Could Gov. Rod Blagojevich Be Innocent?
Are Federal Authorities Overreaching In Their Criminal Complaint
Dec 22, 2008
After making his first formal public statement in regard to a Federal criminal compliant that resulted in his arrest earlier in the month, Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich said he was innocent of the charges and planned a long and perhaps costly political and court fight, which he said would ultimately exonerate him. Blagojevich apparently was led away in handcuffs from his Chicago home in the early morning hours on December 9th, so that his still sleeping family would not have to see him in such a compromising position.
Allegations Against Gov. Blagojevich
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's contention that Gov. Blagojevich was in the middle of several criminal enterprises were outlined in his complaint filed in U.S. District Court of Northern of Illinois's Eastern Division, stating that Gov. Blagojevich was involved in demanding the the firing of certain Chicago Tribune editorial board members in return for a favorable ruling from the Illinois Finance Authority involving a $500m subsidy for the Wrigley Field baseball stadium. The complaint also alleged evidence concerning the solicitation and receipt of campaign contributions in return for official acts on numerous occasions by Gov. Blagojevich, the attempt to trade or sell President-elect Obama's former U.S. Senate seat for a lucrative position either for himself, his wife or both, and lastly that Gov. Blagojevich was the head of an ongoing criminal conspiracy, a pay to play scheme, involving payoffs and kickbacks that seems to stems from a previous federal investigation of the governor's former associate Tony Rezko involving extortion and corruption of the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board.
Actions By The Illinois Attorney General And State Legislature
In the wake of these shocking and substantial allegations the Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan took the unprecedented step of requesting that the Illinois State Supreme Court remove Gov. Blagojevich based on her assertion that the governor no longer has the capacity to be an effective chief executive and recently refused to appoint a lawyer from her office to represent Gov. Blagojevich in his criminal prosecution by Fitzgerald's office and the related state house impeachment inquiry. Madigan's request by Illinois's highest court was promptly rejected and shifted focus and speculation about what might happen to Gov. Blagojevich to a special twenty-one member state legislative investigative committee appointed by Speaker Michael Madigan (the father of the Illinois Attorney General), who met in the Illinois capital of Springfield to open an impeachment process of the governor, the day after the Illinois house voted 113-0 to open impeachment proceedings.
Is A Couple Of Guys Siting Around A Table Talking Enough
True the allegations are stunning and if correct certainly prosecutable, impeachable and prison should be the end result, but where is the evidence? And did the Federal Prosecutor's office act out of haste, but not to stop a grand criminal conspiracy, but perhaps in order to discredit Gov. Blagojevich and his possible appointment to President-Elect Obama's former U.S. Senate seat? What better way to accomplish both goals especially if the Feds thought Blagojevich might appoint himself to the vacated senate seat? In addition various people have now been caught-up directly and indirectly, Rep. Jessie Jackson, Jr., his farther and his brother, Rep Rham Emanuel Obama's incoming chief of staff and Obama himself. But again where is the evidence? Is saying that you would like a job or a job for you wife a crime in and of itself? And as grand as some politician's egos can get (and we know Blagojevich's is uber-grand), what if this was all just wishful thinking on his part? A kind of quid that definitely had no pro and certainly came without a quo.
Business As Usual?
If any of the above is true, then where is the crime, really? And doesn't this type of horse trading go on everyday in American politics? Various highway bills over the years come to mind, Civil Rights legislation of the 1960's, and the Homeland Security Act are just a few other pieces of legislation that have come to fruition due to favors that have been traded for votes. And what about other U.S. Senate seats across the country. If Gov. David Patterson of New York picks Caroline Kennedy to fill Hillary Clinton's soon to be vacant seat, won't Kennedy be expected to raise a lot of money for Patterson and a whole host of other Democrats? Isn't the vacated seat of Vice President-Elect Joe Bidden being held for his son? Gov. Blagojevich may have done his deals within earshot of the Feds and he may ultimately pay the price for that, but one has to question if he has done anything that really hasn't been done before.
 |
 |
 |
 |
