Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
This week on the journal editorial.
Report Charlie Rangel ethics -- how much trouble cause fellow Democrats in -- them.
Plus the WikiLeaks fallout did that document -- endanger innocent lives and -- the newspapers that printed them really serving the public.
Interest plus giving bad teachers the -- DC schools chancellor Michelle -- doesn't what was once unthinkable.
And fires almost 200 for poor performance that teachers union is howling but will be idea.
-- Keep that promise to drain the swamp.
That is Washington DC.
To that sunshine disinfect the congress.
Welcome to The Journal Editorial Report I'm Paula -- -- well the swamp isn't quite drained yet.
The house ethics committee this week charge -- New York congressman and former house ways and means chairman Charlie Rangel with thirteen violations including.
Failing to report rental income from a vacation property.
In the Dominican Republic using a rent stabilized apartment.
In Manhattan for his campaign office and improperly soliciting donations from corporate officials and lobbyists for the Charles B Rangel.
Public policy center in New York.
Joining the panel this week Wall Street Journal columnist and deputy editor -- and handing her columnist Mary Anastasia O'Grady and Washington columnist.
Kim Straus also Kim.
Starting with you John -- -- -- New York Post columnist this week wrote that these charges against -- aren't really don't -- big deal kind of small.
Stuff business as usual you see it that way.
-- -- is I didn't that this is not graft or corruption on a huge scale.
But in -- way this is almost worse for Democrats what they are.
You did not all the party could say look this is an isolated case of one guy doing something wrong.
But -- what these violations are.
Emblematic of everything that the public dislikes about congress -- the sense of entitlement.
It's it's a sense of arrogance the idea that congress doesn't play by the same rules everyone else and it.
A great example of is is -- -- -- come from.
From his holiday home in the Dominican Republic -- if anyone else and not reported that ain't.
IRS would be there -- activation have been thrown in jail probably can't but this doesn't happen.
Particularly as saying that this is business as usual for -- that's -- it and that's because as if that's true then is this really fair to single out Charlie Rangel.
-- there's a perception.
Out there and America this is business as usual in congress maybe not to the degree.
Rangel and I think that these these alleged violations didn't read them are.
Long list of things of wrongdoing.
But that doesn't believe -- and the general public that yeah most of these guys don't play by the signals RS -- out on the merits Mary.
Is is it if you look at this trying to make a judgment as a citizen journalist is it fair put Charlie Rangel in the dock for these.
-- -- I think it is that it's I think it's absolutely outrageous and you know not just that he did one -- two things wrong but as the invested gated subcommittee report says there was a pattern here.
Of inaccurate reporting not just in on his taxes but his financial disclosure reports think this is obviously a politician.
21 terms in congress -- -- I think.
Thank you sorry this will be 21 if he's coming up November -- and dot thinks he's a possible it's very clear I mean he thinks that he is above the law and I I cannot see how.
We could just say well everybody doesn't you know let pass if we expect to have any accountability in conference game.
Business as usual.
Well I don't know I -- it's how do we know whether it's business as usual but I mean I think to some extent they all.
Do something like this the John Murtha case for instance and the earmarks than just.
Being above -- all.
But I think too.
To Kim's point look.
The ethics committee this week.
Put up on its web -- the document of its lawyers was the charges right there is not enough time on our program to read through -- it is and let's just look -- And anyone thinks this is just small change should go through there's hundreds of things in there it's off the charts.
This is exactly what people are upset about the -- that failure to put things on his disclosure report the failure to report taxes -- but the -- -- -- Soliciting.
Donations for the Rangel center from people who have to do business before his committee.
Yeah that's right.
I think one of the things extraordinary here -- is just how does the degree to which.
This is extraordinary coming from the ethics committee given Rangel stature in the congress and how beloved Charlie Rangel is in the car -- beat a very well liked member he's been around forever.
He's partisan sure.
But -- bit in the background recruit even Republicans like him he's jovial he's a good guy he's a back slapper hail fellow well met -- like -- to see it -- -- yeah.
It's a classic -- to be able to do this against somebody who's that well -- means that they felt the ethics committee felt I think that they couldn't do anything else.
That's absolutely right goes to Dan's point and we -- and his committee here is sort of known for being a little toothless I mean that congress of the club.
Nobody like -- members like to go after fellow members.
But these charges were simply so large they couldn't ignore them and actually in the -- -- actually have to give that means committee a little bit of credit because when they decided to do this.
They ultimately did a very thorough job.
What about his defense Mary that he Rangel defense predict that the tax issue and these were inadvertent.
He he really didn't know how much -- he had he didn't know he didn't pay enough attention to the reporting requirements he should've paid more of their mistakes not willful.
Again I -- -- there's a pattern.
You know you make one or two mistakes you don't consistently failed to report all kinds of things it's just that -- the continent that he didn't report there's kind -- -- report that.
That he didn't he didn't report on and you know I think the thing that's really gonna bother the American people is this is a guy who is sort of symbolic of the Democrats view.
People don't pay enough taxes you know and you've always -- as you know who the person who writes the tax rules he does anybody biting fingers yet.
And saying you have to pay more taxes to help the sport and -- being in -- rent stabilized apartment.
On the Charlie Rangel.
The allegation or the defense is that he just cared about education this wasn't about any benefit for him personally this was just about.
His concern for this institution and the educational poor people -- and so it was solicits money premier energy foundation -- Verizon foundation that are various.
That the Ways and Means Committee is in charge of foundations so Andy soliciting money on his -- it get the message guys I want to and he was asking for small change was asking for thirty million dollar up to thirty.
Million dollars a quick couldn't Tim quickly I want to ask each of your equipment Charlie went wanna take the oath of office.
For the 112 congress in January.
It if he can't get.
-- his primary in September there is it a good chance yes.
Yeah I think that's right I mean you have to be cynical what's the problem you can't defeat these people.
I think he can be elected.
But I think -- the process -- he will not take.
His soft again -- gonna survive this all right when we come back the WikiLeaks fallout to the release of thousands of classified Afghan.
War documents put innocent lives in danger.
And -- the papers that printed them really serving the public.
I think we always need to be mindful of the unknown potential.
For damage in any particular document.
That we handle.
Assange can say whatever he likes about the greater good he thinks he and his source are doing.
But the truth is they might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that from an Afghan family.
That was joint chiefs chairman admiral Michael Mullen condemning the website WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange for the release this week of more than 90000 classified military files from the war in Afghanistan.
A son says he withheld or edited thousands of documents that gave the names of Afghan civilians who provided intelligence.
To NATO troops but the British newspaper the times reports that it was able to find the names.
And in many cases the villages and fathers names of dozens of Afghan informants.
In the information that WikiLeaks published.
Wall Street Journal deputy editor and foreign affairs columnist Bret Stephens.
And editorial board member -- Kaminsky join us with more on this story.
So Matt very strong words from admiral Mullen as Defense Secretary Gates was equally as critical does Assange have blood on his hands.
Absolutely I mean that's the real story here and they tried we -- try to manufacture the story of this war is going badly it was embedded in this but -- -- papers that decide to publish this and splash on the front pages -- in this week.
But the real story is actually why do we -- why do we keep these documents confidential.
Because we want to protect sources in the field.
We want to protect.
Our methods of intelligence -- -- battlefield intelligence in many ways -- -- reports from the battlefield by units that go up the chain of command about what's happening in their area who they're talking to -- -- So it's tactical battlefield information.
Absolutely and -- very hard for anyone like like us to understand what's going on right but if you are at a Smart Taliban operative you'll spend the next couple weeks.
Going through it trying to piece together how the Americans get -- intelligence.
And who was helping where and because there are names of village's -- to -- -- as GPS coordinates and -- -- exactly yeah.
You know exactly where to go what is the saints Assange is motivation here Brad isn't politics as it -- Is any anti Americanism.
All of the above well I think it's all of the above I mean he gave an interview to -- German newsweekly der Spiegel which also was one of the papers that published a lot of this material -- I'd like -- Ortiz tonight love crushing bastards.
And in his view the bastards are -- it is the Nader is NATO be America's allies the people who are trying to defend girls who were trying to go to school women who don't wanna be under a -- goes.
Afghans who want a better life.
The bastards are not the Taliban or -- allies in the radical radically islamists groupings in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Were throwing acid on girls faces -- and the rest of it.
Looking big picture on this not just a battlefield tactical stuff which and we've just discussed.
Was there any information that was released in these documents that it was warranted in terms of the public interest you think that that we really didn't know.
That we're glad we now know.
Not at all actually -- I mean I think this has been won the most transparent wars in fact.
But if this war in Iraq War we know exactly was going on issue with the with the Pentagon papers back in Vietnam was that the government was not telling the full truth about involvement.
Everything that came out here has been reported widely discussed.
And I think the -- the collateral damage here will be both to the possible Taliban informants but also.
After 9/11 we've made great progress in getting the CIA to cooperate with the Pentagon to cooperate with other intelligence agencies.
And before that -- 1 o'clock weight because there were afraid of this very sort of leak.
I wanna I wanna read it section from an op -- we ran trip forgot that I know shock when this week about.
Who was actually at a battle in Afghanistan that was that reflected those documents and he wrote for -- that's not to say echo company hid the truth.
Is that these reports from -- Harry commander at the farthest edge of the war zone are by nature -- compressed chunky and in complete.
End quote what he's saying is that instead of actually revealing what happened on the battlefield these documents may distort.
Well actually hope let's let's hope it distorted enough so that it it denies that it -- -- the Indians did the factional actionable information but -- picking up on something that maps that.
No I think people need to also talk about the responsibility not just of Assange but of the times and -- the other two to.
News organizations that.
Released this because you could make it at that.
Credible case that there was a compelling public interest to release some of this material.
If it was revealing that the Bush Administration or the Obama administration had effectively been lying to the American public that things that were important about you know policy making towards the war had not previously been revealed none of that but the times -- -- at the times does say that they've vetted the documents more than Assange -- and took -- and withheld different documents including the names.
All of those in -- yes that's true but they also.
And amplified the -- and brought -- to public attention in a big -- it might not have happened if it it's simply appeared on -- -- WikiLeaks -- -- say in a -- say that with us -- is doing is is good it's useful because they're there -- information within -- validating -- saying -- -- that's what he's doing does provide a public service even if we wouldn't -- Everything that he does is that is.
You -- you agree with -- and I did it but on this I think this of the papers and we are all obviously looking for paper -- ourselves believe in the First Amendment right you know to to to free speech and repressed but there is a responsibility that that the media has.
They decided to take it there are millions of web sites we -- is one of them they decide to take the site.
And turn it into a huge story.
And that's -- Assange went to them.
Because he was frustrated they thought it would -- amplify exactly of course.
What do you do in just in terms of the American military to stop the sort of thing can you.
Do something about a -- Well you can find and very harshly prosecute whoever was who who who -- this material do anything about the size really two suicide while you can try to deny him or the countries where he has to servers.
Put diplomatic pressure on them to shut those to shut those serviced out.
This materially damages American security to the extent of those servers are now like countries -- damages there's prior restraint against the press you want that government to be able to say you can't publish things -- Well if people's lives are at risk then that's that's a genuine issue that people need a bit that we need to -- take seriously all right thanks guys when we come back.
Firing bad teachers -- Practically unheard of even in the country's worst school systems but that may all be about the -- Washington DC schools chief.
Michelle -- gives almost 200 of them.
Washington DC schools chancellor Michelle Rhee announced last week that she is fired.
More than 200 teachers -- that troubled district the majority of whom received low scores and a -- a valuation system.
That for the first time ties teacher performance to student achievement another 737.
Employees rated minimally effective.
By the new system have a year to improve or face dismissal the Washington teachers' union says it will contest the firings calling -- approach punishment heavy.
And support light.
We're back with Dan -- -- also joining the panel wall street journal editorial board member Jason Riley and columnist bill -- so Jason.
This is miraculous news in any public school district how is re able to pull this off.
Hopefully you know when a when a when a law firm fires bad lawyers or newspaper fire is bad journal -- -- -- -- -- the world goes on.
But when schools chancellor with 4000 teachers fires the worst 4% of them.
Its front page news and this is because in public education generally in DC but nationwide it is next to impossible to get rid of bad.
Teachers and she could do this because of the recently signed and agreed to DC schools contract.
Yes gives her -- a power to -- -- yes to two to fire teachers for performance.
And she also has the backing of the mayor of DC and doing this which is important it -- -- Politically she has a lot of support the other thing that's allotted to Apollo is the conditions of schools and DC in 2006 the year before she took over.
Not a single teacher was fired for performance in DC this is a system.
Or 8% of eighth graders were performing at grade level and -- despite the fact that the district was spending.
Dollars per -- which was more than double the national.
OK so the system of political system was ready to change but they'll you know turn one -- school districts around this country.
Where the schools are maybe not quite as bad but are really awful right so and they've not been able to do that site.
What makes her and Washington different well I'd say I agree with brother Riley here on the on the the performance aspect to things one is even when she came there'd been a charter initiative had been a voucher initiative.
-- given her leverage school choice school choice -- options for parents 38% of kids go to charter schools in DC now.
That's leverage when she sitting down to negotiate with them.
And you can't underestimate this contract what she did.
Quid pro quo.
We'll give you more money for the good teachers that's that's sort of gone unreported ministers a lot of -- that something like a taste great lineup that State's right and then as other merit pay.
More pay for good teachers but we're gonna get rid of bad teachers from what she -- the contract that they don't have anywhere else.
They could tie that paid a performance so she's able to get these people off the -- and the ability to do her too.
To have her in her designees do the evaluation bright as opposed to the unions doing some well ceased to point out further added two to Jason's point.
The dismal performance of the school teachers before -- -- of this of the students.
You know it's one of the worst districts if not the worst school district in the nation in yet something like 95% of teachers used to receive the highest -- -- before Michelle.
We came in so that that kind of.
Her ability get put your question hole differently.
How many sanitation workers get fired in any -- around the country.
It's the same reason all of their contracts are collectively bargained they've been able collectively bargain public union contract for the last thirty to forty years has kids art that they don't think he's sorry where is I don't like -- with kisses like the miners' union.
That's the same thing you cannot fire teachers for the same reason you cannot fire sanitation workers are -- people of our department of motor vehicle all the -- you're saying the politicians wouldn't want -- take them on because of the unions are too powerful and -- they haven't taken a month for thirty years and that's how we got to this point and that's.
What's makes this case of -- and they went to unions -- it stands right this is a jobs program you know in New York.
Chancellor Klein spent a hundred million dollars paying teachers that he can take out of the classroom.
But he can't get off the payroll and the reason is it generally goes to our arbitration.
And the no one will get the arbitration cases -- -- friendly to the U how many did chancellor Klein what it was something like 888.
Escalated into what I love to do what Michelle -- did because part of the thing is.
We know getting good teachers in the classroom and that means getting bad teachers out of the classroom and it's just been very difficult Jason on these schools chancellor's.
In contrast to show we're also careers they bounced from one city to the next they know they're gonna get the next job they have their next -- -- -- and they want to do.
-- sit down and make a big fuss with the with the unions.
And because that they think oh my gosh -- I can get hired by Chicago or or and and Michelle Ray Allen distinguished herself this way she said.
Season in it for the short run and she's also -- interestingly enough that if the current mayor who backs her doesn't win reelection and -- in a tough reelection -- right now she might and I hang around so this could actually this is a big case to watch because if they.
Lose then missiles stop and the used to breathe a sigh of relief if it succeeds that we could end up seeing this spread across the country let's hope that that's what happens we have to take one more break when we come back.
Hits and misses of the week.
Time now for our hits and misses of the week Mary first to you.
This is a hit for Goldman Sachs which announced this week that and -- may no longer used profanity and he -- out.
Don't be alarmed -- if not getting religious -- It's just that I think it's been embarrassed.
Quite a bit and emails made public over the course of the financial crisis and so from now violence policy amounts to look -- Squeaky clean for the public.
Choir boys OK Jason.
Paula the urging of the Obama administration a judge in Arizona blocked parts of a new immigration law from taking effect this week.
-- -- Arizona's on the front lines of the illegal immigration problem in this country it simply trying to reestablish the rule of law and it stayed in the response from this administration.
There's a lawsuit that has nothing to do with fixing the problem and everything to do with demonizing political opponents and rattling up the -- for November.
Hit to the Winston Churchill archive trust for reaching a deal that's gonna put the Churchill archives online you know it's it has everything from.
Notes in correspondents and your furniture on the tests on -- -- -- by MI five.
Apparently they were worried that I found on a -- told somewhere at some of them blown -- slipping and an exploding cigar poisoned cigar.
You know for ordinary people means if you wanna sit -- your laptop at home and look up.
Churchill notes and his fight them on the beaches speech you can do it from your home.
Lot better way to use the Internet that we -- leaks thanks bill and remember if you have your own hit -- -- police -- that a strategy are at foxnews.com.
That's it for this week's edition of the journal.
Editorial report thanks to my panel.
And especially all of you for watching college ago we -- to you right here.
Filter by section