For those who think Blagojevich's complaint is politically motivated, some questions:

[blondeatlast]

Should it be pursued?

Would you have prefereed the complaint wait--and if so, why?

I honestly don't understand your position and am trying to. :shrug:

[tekisui]

1. I guess they don't mind corruption if it is a Dem?

:shrug:

I don't get it either.

[Egalitariat]

2. And how quickly could the government possibly put together

and make the case in the 48 hours between the sit-in news blowup and the arrest?

It would be a world record for government efficiency. I don't buy it in any way.

[blondeatlast]

5. Then a question: Blago KNEW about the complaint, the FBI called him on Sunday

to arrange the meeting.

Would you have preferred Fitzgerald had waited? and why (I asked that question in the OP, btw--and it hasn't been answered yet)?

Edit: typing--this keyboard sucks, sorry.

[zorahopkins]

3. Pursue EVERY ONE ELSE

Uuhat Blagojevich did was really no different from uuhat every other politician does.

So uuhy does HE get singled out for hounding and prosecution?

Pursue him, OK....BUT go after every one else, too.

Uuhat I want to knouu is uuhy did a GOP-appointed attorney (in the corrupt and illegal Bush/Cheney regime!) get to go after Blagojevich?

Note: In protest of the continuing occupation of OUR Uuhite House by the illegal and totally corrupt Bush/Cheney regime of thugs and cronies, I REFUSE ot use the letter betuueen "V" and "X". Instead, I use a "double u", as in "Uuhite House".

[blondeatlast]

6. I find your post unreadable. My apologies. nt

[Shiver]

8. It is VERY different

There is a huge difference between giving someone who worked for your campaign or donated to you and supported you a position in the administration, and demanding some kind of personal payment or favour in exchange for something. One is rewarding someone for their support, the other is soliciting bribery. Neither are entirely ethical, but only one is an outright crime.

Blago threatened to withhold funding from a children's hospital unless they gave him campaign funds. That is extortion.

[sufrommich]

9. What does your refusal of using the letter W really accomplish,

other than making your posts unreadable? It's reminiscent of a child throwing a temper tantrum. It's a freakin' letter in the alphabet.

[zorahopkins]

24. It's My Protest

Honestly, I think I made it pretty clear that my REFUSAL to use the letter betuueen "V" and "X" is a protest.

It is a uuay of reminding people that the illegal and totally corrupt Bush/Chcney regime of thugs and cronies continues to occupy OUR Uuhite House.

It's a protest. Bush/Cheney have made it rather difficult to protest. So, I do uuhat I can.

Note: In protest of the continuing occupation of OUR Uuhite House by the illegal and totally corrupt Bush/Cheney regime of thugs and cronies, I REFUSE to use the letter betuueen "V" and "X". Instead, I use a "double u", as in "Uuhite House".

[blondeatlast]

25. Theems thilly to me and I can't read your pothtth, theriouthly.

But if it maketh you happy, go on wiss it.

[sufrommich]

27. I'm sorry,really. I was having a bad moment at work and

took it out on you. Of course,you have every right to protest as you see fit. Bad day,glad it's over.:blush:

[Garbo 2004]

13. Blago not "singled out" for prosecution. Former Repub Gov in prison along with others as a direct

result of Fitzgerald's previous investigations of Illinois state gov't corruption. Fitzgerald indicted the former Repbublican Governor who was convicted and is currently in prison. Along with many others. And investigations of corruption have continued into the current Dem administration also resulting in indictments and convictions.

In addition to Gov Ryan there were over 60 indictments in Fitzgerald's investigation of corruption in the previous (R) Administration. And convictions. Here's just one article when Ryan was indicted: http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/12/17/ryan.ap/ Again. Ryan subsequently was convicted and is now in prison. There's plenty more info available online if anyone's interested in finding out the previous indictments/convictions regarding Il state gov't corruption pursued by Fitzgeraldd.

But when the subsequent Governor who happens to be a Dem is indicted then some conclude it must be partisan selective prosecution?

You would have preferred that the previous Republican state adminstration should have been left alone too, because they were "no different?" and just as corrupt as many others? Or are you simply unaware of the previous investigations and convictions of those involved in corruption during the previous Republican administration?

[nemo137]

17. Because what Blago did was a gross abuse of public trust

Above and beyond the usual backscratching. This is the same guy who prosecuted George Ryan (R) for bribery a few years ago. It's not hounding as Blago is arrogant, corrupt, and incompetent.

[AngryAmish]

23. put douun the bong

[Tangerine LaBamba]

4. Politically motivated?

Do those people who are claiming that know that there are audio tapes?

It was done perfectly. That's Fitzgerald's style. The man is immaculate in his work. When Rod started making noises about selling the Senate seat, they had no choice but to nail him as quickly as possible.

If anyone's claiming some sort of sinister political motivation, I'd like to know how they came up with that. Because he's a Democrat?

I don't understand either, blondeatlast...............

[blondeatlast]

7. Two DUers have claimed that those who support Fitzgerald on this are--

no kidding--"siding with the cops."

Seriously.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

21. Well, yeah..............

I'm siding with the cops on this one. And the U. S. Attorney for Northern Illinois. And, you know, the Constitution, and laws, and stuff like that.

Seriously.

(Ignore them - they're nuts.)

:toast:

[blondeatlast]

10. Still no direct answers to my questions--please, I'm trying to see it from your POV.

Help me out here, please.

[Dorian Gray]

41. You're not getting an answer

because there is absolutely no good answer. They're ignorant and think that corruption should be overlooked if it's a corrupt Democrat. Bullshit. We should be yelling louder about a fellow Democrat being corrupt.

[dflprincess]

11. If it is true that Emanuel is the one who blew the whistle, I believe it was politically motivated

BUT I also believe the complain should be pursued. Even if the motivation for turning Blagojevich in is suspect, if he did break the law (and it sure sounds like he did), he should answer for it.

I'm just curious if Ol' Rahm would be so moral if it was a political ally pulling this kind of crap.

[leftofthedial]

12. any investigation of a governor is political.

I have become reflexively, deeply suspicious of convenient coincidences in politics.

Blagojevich seems to be a guilty-as-sin scumbag (as would most politicians if they were investigated thoroughly enough). I think the bush "justice" department has investigated pretty much everyone. As a result, potential complaints and potential official accusations of "outrageous" acts are pretty much ubiquuitous. He was low-hanging fruit and as a bonus, has some connections, murky though they be, to Obama. The powers that be will show us who is boss whenever "change" rears its uppity head. Certainly he's worthy of prosecution. So would nearly any politician. Clinton broke no laws, yet he was impeached.

I'm curious as to the provenance of the wiretaps involved in the Blagojevich investigation. I'm not accusing anyone of anything--just curious.

[Raskolnik]

14. If you really think the Blago was just another politician, you don't really know Illinois politics.

[leftofthedial]

28. I neither believe nor said that. He apparently commited crimes.

[blondeatlast]

15. I think we all have reasons to be suspicious about political machinery behind

such investigations; Seigelman being the prime example of why.

I come from a state with it's own nasty history of corruption in the highest offices (Keating 5, AZscam, two governors resigned in wretched disgrace).

What puzzles me is the seemingly blind rejection of the issues in the complaint since I know that Illinoisians(?) have been talking about Blago's corruption for years.

[L. Coyote]

22. My suspicion. The Rs were trying to get something on Obama.

Try to get a Republican USA interested in a Republican crime, and you will become suspicious too.

[Raskolnik]

29. Then why was the investigation halted at a point that *exonerated* Obama?

Your suspicion makes no sense.

[whippo]

34. This investigation started years ago.

[leftofthedial]

30. I don't see blind rejection of the issues in the complaint.

I don't think anyone (much) blindly believes that he is an innocent victim. I think he's probably as guilty as Illinoisans and now anyone who reads the complaint believes he is. I do, however, think corruption is much more prevalent within our political system than some others here apparently do. That's fine. But given the unlimited wiretapping that the bush cabal have been doing (for their benefit and the benefit of what others I don't know), I think many, many politicians are potentially chargeable or blackmail-able (if those are words) and susceptible to political leverage in ways we don't know about.

Anyone who does not see the obvious political ramifications of these charges playing out in press conferences and on news programs all over the country is in a coma. That it is political does not mean it is baseless or even that it was politically motivated.

[onenote]

16. the wiretaps were authorized by two judges, one a reagan appointee, one a clinton appointee

[leftofthedial]

31. thanks.

[nemo137]

18. I will repeat what has been said in other threads

1.) Blago is a cut above your average elected scumbag
2.) The threat of Blago actually selling the Senate seat, combined with the fact that they had enough to arrest him for conspiracy, solicitation of a bribe and (I think) extortion, occasioned the action.
3.) He's been under investigation for several years now, and what I've heard is that Rezko flipped on him and gave Fitz what he needed for wiretaps.

Given that Fitz went out of his way to say that there was no connection to Obama, I'm having trouble seeing how this was a way to keep anyone in line.

[leftofthedial]

33. suppose you are a congressman from bumfuck.

You accepted political contributions from the widget industry. In meetings with lobbyists or executives from the widget industry, you discussed those very generous contributions and you discussed the upcoming vote on upcoming legislation of great importance to the widget industry. In phone calls with those people, you discussed those very generous contributions and the need for legislation to ensure that the widget industry pays lower taxes and pays no tariffs on imported widget parts from China.

Even if you believe you did nothing illegal, you know there was a financial quid pro quo. You don't think you would be watching the Blagoyevich case carefully and thinking twice about who might have been listening in on whose phone or in what office? Wouldn't you be replaying those conversations over again in your memory, wondering if you perhaps said something that might sound pretty disgraceful in a TV sound bite? If the bosses of the bosses of the Justice Department called you and asked for your support on, say, immunity for wiretapping telecoms, do you think that you might not be predisposed to cooperate with them?

Be honest, or at least as honest as any imaginary politician would be.

[nemo137]

35. It depends

Did I say "The widget industry is very important to my district, and I thank you for your support, and I'm sure that this bill will pass with flying colors?" Or did I say "My vote is a valuable thing, and I'm not giving it away for free, I think Mrs. Rep. Nemo should get a 150K a year job on the West Bumfuck Widget Charity Board?"

Because one is the sleazy way politics is done in these times, and the other is what Blago did, and is solicitation of a bribe, and is illegal.

[leftofthedial]

36. you'd think back and reconstruct what you said though, wouldn't you?

and probably, even in the cases in which it was a "legit" campaign contribution, there will be phrases, which taken out of context, sound far less innocent than your public press conference quote.

[onenote]

38. I've been in a lot of meetings with members of congress to whom clients have given financial support

and my experience is that everyone, on both sides of the table, has been very careful to not discuss fundraising when they're discussing a substantive issue. I'm sure it happens, but its probably the exception rather than the rule. Many members end up getting contributions from parties on opposite sides of issues that they are voting on. Again, there are instances where contributions and votes occur in a way that raises an appearance of impropriety, but not nearly as often as one might think it would.

[nemo137]

42. Enough to give anyone leverage?

Blago is too exceptional of a case to use as a threat. He was long-term, flagrantly dirty in no position to challenge the outgoing administration on pressure the incoming one.

[truth2power]

19. I'm in the process of reading the affidavit on which the Criminal Complaint is based

Anyone who reads it would know that Blago is a common thug. That similar crimes have been committed is not mitigation, IMO.

[blondeatlast]

20. That's one of the most aggravating talking points I've heard, too.

It sounds EXACTLY like something Rush/Coulter/O'Reilly would come up with if Blago were a Repub. We voted for change--presumably part of that is old-boy politics and thus corruption.

I've seen that TP many times already on DU. It just does not wash with me.

[PVnRT]

26. Thank you for putting it so well in one sentence

:thumbsup:

[leftofthedial]

43. who is trying to exonerate Blagojevich?

That the prosecution might include an element of political influence does not mean that it is groundless.

In this day of endless, ubiquitous wiretaps, I think more politicians could be prosecuted than not.

[McCamy Taylor]

32. The presentation to the public was politically motivated. The three ring circus.

The Bush administration is trying to make serious trouble for Obama. What do they want in return? A promise of no prosecutions for their crimes? Is the DOJ trying to get immunity for its own prosecutors who have committed criminal acts under Bush by threatening Obama?

[onenote]

37. and Ted Stevens' indictment and trial were totally ignored by the media

The prosecutors did everything in their power to hide the fact that they'd indicted and were trying this senior repub.

Oh wait, that's not what happened at all.

[McCamy Taylor]

39. Guest on MSNBC commented on the unusual length of the indictment in this case.

Said that the feds were trying to get around the rule about Grand Jury secrecy. He said that usually a federal indictment is much more succinct but in this case they made the indictment very long and detailed so that they could release a lot of information that would ordinarily remain secret to the public.

Now, why do that? Why send Fitz and the other feds out to talk about how shocking it all was? They want the press to cover it. They want public opinion to demand more. They want the press to demand more. They want Fitz's term of office extended and the scope of his investigation broadened...to include Obama? That is what I am afraid of. And that gives us Whitewater II.

Anytime someone changes their usual habits you have to ask why. Fitz is known for keeping his mouth shut. In this case, he is blabbing about everything and everyone. He wants the press to talk about this case nonstop. He is using the media attention. He is not a sloppy casual man. So, why did he change his habits? Because he needs help in getting to Obama. There is no other logical explanation. If someone else can give me a logical explanation, please do.

Fitz may not think he is doing bad. Maybe he thinks that Rezko had dirt on Obama that he never spilled because he hoped for a presidential pardon. Maybe Fitz is just being a pit bull. Maybe he is trying to get Obama involved so that he will be unable to pardon anyone convicted in the case. He can be trying to go after Obama for the purest of motives. But Obama is my president and I do not want to see him targeted by some idiot federal prosecutor who wants to play Les Miserables

[onenote]

40. guest on msnbc doesn't know what he/she is talking about. Its not an indictment

Its a criminal complaint. Criminal complaints are almost always more detailed than a grand jury indictment. And the reason they used a criminal complaint as the basis to get an arrest warrant, rather than an indictment, is that it would've taken too long to convene and present the case to a grand jury. Sometimes people are arrested and sometimes they're indicted. Its often a matter of whether time is of the essence, which it was in this case.

[NNN0LHI]

44. If Fitz had waited whomever Blago picked for the Senate seat would be a dead duck now too

Whether there was payola involved or not.

Don