Blagojevich is innocent !!!
Ok, that was just to get your attention. Blago is not innocent. But in the case of the Senate seat sale, he may not be all that guilty after all.
I posted this this guy's blog entry (http://daily44.wordpress.com/2008/12/14/blagoobama-why-this-matters-and-doesnt/) a few days ago and got a lot of flack for it. Now I think the New York Times is wondering whether Fitzgerald's case is really all that air-tight! Was Blago just exercising his First Amendemen rights? What was he doing that other politicians don't do on a regular basis without getting in trouble for it?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/16/us/politics/16legal.html?_r=1
Advertisement
Nope, just shows that neither you, nor the New York Times, nor, apparently, even the people the reporter interviewed, understand the difference between an indictment and a jury trial.
December 16, 2008 11:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think so. Fitzgerald is too competent a prosecutor to unload on a current governor without sitting on at least a full house. There are reports that at least one of Blagojevich's advisers was working with the investigation, and today there were reports that Jesse Jackson Jr. has also been helping the investigation for several years now. There will be others who have also helped out the investigation. Recorded evidence obtained from anyone who consented to wearing a wire is admissible in court. I predict there will be more than one instance of Blagojevich or members of his team discussing in great detail, the price for his Senate appointment. This will be far beyond any sort of "hey buddy, can you help me out on my next campaign funding?"
December 16, 2008 11:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, this is all over the cable news today. Fitz has got a lot more on this guy than this senate seat fiasco. He is in deep doo doo and money changed hands and he is a crook and Fitz got upset after three or four years of investigating this guy and was not going to let him soil the new President. That is just my read.
He has had the goods on Blago for a long time.
December 16, 2008 11:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
What has he been waiting for, if "he has had the goods on Blago for a long time"??
I think Fitz. deserves at least a reprimand for his "trial by press conference" smear tactics, regardless of whether Blago can skate or is guiltier than sin.
December 17, 2008 1:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
William Jefferson has been under indictment or investigation or something for several years now, and no trial. Sometimes the wheels of justice move too damn slow, and while I don't like the guy keeping $100K in his freezer, I don't feel that declaring someone guilty because they've been charged or look guilty is the way to go.
Siegelman is still fighting his way out of that politically motivated trap.
December 17, 2008 3:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree about trial by press conference.
December 17, 2008 8:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I found that phrase in an apt TPM comment early in the history of the arrest story circa Dec 9, thus the "". Was it yours?
December 18, 2008 6:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Whether Blago is guilty of federal crimes or not, the statements quoted by Fitzgerald show him to be a thoroughly small and crude man who makes no distinction between his personal pecuniary interests and the public interest, and has no business being in elective office. I don't care if he gets convicted, but he needs to be out of office yesterday.
December 17, 2008 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, Blago IS innocent. Until proven guilty. And I agree that Fitzgerald's bloviations aren't very impressive, evidence-wise, so far. Fitz seems far more offended by Blago's harmless bullshitting about getting paid than he was about Scooter Libby selling out a CIA agent and lying to Congress and federal investigators.
If I were Blago, I'd appoint Fitzgerald to Obama's senate seat. Maybe THAT would give people something to think about!
December 17, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nope. Blago is entitled to a legal presumption of innocence by the court and the jury that tries him. A legal presumption is a procedural device that allocates the burden of proof at trial to one side or the other. Deciding to whom the burden should be allocated, and what the standard of proof should be, is a very serious policy question, but its still a procedural device and, as such, has basically nothing to do with whether he is, as an objective matter, legal or innocent. As a citizen of a state and judicial district other than the one in which he is to be tried, and thus someone who cannot possibly be called as a juror, I have no obligation to withhold judgment under even the most exalted and enlightened standard of citizenship.
December 17, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought MJ Rosenberg was very smart when he, without defending Blaggy, pointed out that more, er... blueblood types seem to get away with a lot worse. Or at least that.
Blagovich reminds me of Dennis Kozlowski of Tyco -- hard to defend but also the kind of "scrapped his way to the top" guy that always seems to get taken down to much fanfare.
December 17, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fitzgerald has investigated Blagojevich for over five years and in those years no evidence of a crime was discovered.
In order to prosecute Blagojevich the crime had to be imagined in order to fit the evidence that Fitzgerald has discovered.
Fitzgerald imagined the need to make an emergengy arrest. He has evidence from his informants and agents that the governor was commiting the crime that Fitzgerald discussed with the governor's political competitors. The media reported the complaints for all five years of the Fitzgerald Investigation and no evidence was discovered because the Governor did not commit a crime during that time.
Fitzgerald should end the investigation.
Constant investigation of one man, a political leader, is tyranny. It is tyranny for every voter.
December 17, 2008 10:42 PM | Reply | Permalink