Reply With Quote
You're a crazy conspiracy theorist for the most part, but in this case, I agree.
Blagojevich's Crime: Honesty
Posted by James Ostrowski at December 10, 2008 07:13 AM
So far as I can tell, Rod Blagojevich's crime is honesty.
Most politicians on a daily basis trade political power for favors such as campaign donations, jobs for machine members and contracts for allies.
Want a list of government contractors? Just look at campaign finance records.
I take it that Rod's crime was being honest about it.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...es/024348.html
You're a crazy conspiracy theorist for the most part, but in this case, I agree.
Do you see the irony in what you say?
nope, because he's right, you're nuts.
-Mars
, even a stopped clock is correct twice a day.
In Blagojevich Case, Is It a Crime, or Just Talk?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/16/us...c73&ei=5087%0A
In Blagojevich Case, Is It a Crime, or Just Talk?
comments (119)Sign In to E-Mail or Save This Print Reprints Share
LinkedinDiggFacebookMixxYahoo! BuzzPermalink
By DAVID JOHNSTON
Published: December 15, 2008
WASHINGTON — When Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the United States attorney in Chicago, announced the arrest of the Illinois governor, Rod R. Blagojevich, Mr. Fitzgerald said he had acted to halt a political crime spree that included what he called an “appalling” effort to sell off the Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama.
Skip to next paragraph
Enlarge This Image
Joshua Lott for The New York Times
The case against Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich, shown outside his home on Monday, may turn out to be difficult to prosecute.
Related
Obama Says Inquiry Shows Nothing Wrong (December 16, 2008)
Transcript: Justice Department Briefing on Blagojevich Investigation (December 9, 2008)
Illinois Legislature Votes for Impeachment Efforts (December 16, 2008)
Times Topics: Rod R. Blagojevich
Blog
The Caucus
The latest on the 2008 election results and on the presidential transition. Join the discussion.
Election Results | More Politics NewsReaders' Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
Read All Comments (119) »But now some lawyers are beginning to suggest that the juiciest part of the case against Mr. Blagojevich, the part involving the Senate seat, may be less than airtight. There is no evidence, at least none that has been disclosed, that the governor actually received anything of value — and the Senate appointment has yet to be made.
Ever since the country’s founding, prosecutors, defense lawyers and juries have been trying to define the difference between criminality and political deal-making. They have never established a clear-cut line between the offensive and the illegal, and the hours of wiretapped conversations involving Mr. Blagojevich, filled with crass, profane talk about benefiting from the Senate vacancy, may fall into a legal gray area.
Robert S. Bennett, one of Washington’s best-known white-collar criminal defense lawyers, said Mr. Blagojevich faced nearly insurmountable legal problems in a case that includes a raft of corruption accusations unrelated to Mr. Obama’s Senate seat. But Mr. Bennett said the case raised some potentially thorny issues about political corruption.
“This town is full of people who call themselves ambassadors, and all they did was pay $200,000 or $300,000 to the Republican or Democratic Party,” said Mr. Bennett, referring to a passage in the criminal complaint filed against the governor suggesting that Mr. Blagojevich was interested in an ambassadorial appointment in return for the Senate seat. “You have to wonder, How much of this guy’s problem was his language, rather than what he really did?”
In presenting his case, Mr. Fitzgerald said Mr. Blagojevich had crossed the line from deal-making to criminality, citing an example in the complaint in which the governor discussed with an aide obtaining a $300,000-a-year job from the Service Employees International Union in return for naming a candidate to the seat.
“We’re not trying to criminalize people making political horse trades on policies or that sort of thing,” Mr. Fitzgerald said. “But it is criminal when people are doing it for their personal enrichment. And they’re doing it in a way that is, in this case, clearly criminal.”
But politicians routinely receive political contributions in return for their decisions, whether they involve making appointments or taking a stand on legislation. Lawmakers vote in favor of bills and steer appropriations backed by their donors without fear that prosecutors will bug their offices and homes.
And while prosecutors have brought increasing numbers of political corruption cases in recent years, they have done so using laws that make it a crime for an official to deprive the public of “honest services.” The cases are based on statutes that never define exactly what conduct might be illegal and do not require proof of a bribe or a quid pro quo to establish criminal wrongdoing.
What those statutes do require is evidence that an official at least tried to seek something of value in return for an official action.
In the case of Mr. Blagojevich, it would be legal for the governor to accept a campaign contribution from someone he appointed to the Senate seat. What would create legal problems for him is if he was tape-recorded specifically offering a seat in exchange for the contribution. What would make the case even easier to prosecute is if he was recorded offering the seat in exchange for a personal favor, like cash, a job or a job for a family member.
Indeed the government has claimed the wiretaps show that Mr. Blagojevich told his aides that he wanted to offer the seat in exchange for contributions and for personal favors, including jobs for himself and his wife.
But talk is not enough. Any case will ultimately turn on the strength of the tapes, and whether the governor made it clear to any of the candidates for the Senate seat that he would give it only in exchange for something of value.
Several lawyers cautioned that the complaint presented last week was a snapshot of the evidence that Mr. Fitzgerald had amassed so far, in an investigation that is continuing.
In moving to arrest Mr. Blagojevich on Dec. 9, Mr. Fitzgerald acted without having presented his case before a grand jury. He is now likely to use such a panel to obtain additional witness testimony exploring whether anyone, including anyone in the Obama camp, had specific discussions with the governor’s office about filling the vacancy.
Mr. Fitzgerald’s decision to bypass a grand jury initially could signal a belief on his part that he did not yet have a fully prosecutable case on his hand, though it appears to have been prompted at least in part by the publication in The Chicago Tribune on Dec. 5 of an article that tipped off Mr. Blagojevich that investigators were listening in on his conversations.
Mr. Fitzgerald has also said he had been worried that if he did not intervene, Mr. Blagojevich might go ahead with some of his schemes, including appointing a successor to Mr. Obama.
In the wiretaps cited in the complaint, Mr. Blagojevich talked about what he said was an urgent need for political contributions and favors, but it was not clear whether he took concerted action to actually obtain anything in return for the seat. Several lawyers said Mr. Fitzgerald might need more evidence to prosecute Mr. Blagojevich over the issue.
“It’s a very difficult case for a number of reasons; not the least is the nebulous nature of the charges and the inherently difficult issues when you’re talking about a person executing his First Amendment right to promote a particular politician,” said Michael D. Monico, a former federal prosecutor who is now a criminal defense lawyer in Chicago.
“Merely thinking about something is not a crime,” said Mr. Monico, a lawyer for Christopher Kelly, a former Blagojevich fund-raiser who was indicted last year on tax charges “Just talking about something is not a crime. You need another action for someone to commit a crime.”
Christopher Drew contributed reporting from Chicago.
But, it's not just talk if there was an overt act committed in furtherance of the conspiracy.
I believe there was a fundraiser carried out as part of the conspiracy to get Candidate #5 appointed.
Candidate # 5 was not appointed. Nor has candidate # 5 been charged with your imaginary conspiracy.But, it's not just talk if there was an overt act committed in furtherance of the conspiracy.
I believe there was a fundraiser carried out as part of the conspiracy to get Candidate #5 appointed.
I believe you're a dumbass who still hasn't read Fitzgerald's press release.
, do you people not read the news? I know, I know, it's hard to find some of this stuff in the liberal press but, some facts can't avoid but be reported.
So you are contradicting your defense of Blagojevich in the other thread.
You need to keep better track of your multiple personalities.
Here, open your mouth Galileo and I'll spoon feed you:
If that fundraiser is determined to be related to the Senate seat, then you have an overt act. No?As Gov. Rod Blagojevich was trying to pick Illinois’ next U.S. senator, businessmen with ties to both the governor and U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. discussed raising at least $1 million for Blagojevich’s campaign as a way to encourage him to pick Jackson for the job, the Tribune has learned.
Blagojevich made an appearance at an Oct. 31 luncheon meeting at the India House restaurant in Schaumburg sponsored by Oak Brook businessman Raghuveer Nayak, a major Blagojevich supporter who also has fundraising and business ties to the Jackson family, according to several attendees and public records.
Two businessmen who attended the meeting and spoke to the Tribune on the condition of anonymity said that Nayak and Blagojevich aide Rajinder Bedi privately told many of the more than two dozen attendees the fundraising effort was aimed at supporting Jackson’s bid for the Senate.
Among the attendees was a Blagojevich fundraiser already under scrutiny by federal investigators, Joliet pharmacist Harish Bhatt.
Blago didn't hold the fundraiser. Next.
You are a conspiracy nut.
Now, that is rich.Irony, thy name is Galileo.
If the fundraiser were held in an effort to achieve the pricetag Blagojevich had discussed with the person organizing the funraiser, it's the same. Blago didn't have to hold the fundraiser.
Blago said Candidate five may get the seat if he raised 1 million dollars for Blago.
Someone associated with Candidate 5 holds a fundraiser for Blagojevich.
If the taped phone calls can fill in the blanks, Blago -- and the fundraiser have a problem.
You confuse bribery with extortion. The person who held the fundraiser could be guilty of bribery, not Blago.
We don't know what's in the phone calls.
If the fundraiser were held to meet the 1 million dollar price tag; and Blagojevich knew that, it's criminal conspiracy.
The feds always tell the best evidence at their press conferences. if they don't tell it, it don't exist.
Yeah...okay.
They did talk about the fundraiser at the press conference.
that's just talk. just jibber-jabber. do they have it on tape?
I don't know, do you?
Blago Lives!
Posted by James Ostrowski at December 17, 2008 04:57 PM
The Illinois Supreme Court turned down the utterly silly request by the Illinois AG to remove the governor from office (because some FBI agent filed an affidavit accusing him of petty corruption).
Illinois politics has really become the capital of the clowns!
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...es/024464.html
The impeachment trial should be interesting.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
