Illinois Governor Arrested

when he gets out of jail he'll become the new mayor of DC
 
The really scary thing is that even though this guy has been arrested, until he's actually forced out of office by the legislature, convicted, or resigns (any of which could take months) he still holds the power to appoint someone to fill Obama's Senate seat... even himself.
 
As a foreigner, I think if there is no political motive behind this arrest and his arrest was a result of genuinely honest investigation, then it is the true face of democracy that US should be promoting, instead of supporting dictators who ought to be hanged for the murder of their own people. No one should be above the law, no one; no matter how powerful that person is.

:2 cents:
 
The really scary thing is that even though this guy has been arrested, until he's actually forced out of office by the legislature, convicted, or resigns (any of which could take months) he still holds the power to appoint someone to fill Obama's Senate seat... even himself.

I just read an article that says this is true. Scary!
 
It's in cases that this that I wish impeachment can be done in matter of days if there's overwhelming proof that the party is guilty of the crime he's accused of. There's got to be something State of Illinois can do to take his powers away and force him to resign.
 
It's in cases that this that I wish impeachment can be done in matter of days if there's overwhelming proof that the party is guilty of the crime he's accused of. There's got to be something State of Illinois can do to take his powers away and force him to resign.

I was just reading about a couple variables that might keep this from becoming completely fubar'ed:

1) There's a little used rule in the Illinois constitution that allows the Illinois Supreme Court to immediately remove any governor that they deem "unfit" to serve in the office. It wasn't exactly designed for this purpose, but it would be within their authority if things got out of hand.

2) Though an interim appointment by the governor is the most common way to fill a Senate vacancy, its not the only way. Specifically, states have the right to simply hold a special election to choose a new Senator. The Illinois legislature is currently writing a bill that would permanently strip from the governor the authority to make Senate interim appointments and instead force a special election. They probably have the votes to get this past a veto from Blagojevich, so this would at least resolve the danger of him making a corrupt Senate appointment.

3) Even if he gets an appointment through, the US Senate doesn't have to accept the man he chooses. According to Article I, Section 5 of the US Constitution, the Senate can refuse to accept the election/appointment of any person by a simple majority vote. Harry Reid has already said that he's in favor of shooting down anybody Blagojevich tries to appoint, but refusing to seat a Senator is serious business and hasn't been done many times in history.
 

Legzman

what the fuck you lookin at?
I still don't see what the big deal is. I'd probably have done the same thing.
 

meesterperfect

Hiliary 2020
Ok, So obama says he's had no contact with Blagojevich.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5c5Cspu1KnE&feature=related
3:00 minutes in.

But on November 23, 2008, his senior adviser David Axelrod appeared on Fox News Chicago and said something quite different.

While insisting that the President-elect had not expressed a favorite to replace him, and his inclination was to avoid being a "kingmaker," Axelrod said, "I know he's talked to the governor and there are a whole range of names many of which have surfaced, and I think he has a fondness for a lot of them."

But then after Blaggos arrest Axlerod said this:

Axelrod this evening issued a statement saying. "I was mistaken when I told an interviewer last month that the President-elect has spoken directly to Governor Blagojevich about the Senate vacancy. They did not then or at any time discuss the subject."

Axlerod mispoke? For 5 minutes?

Well it can be inferred by the wiretaps that Obama refused to pay Blagojevich anything, it also can be inferred that had Obama refused, then he certainly knew.

I don't blame Obama for not telling all he knows.
Whats he gonna say "Oh yeah I knew he was selling the senate seat." ?
But then again I find it hard to beliieve that the Governer from his own state was openly selling the seat and Obama knew nothing about it.

If this was a republican issue the MEDIA would be eating the President elect for lunch.

Here is Obama and the crook in a photo from December 2nd 2008
Looks like contact to me.
 

Jagger69

Three lullabies in an ancient tongue
^Well it can be inferred by the wiretaps that Obama refused to pay Blagojevich anything, it also can be inferred that had Obama refused, then he certainly knew.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRHPD0y-IHw

Inferred? U mean wildly speculated? Fitzgerald said there was nothing to implicate Obama but, if there is, I'm sure that the continuing investigation will ultimately make that known (as it should).
 

meesterperfect

Hiliary 2020
Where does it say, at any point during that whole entire clip, that Obama did anything?

It doesn't.
It implies it.
The woman who was very possibly the choice of the crook to recieve the seat was an advisor and friend of Obama.
She pulled out during the investigation(probably got tipped off and/or spooked).
Obama then gave her a nice cushy job as a senior adviser.

Thats is when the crook said " They (Obamas people) are not willing to give me anything (for the seat).
Fuck them."
Hearing that I think its credible to assume if they were not willing to give him anything, then they certainly knew that he wanted something.

I don't think this is too far fetched.
How could Obama not know?
I'm sure many many politicians and their people knew.
But to Obamas credit, he does have at this time alot on his plate.
 

meesterperfect

Hiliary 2020
Inferred? U mean wildly speculated? Fitzgerald said there was nothing to implicate Obama but, if there is, I'm sure that the continuing investigation will ultimately make that known (as it should).

Wildly speculated Jag?
As far as ultimately making the facts known, I'm not too sure that will happen.
But like you said, it should.
 
Patrick Fitzgerald the prosecutor (who has the tapes) has said there is no evidence of any involvement of Obama.Is it possible that someone in Obama's circle had some contact and told the Gov forget it we don't deal that way which led to the Gov cursing out the Obama camp in the tape,it is possible that happened I think .But again Fitzgerald has said about Obama there is nothing that indicates he was involved in any of it.Obama said today he is having his people review all the contacts any of them had and will release that info.
I know you and other republican sympatheizers are hoping this will involve Obama Mr P, but so far it looks like he is clean.Unlike the last famous politicians who Fitzgerald prosecuted like Scooter Libby.In that case Libby lied and prevented Fitzgerald from getting to the truth he said.Libby was convicted of perjury.And in the book by former white house spokesman Scott McClellan that Bush and Libbys boss Cheney as well as Karl Rove were in on and authorized the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame.I haven't seen a lot of clamor in the media over that or a lot of other clear crimes Bush administration commited.They got away with that,wireless wiretaps,political manipulation of US attorneys and lots more.
And as to this constant charge of media bias I see a lot of talk about this and what Obama's possible involvement might have been by republican operatives who are on all the cable channels.But think we should rely on what the prosecutor says more than a bunch of biased partisans here and in the media might be trying to taint Obama with.Unlike Bush and friends this is all just noise with no evidence of wrongdoing by Obama.
 
Top