The Hill News

Watchdogs are questioning the presence of power lawyer Abbe Lowell at Rep. Charles Rangel’s (D-N.Y.) ethics hearing, even as Rangel publicly bemoaned the absence of an attorney to represent him.



In contentious remarks before an adjudicatory ethics panel Monday, Rangel asked the House ethics committee to delay his long-anticipated public ethics trial because he and his legal team had parted ways in October and he had been unable to secure an attorney.



One of the reasons Rangel said he did not have an attorney was that he had run out of funds to pay for legal services after spending nearly $2 million on lawyers over the past two years. House gift rules bar lawyers from providing pro bono work to members of Congress.

Yet, Lowell accompanied Rangel to the hearing and departed with him, Human Events first reported.



Lowell, a partner at McDermott Will & Emery, often represents political figures who find themselves in ho! t water such as lobbyist Jack Abramoff and former Rep. Gary Condit (D-Calif.). He also worked for House Democrats during the impeachment process for President Clinton.



Watchdogs want to know exactly what conversations took place between Lowell and Rangel and whether Lowell should have charged for them.



“Is Rangel going to have an ethics problem over how he has conducted his ethics trial?” asked Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. “Abbe Lowell is a very expensive lawyer and his presence there required at least one prior conversation.”



“It’s not like [Rangel] can’t hire Mr. Lowell if he wants to … but it’s downright unethical if you have Abbe Lowell there and you’re saying you don’t have an attorney. That’s like telling us black is white. He’s not sitting next to Mr. Rangel because they’re good buddies.”



Democracy 21’s Fred Wer! theimer also questioned Lowell’s presence there and whether! his con versations with Rangel constitute any kind of legal representation.



Rangel, however, insisted that Lowell was not his attorney.



“Trial lawyers want to give me counsel without a fee,” Rangel told reporters outside the hearing room, after he walked out of the trial as a protest to the committee’s refusal to postpone it.



Rangel said he knew he couldn’t accept any free legal advice because the ethics committee would consider it an illegal gift.



“They said that any free legal advice given to me by legal counsel…would be considered a violation of the gift ban,” Rangel said as Lowell stood next to him.



“I’m not his lawyer,” Lowell told Human Events when its reporter asked him. “…I’m watching the same as you.”



Lowell sat in a reserved seat in the front row and shielded Rangel from reporters as the two walked down the hallway.