What do you get when you mix an arrogant lifetime politician on trial for ethics violations with a dash of indignation over the fact that he doesn't have an attorney despite never being denied the opportunity to retain one? Answer: a theatrical and incoherent argument based on a faulty premise followed by the departure of the politician on trial. That's what happened in the trial of Registered socialist congressman and member of the Congressional Black Caucus, Charlie Rangel (D-NY).
Take note when Rangel talks about why he doesn't have counsel. It's too expensive, he can't afford it, and none of the multiple attorneys he knows personally are willing to take the case on ethical and legal grounds. Translation: they won't do it if they don't get paid and Charlie seems to be a little light on cash. Welcome to the conundrum so many of the "little people" face on a daily basis, Charlie. At the end of this clip, you will see G.K. Butterfield attempt to defend Rangel's incoherent argument. Before you ask why, know that he is also a member of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), though NOT one of the 30 members of the 42 member group registered as a socialist.
Can you believe this guy was re-elected earlier this month by a wide margin? His constituents are either socialists or high.
Via MediaIte:
No comments:
Post a Comment