Democrats Fear a Wider Black Caucus-Pelosi Rift

[babylonsister]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/04/AR2007060401664.html

Democrats Fear a Wider Black Caucus-Pelosi Rift

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 5, 2007; Page A04

Democratic leaders fear that Rep. William J. Jefferson's indictment yesterday on racketeering and bribery charges, coming exactly one year after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi engineered his ouster from the powerful Ways and Means Committee, could rekindle a smoldering dispute between the speaker and black lawmakers who were once pillars of her power.

For months, the Louisiana Democrat's mounting legal peril has bedeviled Democrats as they sought first to point to corruption as a tool to oust Republicans from control of Congress, then pressed for ethics and lobbying changes that they said would usher in a new era of clean politics on Capitol Hill. For every thrust Democrats made against the GOP, Republicans parried with Jefferson, saying problems in Congress were bipartisan.

Through it all, much of the Congressional Black Caucus has stood by Jefferson and against the Democratic leadership. And yesterday, Rep. Danny K. Davis (D-Ill.), a veteran caucus member, said it would be "as supportive of our colleague as possible, in terms of saying a person in America is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty."

Pelosi would not say what actions she would take, but she called the charges "extremely serious" and, if true, "an egregious and unacceptable abuse of public trust and power."

more...

[Vidar]

1. Good. The CBC has proven its mettle & Pelosi has & Pelosi has

proven her corruption.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

2. Umm...

The CBC are the ones standing up for the corrupt guy in this case. Not good.

[William769]

3. Depends on if he is found guilty or not.

[Benhurst]

4. Does "innocent until proven guilty" still hold in post-"Patriot"-Act America?

I fear it doesn't.

If he is guilty, I wish he would resign from the House. But if he maintains his innocence, I think the House should take no action, other than to remove him from leadership positions until the case is settled one way or the other.

Unlike Bush and Cheney, there is no question of his having lied and cheated himself into office.

[William769]

5. Isn't that what I said?

[Bullet1987]

6. Did the Rethugs abandon Hastert and others?

[William769]

7. What does that have to do with what I said?

[Renew Deal]

10. No, that's because they accept corruption.

[Benhurst]

9. Every response doesn't have to be a refutation.

Sometimes they are elaborations, although of late, in this contentious election atmosphere, most do tend to be refutations.

:hi:

[MadBadger]

8. In court it does, but not in the media, however

I find myself ready to convict no matter how wrong it is. That 90k in the freezer is just too much for me to explain away.

[bigtree]

11. If the CBC wants to drag themselves down with Jefferson that's their business

but an indictment is an indictment.

I would be pathetic if the CBC couldn't find anything more important to defend than Jefferson. What was good for Delay is certainly good enough for the Louisiana Democrat.