Cowardly Rangel seeks to blame his staff for ethical lapses

Once again a Democrat leader demonstrates the incredible hypocrisy for which that party and their media wing, the crumbling mainstream media, have become well known.

Charlie Rangel, in a demonstration of unethical behavior that can truly be called sorry, now rightly condemned by a House ethics committee chaired and controlled by his own party, for violations of House ethics rules, has thrown his staff under the bus in a blatant attempt to save his own, sorry, fat butt.

That is the equivalent of a Navy captain blaming the sinking of his ship on his enlisted crew or an Army general's blaming his troops on the ground for the loss of a battle. It is a despicable, save-your-own-ass action that has long been considered the epitome of dishonor. Military officers and NCO's know from early in their careers that the blame for failure of their subordinates falls fully on their shoulders and that to shirk that responsibility is the worst failure of honor a military leader can exhibit. It is a concept known as Command Responsibility which holds that the man in command is ultimately responsible for the misdeeds of his subordinates.

Regardless.

Rangel is a Korean combat veteran who left the Army as a staff sergeant, so he knows the rules and he knows the consequences of failure when one is in a leadership position. Yet here we have this senior, very powerful member of Congress, the federal body that exercises oversight and investigative powers for all misguided American military affairs, demonstrating quite clearly that he lacks the honor of the most junior military officer or NCO. This cowardly congressman, Rangel, hides cravenly under his desk and points fingers about his spacious offices, diverting blame to those who have served him well. What a guy, huh? What a concept of leadership Nancy Pelosi seeks to perpetuate, hmmm?

What Charlie fails to consider in claiming that his staff is responsible for any possible ethics violations because he knew nothing of the corporate sponsorships of his Caribbean junkets is the existence of a documented paper trail of staff memos to Charlie informing him of such.

What's his fallback defense, the dog ate his mail?

Sorry, Charlie...

Once again a Democrat leader demonstrates the incredible hypocrisy for which that party and their media wing, the crumbling mainstream media, have become well known.

Charlie Rangel, in a demonstration of unethical behavior that can truly be called sorry, now rightly condemned by a House ethics committee chaired and controlled by his own party, for violations of House ethics rules, has thrown his staff under the bus in a blatant attempt to save his own, sorry, fat butt.

That is the equivalent of a Navy captain blaming the sinking of his ship on his enlisted crew or an Army general's blaming his troops on the ground for the loss of a battle. It is a despicable, save-your-own-ass action that has long been considered the epitome of dishonor. Military officers and NCO's know from early in their careers that the blame for failure of their subordinates falls fully on their shoulders and that to shirk that responsibility is the worst failure of honor a military leader can exhibit. It is a concept known as Command Responsibility which holds that the man in command is ultimately responsible for the misdeeds of his subordinates.

Regardless.

Rangel is a Korean combat veteran who left the Army as a staff sergeant, so he knows the rules and he knows the consequences of failure when one is in a leadership position. Yet here we have this senior, very powerful member of Congress, the federal body that exercises oversight and investigative powers for all misguided American military affairs, demonstrating quite clearly that he lacks the honor of the most junior military officer or NCO. This cowardly congressman, Rangel, hides cravenly under his desk and points fingers about his spacious offices, diverting blame to those who have served him well. What a guy, huh? What a concept of leadership Nancy Pelosi seeks to perpetuate, hmmm?

What Charlie fails to consider in claiming that his staff is responsible for any possible ethics violations because he knew nothing of the corporate sponsorships of his Caribbean junkets is the existence of a documented paper trail of staff memos to Charlie informing him of such.

What's his fallback defense, the dog ate his mail?

Sorry, Charlie...