Rahm ducks questions and McQ wonders why:
My question, if this is all true, is why dissemble about it? A replacement for the Obama seat is something which any reasonable person would expect the two teams to discuss. If there were discussions, especially in light of the fact that such discussions might have been taped, why would you not admit them and discuss their content? Since the Fitzgerald charges seem to claim Blagojevich was unhappy with only the "appreciation" that the Obama camp was offering, it is pretty reasonable to assume he got that from someone within Obama's organization that he felt spoke for Obama.
To me that's exculpatory on Obama's behalf. Why wouldn't you be trumpeting that, if you were him, and admitting such a discussion instead of claiming none took place?
My guess - Rahm didn't play ball but he didn't call the coppers, either, which leaves him in an ethically gray area and exposes him to possible howls of "Geez, if the President's projected chief of staff didn't think that was illegal, what would it take to get this Administration's attention?"
Awkward, even if legal. Of course, his years in the Clinton White House will be invaluable now - there is no scnadal so small that a diligent cover-up can't turn it into something newsworthy.
Per Politico's Ben Smith:
Rahm Beet Red
Posted by: centralcal | December 12, 2008 at 01:39 PM
I think Rahm is busy finding ways to threaten Patrick Fitzgerald into announcing Rahm was
a)instrumental in bringing down Blagojevich and
b)asked by Fitzgerald to remain silent about his cooperation and begged Obama to lie to the press about his staff having no part in it.
Posted by: MayBee | December 12, 2008 at 01:40 PM
I asked essentially the same question on Thursday about Obama's response. My answer was that these guys just habitually dissemble. It's like asking why they breathe. The dissembling gives them a chance to huddle and coordinate a consistent response that will be hard to disprove.
This is why the police put criminal co-conspirators in separate rooms right away and look for inconsistencies. (Also to say to one that the other guy is about to give him up.) That way they don't have a chance to coordinate their stories.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 12, 2008 at 01:49 PM
Heh TM!
On the right side of the QandO article is a google ad for:
Posted by: glasater | December 12, 2008 at 01:50 PM
I wonder if Rahm is getting dead fish in the mail.
==============================
Posted by: kim | December 12, 2008 at 01:58 PM
Way OT, but we don't have to go to Alaska. We can go to St. Janes!
Posted by: Caro | December 12, 2008 at 02:07 PM
TM:
Rahm may have thought he was the recipient of a stupidly crude horse trade offer that was not illegal. But now that eager beaver Fitzy boy is on the case, he is mindful that he could be in trouble, since Fitzy boy thinks the law is a penumbra that can always be expanded to capture the bad sorts.
My guess is that Rahm, having seen the tortures of the darned that Rove went through in a not dissimilar position, wants to keep his mouth completely shut.
Good ol' Fitz. He expands the law just as surely as your average Warren Court judge.
(This is not to say Blago did not commit crimes -- I just think that the highly entertaining wiretap reportage relating to the senate seat auction struck me as more profane than actionable.)
Posted by: Appalled | December 12, 2008 at 02:09 PM
Rahm's problem is that his boss man has been trying to pretend they didn't get involved.
Posted by: MayBee | December 12, 2008 at 02:13 PM
I am referring to this possibility that Appalled posits:
Rahm may have thought he was the recipient of a stupidly crude horse trade offer that was not illegal.
vs. this from PEBO:
Mr. Obama added that he was “absolutely certain” his staff was not involved in any deal-making regarding his successor.
“That would be a violation of everything that this campaign has been about,” he said at a news conference in Chicago.
Bad enough.
But couple that with the idea that Obama would have to launch some sort of investigation to determine what his Chief of Staff (and known Blago associate) was up to, and you've got a political problem on your hands.
Posted by: MayBee | December 12, 2008 at 02:18 PM
Haven't read the threads, but was out Christmas shopping and RUSH is outraged that the Democrats think AQ and all the Gitmo terrorists should be given due process but not Blago!!! I all most ran off the road laughing so hard. :)
Posted by: Ann | December 12, 2008 at 02:24 PM
OK, this is kind of cute. Newly elected Louisiana Representative Cao, with mostly black constituents, has asked to join the Congressional Black Caucus.
=================================
Posted by: kim | December 12, 2008 at 02:25 PM
**almost**
Caro, More, more, more. Love the Photoshop signs!
Posted by: Ann | December 12, 2008 at 02:26 PM
St Jane's It IS!!!!
He's right, though,Ann.
And I agree with appalled, the selling of the Senate seat is more stench than crime..so why did he shut the whole thing done NOW to protect this bit of P.R. fluffery?
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 02:28 PM
"Awkward, even if legal."
"The first Congress passed a misprision of felony statute in 1789. The statute holds, "Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony … conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States" is guilty of misprision of felony and can be punished with up to three years in prison."
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/misprisions+of+felony
Isn't this what they impeached Nixon over? I know, I know, Nixon tried to cover up the break in. But isn't that what the Obama team is doing by suggesting that they never spoke to Blagojevich? Aren't they attempting to cover up the fact that they had knowledge of Blagojevich's scheme and that someone attached to Obama offered to get Blagojevich's wife a position on a corporate board of directors?
Posted by: Art | December 12, 2008 at 02:29 PM
the most damaging remark--indicating the president preferred the 501(c)(4) arrangement because his fingerprints weren't on it IIRC was not from one of HIS aides but someone else so it's not clear that anyone on the O team made that offer to anyone.
But we don't know. We've been told we're only hearing 3 hours worth of 300 hours of tapes. I take that disclosure is made to scare the carp out of everyone and the repeated statements that the FBI agents were shocked by the language strikes me also as part of the Fitz pavane.
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 02:36 PM
Heh, Art, it's not the crime, it's the cover-up.
Texas Darlin' keys on this quote from Fitz's presser: "There's no reference in the complaint to any conversations involving the president-elect or indicating that the president-elect was aware of it, and that's all I can say".
She believes it is a coy way of saying that he has more, but it is not in the complaint.
Out there also is the theory that Fitz shut this down now in order to leave enough time between now and the inauguration for Blag to turn on Obama. I'd add, for Rahm to turn on Obama. The Liar, Liar, has Pants on Fire. Whaddya bet he gets more and more frantic as this works on him. Smoking more now and enjoying it less.
============================
Posted by: kim | December 12, 2008 at 02:37 PM
The establishment of the "Office of the President Elect" gives this whole story an institutional focus it would have otherwise lacked.
Smell the Change ™
Posted by: mason | December 12, 2008 at 02:37 PM
The establishment of the "Office of the President Elect" gives this whole story an institutional focus it would have otherwise lacked.
Smell the Change ™
Posted by: mason | December 12, 2008 at 02:38 PM
The establishment of the "Office of the President Elect" gives this whole story an institutional focus it would have otherwise lacked.
Smell the Change ™
Posted by: mason | December 12, 2008 at 02:38 PM
The establishment of the "Office of the President Elect" gives this whole story an institutional focus it would have otherwise lacked.
Smell the Change ™
Posted by: mason | December 12, 2008 at 02:38 PM
Blagojevich, Obama, and Rahm are just typical Chicago politicians. I'm shocked that people are shocked by the criminal and ethical issues. What exactly did people expect, if you can buy a presidency, why not a cheap senate seat? P L E A S E! We are dealing with the promised change in Washington all right, if DC wasn't corrupt enough...we now have imported the Chicago branch of the Democrat/Progress/Socialist-slime.
I don't care for either side but these guys even worse than the norm. Looking at the last couple years of Democrat majority in both the House and Senate have destroyed the economy OR THE SAKE OF AN ELECTION!
Well, Nancy and Harry picked up some seats...that's all it was about. Never mind that they hurt the country and it spread to the world. The important thing is they got more power.
Is it too early for the IMPEACHMENTS to begin?
Posted by: Black dog | December 12, 2008 at 02:39 PM
BREAKING NEWS
You guys should check out the Capitol Fax Blog. It's perhaps the best independent source for news about politics in Illinois. They have all the emerging developments in this story.
Capitol Fax Blog
Blagojevich's fundraisers have had their offices raided by the Feds A WEEK AGO. Most of this appears related to Rezko singing to save himself. I'll repost here what I did at CapFaxBlog.
From the Tribune story about the meeting at the India House…
Why would Raghu “need” Jesse Jackson Jr. as a United States Senator?
The Feds have been digging into records at Mutual Bank Corp., Amrish Mahajan’s bank and a himself a huge Blagojevich fundraiser, in regards to the Rezko land deal next to Obama’s home. Doesn’t it appear that Rezko is singing all sorts of tunes?
These raids are all coming just weeks after we learned about Rezko singing and the civil suit filed by former Mutual Bank credit analyst Kenneth Connor for wrongful firing.
12/10/2008: Raghuveer Nayak Tribune story
12/5/2008: Tribune story about raid of two locations owned by Nayak
The criminal complaint against Blagojevich and Harris and their arrests on Monday was highly unusual, but they now appear to be mere role players for a corruption ring. Fitz was able to get wiretaps for a sitting governor. How many wiretaps for non government officials has he been able to obtain?
This looks huge.
Posted by: Gabriel Sutherland | December 12, 2008 at 02:39 PM
Art, Nixon was never impeached, actually.
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 02:40 PM
Blagojevich, Obama, and Rahm are just typical Chicago politicians. I'm shocked that people are shocked by the criminal and ethical issues. What exactly did people expect, if you can buy a presidency, why not a cheap senate seat? P L E A S E! We are dealing with the promised change in Washington all right, if DC wasn't corrupt enough...we now have imported the Chicago branch of the Democrat/Progress/Socialist-slime.
I don't care for either side but these guys even worse than the norm. Looking at the last couple years of Democrat majority in both the House and Senate have destroyed the economy OR THE SAKE OF AN ELECTION!
Well, Nancy and Harry picked up some seats...that's all it was about. Never mind that they hurt the country and it spread to the world. The important thing is they got more power.
Is it too early for the IMPEACHMENTS to begin?
Posted by: Black dog | December 12, 2008 at 02:40 PM
Art, from my handy online legal guide WIKI:
"Misprision of felony" is still an offense under United States federal law after being codified in 1909 under 18 U.S.C. § 4:
Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This offense, however, requires active concealment of a known felony rather than merely failing to report it.[6] "
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 02:41 PM
To me, one of the most revelatory remarks is Obama's claim that there was no contact. This is patently false. Is Obama so arrogant as to think he can get away with it, or is lying in order to create his own fantasies such an ingrained habit that he can't avoid doing so.
Either way, arrogant or munchausenic, it bodes poorly.
=============================
Posted by: kim | December 12, 2008 at 02:42 PM
the laws on political corruption are pretty clear, and it's clear that Blagojevich broke them...The question is who's gonna turn next....Chicago and Illinois as a state are incredibly corrupt; envelopes of money, dirty land deals between officials and supporters (George Ryan, Obama, et al)..I'm sure Emmanuel is in it just as deep as Obama and Blagojevich. It's not a matter of whether they broke the law, but rather the political will to enforce the law.
Posted by: matt | December 12, 2008 at 02:42 PM
Rahm is now pondering Obambi's treatment of suddenly inconvenient associates.
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | December 12, 2008 at 02:43 PM
To the politics of this issue; is there a strong case to be made here about how large a role government plays right now in the act of directing capital in the United States to the point where business interests literally say things like "we need to make candidate X a Senator"?
The recollections of these conversations do appear to show how the business community reacts to capital markets when more than a fifth of all the capital flows to government sources and then back out to industries.
Obama has pledged to INCREASE the capital grabs the government will make. This is red meat for the opposition. When the Governor resigns/impeached-removed the opposition should turn the big guns on the pledge of bigger government.
Posted by: Gabriel Sutherland | December 12, 2008 at 02:44 PM
C, Oh, I know he is right but we are always the ones to be called hypocrites. Do you think this will hamper Caroline's throne in NY?
Posted by: Ann | December 12, 2008 at 02:46 PM
We know from Fitz's Big Book of Blago Complaints that Rod was using the Chicago Sun-Times gossip columnist to send messages to the Obama camp. Was the Obama camp using CNN to pull Blago's string?
On Nov. 9, CNN announced that "A prominent Democratic source close to Barack Obama confirmed Sunday that Valerie Jarrett is Obama’s choice to replace him in the Senate."
On Nov. 10, CNN announced "Two Democratic sources close to President-elect Barack Obama tell CNN that top adviser Valerie Jarrett will not be appointed to replace him in the U.S. Senate."
Lynn Sweet of the Sun-Times reports today: "CAMBRIDGE, MASS.--Contrary to comments made by Gov. Blagojevich--according to federal wiretaps--about President elect Barack Obama wanting confidant Valerie Jarrett to replace him in the Senate, David Axelrod said Thursday that Obama's "preference was always she serve in the White House." Jarrett was tapped to be a senior advisor. Axelrod spoke at a forum at Harvard University's Institute of Politics."
Oh, my -- was Hot Rod a patsy for mind games guaranteed to launch him into an orbit of greed and revenge -- just in time to be caught on tape after someone tipped the FBI to his nefarious scheme?
Does CNN mind in the least that they might have been used in a political game? (I doubt it.)
Posted by: JBean | December 12, 2008 at 02:47 PM
It doesn't strike me that Rahm became aware of anything he was obliged to report under the misprision statute.
I really do believe there's nothing here, other than big problems for Blago (who, bear in mind, hasn't even been indicted yet). But I'm delighted to see gasoline poured on the whole thing, simply because the Democrats are involved this time. There, I've said it.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | December 12, 2008 at 02:49 PM
"Mr. Obama added that he was “absolutely certain” his staff was not involved in any deal-making regarding his successor."
MayBee,
We need the precise quote. Word count matters in determining the skill of the liar. For example: "I did not have sex with that woman - Miss Lewinsky." Only ten words, with lie concentrated on "sex".
I've seen: “Our office had no involvement in any deal-making around my Senate seat — that, I’m absolutely certain of,” That's eighteen, with lots more room for equivocation regarding "our office", "no involvement" and "deal-making" than Clinton generated with "sex". So, can Obama be considered a better liar than Clinton? IMO - he's a better thief but Clinton was and is a much better liar.
I believe that the spin will bear out my opinion.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 12, 2008 at 02:50 PM
I think the Libby-niks here have a valuable skill to exploit..let's sell our knowledge of Fitz and his magic to the highest bidders in this mess.
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 02:50 PM
Find out the Dem who tipped off CNN to that fake story and you have another Armitage..IF that story was fake. I don't think it was really. Pardon me for not automatically crediting Axelrod's version.
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 02:54 PM
Thanks, DoT--I'm inclined to agree.. Has FDL and her running dogs started attacking Fitz yet? Will I in time before a star to the left? ROFL
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 02:55 PM
**BeCOME a star***
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 02:56 PM
Also **HAVE FDL****
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 02:56 PM
Clarice, I'm pretty sure that a guy named Mike Madigan was the US Attorney for Northern Virginia back in the late '80's. Is he the son of the Illinois Speaker, and the brother of the Illinois AG?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | December 12, 2008 at 02:56 PM
RickB, I think his easiest out is "deal-making." It really seems to me that the truth is there wasn't any.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | December 12, 2008 at 02:58 PM
Yahoo has reported John Harris has resigned. Any one want to guess whether he will protect those he has worked for, or himself? Remember he was budget director for the Mayor, as well as working for the Governor.
Posted by: Pagar | December 12, 2008 at 02:59 PM
DoT, I don't know about Madigan.
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 03:01 PM
DoT: Sounds unlikely. If this is the Michael Madigan you are describing he appears to be from the northeast United States. His background looks Republican as he appears to have caught on with Senator Howard Baker and Senator Fred Thompson who took the same seat as Baker when he retired.
Lisa Madigan and her father Mike Madigan are both midwesterners.
Posted by: Gabriel Sutherland | December 12, 2008 at 03:01 PM
Maybe Jeff will return and defend Fitz...ROFL
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 03:02 PM
Clarice --
"Pardon me for not automatically crediting Axelrod's version."
Very careful wording, that.
I'm beginning to think Blago was set up for a Fitz-kill.
Posted by: JBean | December 12, 2008 at 03:03 PM
Clarice
Now might be a good time to do a Libby postmortem. We discovered during the trial that Fitz's target was not "whoever leaked Plame," but "whoever will damage Bush."
He wanted Rove, but had to settle for Libby. The question now is: Who does he want to damage in this case?
My guess is, it's not Obama.
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | December 12, 2008 at 03:05 PM
I'm just thinking of that ITO story and the follow on comment about the thugs who tried to kill him--unbelievable...........
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 03:08 PM
I'm beginning to think Blago was set up for a Fitz-kill.
Unlikely. Fitzgerald has been taking down players before Blagojevich. Rezko has to be singing because the Feds are rolling up organizations that were not previously known to be under any suspicion.
Posted by: Gabriel Sutherland | December 12, 2008 at 03:12 PM
Will FDL run a picture of Obama in blackface?
Posted by: peter (not peteruk) | December 12, 2008 at 03:13 PM
Uncle, I think his target was really Cheney, Comey's nemesis..and Libby was as close as he could get to harming Cheney-
As for who his real target is now-I haven't enough information yet.
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 03:15 PM
Whoa..I go out of town for a while and exciting things are happening. Went on annual Louisiana plantation home pilgrimage and the locals were very upbeat about Jefferson's fall. Also, believe Jindal will be the next Republican president. If LA can root out the riffraff, so can Chicago.*oooh,that sounded glib! Anyhoo, I think Rahm and Axelrod are probably shaking in their Armani's about what Blago will say to lessen his time at Joliet. Could Fitz really want to get the actual criminal, this time? Obama, again, just ignores he needs to be accountable for his past, but that karma is a funny thing. If Fitz would care to make history, he needs to connect the dots from Blago/Axelrod to Obama/Axelrod and all the little Rezkos in between. From alderman to bank presidents to charitable trusts--there is a lot of stinky fish, there!
And again, I ask for prayers-we will be heading to Methodist Hospital in Houston where the lovely sister of my husband will be receiving her new lungs @ 7:00p.m. She was diagnosed w pulmonary fibrosis only 4 months ago...prayers for her, and the donor's family, please. I am trying to concentrate on the goodness in this world and hope my disdain and disgust for the selfish will not enter my heart!
Posted by: glenda waggoner | December 12, 2008 at 03:17 PM
I think the Libby-niks here have a valuable skill to exploit..let's sell our knowledge of Fitz and his magic to the highest bidders in this mess.
Yes, Clarice, JOM and Fitz-jinks are a match made in Heaven.
Posted by: Caro | December 12, 2008 at 03:20 PM
Unlikely. Fitzgerald has been taking down players before Blagojevich. Rezko has to be singing because the Feds are rolling up organizations that were not previously known to be under any suspicion.
Yes, but that's old hat, and this -- the selling of a Senatorial seat -- is Fitz-flashy, and clearly evident from the phone tapes.
There's also that footnote on Pages 11-12 that sows some doubt as to the solidity of the other charges: "Rezko, whose reliability has yet to be fully determined...Because the government is not yet satisfied that Rezko’s accounts are full and complete, the government is not relying on Rezko’s account for probable cause..."
Posted by: JBean | December 12, 2008 at 03:22 PM
"Blagojevich was caught on tape blathering about an Obama adviser, saying when "he asks me for the fifth CD thing, I want it to be in his head"
Turns out Blagojevich endorsed Rahm when he ran for the 5th Congressional District in 2002. Mayor Daley did as well. Wonder how much that cost? Anyways some blog did a search (HillBuzz before the election??) and found that Rahm home didn't pay any property taxes because it's listed as a non-profit.
More grist for the mill...
New MSM Headline: Fitzgerald the new Ken Starr.
Posted by: dk70 | December 12, 2008 at 03:23 PM
Well, I don't think Obama was on Fitz's hit list when this started, or even close to it. Fitz has wanted to bring down Daley since he took the job. But I remembered a little while ago that Valerie Jarrett used to work in Mayor Daley's office, so putting her up for Senate may have tipped Fitz over the edge WRT Obama.
And Rahm is now in total hiding in his own house. How can he do his job as chief of staff for Obama hiding in his house? He should clearly resign now. There is a very limited period of time during the transition, and a lot of it will be wasted if Rahm is still chief of staff.
Posted by: Ranger | December 12, 2008 at 03:23 PM
"Rezko has to be singing because the Feds are rolling up organizations that were not previously known to be under any suspicion."
I lean toward that explanation. Uncle Tony got the word that he's really, really, really not the Rezko that Zero knew. No help is coming so he's singing like Pavarotti at the height of his career. Fitz made it clear in the statement that Tony needs to work on his lyrics. I'll bet he takes the hint. If we hear that Northern Trust has received a subpoena to match the one Mutual Bank received, then I would say that Zero is being dragged in.
Right now I would say that Fitz has decent job security. He wants Daley and he may get what he wants.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | December 12, 2008 at 03:24 PM
"Right now I would say that Fitz has decent job security. He wants Daley and he may get what he wants."
I agree especially after watching the whole Libby Show.
Posted by: dk70 | December 12, 2008 at 03:28 PM
I think the judge's fn means--Dear Mr Rezko, we know you want to be sentenced so you can get out of solitary confinement, but until your story suits Fitzarola you'll stay right where you are..no sunshine, no fresh air, and--best of all--no visitors to concoct stuff with..
Glenda, I'll have everything crossed.
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 03:32 PM
Hi friends. Long time no post. I think we may be selling Fitz short. I do not think he is politically motivated. I think he HATES being messed with and thought Libby messed with him -- and perhaps he did. If I am right, this should be a warning to Rahm and the others who will try to walk the line between telling the truth and making themselves look good. Rahm may need to get out front and admit that he knew Rod had pay for play on his mind. Otherwise he may face the wrath of Fitz.
Posted by: theo | December 12, 2008 at 03:33 PM
Oh my Gawd Caro, that is just great! I was thinking of those Pix a few days ago. I'm so glad you posted them!
Posted by: Jane | December 12, 2008 at 03:33 PM
Fitz looking into the Rezko-Obama land deal makes perfect sense for Fitz. It was Rezko's wife that filled out the loan application, which puts her directly in line for any criminal charges. That gives him huge leverage over Rezko. Then there is the fact that the land deal itself makes it very hard for Obama to give Rezko a pardon. There is a very clear conflict of interest that everyone in the country would see even if the MSM tried to ignore it. Any prosecutor would love to have that kind of leverage over a witness to ensure their co-operation.
Posted by: Ranger | December 12, 2008 at 03:34 PM
Posted by: Antimedia | December 12, 2008 at 03:35 PM
JBean,
Good to see you again. That was my first take on the Rezko footnote as well and I think recent law enforcement activity is probably more properly attributed to the cooperation (such as it is) of Individual A than to that of Rezko.
Posted by: Elliott | December 12, 2008 at 03:35 PM
I've always been of the opinion that the land deal resulted in Rezko giving the Os more than they paid for, but I must say cathyf made some great counterarguments the other day on the thread about the valuations jerfuffle. Too bad she can't get into solitary to whisper in Antonin's ear.
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 03:40 PM
**Kerfuffle**
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 03:42 PM
OT
Here in Detroit, there are 18 people campaigning to be the next Mayor Of Detroit (the MOD Squad). Personally, I would be running the other way fast. But still, there is one that is especially amusing and a little scary at that.
Nicholas Hood III, 56, minister of Plymouth United Church of Christ, two-term council member, ran for mayor in 2001
Hood For Mayor???
Man, that would be fun - pass the popcorn and just watch the jokes fly.
But, now he has signs on billboards and city buses with the following slogans:
Love You Can Feel
Integrity You Can Trust
OK, now that is a little concerning. He is not even saying he won't have TEXT with that WOMAN.
Next, a website (LUN) that is up about him is what really concerns me. PUCC looks to be in the same league as TUCC in Chicago and one of the main Poverty Pimps (Jesse Jackson) is in the Pictures.
So, let me get this straight:
1. A Hood wants to be Mayor of Detroit.
2. He has trite little slogans that reveal his character (Love you can feel, baby).
3. Already been in the City Council, which has proved itself so very useful.
4. Is a minister who has a special prayer on his church website (www.puccdetroit.org) - A Prayer of Thanksgiving for the Election of Barack Obama.
5. Has been a leader in the NAACP and hangs out with Poverty Pimps like Jesse Jackson.
You just can't make stuff up like this. I guess I should not be surprised if this guy actually gets elected.
Personally, I would vote for Dave Bing, a local successful business man, former basketball player.
Posted by: PDinDetroit | December 12, 2008 at 03:42 PM
Hi, Elliott --
Like you, I think perhaps Rezko is proving not to be such a reliable witness.
As for the rest -- the phone taps, the Tribune strong-arming, the selling of the Senate seat -- the timing and motivation for the investigation are curious, to say the least.
Posted by: JBean | December 12, 2008 at 03:47 PM
That means, for example, that Blago will wait until he knows exactly what he's up against (in terms of charges, strength of evidence against him and sentencing possibilities) and then he will give up someone of value enough to reduce his sentence to an acceptable amount of time.
He might provide information but refuse to testify in open court, for instance. He might be willing to give up Emil Jones but not Richard Daley. And payback will always enter into any calculations. Those whom Blago perceives have slighted him or not provided sufficient support will be among the first to be outed.
These guys are all cold, calculating what's-in-it-for-me political players. When caught they will weigh the pros and cons and go with the strategy that they believe benefits them the most.Posted by: Antimedia | December 12, 2008 at 03:47 PM
And again, I ask for prayers-we will be heading to Methodist Hospital in Houston where the lovely sister of my husband will be receiving her new lungs @ 7:00p.m
Wow Glenda, that's a big big deal. You've got my prayers - such as they are...
Posted by: Jane | December 12, 2008 at 03:50 PM
My take about the Rezko-Obama land deal is there is nothing there that could legally hurt Obama. But Rezko's participation was dirty on a couple of levels. First, the loan was shady from the beginning. It was done in Rezko's wife's name, not his, and based on what we know, there is no way it should have been approved on the info she provided the bank. That made the loan a special favor for Rezko (and Obama indirectly).
I seriously doubt Rezko told Obama 'Hey, I'd love to help you with this deal, but I'm gona have to call in a couple of favors and fudge the loan a little.' Rezko did a favor that was perfectly (by design) deniable on Obama's part.
The issue for Obama was asking Rezko to help him with the deal in the first place. He of such outstanding judgement should have known how shady a guy Rezko was and that by asking for the favor he was basicaly asking Rezko to bend the law a little to accomplish it (because that is just the way Rezko does things).
Posted by: Ranger | December 12, 2008 at 03:51 PM
Obama wants to move into Blair House early because it will take him a long time to move all his baggage to Washington.
===================================
Posted by: kim | December 12, 2008 at 03:54 PM
Ranger --
Rezko did a favor that was perfectly (by design) deniable on Obama's part.
Plausible deniability is an Obama trademark.
He of such outstanding judgement should have known how shady a guy Rezko was and that by asking for the favor he was basicaly asking Rezko to bend the law a little to accomplish it (because that is just the way Rezko does things).
Channeling Ben Smith of Politico, among others: "It was an innocent mistake."
Posted by: JBean | December 12, 2008 at 03:59 PM
To the politics of this issue; is there a strong case to be made here about how large a role government plays right now in the act of directing capital in the United States to the point where business interests literally say things like "we need to make candidate X a Senator"?
Not if you mean to imply that it's somehow different than 50-100 years ago. "Mr Smith Goes to Washington" and the stuff in Upton Sinclair (and on a smaller scale, some early Heinlein) was believable because it was based on real politics.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | December 12, 2008 at 04:02 PM
Man -- pol's all over Chicago were holding fundraisers for Blago -- another senate seat seeker take his name out of the running
LUN
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | December 12, 2008 at 04:04 PM
I share Theo's view of Fitz. There's no political bias or even interest there--it's 100% pure self-righteous zealotry, and a maniacal aversion to being messed with.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | December 12, 2008 at 04:05 PM
Clarice:
I was following that thread about the valuations. What was NOT said was that in selling 1/6 of their lot for 1/6 of the valuation, the remaining lot is now UNBUILDABLE by local code.
It is now permanently a side yard for the Obamas. So really, Rezko has no substantive value remaining in the property after the 1/6 of-a-lot sale.
Posted by: David Jay | December 12, 2008 at 04:08 PM
Ranger --
Rezko did a favor that was perfectly (by design) deniable on Obama's part.
Plausible deniability is an Obama trademark.
He of such outstanding judgement should have known how shady a guy Rezko was and that by asking for the favor he was basicaly asking Rezko to bend the law a little to accomplish it (because that is just the way Rezko does things).
Channeling Ben Smith of Politico, among others: "It was an innocent mistake."
Posted by: JBean | December 12, 2008 at 04:08 PM
Ranger --
Rezko did a favor that was perfectly (by design) deniable on Obama's part.
Plausible deniability is an Obama trademark.
He of such outstanding judgement should have known how shady a guy Rezko was and that by asking for the favor he was basicaly asking Rezko to bend the law a little to accomplish it (because that is just the way Rezko does things).
Channeling Ben Smith of Politico, among others: "It was an innocent mistake."
Posted by: JBean | December 12, 2008 at 04:09 PM
Whoops -- sorry for the double post!
Posted by: JBean | December 12, 2008 at 04:10 PM
David--Oh, yews, we all noted that but cathy argued there are townhouses and apts all around that property and they could be built on the periphery of the lot which would make the 1/6 a valuable buffer to both the Os and the owner of the remainng lot.
Go to the thread where TM raised the claimed overvaluation issue on that lot for all of cathy's very intriguing arguments.
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 04:12 PM
David, the local code in Chicago isn't worth the aper it's written on--whatever it says you can or cannot build depending on "who sent you".
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 04:13 PM
**Paper**
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 04:19 PM
What does LUN mean?
Posted by: dk70 | December 12, 2008 at 04:24 PM
There will not be a single Obama fingerprint on any of this. He would never involve himself in an actual negotiation. You delegate to someone who knows what you want him to do and/or what needs to be done without being told. That's why trusty Chicago buddies who go way back like Emanuel and Axelrod are absolutely central to Obama's M.O. That's why you pick Rahm to handle Blagojevich. That's what also makes it difficult for your delegate to rat you out, because you never did actually tell him what to get, how to get it, or what to offer for it. If worse comes to worse, as long as you're not on tape yourself, you can say he misinterpreted your instructions.
Not that I see Emanuel ever turning on Obama. That's really where the the difficulty of doing "two things at the same time" that he was talking about comes into play. I'd be surprised if he doesn't think that he could outmaneuver Fitz if left to his own devices, but at this point he's pretty well hitched himself to Obama's star which takes away the maneuvering he has ceded to the boss. What to do?
On Obama's end, I agree with MayBee's earlier comment that there's no way Obama is going to sacrifice Emanuel -- if he can avoid it. The 'Oly Trinity know he'll do it if he has to, though, which is probably what they're trying to figure out right now -- and why Rahm looks so stressed. He kept his day job, but if he goes back to Congress under a cloud, without a shot at the speakership (or maybe even reelection) his value drops from priceless to near zero. Toughing it out looks like a much better option; the question is just how bad you can let it get and just how much halo tarnishing Obama is prepared to tolerate. A lot of that depends on how long the press will let him get away with non--responsive answers to critical questions, now that he's actually got a job. If Fitzgerald goes back to working behind the curtain, though, the press may well revert to the status quo ante.
Posted by: JM Hanes | December 12, 2008 at 04:36 PM
What does LUN mean?
Link Under Name -- mouse over the poster's name, and you should see the link in your browser, or just click on the name to go to the link.
Posted by: JBean | December 12, 2008 at 04:37 PM
dk - Link Under Name. For instance, clicking on "Topsecretk9" @the 4:04 post will take you to a chicagobusiness.com page.
Posted by: bgates | December 12, 2008 at 04:37 PM
Well, I have been thinking lately that the idea of the side lot was originally intended to make the house more saleable. The idea being that who ever wanted the house would buy the side lot and then build town houses on it, which they could sell and pay off the orginal house loan. The problem was that Obama wasn't really the kind of buyer the sellers were looking for, so it created a problem rather than being an advantage.
Posted by: Ranger | December 12, 2008 at 04:40 PM
Here it the the link to Cathf's remarks or at least on of them on that thread.
Cathyf
Cathyf also waded through an article from another link on that thread called GOPMom and which is linked in Cathf's comment--which goes into extensive detail on the Zero land transaction with Rezkp.
Posted by: glasater | December 12, 2008 at 04:42 PM
Here's a good laugh:
Just the Defender Chicago Politics Needs
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | December 12, 2008 at 04:42 PM
Clarice:
"I think the Libby-niks here have a valuable skill to exploit..let's sell our knowledge of Fitz and his magic to the highest bidders in this mess."
I'd open with provocative pressers (and leaks) which generate coverage that Fitz can use in his filings and wave around in court.
Posted by: JM Hanes | December 12, 2008 at 04:43 PM
Rick: Who is the figure connected to Northern Trust Bank? I know about Mutual Bank Corp, but I don't know about Northern Trust. Did you mean Broadway Bank? This is the bank owned by the Giannoulis family whose son is the State Treasurer.
This is inaccurate. Rahm does pay property taxes. The problem with the records was that Rahm's property is owned by a charity where his wife and him are the only officers(sweet deal. I love bankers), there are actually two adjacent properties that it owns. The house itself is on one lot and the neighboring lot is the one that is recorded for property taxes. The property taxes are assessed for both properties, but listed under the property that is just landscaping.LUN is Link Under Name. You use the URL field to enter a link for your comment and then when you post your name is highlighted as a link to another site.
Posted by: Gabriel Sutherland | December 12, 2008 at 04:44 PM
I know it's stupid, but I keep recalling cryptic comment that not much can be done at justice until the Fitz mess was cleaned up.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 | December 12, 2008 at 04:46 PM
JMH --
There will not be a single Obama fingerprint on any of this.
That's a given.
Half my brain says Hot Rod was set up for this by the O-Axelrod axis, since he'd become a potential liability.
The other half says it was Chicago politics as usual, and Emanuel stepped in it.
Or maybe a bit of both.
Posted by: JBean | December 12, 2008 at 04:49 PM
Exactly, jmh..Let's call that Opening Ploy
Taint the jury pool; set the press coverage meme in a very misleading presser because everyone will take it as proven even though you never introduce one piece of evidence in support of your more eye popping claims.
Follow with lots of leaks designed to continue this fairytale AND to keep potential witnesses and subjects continually off balance, wondering who said what to whom.
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 04:50 PM
<.b>
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 04:52 PM
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 04:52 PM
I never heard that and don't know what it means, ts. Do you?
Posted by: clarice | December 12, 2008 at 04:54 PM
Thanks for the LUN definition.
Can't wait until Obama brings home the Olympics. With all those Billions sloshing around, I'm sure Chicago taxpayers won't get left holding the bag.
Posted by: dk70 | December 12, 2008 at 04:55 PM
It's truly stunning to see people still raising money for Governor Blagojevich on December 5th. The Governor has had this federal investigation cloud over his head for 18 months now. The public is aware that "Friends of Blagojevich" has directed almost a million dollars towards legal expenses to his defense firm Winston & Strawn.
The check you write might as well be written out directly to Winston & Strawn.
Gerry Chico, the Mayor's former chief of staff and the current head of the Parks Department, hosted a fundraiser for Governor Blagojevich on Monday. The next day all the checks had been canceled according to the Chicago Sun-Times.
With the Luis Gutierrez information, it's painfully obvious that elected officials that "needed" the governor by now understood the only way to get his attention was through raising money for him. As Jesse Jackson Jr put it, he had not spoken to the Governor in 4 years. That's hard to believe, unless you recall that Jesse Jackson Jr. has been pretty good at maintaining standards for his political office.
J3 is good, but gets dragged down by his father. After this he is probably finished for any Illinois statewide posts.
If it was only his spouse that was in trouble, the way Jan Schakowsky's husband was in trouble, he could probably still have a chance at a statewide office.
Posted by: Gabriel Sutherland | December 12, 2008 at 04:56 PM
Breaking News: Fox, Rahm Emanuel IS NOT A TARGET.
Posted by: Pal2Pal (Sara) | December 12, 2008 at 05:00 PM