<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>No Agenda</title>
      <link>http://www.noagenda.org/</link>
      <description></description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 22:00:44 -0500</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/?v=3.2</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

            <item>
         <title>IRS Investigates Obama&apos;s Church Over Speech</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><A href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jlQQQuZKZmCSwpSPaZL-1qFIFX8QD8V2C8NO1">From the Associated Press</a>:<br />
<blockquote>The IRS is investigating the United Church of Christ over a speech Sen. Barack Obama gave at its national meeting last year after he became a candidate for president, the denomination said Tuesday.</p>

<p>Obama, an Illinois Democrat, belongs to the 1.2 million-member Protestant group through his Chicago congregation.</p>

<p>In a letter the denomination received Monday, the IRS said "reasonable belief exists" that the circumstances surrounding the speech violated restrictions on political activity for tax-exempt organizations. The denomination has denied any wrongdoing.</p>

<p>Obama, a member of Trinity United Church of Christ, spoke about faith and public life at the denomination's June 2007 General Synod in Hartford, Conn.</p>

<p>The IRS said in the letter that it was concerned about articles posted on the church's Web site and on other sites stating that Obama had addressed nearly 10,000 people at the event. The agency also said Obama volunteers had staffed campaign tables "outside the center to promote his campaign."</blockquote></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2008/02/irs_investigates_obamas_church.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2008/02/irs_investigates_obamas_church.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 22:00:44 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>CREW Files Ethics Complaint Against Senator Landrieu</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>It's very rare for liberals to recognize or even admit the existence of corruption in their own party.. So, when a liberal watchdog group decides to go after you, it is safe to say they're doing so only because the evidence is so ironclad that to ignore it would severely damage their claim of being non-partisan.</p>

<p>So, when <a href="http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/30690">a liberal ethics watchdog group files an ethics complaint against a Democrat</a>, the evidence obviously speaks for itself:<blockquote>Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) today sent a complaint to the Department of Justice, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District for Louisiana and the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, asking for an investigation into whether Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) violated federal bribery law by including a $2 million earmark for Voyager Expanded Learning in a bill a mere four days after receiving $30,000 in campaign contributions from company executives and their relatives. CREW also asked the Senate Ethics Committee to investigate the matter.</blockquote></p>

<p>Landrieu, unable to ignore the complaint, <a href="http://landrieu.senate.gov/~landrieu/releases/08/2008108A27.html">issued a response</a>, even providing  documents (<a href="http://landrieu.senate.gov/news/Voyager.pdf">available on her website in PDF form</a>.) Yet, even CREW saw that the documents only support their claim.</p>

<blockquote>“Sen. Landrieu’s response to CREW’s Department of Justice and Ethics Committee complaints fails to address the key allegation: that she inserted an earmark in return for campaign contributions. According to a document just provided by Sen. Landrieu, the District of Columbia apparently asked the senator on April 25, 2001 to include an earmark for Voyager in the D.C. appropriations bill. Nevertheless, by September 24, 2001, when a House committee included a $1 million earmark for Voyager, the company still had not attracted a Senate sponsor. Sen. Landrieu has not explained why she didn’t follow through on the District’s request until November 6, 2001, four days after Mr. Best and his associates contributed $30,000 to the senator’s campaign.”</blockquote>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2008/01/crew_ethics_complaint_landrieu.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2008/01/crew_ethics_complaint_landrieu.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jan 2008 19:24:59 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Rep. Filner&apos;s Actions Probed By Ethics Committee</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2007/09/house_ethics_opens_probe_into.html">From the <i>Washington Post</i></a>:<blockquote>The House ethics committee announced today that it will investigate Rep. Bob Filner (D-Calif.) for his alleged assault and battery of airline employees at <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/06/AR2007090601856.html">Dulles International Airport on Aug. 19</a>.</p>  <p>Filner, who faces a trial on the misdemeanor charges beginning Oct. 2, is accused of storming into a United Airlines baggage office, pushing his way past other customers and shoving a female employee.</p>  <p>Filner, the chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee, issued a statement in late August explaining that the incident was one of "much misunderstanding" after a delayed flight and <a href="http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2007/08/filner_ends_silence_on_assault.html">then delayed luggage arrival.</a></blockquote></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2007/09/rep_filners_actions_probed_by.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2007/09/rep_filners_actions_probed_by.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2007 20:23:02 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Jane Harman Under Investigation</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><A href="http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1549069,00.html">TIME Magazine reveals</a>:<blockquote>Did a Democratic member of Congress improperly enlist the support of a major pro-Israel lobbying group to try to win a top committee assignment? That's the question at the heart of an ongoing investigation by the FBI and Justice Department prosecutors, who are examining whether Rep. Jane Harman of California and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) may have violated the law in a scheme to get Harman reappointed as the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, according to knowledgeable sources in and out of the U.S. government.</p>

<p>The sources tell TIME that the investigation by Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which has simmered out of sight since about the middle of last year, is examining whether Harman and AIPAC arranged for wealthy supporters to lobby House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi on Harman's behalf. Harman said Thursday in a voicemail message that any investigation of — or allegation of improper conduct by — her would be "irresponsible, laughable and scurrilous." On Friday, Washington GOP super lawyer Ted Olson left voicemail messages underscoring that Harman has no knowledge of any investigation. "Congresswoman Harman has asked me to follow up on calls you've had," Olson said. "She is not aware of any such investigation, does not believe that it is occurring, and wanted to make sure that you and your editors knew that as far as she knows, that's not true... . No one from the Justice Department has contacted her." It is not, however, a given that Harman would know that she is under investigation. In a follow-up phone call from California, Olson said Harman hired him this morning because she takes seriously the possibility of a media report about an investigation of her, even though she does not believe it herself.</blockquote></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/10/harman_under_investigation.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/10/harman_under_investigation.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Sat, 21 Oct 2006 20:32:50 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Blagojevich Adviser Indicted</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://apnews.myway.com/article/20061012/D8KMPURO0.html">The AP reports</a> that one of IL Governor Rod Blagojevich's top advisers and fundraisers was "charged in a federal indictment, unsealed Wednesday, with scheming to collect millions of dollars in kickbacks from companies seeking to do business with the state."</p>

<blockquote>Businessman Antoin "Tony" Rezko was charged with operating a fraud scheme in which he, millionaire political contributor Stuart Levine and other insiders used Levine's position as a member of two state boards to pressure companies to pay kickbacks in exchange for state business.

<p>Levine is among those previously charged in the case.</p>

<p>Rezko, 51, is also accused of trying to squeeze a company seeking to do business with the state for a $1.5 million contribution "to a certain public official." Prosecutors declined to name the official or to say whether anyone in the Blagojevich administration, including the governor, might be a target in the corruption investigation.</p>

<p>"This basically involved a pay-to-play scheme on steroids," U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald said. Rezko and Levine engaged in "a frenzied effort to collect kickbacks," he said.</blockquote><p></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/10/blagojevich_adviser_indicted_1.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/10/blagojevich_adviser_indicted_1.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 2006 13:37:31 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Disney Protected Hillary Clinton</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Peter Paul <a href="http://www.peterfpaul.com/2006/09/disney_execs_doctored_abc_2020/">reveals on his blog</a> that Disney executives doctored their ABC 20/20 Clinton Fraud Investigative Report in order to protect Hillary Clinton. The report edited out all references to Hillary's finance director David Rosen, who apparently used the doctored report to get the jury to acquit him of election fraud.<br />
<blockquote>Hillary Clinton has more clout than Bill does with ABC. Three days before the very hyped broadcast of ABC 20/20's Brian Ross' exclusive interview with Peter Paul regarding his campaign finance fraud allegations against Hillary Clinton and her Senate campaign, Michael Eisner dispatched Disney brass to New York to re-edit investigative reporter Ross' "Clinton frauds" expose. All references to Hillary Clinton's finance director, David Rosen, were erased, and the name David Rosen was never mentioned, even though Paul featured Rosen's role in the fraud in his allegations. </blockquote><a href="http://www.peterfpaul.com/2006/09/disney_execs_doctored_abc_2020/">Click here for more</a.>.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/09/disney_protected_hillary.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/09/disney_protected_hillary.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 14 Sep 2006 11:52:12 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Rep. Jefferson Tried To Hide Papers</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/30/AR2006053001236_pf.html">Things continue to get worse for Rep. William Jefferson</a>...<br />
<blockquote>The Justice Department yesterday vigorously defended the recent weekend raid of Rep. William J. Jefferson's Capitol Hill office as part of a bribery investigation, asserting that the Democratic lawmaker attempted to hide documents from FBI agents while they were searching his New Orleans home last August.</p>

<p>The government questioned in a 34-page motion filed in U.S. District Court here whether it could have obtained all the materials it had sought in a subpoena if it had not launched the surprise raid on Jefferson's congressional office May 20. According to the government filing, an FBI agent caught Jefferson slipping documents into a blue bag in the living room of his New Orleans home during a search.</p>

<p>"It is my belief that when Congressman Jefferson placed documents into the blue bag, he was attempting to conceal documents that were relevant to the investigation," FBI agent Stacey E. Kent of New Orleans stated in an affidavit that was part of the government's court submission. The document was filed in response to Jefferson's lawsuit demanding that the government return to him documents seized during the raid on his Capitol Hill office 11 days ago.</blockquote></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/05/jefferson_tried_hiding_papers.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/05/jefferson_tried_hiding_papers.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 31 May 2006 12:43:42 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Jefferson Charges by July</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>From ABC's <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/officials_jeffe.html">The Blotter</a>:<blockquote>Federal officials tell ABC News they already "have enough evidence to arrest" Congressman William Jefferson (D-LA) but will wait until a grand jury in Virginia returns a formal indictment. Charges are expected within four to six weeks on allegations Jefferson took bribes in exchange for his official help with a telecommunications contract in Africa.</blockquote></p>

<p><font color="red"><B>UPDATE, 5/24/06 8:13 PM: </b> Clearly realizing how Jefferson's ethical problems will haunt the Democratic Party, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/24/AR2006052400350.html?nav=rss_politics">has asked Jefferson to resign from Ways and Means Committee</a>. "In the interest of upholding the high ethical standard of the House Democratic Caucus, I am writing to request your immediate resignation," she wrote. In the spirit of the House Democratic Caucus's "high ethical standards," Jefferson has once again refused to resign.</font></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/05/jefferson_charges_by_july.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/05/jefferson_charges_by_july.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 23 May 2006 13:28:36 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Jefferson&apos;s Office Searched</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060521/D8HNU35G2.html">The Associated Press reports</a>.<blockquote>FBI agents searched the congressional office of Rep. William Jefferson of Louisiana Saturday evening in connection with a public corruption investigation that has already netted two guilty pleas by two associates, authorities said.</p>

<p>The search began at 7:15 p.m. EDT in the Rayburn House Office Building, where Jefferson's office is located, said Debra Weierman, an FBI spokeswoman.</p>

<p>It was not clear what agents were looking for and Weierman said she could provide no additional details because the affidavit supporting the search warrant was sealed.</p>

<p>But she indicated the search could take several hours.</blockquote></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/05/jefferson_office_searched.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/05/jefferson_office_searched.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Sun, 21 May 2006 00:25:33 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Jefferson Won&apos;t Resign</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060516/D8HKKCU00.html">I can't say I'm surprised</a>...<br />
<blockquote>U.S. Rep. William Jefferson said Monday he will not resign in the face of a federal investigation that has netted two guilty pleas from people who implicated him in a bribery scheme.</p>

<p>Jefferson, a Democrat in his eighth congressional term, declared his innocence during an afternoon news conference outside the federal building in New Orleans.</p>

<p>"I would take full responsibility for any crime that I committed, if that were the case. But I will not plead guilty to something I did not do, no matter how things are made to look and no matter the risk," Jefferson said, reading from a statement.</blockquote>And O.J. Simpson was "absolutely, 100% not guilty," too.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.noagenda.org/democrats/william_jefferson/">Click here for The Jefferson File</a>.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/05/jefferson_wont_resign_1.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/05/jefferson_wont_resign_1.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 16 May 2006 08:30:26 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>More Aides Subpoenaed in McKinney Case</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>The Associated Press <a href="http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060425/D8H7APA81.html">reports that more House aides have been subpoenaed</a> to testify in the grand jury investigation in the incident where Rep. Cynthia McKinney assaulted a Capitol Police officer.<br />
<blockquote>Staffers from four congressional offices, in statements read on the House floor Tuesday, announced they would comply with subpoenas issued by the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.</p>

<p>The offices of Reps. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., and Barbara Lee, D-Calif., confirmed that the subpoenas were related to the March 29 incident where McKinney, a Georgia Democrat, entered a Capitol building unrecognized by the officer on duty and then hit him when he tried to stop her.</p>

<p>Those receiving the subpoenas are thought to have been witnesses to the altercation.</p>

<p>The other two subpoenas went to aides to Reps. Lois Capps, D-Calif., and Donald Payne, D-N.J. Capps' office would not comment on the purpose of the subpoena and there was no immediate response from Payne's office.</blockquote></p>

<p><B>UPDATE, June 16, 2006:</b> McKinney beats the rap, <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060616/ap_on_go_co/mckinney_scuffle;_ylt=ApDuBuwxWUagoQsOc.BkVeGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--">federal grand jury refuses to indict</a>.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/04/more_aides_subpoenaed_in_mckin.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/04/more_aides_subpoenaed_in_mckin.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:56:20 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Mollohan Steps Down From Ethics Committee</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>He was against stepping down before <a href="http://reuters.myway.com/article/20060421/2006-04-21T234337Z_01_N21390326_RTRIDST_0_POLITICS-CONGRESS-ETHICS-DC.html">he was for it</a>.<blockquote>Rep. Alan Mollohan of West Virginia, facing questions about his finances, stepped down on Friday as the top Democrat on the ethics committee of the scandal-rocked U.S. House of Representatives.</p>

<p>Mollohan insisted he was the victim of baseless political attacks, but said he had decided it would be best to leave the panel while he deals with the matter, first raised publicly a few weeks ago.</p>

<p>"As difficult as it has been for me to reach this decision, I believe that the reasons I have set out ... will be fully understood and accepted by fair-minded people," Mollohan wrote House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat.</p>

<p>Pelosi, in a brief statement, accepted Mollohan's decision and expressed confidence in the 12-term lawmaker up for re-election in November.</p>

<p>The Wall Street Journal reported on April 7 that federal prosecutors had begun a review of Mollohan's finances, and it raised questions about so-called earmarks -- provisions put in big spending bills -- that Mollohan had helped direct to nonprofit groups in his state in recent years.</p>

<p>On the same day, the conservative National Legal and Policy Center announced it had filed a complaint against Mollohan in February with the U.S. attorney's office in Washington. The center cited a sharp increase in Mollohan's assets in recent years and charged he had violated ethics law.</blockquote></p>

<p>House Majority Leader John Boehner  issued following statement today on Mollohan's decision:<br />
<blockquote>Congressman Mollohan and the Democrats have repeatedly used the Ethics Committee to play politics while blocking the committee from functioning. In light of the troubling accusations regarding his own conduct, Mr. Mollohan's reluctant decision to finally step down from the committee is important for the integrity of the ethics process.</blockquote></p>

<p>In response to the news, Nancy Pelosi released <a href="http://democraticleader.house.gov/press/releases.cfm?pressReleaseID=1521">her own statement</a>, blaming partisan attacks for Mollohan's problems.<blockquote>The allegations against Congressman Mollohan originate from the National Legal and Policy Center, which engages in highly partisan attacks on Democrats.  These attacks are an attempt to deflect attention from the long list of Republican criminal investigations, indictments, plea agreements¸ and resignations that have resulted from the reported long-term and extensive criminal enterprise run out of House Republican leadership offices.  The Republican culture of corruption has been ignored by the Ethics Committee for a year and a half following the decision of the Republican leadership to fire their own chairman and some Committee members for doing their job. </p>

<p>Despite the source of these accusations, Mr. Mollohan today has made an honorable decision to step aside so that he can address the charges, and I commend him for his leadership.</blockquote>Nancy has to write this situation off as a Republican attack in order to avoid dealing with the facts of the case against Mollohan. </p>

<p>Nancy now has a big problem. All her talk about the "culture of corruption" is exposing the corruption in her party.</p>

<p>Congressman <A href="http://www.noagenda.org/democrats/howard_berman/">Howard Berman</a> was chosen to replace Mollohan a ranking member on the ethics committee.<br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/04/mollohan_steps_down.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/04/mollohan_steps_down.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 21 Apr 2006 22:29:07 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Operation G-Sting</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>We're having one heck of a good political corruption scandal out here in Las Vegas - its got sex, adultery, bribes; the whole ball of corrupt political wax.  I bring this up because of Dario Herrera, one time golden boy of the Nevada Democratic Party.</p>

<p>Herrera once had everything going for him.  Good looks, telegenic personality, support from <a href="http://www.newsreview.com/reno/Content?oid=oid%3A18053">Democratic House members</a>, <a href="http://www.prospect.org/print/V13/21/goodno-j.html">support from leftwing groups</a>...and, of course, the support of Senator Harry Reid, late of the anti-GOP corruption campaign.  What is really amusing is that Herrera <a href="http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=104&subid=210&contentid=1863">lists </a>Bill Clinton as one of his heros...and <a href="http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Apr-20-Thu-2006/news/6958375.html">now we know why</a>:</p>

<blockquote>Dario Herrera adamantly denied Wednesday that he accepted cash payments from former strip club owner Michael Galardi, and he tearfully recounted sexual encounters he had with strippers.

<p>Herrera's wife, Emily, who has been in the courtroom for most of the trial, cried as she listened to his testimony about his numerous extramarital affairs.</blockquote></p>

<p>Yep, those clean-as-a-whistle Democrats, they'll stop the corruption in politics...<br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/04/operation_g_sting.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/04/operation_g_sting.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2006 13:40:24 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Mollohan Owns More Property Then He Previously Claimed</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Of course, <a href="http://www.wtrf.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=10280">you won't hear much about this</a> in the mainstream media...<blockquote>During the past two weeks, questions have popped up over the amount of property owned by one of West Virginia's congressmen.</p>

<p>It turns out U.S. Rep. Alan Mollohan, D-W.Va., may own more than he even knows.</p>

<p>In Tucker County alone, the Congressman and his wife own all or part of eight parcels, several of which are around Canaan Valley Resort and Timberline Four Seasons Resort.</p>

<p>The congressman's property ownership took center stage after the National Legal and Policy Center, a conservative government watchdog group, noticed a rapid increase in Mollohan's reported assets.</p>

<p>NLPC chairman Ken Boehm said his group uncovered hundreds of instances where Mollohan omitted or misrepresented the value and scope of real estate holdings in financial disclosure forms. </blockquote><br />
Mollohan claims his stunning increasing assets was as a result of wise real estate investments.<blockquote><em>The State Journal</em> asked Mollohan ... whether he owns any other property.</p>

<p>Mollohan said he did not.</p>

<p>Then, this week, Mollohan told the <em>Charleston Daily Mail</em> he owned a house in Canaan Valley that he and his wife purchased with his parents, Helen and the late Robert Mollohan, in the mid-1990s. He said Barbara and he purchased a lot next to that house, as well as two other lots in Tucker County.</p>

<p>He also told the <em>Daily Mail</em> he and a childhood friend purchased a farm along the Cheat River in Tucker County in 2005.</p>

<p>The Tucker County Assessor's Office shows Mollohan owning a bit more than that. In total, Mollohan owns part or all of just fewer than 305 acres in Tucker County.</p>

<p>During a phone interview with The State Journal April 19, Mollohan said there must have been a misunderstanding.</blockquote>Whenever Democrats get caught, they call it a "misunderstanding."</p>

<p>Will Mollohan step down from the Ethics Committee now that he's been caught lying? Don't count on it.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/04/mollohan_properties.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/04/mollohan_properties.php</guid>
         <category>Under Investigation</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2006 13:19:50 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>CREW Prepares Ethics Complaint Against Rep. Jefferson</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.citizensforethics.org/press/newsrelease.php?view=115">From CREW's website</a>..<br />
<blockquote><b>Jefferson Breaks Federal Bribery Laws and House Rules</b></p>

<p>Washington, DC –Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has prepared an ethics complaint against Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) regarding his role in a conspiracy and bribery scheme as well as for misusing federal resources in the wake of hurricane Katrina. Last fall, CREW named Mr. Jefferson as one of the 13 most corrupt Members of Congress.</p>

<p>CREW is asking that a Member of the House forward the complaint against Rep. Jefferson to the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, better known as the House Ethics Committee. CREW is not submitting the complaint to the Ethics Committee directly because outside groups are barred from filing complaints. The rules allow a Member of the House to certify that CREW’s complaint has a good faith basis and forward the complaint to the Ethics Committee, stating that the complaint merits the Committee’s consideration.</blockquote></p>

<p><B>CREW DOCUMENTS:</b><br />
<a href="http://www.citizensforethics.org/filelibrary/JeffersonExhibits.pdf">Jefferson Complaint - Exhibits</a><br />
<a href="http://www.citizensforethics.org/filelibrary/JeffersonEthicsComplaint.pdf">Jefferson Ethics Complaint</a></p>

<p><B>MORE:</B><br />
<a href="http://www.noagenda.org/democrats/william_jefferson/">The Jefferson File</a></p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/04/jefferson_ethics_complaint.php</link>
         <guid>http://www.noagenda.org/2006/04/jefferson_ethics_complaint.php</guid>
         <category>Bribes</category>
         <pubDate>Thu, 13 Apr 2006 00:45:50 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>
