desk of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton:

Will Proposed Ethics Reforms Make A Difference?

As the 109^th Congress begins, Democrats at least appear to be making an attempt to institute ethics reform in the House of Representatives. A new package of rules unveiled by the Democrats yesterday target financed travel, gifts and earmarks (special interest funding “hidden” in other legislation). It was passed by a vote of 430 to 1. Overall, the rule changes seem to be a step forward, but without any ethics enforcement to back them up, the new rules may mean nothing in the end.

The rules changes mean:

House members will no longer be allowed to travel on lobbyists’ or their clients’ dollars, and all travel financed by outside groups will be subject to pre-approval by the House Ethics Committee. Also, all travel on corporate jets will be set at market value cost.

Representatives will also be subject to a total gift ban, prohibiting them from accepting gifts from lobbyists. The previous ethics rules placed a $50 cap on all gifts, leaving lobbyists open to offering sports tickets and other gifts often purchased for less-than face value in order to evade the cap.

With respect to earmarks, committees would have to make the requests public and identify the requesting lawmaker under the new rules. Other legislative ethics changes include shorter voting windows, the inability to revise already-signed conference reports, and the inclusion of elected members into conference committee meetings.

That’s all well and good, but can we really trust members of Congress to enforce these new rules when they openly flouted the old ones without consequence?

Gary Condit, Cynthia McKinney, William Jefferson, Duke Cunningham, Tom Delay, Jim McDermott, and Patrick Kennedy, and Alan Mollohan (a former co-chair of the Ethics Committee!) are examples of alleged wrongdoers who faced little-to-no ethics enforcement in the House despite evidently violating rules already on the books. Just last week, the House Ethics Committee let Michigan Congressman John Conyers off the hook even though he violated House rules by forcing his staff members to serve as his personal servants, valets, and as campaign staff while on the government payroll. And earlier this week, only two congressmen were fined for violating travel rules, despite the fact that dozens of members had flouted the rules. How much has changed in a few days?

Speaker Nancy Pelosi has promised to lead “the most ethical Congress in history,” which is eerily similar to Bill Clinton’s hollow pledge to run the "most ethical administration in the history of the Republic.” (We all know how that turned out.) Given the fact that Pelosi and company are at least half responsible for the breakdown of the ethics process in Washington, it’s going to take more than a few rule changes to convince me they’re serious about cleaning up corruption on Capitol Hill. The sheer number of seemingly corrupt members still in the House is staggering. Let’s hope that the Justice Department continues aggressive investigations and prosecution of corrupt members of Congress.

Tom Fitton
President

Judicial Watch is a non-partisan, educational foundation organized under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue code. Judicial Watch is dedicated to fighting government and judicial corruption and promoting a return to ethics and morality in our nation's public life. To make a tax-deductible contribution in support of our efforts, click here.

All logos, trademarks and postings on this site are property of their respective owner(s).

Send A Link For This Article To A Friend

Send an e-mail message with a link to this article to anyone/everyone in your address book. Click on e-mail [envelope] icon, below

Barack Obama's Whitewater?

POLITICS / BARACK OBAMA'S WHITEWATER?

Judicial Watch

Smiley Flag Waver Press reports suggest Rezko has raised as much as $60,000 in campaign contributions for Obama. What has he received in return for his generosity? (Such relationships are never one-sided.) New revelations surfaced this week indicating that Rezko was successful in persuading Obama to award a coveted internship with his Senate office to a Rezko business associate. (Incidentally, the business associate, John Armanda, has donated $11,500 to Obama’s campaigns.) Is there more to this story?

January 5, 2007

From the Desk of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton:

Barack Obamas's Whitewater?

Washington pundits are excited for a potential battle for the Democratic nomination for president between the “fresh-faced” freshman Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, and the consummate political insider, New York Senator Hillary Clinton. However, new revelations about a corruption scandal involving Obama suggest he may have more in common with Hillary than he would like to admit.

As you may recall, in November, press reports surfaced regarding a questionable land deal between Obama and Antoin “Tony” Rezko, an indicted political fundraiser. The long and the short of it is that Obama approached Rezko with the idea to simultaneously purchase adjoining lots in Southside Chicago. Rezko obliged. Obama obtained his lot for a reduced price. Rezko later sold a portion of his property to Obama. All of this took place while Rezko was the subject of a federal corruption investigation.

Political handicappers have begun to assess what these revelations might mean to Obama’s presidential aspirations, but personally, I’m not interested in the political fallout. The salient question ought to be what do Obama’s dealings with Rezko tell us, if anything, about the Obama’s ethics. Here are some thoughts.

First, Obama’s dealings with Rezko reveal a politician oblivious to the expectations of at least the appearance of integrity for those in public office. At the time Obama entered into his dubious land deal, it was widely known that Rezko was the subject of a federal investigation for allegedly trying to collect nearly $6 million in kickbacks from government deals. Obama and Rezko have been “friends” since 1990. Obama knew about Rezko’s shady reputation and ought to have avoided the appearance of impropriety.

Second, Obama’s dealings with Rezko suggest, at least, that Obama might be the kind of politician willing to peddle his influence. The Chicago Tribune reported that Obama purchased his land for $300,000 less than the asking price, while Rezko’s wife paid full price for the adjoining lot from the same owner. Did Mrs. Rezko partially subsidize the purchase of Obama’s new home? And what of the subsequent sale of a section of the Rezko property to Obama shortly thereafter?

Press reports suggest Rezko has raised as much as $60,000 in campaign contributions for Obama. What has he received in return for his generosity? (Such relationships are never one-sided.) New revelations surfaced this week indicating that Rezko was successful in persuading Obama to award a coveted internship with his Senate office to a Rezko business associate. (Incidentally, the business associate, John Armanda, has donated $11,500 to Obama’s campaigns.) Is there more to this story?

Third, Obama’s dealings with Rezko suggest that Obama may be willing to cast aside his professed sense of ethics for personal financial gain. Obama, through his dealings with an indicted political fundraiser, was able to purchase his luxurious home at a cut-rate price and expand his property. Obama acknowledged the deal was a mistake, but only after the media made hay of it.

In 1992, the Clintons came into the White House despite evidence of their shady real estate dealings in Arkansas, a scandal known as “Whitewater,” setting the tone for what would be the most corrupt presidency in our nation’s history. Is this Rezko land deal Barack Obama’s Whitewater? Let’s find out sooner than later.

Tom Fitton
President

All logos, trademarks and postings on this site are property of their respective owner(s).

Send A Link For This Article To A Friend

Send an e-mail message with a link to this article to anyone/everyone in your address book. Click on e-mail [envelope] icon, below

Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Housing Market Continues To Collapse

HOUSING - REAL ESTATE / HOUSING MARKET CONTINUES TO COLLAPSE - POSSIBLE FINANCIAL MELTDOWN FORESEEN

The Washington Times

Communist Democrat's Socialist Economics 101 ...

Smiley Flag Waver

Despite the growing dangers, substantial risks to the economy and financial markets from the deepening recession in the housing market, and possible mortgage-finance crisis, Democrat Rep. Barney Frank, incoming chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, welcomes the housing market crisis, indicating that recent large drops in home prices make housing more affordable for young people and minority buyers.

"... If a few speculators get burned, that's just icing on the cake," says Frank.

Risky Mortgages Imperil Market

~ By Patrice Hill
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
December 12, 2006

The risk of a financial crisis is growing as home prices continue to fall and questionable mortgages made in the past two years go into default, finance officials warned yesterday.

Banks and mortgage brokers have been passing along to unwary investors as much as $600 billion a year in risky mortgages they made through untested channels in the junk-bond market. That raises the threat of a financial crisis beyond the ability of the Federal Reserve to remedy, said Lewis Ranieri, the Wall Street guru who is widely credited with creating the multitrillion-dollar market for mortgage-backed securities in the 1980s and 1990s.

Bank regulators told the National Housing Forum here yesterday that they have found major banks punting to investors questionable mortgages they could not legally keep in their own loan portfolios. Mr. Ranieri said brokers on Wall Street have raised the risks by repackaging the mortgages in deceptive and opaque ways so that the small investors and foreigners who buy them are unable to understand the risks.

"No securities market can stand if we do not have true disclosure, and we do not have true disclosure" of the growing risks of exotic mortgages whose payments can double overnight and force buyers into default, said Mr. Ranieri. "This stuff doesn't just get sold to [professional] money managers. It gets sold to the public and to foreign investors who don't have a clue what to look for."

Allen Sinai, chief global economist at Decision Economics; Richard A. Brown, chief economist at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.; and several other economists and regulators attending the forum also emphasized the substantial risks to the economy and financial markets from the deepening recession in the housing market and possible mortgage-finance crisis.

Despite the growing dangers, Rep. Barney Frank, incoming chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, indicated he saw no reason for federal legislation to better regulate the mortgage markets to prevent a possible financial meltdown.

He said he welcomes recent large drops in home prices because it makes housing more affordable for young people and minority buyers.

"Housing suffered from irrational exuberance" during the first part of the decade, though it fell short of being a full-blown bubble, the Massachusetts Democrat said. "The end result of a 10 percent drop in many parts of the country will be a more rational housing market. ... If a few speculators get burned, that's just icing on the cake."

Mr. Frank noted that a few years ago, consumers were expected to devote about 25 percent of their income to house payments. Today, however, consumers expect their homes to contribute 25 percent to their income -- through cash-out refinancings and other techniques that have come into vogue, he said. "Let's get back to the normal situation."

A top national bank regulator said many banks are continuing to offer consumers loans they cannot afford when their teaser interest rates expire and payments rise to reflect market conditions. Some banks are selling the questionable loans to investors to avoid keeping them in their portfolios, where they would be unacceptable to regulators, said Kathryn Dick, deputy comptroller at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

Consumers also may be unaware of the risks inherent in these adjustable-payment loans, she said, because they are not getting full disclosure or are getting information too late to prevent them from closing on the loans.

Mr. Ranieri said the riskiest loans were made in the past two years as banks and brokers strived to help consumers qualify for high-priced homes that were beyond their reach. Loan innovations and loose lending standards have continued despite efforts by a group of five federal banking regulators to limit such loans, he said.

"We have a tremendously powerful mortgage-backed securities market. This market is unfettered in its enthusiasm and unchecked by regulation," Mr. Ranieri said. "The interagency task force can't touch it. The capital is coming from international markets."

Mr. Ranieri said that brokers are even bypassing the traditional market for mortgage-backed securities that he helped create. Instead, they are bundling the riskiest mortgages together and offering them as "collateralized debt obligations" on the corporate bond market. The offering documents often do not explain the serious risks involved with the mortgages in a declining housing market, he said.

One recent offering failed to disclose to investors that the homeowners not only were faced with high adjustable payments that they might have difficulty paying, but they had financed 100 percent of their purchase and had no equity in their houses -- something that greatly increases their likelihood of default.

Mr. Ranieri said the quality of loans has fallen so much recently that his firm has stopped buying whole mortgages for repackaging into mortgage-backed securities. He recently rejected some mortgages offered to the firm. He said he asked what the broker would do with the loans, and was told they would be sold to investors in the junk-bond market.

The only federal regulator with jurisdiction over the burgeoning market for such securities is the Securities and Exchange Commission, Mr. Ranieri said. But the SEC seems to be largely unaware of what's going on in the mortgage market, he said.

E-Mail To A Friend Send A Link For This Article To A Friend

Send an e-mail message with a link to this article to anyone/everyone in your address book. Click on e-mail [envelope] icon, below

Friday, December 08, 2006

Pelosi Faces Ethics Test In "Culture Of Corruption"

POLITICS / RADICAL LIBERAL EXTREMIST PELOSI EXPANDING DEMOCRAT'S "CULTURE OF CORRUPTION"

CNS News

Smiley Flag Waver Rep. Alan Mollohan of West Virginia is under investigation by the F.B.I. regarding accusations that he funneled taxpayer money into nonprofit organizations he helped to set up and which support him with campaign contributions.

He is in line to head the panel that determines the FBI's budget.

"Somebody under investigation by the FBI shouldn't have any leverage over his investigators," Boehm said. "If Pelosi or the new majority in Congress doesn't understand that, then they don't have a clue as to what the 'culture of corruption' is because it's staring them in the face."

Politics

Pelosi Faces Ethics 'Litmus Test' With Mollohan Case, Analyst Says

~ By Randy Hall
CNSNews.com Staff Writer/Editor
December 08, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - For the third time in as many weeks, House Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi faces what one analyst called a "litmus test" of her stated commitment to ethics, as a congressman whose finances are being examined by the Federal Bureau of Investigation is in line to head the panel that determines the FBI's budget.

Rep. Alan Mollohan of West Virginia is the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee's subcommittee for Science, State, Justice, Commerce and Related Agencies, which oversees the Department of Justice, including the FBI. Other than Mollohan, no Democrat has announced an intention to seek the chairmanship.

However, the FBI is investigating the 63-year-old lawmaker regarding accusations that he funneled taxpayer money into nonprofit organizations he helped to set up and which support him with campaign contributions.

Ken Boehm, chairman of the conservative National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) told Cybercast News Service on Thursday that Mollohan's leadership aspirations were a "litmus test" of how serious Pelosi was when she and fellow Democrats campaigned this year on "draining the swamp" in Congress of what they called a GOP "culture of corruption."

"Somebody under investigation by the FBI shouldn't have any leverage over his investigators," Boehm said. "If Pelosi or the new majority in Congress doesn't understand that, then they don't have a clue as to what the 'culture of corruption' is because it's staring them in the face."

Noting that Pelosi made ethics in government "the absolute, number one issue" in the Nov. 7 midterm elections, the NLPC chairman said her decision regarding Mollohan is "going to be pretty telling," especially since the speaker-designate has suffered two political setbacks in recent weeks.

On Nov. 16, Maryland Rep. Steny Hoyer was overwhelmingly voted in as the new majority leader despite Pelosi's efforts supporting Pennsylvania Rep. John Murtha for the post.

Murtha, whose war hero status and Abscam involvement came under scrutiny earlier, was supported by Pelosi because of what she called his "courageous leadership" in the national debate over the war in Iraq.

"Is that the type of person she wants as majority leader?" Boehm asked. "Apparently, her own caucus - by a vote of 149 to 86 - rejected that.

"If she can't sell her own caucus on putting a sleazy member of Congress into a position of authority, then how is she going to sell that [the Mollohan post] to the public? I don't think she will," Boehm added.

On Nov. 28, Pelosi announced she would not elevate Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.) - her original choice for chairman of the House Intelligence Committee - because of concerns over his impeachment while serving as a federal judge in 1989. Instead, she named Rep. Silvestre Reyes of Texas to the post.

Because of the Murtha and Hastings setbacks, Pelosi's decision on Mollohan will be "a big, underappreciated test" of her leadership, Boehm noted.

'Integrity versus corruption'

According to documents obtained by the NLPC, Mollohan and his wife, Barbara, reported under $550,000 in assets in 2000. That figure soared to more than $8 million just five years later.

On April 10, the NLPC accused the West Virginia Democrat of violating more than 250 House ethics rules.

Eleven days later, Pelosi announced that Mollohan would step down from the ethics committee while defending himself against the allegations.

On June 13, Mollohan filed two dozen corrections to his past six annual financial disclosure forms, asserting that his accountant had uncovered several unintentional errors. He attributed his substantial rise in assets to prudent real-estate investments.

However, Boehm said that the congressman had admitted to other ethical breaches as well.

Mollohan should not serve on the subcommittee that handles appropriations for the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the NLPC chairman said, because he "has a history of using earmarks in HUD to direct tens of millions of dollars to a group run by one of his business partners" who used to be a member of his staff.

"Wouldn't anybody who wants to 'drain the swamp,' as Nancy Pelosi has so elegantly put it, think that somebody who's shown time and again he'll abuse the appropriations process should be taken off the committee, and pronto?" Boehm asked.

Hoyer told reporters on Tuesday: "I don't have any thought that Mr. Mollohan ought to step down at this time."

The liberal group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has recommended that "no member under federal investigation be involved in the oversight or appropriations of any agency involved in investigating that member."

Boehm welcomed CREW's stance. "This shouldn't be a conservative-versus-liberal issue, a Republican-versus-Democrat issue. This is an issue of integrity versus corruption.

"The standard that Nancy Pelosi has set for the 110th Congress is that this is going to be the most ethical one ever," Boehm added.

"She is being called upon to use her position to make a decision, and the decision ought to be in favor of what's right and what's ethical and the way Congress can be, especially in light of the fact that that's been her mantra for the past year," Boehm said.

Calls seeking response from Pelosi and Mollohan were not returned by press time.