Mo Brooks: Is It Fear Or Is It Ethics?

Mo & Bibi

 Earlier, Mo had an issue with the Ethics Committee investigating Members of Congress.

I dropped his press release below the article.

Hmmm....could it be Israel?

Was someone "compromised"?

Hmmm...

Brooks Suggests Republicans Are Retiring Because of Assassination Fears

Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks suggested in a radio interview that Republicans are retiring en masse because of assassination fears.
Brooks was speaking on “The Dale Jackson Show” about the first Republican practice the Congressional Baseball Game after last year’s shooting that left Majority Whip Steve Scalise severely injured.
“We have multiple rings of security, plainclothes, uniform, Capitol Police, other police,” he said. “There was a medical vehicle nearby just in case there was a copycat.”
But Brooks said while there were multiple factors that contributed to a slew of Republicans leaving the House, he suggested fears of violence was a major one.
“One of the things that’s concerning me is the assassination risk may become a factor,” he said.
Brooks referred to the fact many members of the Republican baseball team are retiring, including Sen. Jeff Flake and Reps. Ryan Costello, Pat Meehan, Dennis

Earlier, he had an issue with the Ethics Committee oversight of Congress.

Hmmm...

Brooks' Statement on Office of Congressional Ethics

January 3, 2017

Press Release

Washington, D.C. – This morning, Congressman Mo Brooks (AL-05) supported killing changes to the Office of Congressional Ethics (“Ethics Office”).  The changes included renaming the Ethics Office to the Office of Congressional Complaint Review, placing the Ethics Office under the oversight of the House Ethics Committee, and requiring the Ethics Office to adhere to Bill of Rights and 14th Amendment Equal Protection and Due Process provisions that citizens in America’s judicial system are guaranteed as a matter of course. 
Congressman Brooks said, “In my view, it is inappropriate to consider an issue of this magnitude with so little public debate and so little time for proper evaluation and consideration.  The final version of the proposed changes to the Ethics Office was provided to Congressmen with less than 24 hours before a scheduled House floor vote.  While the ethics reform contains some positive policy changes (such as guaranteeing Congressmen accused of ethical violations the same protections afforded citizens in America’s judicial system)*, it also contained questionable provisions which warranted further review and understanding.”
Brooks concluded, “While I support reasoned strengthening of the ethics process and the protection of the rights of people accused, the reform proposed this week was rushed, inadequately researched, and inadequately understood by Congress and the public.  I disfavor last-minute, major policy revisions.  Under these circumstances, I opposed inclusion of major changes to the Ethics Office in the rules package that will govern House operations for the next two years.  I am thankful that President-elect Trump agreed and intervened.  And I believe the House Leadership acted wisely when it withdrew the proposed Ethics Office changes.”
* U.S. Constitution Article I, Section 5 gives the House of Representatives the power to “punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.”  This Constitution provision has been construed to give the House power over its Members’ conduct, define what constitutes “disorderly Behaviour”, determine the process by which “disorderly Behaviour” accusations against Members will be investigated and resolved, and determine the punishment to be meted to Members who violate the House’s Rules of Conduct.  Arguably, Article I, Section 5 supersedes rights American citizens take for granted and which are otherwise guaranteed by the Bill of Rights and 14th Amendment, at least to the extent a Congressman’s “disorderly Behaviour” is at issue.
 

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©