Flash Tizzle Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (Soxy @ Dec 12, 2008 -> 12:50 PM) Lisa Madigan is my hero. Link to story about motion filed by Madigan. She's intimidating. I was watching her earlier at the press conference and she wasn't taking s*** from any of the reporters. Intelligent women, obviously. She may have been helped by her father in some capacity, but I could definitely see her being our state's governor -- or a US Senator -- some day. Edited December 13, 2008 by Flash Tizzle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 The General Assembly by law shall specify by whom and by what procedures the ability of the Governor to serve or to resume office may be questioned and determined. The Supreme Court shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction to review such a law and any such determination and, in the absence of such a law, shall make the determination under such rules as it may adopt. If you read it carefully the Supreme Court only has "original and exclusive jurisdiction to review such a law" Now that refers to: The General Assembly by law shall specify by whom and by what procedures the ability of the Governor to serve or to resume office may be questioned and determined. The problem is that there seems to be a complete lack of law in that area. There is no guideline for whom and by what procedure the Governor is to be questioned. Madigan brought a suit by the Attorney General, but no where does it say that the Attorney General bringing suit to the IL SC is the proper procedure for questioning the ability of the governor to serve. Also I think that its going to be hard because in the United States people are innocent until proven guilty. Unless Blago confesses there is no way he will be convicted in time for this trial, so all Madigan has is mere allegations. I think its a political stunt, but thats just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted December 14, 2008 Share Posted December 14, 2008 CHICAGO, Illinois (CNN) -- U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. said Friday that he was fighting to get "my name back" after he was identified as "Senate Candidate 5" in a criminal complaint against Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. says neither he nor any emissaries offered favors in exchange for a Senate appointment. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. says neither he nor any emissaries offered favors in exchange for a Senate appointment. Jackson, the son of famed civil rights leader Jesse Jackson and a six-term Democratic congressman from Chicago, had publicly sought to succeed President-elect Barack Obama in the U.S. Senate. Jackson had talked to Blagojevich, the person with the sole power to make the appointment, on Monday, just one day before federal agents arrested the Illinois governor. Jackson said he only presented his credentials and polling information that suggests he could win re-election in 2010. Jackson said he had fought corruption "since day one" but said he could not serve as Illinois senator until his name was cleared in the public eye. "While I would be honored to serve the people of this state, it is clear to me that I am no capacity to serve them if there is a cloud over my head that seems to suggest that I am involved in some unscrupulous scheme to be a United States senator or anything else," Jackson told CNN's Don Lemon. Prosecutors accuse Blagojevich of selling the Senate seat in exchange for campaign contributions and other favors. However, they did not accuse Jackson or any of the other candidates referred to in the complaint of wrongdoing. Don't Miss Jackson denied participating in the "pay to play" politics that Blagojevich is accused of in a federal criminal complaint. Jackson also said he was eager to talk to U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald about his role. "When it's over, I want every to know that I want my name back. ... I'm fighting now for my character, and I'm also fighting for my life," he said. "This is about my children being able to Google their name in five years and there be nothing there associated with them that suggests anything wrong." Video Watch Jackson say he wants his name back » Jackson said he does not understand why Blagojevich believed he would trade favors in exchange for an appointment to the Senate, saying he had "nothing to offer but my record of public service." He also said he did not send an emissary -- including his father or his brother, Jonathan -- to Blagojevich offering favors. "When the facts become clear ... I think the American people will recognize that the governor of our state is a little different," he said. Video Watch Jackson question the governor's mental capacity » advertisement Jackson said believed that it was wrong for politicians to believe they can gain personally as a result of holding public office. "I think that there is a disconnect between public service and private sacrifice. ... If for one moment you think that public service is also private gain, then you are trampling on very, very unsteady ground that is likely to force you and good people with good names in a very different process," he said. Please, God.... do not let this man get off scott-free. Jesse Jr. is guilty, people don't just raise 500K for no good reason, and he should be held accountable on some level. He wont go to jail, but in the public eye... people must remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted December 14, 2008 Share Posted December 14, 2008 QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Dec 12, 2008 -> 08:50 PM) She's intimidating. I was watching her earlier at the press conference and she wasn't taking s*** from any of the reporters. Intelligent women, obviously. She may have been helped by her father in some capacity, but I could definitely see her being our state's governor -- or a US Senator -- some day. If it weren't for Michael Madigan... you would never have heard of Lisa Madigan. Yes she's kept her nose clean since winning the Atty General Job (she was unqualified when she originally won) but she is no different than any other politician who rides a parent's coatails to office -- especially in this state -- they owe favors. Me personally, I'd rather see a guy like Paul Vallas or Jim Ryan as our next governor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chet Lemon Posted December 14, 2008 Share Posted December 14, 2008 Dec. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich doesn’t plan to resign tomorrow, a spokesman said, contradicting speculation by the state’s attorney general that the governor might quit in response to federal corruption charges. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...&refer=home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 It seems as if the timing of the Blago arrest wasn't exactly what it was supposed to be. The Trib was about to blow the Feds cover. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/12/14/t...-of-their-case/ The Real Story Behind the Rushed Blagojevich Bust: How the Feds Are Frustrated by Losing (Maybe) Half of Their Case Cam Simpson reports on the Rod Blagojevich case in Chicago. Conventional wisdom holds that U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald ordered the FBI to arrest Rod Blagojevich before sunrise Tuesday in order to stop a crime from being committed. That would have been the sale of the Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama. But the opposite is true: Members of Fitzgerald’s team are livid the scheme didn’t advance, at least for a little longer, according to some people close to Fitzgerald’s office. Why? Because had the plot unfolded, they might have had an opportunity most feds can only dream of: A chance to catch the sale of a Senate seat on tape, including the sellers and the buyers. The precise timing of Tuesday’s dramatic, pre-dawn arrest was not dictated by Fitzgerald, nor was it dictated by the pace of Blagojevich’s alleged “crime spree.†It was dictated by the Chicago Tribune, according to people close to the investigation and a careful reading of the FBI’s affidavit in the case. At Fitzgerald’s request, the paper had been holding back a story since October detailing how a confidante of Blagojevich was cooperating with his office. Gerould Kern, the Tribune’s editor, said in a statement last week that these requests are granted in what he called isolated instances. “In each case, we strive to make the right decision as reporters and as citizens,†he said. But editors decided to publish the story on Friday, Dec. 5, ending the Tribune’s own cooperation deal with the prosecutor. Consider what had been dangling in front of FBI agents and federal prosecutors one day earlier. Since at least late October, agents had been listening through their headphones to Blagojevich allegedly dream and scheme about a host of potential prizes he could win for the Senate seat, including everything from an ambassadorship to a corporate board slot for his wife. But on Thursday, Dec. 4, he was talking about cash. And a politician talking about trading an official act for cash is a very welcome sound to the ears of an eavesdropping fed. In addition, the Dec. 4 conversation appears to have been the first substantive chat about allegedly selling the seat since Nov. 13. But on Dec. 4, according to the feds, here’s what they heard: Blagojevich told an adviser he was giving “greater consideration†to one pick for the Senate seat, named “Senate Candidate 5″ by the feds, because of that politician’s willingness to raise money. That man has since been identified as U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., the Chicago Democrat affectionately known in his hometown as Triple J. Jackson has denied any involvement in such schemes and says he never authorized anyone to deal in such a manner on his behalf. He also said Fitzgerald’s office informed him that he’s not a target in the investigation. Perhaps even more encouraging to the feds listening in on Dec. 4 was what they knew about the first time such a deal was discussed. About a month earlier, Blagojevich was caught on tape describing an approach by an alleged associate of Jackson. Blagojevich’s now-infamous quote about that meeting had been tantalizing. “We were approached ‘pay to play.’ That, you know, he’d raise me 500 grand. An emissary came. Then the other guy would raise a million, if I made him (Senate Candidate 5) a Senator.†On Dec. 4, with the feds listening in, Blagojevich was allegedly putting this deal back into play. The conversation resumed later that same day, as Blagojevich allegedly told his brother, a man identified in the affidavit as “Fundraiser A,†that he was “elevating†Mr. Jackson on the list of candidates, because the governor might be able to get something “tangible up front†for the pick. He told his brother to meet with someone (unidentified by the feds) whom the pair believed to be close to Jackson. He urged his brother to tell this alleged supporter of Jackson that “some of this stuffs gotta start happening now… right now…and we gotta see it. You understand?†He was talking about campaign cash, the feds allege. Then he allegedly offered his brother one final proviso: “I would do it in person. I would not do it on the phone.†The next morning, on Friday, Dec. 5, it all came crashing down for the FBI agents underneath the headphones. The Tribune’s front page screamed: “Feds taped Blagojevich; TRIBUNE EXCLUSIVE: Adviser cooperated with corruption probe, sources say.†Blagojevich read the same headline. “Undo†that “thing,†the governor allegedly told his brother, according to the FBI. And just like that, the meeting was off, only one day after it had been put back into play. There appear to have been fears in Fitzgerald’s office that those caught on tape might now seek to “undo†other “things.†Hours were logged over the weekend. Paperwork was pounded out. And before sunrise Tuesday, Blagojevich and his chief of staff were arrested simultaneously. At that same moment, FBI agents also knocked on the doors of witnesses. These were just a few of the people agents wanted to interview before cellphones started ringing across the city and others who had been caught on tape had a chance to get their stories straight. Had it not been for the Tribune’s Dec. 5 story, the meeting Blagojevich’s brother was arranging might have proceeded. Mr. Blagojevich is quoted as citing the story, in the affidavit, then calling off the meeting. At a minimum, the FBI’s recorders would have been rolling when he reported back. The feds also probably would have tried to bug the session live, or at least to tail the participants and secretly film or photograph them. That’s what feds do. Jurors love video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cknolls Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Dec 12, 2008 -> 08:50 PM) She's intimidating. I was watching her earlier at the press conference and she wasn't taking s*** from any of the reporters. Intelligent women, obviously. She may have been helped by her father in some capacity, but I could definitely see her being our state's governor -- or a US Senator -- some day. And her daughter could be our future state's attorney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 So here is how you have "no contact" with Blago on your replacement... you have your Chief of Staff tell his aides to contact the Governors aides to talk to the governor about your list of acceptable replacements for your old job. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122926660096904673.html Mr. Emanuel didn't talk to Mr. Blagojevich directly about the matter, by phone or in person, according to people familiar with the matter. He spoke by phone with aides to the governor, those people say. Neither Mr. Emanuel nor representatives of the transition team would comment for this article. The Chicago Tribune reported Saturday that Mr. Emanuel relayed to Mr. Blagojevich's team a list of candidates who would be acceptable to the Obama camp, and that these conversations were captured on a tape possessed by U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald. There is no evidence that this was part of a deal or quid pro quo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 That by itself really means absolutely nothing, and is 100% acceptable unless Obama was somehow involved in bribes (and from the affidavit it appears he wasn't). I mean, really, what dummy actually thinks a senator leaving to become president wouldn't talk to the governor of his state about a replacement? Obama's a moron for answering the question the way he did, turning this one-day non-story into a week-long or longer story, still about nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 01:14 PM) That by itself really means absolutely nothing, and is 100% acceptable unless Obama was somehow involved in bribes (and from the affidavit it appears he wasn't). I mean, really, what dummy actually thinks a senator leaving to become president wouldn't talk to the governor of his state about a replacement? Obama's a moron for answering the question the way he did, turning this one-day non-story into a week-long or longer story, still about nothing. That's been my take on it. He just wanted to distance himself as much as possible without having to say "Yeah, we talked to him, and yeah, he wanted us to bribe him." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 01:14 PM) That by itself really means absolutely nothing, and is 100% acceptable unless Obama was somehow involved in bribes (and from the affidavit it appears he wasn't). I mean, really, what dummy actually thinks a senator leaving to become president wouldn't talk to the governor of his state about a replacement? Obama's a moron for answering the question the way he did, turning this one-day non-story into a week-long or longer story, still about nothing. That's been my issue from day one with it. If you want to be different than the administration you are replacing, you probably shouldn't be using their playbook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 01:26 PM) That's been my issue from day one with it. If you want to be different than the administration you are replacing, you probably shouldn't be using their playbook. I think his administration will be different in that it won't be invading countries pre-emptively, disregarding the environment, advocating torture, attempting to privatize 401Ks, taking a dump on our civil liberties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 02:26 PM) That's been my issue from day one with it. If you want to be different than the administration you are replacing, you probably shouldn't be using their playbook. I think the difference here is, most reasonable people don't even suspect Obama did anything wrong since it basically says he wasn't going to give Blago anything in the affidavit, whereas Bush would just stonewall and claim executive privilege whenever there was even a hint of wrongdoing. Unless this is a part of a larger strategy (my guess is avoiding the need to testify), Obama's creating unnecessary drama by being tight-lipped here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 01:37 PM) I think his administration will be different in that it won't be invading countries pre-emptively, disregarding the environment, advocating torture, attempting to privatize 401Ks, taking a dump on our civil liberties. 401(k)'s are private. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 02:43 PM) 401(k)'s are private. I'm pretty sure he meant SS benefits FWIW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 01:44 PM) I'm pretty sure he meant SS benefits FWIW Yeah what he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 01:38 PM) I think the difference here is, most reasonable people don't even suspect Obama did anything wrong since it basically says he wasn't going to give Blago anything in the affidavit, whereas Bush would just stonewall and claim executive privilege whenever there was even a hint of wrongdoing. Unless this is a part of a larger strategy (my guess is avoiding the need to testify), Obama's creating unnecessary drama by being tight-lipped here. The very actions he is undertaking here arouse suspicion where there should be none. If he had just came out and said I did the prudent thing and met with the governor regarding my replacement, there really isn't much that could be said. Instead they went through the back door, with not even direct contacts, but something like 5th party contacts. Why go so far to try to hide your meeting, even before an arrest had been made. and Blago became political kryptonite? Heck he promised us more direct contacts with dictators, yet he won't meet face to face with the governor of his own state, even before his arrest? The more I read, the funnier things smell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 01:52 PM) The very actions he is undertaking here arouse suspicion where there should be none. If he had just came out and said I did the prudent thing and met with the governor regarding my replacement, there really isn't much that could be said. Instead they went through the back door, with not even direct contacts, but something like 5th party contacts. Why go so far to try to hide your meeting, even before an arrest had been made. and Blago became political kryptonite? Heck he promised us more direct contacts with dictators, yet he won't meet face to face with the governor of his own state, even before his arrest? The more I read, the funnier things smell. So what exactly are you accusing him of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 02:00 PM) So what exactly are you accusing him of? Being George W. Bush the Second. How ironic, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 02:03 PM) Being George W. Bush the Second. How ironic, huh? Pretty weak correlation if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 02:04 PM) Pretty weak correlation if you ask me. About as much correlation as John McCain being George W. Bush the Second. It's funny when the same games are played by "your guy" how he's defended in his actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 02:05 PM) About as much correlation as John McCain being George W. Bush the Second. It's funny when the same games are played by "your guy" how he's defended in his actions. If this is the biggest reason to compare Obama and Bush then good luck. Hope you're not a salesperson in real life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 Impeachment Committee Formed FROM CNN.COM Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan announced Monday the formation of a legislative committee to consider the possible impeachment of embattled Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Gov. Rod Blagojevich spent nearly eight hours Sunday talking to a high-priced Chicago attorney. Gov. Rod Blagojevich spent nearly eight hours Sunday talking to a high-priced Chicago attorney. The committee will include 12 Democrats and nine Republicans. Madigan, a Democrat, said that due to "the gravity of the subject matter," the committee's Democratic members will all be longtime members of the state Legislature. Each member will have served at least six terms. Madigan promised that while he has often opposed Blagojevich's agenda, his "record of opposition ... will not stand in the way of this committee affording to the governor all of his constitutional rights under the federal and state constitution, rights such as due process [and] equal protection under the law." He also promised the panel will work continuously -- with the exception of Christmas Eve and Christmas Day as well as New Year's Eve and Day -- "until they have rendered a judgment." Blagojevich was arrested last week after federal prosecutors accused him of trying to "sell" President-elect Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat by pressuring possible candidates to provide campaign contributions and other favors. Illinois law gives the governor the sole power to appointment interim senators. Blagojevich's arrest has thrown Illinois politics into chaos, and many of the state's political leaders -- and Obama -- have called on the governor to resign. Madigan is the father of Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan. Lisa Madigan is trying to get the state Supreme Court to declare Blagojevich "unfit" for office. She said Sunday said that Blagojevich may step aside on Monday, but a spokesman for the governor said he knows of no such plan. "We have heard that there is a possibility that tomorrow he will make an announcement that he will step aside," Madigan said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I don't know if that means he will resign or take another option that's provided under the Illinois Constitution, where he can voluntarily recognize that there is serious impediment to his ability to carry out his duties and therefore temporarily remove himself." But Lucio Guerrero, spokesman for Blagojevich, said the governor "is not resigning tomorrow." "I know of no event or action the governor is doing today or tomorrow," Guerrero said. There are other signs that Blagojevich could be preparing for a fight. He spent nearly eight hours Sunday talking to a high-priced Chicago attorney known for helping big shots in a bind. Blagojevich spoke briefly with reporters outside his attorney's office Sunday afternoon. When asked if he will resign, he said, "I just think you should all have a great holiday season." "There will be an appropriate time to talk about this, but let me just wish everybody happy holidays," he said. "Things will work out just fine.". On Friday, Lisa Madigan petitioned the state Supreme Court to remove Blagojevich temporarily from office or at least strip him of some of his authority, arguing that the governor was "disabled" and cannot carry out the functions of his office. If Blagojevich does resign, or if the state high court removes him from office, Illinois Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn would become acting governor. advertisement On Sunday, Quinn again called on the governor to leave office voluntarily. "I hope the governor does resign," Quinn said. "I think that is best for the people of Illinois as well as himself and his family. ... He obviously needs to do something because our state is in crisis." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Dec 15, 2008 -> 02:05 PM) About as much correlation as John McCain being George W. Bush the Second. Real good point. Anyways, if you read that closely, you would see there was no accusation in there. It just really raises some red flags when you have the President saying one thing on camera, and then sneaking around to deliver something that should have been done face to face. It doesn't bother you that Obama is already lying to people after you were promised that things would be different, BS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 Obama wouldnt be human if he didnt try and stretch the truth at some point. Obama's biggest problem in this mess is that Obama does not understand scandals and therefore he didnt realize it would have been better to just say that he had heard "rumors" about Blago's intentions but that since he had never spoken to the Governor himself he was not sure whether they were factual. He should have also stated that the Blago investigation is ongoing and therefore it may not be appropriate for him to speak on certain sensitive matters at this time. In short Obama pulled the dumb move of trying to cover up something little and then the cover up is what gets them in trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts