« UPDATE: MDE EXCLUSIVE: DATA PRACTICES REQUESTS FILED TODAY REQUESTING COPIES OF CERTAIN REJECTED ABSENTEE BALLOTS | Home | STAR TRIBUNE EDITORIAL: “ELLISON FAILS PART OF ROUTINE ETHICS TEST” »
MUST READ FROM THE STAR TRIBUNE: “ELLISON’S PRIVATELY PAID TRIP TO MECCA PROMPTS DEBATE”
By Ryan Flynn | June 26, 2009
It appears that Congressman “Scofflaw” is at it again.
###
“WASHINGTON – Last fall, two years after becoming the first Muslim member of Congress, U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison received an intriguing offer from an organization based in Inver Grove Heights — a free pilgrimage to Mecca. After clearing it with the House Ethics Committee, the Minneapolis Democrat packed his bags for Saudi Arabia.
The 16-day trip, including food and lodging, was on the dime of the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, where an imam is an acquaintance of Ellison’s.
Though members of Congress are required to disclose the details of just about any gift they receive, Ellison’s office has declined to make public the cost of his trip, estimated at several thousand dollars, maintaining that it was ‘personal.’ His spokesman also says the ethics panel didn’t require disclosure of the figure.
On Wednesday, in response to inquiries from the Star Tribune about whether the cost should have been reported on disclosure forms released this month, the Ethics Committee is revisiting whether the congressman must report it, said Ellison spokesman Rick Jauert.” Source: Star Tribune, June 25, 2009
Click here for the complete story.
Tags: Uncategorized
Topics: Uncategorized | 33 Comments »
33 Responses to “MUST READ FROM THE STAR TRIBUNE: “ELLISON’S PRIVATELY PAID TRIP TO MECCA PROMPTS DEBATE””
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
June 26th, 2009 at 3:50 PM
Slow news day, eh Ryan?
June 26th, 2009 at 4:03 PM
Is it always a “slow news day” when a Democrat’s ethics are being called into question danbrome? Why is Congressman Ellison so unwilling to disclose this information?
Is he eventually going to disclose but is now delaying in order to do a cover-up? Will he back date a check and will the organization receiving the check back date the receipt of the funds? It takes time to re-do the books.
I suspect that he will “come clean” in the next week or so after having enought time to make everything look right.
“Slow news day” my ass.
June 26th, 2009 at 4:09 PM
Focused..
“Why is Congressman Ellison so unwilling to disclose this information?”
Where did that come from? I suggest you stick to factual statments instead of rhetorical babble.
June 26th, 2009 at 4:35 PM
Liberal danbrome, I’m still waiting for Hakim Ellison to disclose the details that led up to the 911 call by a woman reporting that Hakim Ellison assaulted her.
I’d like to know if the assault was of the punch/slap variety, or if it involved touching private areas.
http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2006/08/30/mde-exclusive-woman-called-911-to-report-she-was-assualted-by-keith-ellison/
June 26th, 2009 at 5:27 PM
If Congressman Ellison were willing to disclose the information there would be no need for “the Ethics Committee is revisiting whether the congressman must report it, said Ellison spokesman Rick Jauert.â€
Sorry danbrome but it is obvious that the Congressman is unwilling to disclose the information unless forced to by the ethics committee.
Those are the facts so please discontinue your “rhetorical babble” and either provide a reasonable response or resist the temptation to be a jerk.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:58 PM
danbrome said:
“I suggest you stick to factual statments instead of rhetorical babble”
Sounds like advice danbrome could use.
June 28th, 2009 at 9:47 AM
Saying it was personal is a HORRIBLE excuse and he shouldve thought of another one if he’s goingn to try to get out of this.
I believe Jefferson, Stevens, and Delay all committed their crimes for personal reasons as well.
June 28th, 2009 at 11:02 AM
What crimes has Stevens been convicted of Andrew? Being accused for partisan political purposes does not make anyone a criminal. http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE5302O820090401
How about Delay? Is this website your source for your claim? http://wallstreetjackass.typepad.com/raptureready/2006/01/tom_delay_sente.html
Has the Jefferson trial ended and the verdict arrived? Sure he was found with $90,000 dollars in his freezer but it has yet to be proved it was his. http://allafrica.com/stories/200906090397.html
June 28th, 2009 at 11:03 AM
All the congressman has to do is provide the financial information related to the trip. If he did nothing wrong he has nothing to lose.
His refusal is looking like a cover up and will cost him.
June 28th, 2009 at 12:24 PM
2010, Stevens was convicted on 7 counts – all tossed out in April when prosecutorial misconduct was discovered. I hope that all involved in the misconduct lose their virginity in prison.
To Franken supporters this is still a win. Stevens was narrowly defeated while partisan charges were made. Democrats won’t lose a moment of sleep about wrongly convicting a good and decent man, all they care about is having another seat in the senate.
June 28th, 2009 at 6:47 PM
Focused..
You are probably right. He will only carry the 5th CD by 15% next time.
June 28th, 2009 at 8:08 PM
You may be right. He is a Democrat and the DFL doesn’t seem to give a damn about anything but winning, no matter what it takes. There are plenty of people like you who only vote their pocket book everybody else be damned.
June 28th, 2009 at 9:22 PM
Liberal danbrome, you prove once again that the DFL has no moral compass.
Speaking of Obama, did you see his ratings continue to sink?
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history
June 29th, 2009 at 9:41 AM
Chile,
You really need to take a closer look at your beloved Rasmussen Reports:
Current Approval: 55%
Current Disapproval: 44%
Average Approval since inauguration: 57%
Average Disapproval since inauguration: 42%
So you think that proves his ratings are “sinking?” Take a stats class then we’ll talk.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:53 AM
AC..
chile really knows how to tee it up for us.
Thanks!
June 29th, 2009 at 10:34 AM
Approval at inauguration: 65%
Disapproval at inaugration: 30%
Current approval: 55%
Current disapproval: 44%
Now pay attention here, is approval has gone from 65% to 55% but his disapproval has gone up from 30% to 44%. All those people that were withholding judgement in Jan. now recognize the extreme left wing agenda of this administration and are unhappy.
Will Obama start shooting people in the streets when the protests start in 20210?
June 29th, 2009 at 10:36 AM
AC, a picture is worth a thousand words!
Here’e a link to a graph on that page.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Liberal danbrome, your welcome.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:49 AM
2010, apparently AC and liberal danbrome missed the ratings for Obama’s informercial that ABC provided to him free of charge. He came in last place! He was even crushed by a repeat of CSI NY.
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/06/25/wednesday-ratings-so-you-think-you-can-dance-keys-fox-win-philanthropist-premiere-fair/21421
June 29th, 2009 at 10:51 AM
Obama will be dead in 20210.
Get a clue.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:32 AM
danbrome,
Since it is obvious that you are incapable of having an intellegent conversation I will not even attempt it. You clearly are in denial of the facts and will never be anything other than a pain in the ass with nothing of importance to add to the conversation.
I wish you luck and hope that someday you recognize the fact that you are part of the problem in todays political world and somehow redeem yourself and become a part of the solution.
Until then you will only help the Republican Party regain the majority in Congress and win back the White House. For that I thank you.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:37 PM
Liberal danbrome responds with another post about a typo someone made? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
This comes from a little sissy who claims to have a college degree but thinks “irregardless” is a word.
Four days ago, liberal danbrome gave an “apoligy.”
Perhaps liberal danbrome would be better served by using his queer eye for the dotted “i” to proofread his own posts.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:17 PM
President Obama’s Approval Ratings:
Gallup 6/25 – 6/27 57% to 35% +22
Rasmussen Reports 6/25 – 6/27 54% to 45% + 9
Democracy Corps (D) 6/19 – 6/22 56% to 36% +20
ABC News/Wash Post 6/18 – 6/21 65% to 31% +34
CBS News/NY Times 6/12 – 6/16 63% to 26% +37
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 6/12-15 56% to 34% +22
Pew Research 6/10 – 6/14 61% to 30% +29
Strong Support, solid performance.
I wonder why you would have picked the Rassmussen poll for your sample?
Oh yeah, it’s the best one for those of you in denial to cherry pick from the list.
Even though the approval ratings have fallen a few points since election day, our bold and courageous President is building the confidence of the American people.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html
June 29th, 2009 at 1:32 PM
Liberal danbrome, you fool, I chose Rasmussen because it’s the most up to date. The RCP average includes polls that are two weeks old.
RCP average: You prove my point, you uneducated stooge. Look at the graph, dolt, Obama’s numbers have continually gone into the toilet since he took office five months ago.
Liberal danbrome: Stupid, ignorant, and uninformed.
June 29th, 2009 at 1:54 PM
chile..
Oh now I get it.. this is just an absurd act, an attempt to be funny.
For a while, I thought you were serious.
No reasonable reader would review these results and conclude that Obama’s numbers have continually gone onto the toilet.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:05 PM
Makes you wonder what definition danbrome uses for a “reasonable reader”. Since danbrome is himself unreasonable it seems obvious.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:39 PM
Pete, in post #16, I challenge you to go find similar charts for Bush II, Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, etc. and I bet you will find a similar curve. It just illustrates the natural honneymoon period winding down for each president. It’s not a sign of the appocalypse.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:42 PM
Chile, you are right in post #17. If that picture is worth a thousand words, this one is worth a million.
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/assets_c/2009/01/gwb%20approval-thumb-550×412.png
Granted, it’s not Rasmussen, but it’s close. Notice the similar “honeymoon’s over” trend at the beginning?
Notice how 9/11 and Iraq were huge opportunities to be an effective leader and he blew it?
And look at the last two numbers? Do you people REALLY want to slam Obama’s numbers right now? Didn’t think so.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:47 PM
Chile, who in the world cares about the TV ratings? Turn off your TV and do something outdoors!
I thought that whole infomercial on ABC was stupid to begin with. Snooze.
June 29th, 2009 at 2:51 PM
Chile, you are pretty big pompous ass if you think you know better than Merriam-Webster,
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless
An I suppose the folks at Oxford are also wrong:
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/irregardless?view=uk
June 29th, 2009 at 2:54 PM
Chile, in #23…
Obama’s number’s aren’t even approaching the “toilet” that Bush’s numbers were in for most of 2008.
Get over it.
June 29th, 2009 at 4:07 PM
AC, and this is the advice Merriam-Webster gives to ingnorant fools like danbrome who use “irregardless”: “Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.
GWB was elected for a second term, that won’t happen for Obama.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:18 PM
chile..
care to share who you think the GOP can run to beat him? Norm Coleman?
June 30th, 2009 at 4:17 AM
Liberal danbrome, It will be the person endorsed by the Rebublican party. We’ll have a good idea who that is in three years.