Blagojevich: what the wire reveals
At this point we can safely say that Governor Blagojevich of Illinois is outrageously corrupt in an almost-comic book—or textbook, if you prefer—sort of way.
The proof is in the wire. It’s not a case of “he said, she said.” It’s simply “he said. And then he said and said and said and said.”
It’s ironic that Blagojevich ran on an anti-corruption platform six years ago, saying he would overturn “what he called a Republican ‘legacy of corruption, mismanagement and lost opportunities.'” Who knew that the accent in that quote would be on the word Republican, and that the “lost opportunities” he referred to were the lost opportunities for Democratic—or, more specifically, Blagojevichian—corruption? Apparently, nobody does it better—although in Illinois and Chicago, there’s a lot of bi-partisan competition for the honor.
Corruption in politics is nothing new. Corruption by particularly self-righteous politicians (such as, for example, Elliot Spitzer) seems to be a bit of a trend lately. And in the Blagojevich case, the wearing of the wire gives us an extraordinary glimpse behind the scenes at the dichotomy between public and private persona.
One can safely assume that public figures speak and act differently in private than in public. With their families and friends, they are more relaxed, for example. They also tend to clean up their language for public consumption. But the gap between the public Blagojevich and the governor who wheeled and dealed to sell a Senate seat to the highest bidder is pretty much on the order of the Grand Canyon.
One of the revelations, aside from the depth and breadth and sheer audacity of Blagojevich’s corrupt dealings, is that his favorite word by far is the f-word. A typical quote:
Rod Blagojevich said that the consultants … are telling him that he has to “suck it up” for two years and do nothing and give this “motherfucker [the President-elect] his senator. Fuck him. For nothing? Fuck him.”
I said his corruption was comic book. It is also cinematic—or at least his language is. It reminds me of one of my favorite movies, “Midnight Run.” Ever seen it? (And I’m not talking about the similarly-titled “Midnight Express”—I’m talking this one).
Although “Midnight Run” may not be exactly the film you might think I would go for, I have to say it’s one of the funniest movies ever, and I’ve seen it about eight times. One of its most salient characteristics is the liberal and very comic use of the f-word by most of its characters. I once saw the film on TV in an expurgated version, and it was funny in a different way—it seemed that every other word (literally) was blipped.
For those of you who haven’t had the pleasure, and as a tribute to the somewhat limited but colorful vocabulary of the private Blagojevich, I offer you this You Tube video featuring relevant excerpts from “Midnight Run:”
[NOTE: “Midnight Run” also features a wonderful scene involving the wearing of a wire by Robert de Niro towards the end. Just rent it and watch it.]
Well, to be fair, Spitzer’s crime wasn’t corruption in the ordinary sense, but simply vice (he was using his own personal funds for the, er, “transaction.”) But it was certainly stupid, as he was caught using a technique that he himself had innovated while attorney general (i.e., follow the money).
Blagojevich’s offense is, aside from being venal and the epitome of corrupt, also incredibly stupid (to levels that eclipse Spitzer’s stupidity by miles), to the extent that the only possible explanation that makes any sense is that he honestly didn’t realize what he was doing was illegal. Of course, that is also stupid, though at a level only slightly less titanic than that he didn’t realize his lines were likely tapped.
When something goes wrong, my brother and his wife now exclaim “Alaska!”, in homage to the beginning of Lisa Nova’s Sarah Palin video. Then, like the middle class nerds they (and I) are, they collapse in giggles.
I saw “Midnight Run” (1989) for the first time last March on TV. It was on my top favorite list right away!! So F***ing funny!
“what he called a Republican “legacy of corruption, mismanagement and lost opportunities.”
The key words are “mismanagement” and “lost opportunities”. He meant he could be better at corruption than the incumbent — I’m sure of it — I’m from Chicago.
And “Midnight Run” is one of the great comedies and that clip is the single funniest clip I’ve ever seen.
“and it was funny in a different way–it seemed that every other word (literally) was blipped.”
Sounds like what they would have to do to my favorite HBO series (“Deadwood”) if it was run on the regular networks.
–
Hmm, leaves one wondering exactly what The Chosen One paid for His own Senate seat originally….
But of course the MSM will sidestep any questions in the matter that may inplicate their Beloved Leader.
The Wall Street Journal today has a fairly detailed analysis of the case, a timeline, and the accusations, as well as a chart of the *options* Blagojevich was willing to trade in exchange for allowing The Messiah to hand pick His successor.
Of course, the key point here being that Blagojevich was operating explicitly under the assumption apparently that The Big O had a hand in the negotiations in some way – and that’s the key.
Obama was assumed by Blagojevich to be willing to trade the selection of someone to fill His old Senate seat for something of value to Blagojevich.
Now how, pray tell, did Blagojevich come to that kind of an assumption??????
“the liberal … use of the f-word by most of its characters.”
And there it is: The Kos Experience distilled down into a sentence fragment!
Better question, and more succinct than my analysis:
“What did He (The Messiah) know, and when did He know it?”
More interesting question is – what Blagojevich will be willing to reveal to the interested party in return to diminished sentence.
Which stems into 2 more subquestions
1) are the party really that interested (i.e. does Patrick Fitzgerald feels his seat hot enough to continue ask questions, or his interest will be cooled down with some candy from Obama)
2)speaking of Spitzer – how come, after all the scandal, his wiggled his way out of the mess virtually scot-free? What info he gave up?
Now Jesse Jackson Jr.’s lawyer has said that Jackson was Senate candidate #5, who according to the Feds offered $1 MM for that fine Senate seat, barely used. Meanwhile, one of Blagojevich’s deputy governors has suddenly resigned without explanation.
Chicago Dems right now are looking like cockroaches when the light is turned on. Everybody is scurrying for the nearest baseboard.
And here I was not looking forward to the Obama Presidency…
Occam,
Something I’ve noticed over the years, without exception, is that when a politician becomes the butt of widespread and insistent ridicule in the popular culture their political careers tend to fizzle out.
A politician can joke around, and a politician can occasionally be the target of a joke (which if they are smart will laugh along with as if they are in on the joke in order to diffuse it) – but a politician can never survive politically if they end up appearing as a running joke without end themselves.
That’s what was unsuccessfully attempted on the Gipper (as a result of his own inate wit he handed them their heads with a smile), it’s what happened to Quayle, it’s what happened to Bush the Elder, it’s what happened to Bush the Younger, it’s what happened to Palin, it’s what happened to McCai….uh…sorry, that last one was actually accurate.
Anyway – Obama is not even in office yet and he’s become incredibly fertile ground for ridicule on a number of grounds: his overall messianic demeaner, his insistence that you have to look up his nostrils as he’s always tilting his damn head back, his repeated halo’s in photos, his wholesale creation of fantasy offices (office of the president elect? excuse me???), his creation of non-presidential presidential candidate logos, his associations going back to his “community activist” days, Ayers, Wright, Rezcko – and did I mention he’s not even in office yet!
If the political right wants to have a good chance at retaking control of government in 2010 they need to start publicly pointing out the foibles surrounding this bunch of losers.
Don’t bother to try to actually go after them on legal grounds (but don’t pass up the opportunity either) – the press will run interference for the left as if their lives depended on it – but it’s really not necessary.
Just point out with acidic sarcasm in as many public and private forums as possible the rampant hypocrisy and corruption that’s evidently the norm for the leadership of the democrat party these days.
Point it out often, point it out at every opportunity, drop the stupid live and let live approach – the left won’t return the favor – and if a few republicans have to go down with the democrats then it shouldn’t be a huge sacrifice for their party if they were in fact just as corrupt as the democrats.
Consider it an opportunity to clean house.
Once the ridicule hits a certain critical mass in the popular culture and takes hold of the imagination of the general public, that politician’s days as a power broker are numbered.
One of the qualities of a true leader is an ability to laugh at oneself – but anyone who wishes to lead cannot do so if they are widely seen as a joke instead, and will not be taken seriously.
The republic party has had its share of ridiculousness. For example, Larry Craig has once again failed to get a court to rescind his guilty plea in the wide-stance case.
Good point, Scottie.
I hold no brief for corrupt Republicans any more than corrupt Democrats. Corrupt politicians of any party should swing.
This is why I don’t get into identity politics. Any organization large enough will have bad apples given a large enough period of time.
The Democrats have had their machine and collusions and coercive tactics and the Republicans have their idiocies.
But when it comes to policy. I have never seen such brazen stupidity lately when it comes to the subject of tax rate increases leading into a recession.
I wish once and for all Obama would let everybody know he apologizes for his capital gains rate and income tax rate proposals and says he understands economics now and works with the conservative types in Congress (whether Democrat or Republican) in getting the capital gains tax rate reduced, the corporate tax rate reduced and the income tax rates reduced.
This bracing and buckling and preparing for a recession/depression has gone on long enough. Leftists need to get a clue about economic policy QUICK!
Yes. That was horrible grammar but I was in a hurry. 🙂
“f***, f***, f***, f***, f***, . . . . .. … .. ..”
Funny? Maybe to baby boomers, otherwise pointless and crude. And characteristic of losers.
Scottie has it exactly right.
the press and no one else i have seen yet (still havent read the comments here yet), has pointed out a key thing.
he wasnt approached, he put out a call for bid.
this means that a majority of the dems willing to bid for the position thought such business was normal, and none of them went to the FBI (as far as we know yet).
in many ways (i dont have the time) i would love to see a list of all the things that politicians have been caught, what party they were at the time, and if they ever switched parties…
and then let the public vote on the level of heinious, and then see which side gets how high a score. of course such a system would be moved on by organized left like they do at amazon and google voting things they dont like as offensive building scores high enough that things get pulled and targets are harrased.
another experiment i would love to see is a legal two place sort. take 100 common crimes/laws and randomly pair them up. then ask lots of people randomly… which is worse a) or b)… that would then be used to order the things and then compare the outcomes to sentences we give.
anyone else noties that his hair style is right out of 1973?
Once more, while trying to sound smart… rather than BE smart… our own Mitsu credits Spitzer as innovated follow the money. Heck before that, not even the men going after Al Capone thought of that.
to the extent that the only possible explanation that makes any sense is that he honestly didn’t realize what he was doing was illegal.
Ah… that’s the point when your morals are defined by the personal desirability of the end result and not based on something of a higher order, which socialists are incapable of reaching given that the second they have accepted that doctrine, they have compromised their values without knowing it (if they have any to start with). So what happens is that they don’t know where the moral line is. they smoothly go from moral desires of earning a living and doing their job… to something past the line since there is no line that stops them (not even if millions are going to die). (poor Ethiopians next year are going to starve because of American greenie policies, but they will spin it to something else).
Of course, that is also stupid
Actually not stupid… habitual. It happens with criminals all the time… they are so used to committing the crimes that they forget to bother with caution. They are completely aware that what they are doing is illegal, what happens is that they lose the heightened state that they had to maintain, and they relax, and so what would make you think, doesn’t initiate action.
This has nothing to do with intelligence. It has to do with doing something so long without getting caught that one no longer does it out of conscious effort, but does it automatically out of habit and with little contextual examination which would turn on the caution machine.
he didn’t realize his lines were likely tapped.
Didn’t realize? He invited people to tap him, wire him, and record conversations in his office!!!!! Or as with everything else you were out that day in history?
Unfortunately the note about ridicule killing a politician’s career applies to Sarah Palin on the National stage. It was wrong on a scale at about the same level of what Clarence Thomas was put through.
If O didn’t pass the goods on Gov. B. to Patrick Fitgerald it means that he knew the Gov was shopping the seat and kept his mouth shut. Not good.
I consider “Midnight Run” one of my favorite movies, too, and have long thought it is generally underappreciated. At least I never hear any mention of it anywhere. I was pleasantly surprised to see it mentioned here. As to the F words, I could see how they could ruin the movie but in my opinion they don’t. I was quite surprised to see the clip since I don’t remember that word appearing with the frequency it apparently does. I remember a funny movie with funny characters that doesn’t depend on four letter words for a laugh (actually, many laughs).
Neo, I’m guessing you might particularly like it because in addition to the action sequences and the humor, it does involve a fair amount of psychological probing of the characters. Jack’s relationship with his daughter and his ex-wife, his relationship with the mob boss, his relationship with the FBI agent, and his relationship with the man he’s trying to return to the bail bondsman (Charles Grodin in a great performnce) all figure prominently in the story. Or, perhaps, I’m just unfairly pigeonholing you. 🙂
Mitsu, now you’re scaring me. No one is this naive.
But your post does shed light on the origin of liberalism, to wit, the apparent failure to grasp that there are bad people in this world.
Yes, there are. Some very bad people indeed. Blagojevich is a candidate for sainthood compared to some of them.
So if the only explanation that “makes sense” is that Blagojevich “honestly didn’t realize what he was doing was illegal” (I can barely type this without laughing) then perhaps you should examine your thought processes, and think harder.
Blagojevich’s actions may not make sense to you, but that’s irrelevant. What’s relevant is that they apparently made sense to him, because he’s not a very nice man.
You need to get past your individual perspective (“I’m a nice person, and a good person, and doggone it, people like me”) to realize that not everyone shares that perspective. Some people are rotten swine who don’t give a good goddamn about anyone but #1, and who are utterly shameless and ruthless about advancing #1’s interests (as they see them, which is usually in the short term). Prisons are full of people with this latter perspective, and yet there are still lots of other people like that running around loose. (Soros, for example, is obviously of that ilk, having screwed millions of Thais into the ground to line his own pockets.)
I apologize for the personal tone of this post, which I don’t mean in a derogatory way, but rather as a serious call for reflection. To impute honesty to Blagojevich because his alleged actions don’t “make sense” to you otherwise is scary stuff indeed.
East Bay Jim,
It may or may not apply to Palin – the interviews with Obama voters indicates a general ignorance of facts.
When confronted with facts most intelligent people change their views while the stupid people cling to those views in spite of all evidence pointing to a contrary opinion.
So, Palin did get lambasted and ridiculed by the MSM and most on the left have a low opinion of her intellect.
How is that different than the view of most of the left regarding *anyone* who’s views they disagree with????
It seems to be a mindset of the left that anyone who disagrees with them is simply stupid, as they are certain their own opinions cannot actually be wrong.
A huge difference between Palin and the aforementioned figures I listed has to do with these facts.
Fact # 1 is that Palin IS demonstrably smarter than she is being given credit for.
When one underestimates one’s opponents, one shouldn’t be surprised when one’s opponents turn out to do things that were not anticipated.
Palin is definitely capable of that feat.
Fact # 2 is, in spite of what the leftists want to project as mainstream opinion in this country, Palin is extremely popular.
If it had been Palin/McCain instead of McCain/Palin the results of the election may have been quite different. Anyone saying Palin pulled down the ticket isn’t paying very good attention, as without Palin, McCain would have received an even worse drubbing than what he got.
Fact # 3, Palin is a fighter.
Whereas McCain was content to appease, Palin was dishing out red meat. Any attempt to pull down her image is likely to backfire in the future, as Palin no longer has anyone on the ticket above her to keep her from going all out in a campaign now. She can fight to win.
Fact # 4, Palin DOES have a pretty good sense of humor. While the term “Reaganesque” is often misapplied, I don’t believe that’s entirely the case here. It’s a big order to live up to, and I’m certainly not saying she’s done so, but she has a common touch that people respond to positively.
She is capable of laughing at herself (note the last comment I made in the original post above), but just as importantly she’s proven capable of slinging barbs with a smile while making her point.
Anyone going one on one with her, especially if the opponent is actually held to any semblence of the facts and not allowed to lie or make verbal mistakes with impunity (refer to the gaffemeister Joe Biden) is gonna have their hands full just trying to hold their own – much less put Palin down.
So, based upon those facts, I’d suggest that Palin is in pretty good shape to weather any ridicule directed her way, and while the left is certainly going to continue to do so (after all, she must be destroyed to remove her as a threat) it doesn’t mean that ridicule will have much traction with any but the devoted leftists.
kcom: I think you are correct. The movie is so funny that it’s easy to miss the psychological complexity of Jack’s character. There’s an especially heartwrenching scene when he goes back to his ex-wife to borrow money and sees his daughter. DeNiro underplays it perfectly.
>No one is this naive
Ha ha, Occam, I greatly appreciate your advice, but believe me, I do not believe there are no bad people in the world. The problem here is, for him to say those things while he himself must have known his phone may have been tapped (he even made reference to this possibility on Monday!) and NOT realize it would lead to his arrest — it’s just another version of stupidity/naivete which is just as hard to believe. As you may know, one of the reasons Blagojevich was going into overdrive with the corruption was because of an ethics law (which Obama helped bring into being) that was due to go into effect on January 1. One might imagine, if Blagojevich was incredibly, incredibly stupid and naive, that he thought that because this ethics law was due to go into effect on January 1, that what he was doing was perfectly legal until then. Obviously what he was doing violated Federal law, but perhaps he was just too dumb to realize that, since his focus was apparently on this state law about to go into effect.
In any event, regardless of whether he was so dumb as to think the only law that mattered was a state law intended to go into effect on January 1, or so dumb as to think that the FBI wasn’t listening in on him when he himself alluded to the fact that he was probably under surveillance … it’s just one version of stupid or another, take your pick.
Mitsu, thanks for taking my post the way it was meant.
It’s hard to know how to interpret Blagojevich’s comment on Monday re wiretapping. At that juncture the Feds had already wiretapped him (since the indictment had been filed under seal the previous week). Blagojevich may have gotten wind of what was in the offing and for some reason made his wiretapping comment. No idea why.
Re the ethics law, I wouldn’t give Obama kudos just yet. He’s obviously lied about not talking with Blagojevich re his successor. Axelrod let the cat out of the bag, only to have to eat his words later, so somebody is full of crap. At this point, cui bono considerations definitely kick in.
And to take the most sanguine view, it is inconceivable that any politician would pass up the chance to earn a favor by throwing his influence behind one candidate or another. The chance that Obama is telling the truth is approximately 1/Avogadro’s number.
First of all when you start with a putdown from a Youtube video starring a third rate actress, doing
a pathetic impression of Sarah, you don’t win any
points here. If you at least acknowledge her efforts against machine politics in her state, and pursuit of valuable energy development, you’ll be given a hearing. She burned bridges to the State Party when she challenged Ruedrich’s hold on the Treasury, which ultimately led to her resignation from the oil commission. Her campaign against the Murkowski machine, was the closest thing to an independent effort in at least a decade; since Walter Hickel, left the office. Her negotiations for the gas pipelines, that forced the ‘seven sisters’ to give up their grasp, was another signal effort. The decision to ultimately abandon “the Bridge to Nowhere” also was not an easy effort. The pallid parody offered by Fey and Nova, and many other untalented imitators would never haveaccomplished
that. the pathetic post election slanders, which NewsWeek still hasn’t apologized for spreading; are really not worthy of consideration. The latest round of course is the ‘wardrobe and makeup gate, which at the very least suggest that she could never have attended so many events as she did. She was the heart and soul of this campaign; such as it was, consequently the incoming fire was directed at her.
Blago’s as crooked as they come, him and Obama were practically joined at the hip; until very
recently, they shared campaign advisors, staff et al. The expectation that he didn’t know or even approve of these negotiations, strikes me as fishy.
The career path of misusing foundation funds, ala
CAC, disqualifying opposing candidates’s eligibilty
signatures, forcing the unsealing of court records,
all signal an unethical, if not illegal bent.
Forget it, Jake. It’s Chi-town.
I suspect that Blagojevich has been running amok like this for most of his political career and getting away with it, so I don’t think he’s stupid, just very, very cynical.
You could be right, Occam.
>joined at the hip
Pretty much every report on this I have read suggests that Obama and Blagojevich were not at all close — in fact, they had a relatively frosty relationship, partly because Obama pushed this ethics law which Blagojevich opposed. I’m not suggesting Obama is necessarily in the clear here, just that there’s little to no evidence to suggest he was involved in any of Blagojevich’s venal doings.
I agree with that. At this juncture there is no evidence at all against Obama.
Having said that, the index of suspicion is non-zero. It’d be pretty amazing if he were in the eye of the storm of corruption and yet were untouched by it.
(Here I don’ t mean financially. Obama doesn’t strike me as a man with pecuniary motivation. I could, however, easily see him cutting deals that gave money to others in return for his political aggrandizement. Given his meteoric rise, on a, shall we say, “thin” resume, and Chicago’s notoriety for corruption, that seems almost a given.)
Michael Corleone was not as stupid as Blagojevich and while he was not above using the “f” word he used it infrequently and selectively. Not that I am an admirer of Michael Corleone and The Godfather (but it is an interesting film in many ways), but I think most of us, however we despise the Mafia, did want to utter the “F” word a lot when Michael’s father was betrayed and shot and when his stupid older brother Sonny was also betrayed and shot.
People like Blago, however, are completely without any sense of honor.
I guess what most offends me is the fact that Chicago and the state of Illinois have such deep and pervasive corruption, and that the people tolerate it and even expect it. They try to profit from it, one way or the other. How did that place get to be so depraved? I used to think political corruption here in Boston was bad, but the political corruption in Boston and in Massachusetts is kids’ stuff, Kennedy’s notwithstanding.
Somehow I doubt the Corleone Family would trust people like Blago, Rezko, Daley, Emanuel, Oobonga, and his manager, Axelrod. They’d obviously pay them, but would never trust them completely.
Blag was under investigation for 5 years!
5 years under the notoriously grinding scrutiny of Patrick Fitzgerald.
And this is the final result?
If Blag’s such a blatant crook, why did it take them 5 years to nail him?
Just asking…
1. Mitsu, re: Blagojevich — It’s not that he’s dumb; not that he’s naiive; not stupid, either. It’s called ARROGANCE coupled with an oversize sense of entitlement in a man whose narcissism is in maximum overdrive.
2. I am not intimately knowledgeable about the specific nuances of Chicago politics, save for the general consensus that the political machine of Illinois and, particularly Chicago, is nothing but a sewer and a breeding ground for evolutionary creepier politicians.
It seems that there is no shortage of those who would be eager to offer proof that this is, indeed, the case.
I don’t know where Mitsu read that Blagojevich and Obama “were not at all close” and that they had a “…frosty relationship.” In fact, Obama supported Blagojevich, and was key in rallying support for him on the South Side of Chicago where he had had many problems, as had his father-in-law before him. Blagojevich was said to be very supportive (just what that entails I dare not guess, especially in light of what we now know about this man, and are likely to learn much more) of Obama’s campaign for the state senate seat and thereafter.
Further, apparently “Rahm Emanuel said that he and Obama were top advisors to Blagojevich during his run for governor.
(See http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/12/obama-emanuel-are-so-close-with.html and numerous other articles online)
Many have interpreted some of Blagojevich’s excerpted comments in which he liberally uses profanity when referring to our President-Elect, as indicative of the fact that that proves Obama is in the clear. However, it when Blagojevich said that “all I’m getting from [Obama] is appreciation,” it seemed to me that his complaining was based on expectation of something, and bitterness that “something” wasn’t what he was getting.
There is also the fact that both Obama and Blagojevich were very tight with Tony Reczko. It was precisely the same type of bribery, corruption and kickback operations, especially with politicians, in which Blagojevich is now entangled, that got Mr. Reczko convicted.
And meanwhile, David Axelrod is back-peddling to revise his statement made just a couple of weeks ago saying he KNEW that Obama had spoken to the governor about the available Senate seat and who might fill it. Only because yesterday, Obama stated at a press conference that he NEVER talked to Governor Blagojevich.
There are so many “shadows” hanging over Obama’s head, so many shady and corrupt alliances, racist and terrorists ties, and so forth, that it just gives me the creeps. I still remember a time when the least little whisper of something not completely “kosher” killed a politician’s career. Yet, at a time of major economic turmoil, 2 wars and unprecedented — and very realistic — threats to the safety of the American people, we have elected a man who undoubtedly has well hidden skeletons hanging in his closet. Whether you love him or not, this is the time when it would be stupid or naive or “so dumb” to believe that he is completely honest and ethical.
He IS going to be President though, in little over a month. And maybe I’ve read too many conspiracy theory thrillers, but the hairs on my neck rise when I think of the power and the capabilities available to the guy who sits in that Oval Office, especially when he’s hired strongmen like Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod et al. to consolidate said power and use it to advantage.
I know next to nothing about Blagojevich beyond what I’ve read in recent news accounts. However, I’ve read a number of articles saying the same thing: Obama and Blagojevich were not close (why couldn’t B… have had an easier to type name… if future, politicians with long names should please make an effort to avoid scandal, I think this should be some sort of new rule.) Yes, Obama supported him in 2006, but since then most news accounts say he’s kept increasing distance from him.
For example, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/11/us/politics/11Fallout.html?_r=1&hp says they had a “strained” relationship, etc. In any event I’m no expert on B… you can read the papers as well as I can.
Again, Fitz, a Republican, was investigating Blag for five years.
Kind of hard to believe he’d fail to pursue any connections with Obama before now, had they been substantive.
Then there is Republican opposition research.
We know the GOP is having a hard time with divisions between anti-immigration zealots, right-wing Christians, economic libertarians and militarists, but it remains a going concern.
Does anyone really believe the GOP was unable, during the 5 years Blag was being investigated, to discover any unsavory links with Obama?
Maybe they were spending too much time trying to place Obama in a mosque and in Ayers orbit to bother to look at more obvious, sane, sources of corruption like Blag.
That would be funny, wouldn’t it? But unlikely.
And if Obama is such a Chicago operator, where are the big appointments for his fellow Illinois pols? Looks to me like he focused exclusively on objective qualifications and appointed people from all over the country and all sectors.
Wouldn’t a man mired in Chicago patronage politics owe some payback to his sponsors? Where is it?
And then there’s Fitzgerald’s plain-as-day statement that the president-elect is not implicated in the case.
Seems pretty obvious to me there’s no Obama connection, but I’m willing to wait a while before reaching any conclusions.
Governor Blagojevich of Illinois is outrageously corrupt in an almost-comic book–or textbook,
It’s very surprised and outraged about US law… here we got guy calling him “outrageously corrupt” who trying using his position for his personal gain, caught and will be in the court , Obama asked him to resigen.
Then you got ambassoder Paul (Jerry) Bermer got off with USD 9.0 Billions vanished while he is his top official responsibel for that money, no single one asked him to resigen or call to be brought to the court for far more ” outrageously corrupt” attitude, instaed Bush awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom!!!
How strange is things in US?
Truth, there are no credible accusations that Paul Bremmer made off with that money or profited by it. The most likely scenario is that peacetime bookkeeping rules and wartime necessity don’t match. When you expect soldiers and officers in combat to get arcane, contradictory accounting rules right (especially when those rules are blatently illegal for anything except government contracting) you are expecting something that is harder than impossible; it is improbable.
I lay the blame at the feet of the same sainted Congress that gave us the tax code.
Ha!! The video at the end was hilarious!
I wanted to add my admiration for Midnight Run – I saw it in theaters when it first came out and have watched it several times since.
It’s true the f-bomb is dropped liberally in the movie, but that video gives the wrong impression, imo. It’s not a script that depends on shock value – it’s full of wit, just happens to be wit accompanied by salty language. So, Ozyripus and others of like mind, consider giving the movie a chance.
Truth,
Nice change of subject with no evidence (wiretaps or anything).
When did you stop beating your wife?
And BTW, do you know how many billions the Congress can’t account for each year?
A couple of things come to mind here. First – his wife seems to be just as corrupt and has just as foul a mouth. You must have some sympathy for any children that grew up in that household.
I don’t think he is going to get a lot of sympathy from anyone after saying he had to find a way to support his family because he was ONLY making $177,000 a year. Did he think Obama’s tax hikes were going to reach down to him? Why didn’t he just go get on the “job bank” with the UAW? He could have still kept his job.
I think, more and more, we will see this in the public offices. It seems since the days of Clinton – when so many said “It’s his private life and has nothing to do with how he does his job” – that political figures have the idea they can do what they want and the public will not hold them accountable. Of course a lot of the same machinations went on before then I guess, but somehow not so blatantly or often.
Bogey,
In case you don’t know it, public corruption investigations often take a very long time. “Knowing” someone is dirty is very different than being able to prove it in court. These are not like buy-bust arrests, with dope on the table, and then the cops kick the door in. No, they’re more like espionage or RICO investigations, where bits and pieces of evidence are gathered over an extended period. The reason for this is simple: the suspect is often trying to cover his tracks by speaking in coded language, working through cutouts, and laundering funds through offshore accounts. Weeks, even months can go by without any usable evidence being collected, so it can take a while to even get enough probable cause for a wiretap, much less an indictment. Even with the Title III up and running, the prosecutors don’t always get the evidence they need. But when they finally do take the case to trial, they want to make sure they get a conviction.
From what I’ve seen so far, I’m estimating is that Blago will be going bye-bye for 5 to 10, unless he cuts a deal first. If he does, then it’ll get really interesting, because he’ll probably have to dime out all his buddies as part of the plea agreement. His singing may or may not touch Obama, but there’s probably a lot of Rolaids being sold in Springfield right now.
The problems Obama faces is the complicity of his silence and the deceit of his repeated insistences that, like Sgt Schultz, “I know nothing!” viz, Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, and now Gov. Blag.
Those who go on about how smart and savvy Obama is must realize that Obama came to power through the most corrupt political machine in the US and that therefore he must have a deep understanding of how that unsavory machine works.
Which is why when questioned about B., Obama categorically denied all contact.
fact, they had a relatively frosty relationship,
http://www.moonbattery.com/obamablagoatgovernorsmeeting.jpg
http://www.moonbattery.com/obama_met_with_blago.jpg
articles come out too fast to establish ‘facts’ by who is fastest… which is why a leftist will hear reports that make everything bad seem ok right away… all part of the technique of the big lie.
which is how they can belive that in the most corrupt political engien in the country, obama the minnow can swim with the sharks, and not get eaten because he is honest… maybe the halo is real?
If Blag’s such a blatant crook, why did it take them 5 years to nail him?
because he was fishing everyone else out of the pond too…
watch jesse jackson jr squirm
its going to get interesting if they let it all out.
Everyone knows my conservative credentials here.
I just want to say that Obama could come out shining here. It was Rahm Emanuel wasn’t it that informed the FBI what was going on and helped bag Blagobing. (I heard the Blagobing name on a morning talk show here in Sacramento).
Obama has a lot to be desired here in his press conferences on this subject and has been scrubbing his change.gov website of Blagobing questions but here are two things:
1) Messaging is important
2) You really can’t comment on an ongoing investigation where you will be a witness.
Here’s a third thing. Yes, Obama knew about Blagobing and what if, what if Rahm going to the FBI was at Obama’s direction?
Am I missing something?
Baklava — Possibly, and I would think better of Obama if that were true.
However, Obama’s pattern thus far is to use nasty people for steppingstones, giving them his unreserved verbal support on his way up, and then when the nastiness if revealed, Obama backs away with transparent lies like “This is not the Rev. Wright I knew” or Bill Ayers is “just a professor of English in Chicago” and “a guy who lives down the street.”
That’s my reading.
mitsu thinks that the almost bankrupt and readerless ny times, which ad copy says “we tell you what to think” is the place to get good info on the reality of bad leftist relations.
mitsu’s inputs are all clogged… completely…
nothing we say, or show, or anything changes mitsu to look somewhere else… he has his head in a fishbowl and loves the sound of his own la la la, while what we say just doesnt get into his own lower atmosphere.
perhaps the huge negatively capitalist sulzbergers are mitsus kind of people?
you see… mitsu doesnt know history… so mitsu doesnt know the origins of the paper that he reads, nor the origins of actually several key papers. they were the key papers that the robber barrons took over to attempt to control what they are not allowed to control in capitalism.
mitsu only cares if the paper confirms what mitsu wants it to confirm so that it provides pravda type proof as amunition so that he can continue to listen to teh la la la in the fishbowl
i bet that mitsu knows nothing about the pilgrims society…
The Pilgrims Society, founded in 1902, is a British-American society established, in the words of American past-president Joseph Choate, ‘to promote good-will, good-fellowship, and everlasting peace between the United States and Great Britain’. Over the years it has boasted an elite membership of politicians, diplomats, businessmen, and writers. It is notable for holding dinners to welcome into office each successive U.S. Ambassador to the United Kingdom and each new British Ambassador to the United States. The patron of the society is Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
The New York Times and Time Magazine have been the news publications the most intimately tied to to the Pilgrims of the United States over the years. Since 1896 the New York Times has been owned by the Ochs-Sulzberger family, members of which have been generational members of the Pilgrims since the very beginning. Orvil E. Dryfoos, who married a daughter of Arthur Sulzberger and rose to president of the New York Times in 1957 and publisher in 1961, was another member of the Pilgrims. A number of outside Pilgrims held senior positions in the New York Times too over the years. Among them were John William Harding, George McAneny, Philip Du Val, Cyrus Vance and Charles H. Price II.
Time Magazine was set up by Henry Luce in 1923. Although he himself appears not to have been a Pilgrim, most of his associates were, including some of those who financed the founding of his magazine: J. P. Morgan partners Thomas W. Lamont and Dwight Morrow, together with the Harriman and Harkness families. Among the Pilgrims that have held senior positions in Time Magazine are Paul Gray Hoffman (OSS-CIA), Philip G. Howlett, William J. Cross, Hedley Donovan, Donald M. Elliman, Jr., George A. Heard, Roy E. Larsen, Samuel W. Meek and Frank Pace, Jr. Henry Luce III became president of the U.S. Pilgrims in 1997.
Another important Pilgrims-affiliated publication used to be the New York Herald Tribune, owned by the Reid family and dissolved in 1966. Whitelaw Reid, Whitelaw Reid II, Ogden Mills Reid, Ogden Rogers Reid and several other family members have all been members of the Pilgrims Society. In 1958, John Hay Whitney, a vice president of the U.S. Pilgrims, took over the newspaper from the Reids.
Although not very prominent within the Pilgrims Society, some of Reader’s Digest most senior and long term managers have been Pilgrims, spanning the period from the 1940s to the 1980s. Among them were William John Cross, C. Robert Devine, Walter Wood Hitesman and Kent Rhodes.
you see… mitsu is against large anticapitalists who have used capitalism to create their own ends.
which is why mitsu doesnt know that mitsu has been taught by them, and still listens to the angles that they fund..
that the list of the pilgrims would make mitsu throw up if he knew…
mitsu doesnt know about the meetings where these people… morgans, carnegies, and others of the key robber barrons of a period where dishonest power people sought to use capitalism to push out the rulers of merit, and take over.
ford said, he wants to own nothing, and control everything…
News stations are considerably less prominent in the Pilgrims Society. One of the exceptions has been the Radio Corporation of America (RCA), located in Rockefeller Center and one of he most dominant broadcasting companies from the 1930s to the early 1970s. Morgan banker Owen D. Young founded the RCA in 1919. Young was chairman of General Electric, which took a controlling interest in the RCA. For the next fifty years, until 1970, the company was headed by James G. Harbord, Frank M. Folsom, and David Sarnoff. All these men, including Young, were members of the Pilgrims Society. In 1970, Sarnoff’s son, Robert, took over the chairmanship of the RCA, but couldn’t prevent the company from going into a permanent decline. Robert was ousted in 1975 and in the years after the RCA was taken over by other media conglomerates not particularly tied to the Pilgrims.
The RCA, in cooperation with General Electric and Westinghouse, had formed the NBC in 1926, which became its main broadcasting corporation. By the late 1930s, NBC had become so dominant on the airwaves that the FCC forced it into two companies, one becoming the significantly less influential ABC. At this moment it appears that the succeeding heads of both NBC and ABC weren’t invited to the Pilgrims. Of course, the Pilgrims of the RCA did continue to exert their influence over NBC for many years. One person not mentioned before is John Brademas, one of the directors of the RCA/NBC. Brademas is a perfect example of a WASP elitist. A member of both the American and British Pilgrims, he was a Rhodes Scholar, a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation, on the advisory board of the David Rockefeller Fellowships, a director of the Aspen Institute, a governor of the American Ditchley Foundation, a member of the CFR and a member of the Trilateral Commission. Brademas also served on a number of Carnegie commissions.
The other exception of a broadcasting company that has been represented in the Pilgrims Society is CBS. Over the years several Pilgrims have been directors of this New York-based company, among them Henry Kissinger and Marietta Peabody Tree (vice chair Pilgrims; great-granddaughter of George E. Peabody, the famous Morgan partner). William S. Paley, the founder and continuous owner of CBS until his death in 1990, was a member of the Pilgrims Society. So was “the most trusted man in America”, Walter Cronkite, the well known anchorman for the CBS Evening News from 1962 to 1982.
they basically sat aroudn… and said… what key things do we need to own to control public opinion and move the country where we ant it.
the times, the tribune, etc… nbc abc and cbs…
these were all put together by them pooling their massive wealth and control… to insure that now that they go to the top, they would break the capitalist system to insure that they STAY on the top.
In his 1977 Rolling Stone article, Bernstein mentioned one British-based news agency (with an important New York department) that has been significantly influenced by Pilgrims: Reuters. Among the Pilgrims who have held senior positions in Reuters are Sir Christopher Chancellor, general manager from 1944 to 1959; Lord William Barnetson, chairman from 1968 to 1979; Sir Denis Hamilton, chairman from 1979 to 1985; and directors Lord Thomson of Fleet and Sir David Walker.
you will find that they follow the soviet power principal perfectly… they control both sides of an issue…
In 1948, Frank Wisner was appointed director of the Office of Special Projects (OSP). Soon afterwards OSP was renamed the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC). This became the espionage and counter-intelligence branch of the Central Intelligence Agency. Wisner was told to create an organization that concentrated on “propaganda, economic warfare; preventive direct action, including sabotage, anti-sabotage, demolition and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world.”[2]
Later that year Wisner established Mockingbird, a program to influence the domestic and foreign media. Wisner recruited Philip Graham from The Washington Post to run the project within the industry. According to Deborah Davis in Katharine the Great; “By the early 1950s, Wisner ‘owned’ respected members of The New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles.”[3]
In 1951, Allen W. Dulles persuaded Cord Meyer to join the CIA. However, there is evidence that he was recruited several years earlier and had been spying on the liberal organizations he had been a member of in the later 1940s.[4] According to Deborah Davis, Meyer became Mockingbird’s “principal operative”.[5]
In 1977, Rolling Stone alleged that one of the most important journalists under the control of Operation Mockingbird was Joseph Alsop, whose articles appeared in over 300 different newspapers. Other journalists alleged by Rolling Stone Magazine to have been willing to promote the views of the CIA included Stewart Alsop (New York Herald Tribune), Ben Bradlee (Newsweek), James Reston (New York Times), Charles Douglas Jackson (Time Magazine), Walter Pincus (Washington Post), William C. Baggs (The Miami News), Herb Gold (The Miami News) and Charles Bartlett (Chattanooga Times).[6] According to Nina Burleigh (A Very Private Woman), these journalists sometimes wrote articles that were commissioned by Frank Wisner. The CIA also provided them with classified information to help them with their work.[7]
sooooooooo since the politics want the control over peopel that the soviets had, they have done what to what papers? they have done what to people like mitsu.
mitsu… know anything at all about this?
bet not..
and for another poster that asked about how accurate mitrokhen is…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Mitrokhin_Commission
and here… Commons Hansard Debates 21 Oct 1999 : Column 587
fas.org/irp/world/uk/docs/991021.htm
In 1992, after Mr. Mitrokhin had approached the UK for help, our Secret Intelligence Service made arrangements to bring Mr. Mitrokhin and his family to this country, together with his archive. As there were no original KGB documents or copies of original documents, the material itself was of no direct evidential value, but it was of huge value for intelligence and investigative purposes.
Thousands of leads from Mr. Mitrokhin’s material have been followed up world wide. As a result, our intelligence and security agencies, in co-operation with allied Governments, have been able to put a stop to many security threats. Many unsolved investigations have been closed; many earlier suspicions confirmed; and some names and reputations have been cleared. Our intelligence and security agencies have assessed the value of Mr. Mitrokhin’s material world wide as immense.
read the rest… mitrokhin refused to turn the info over unless it was going to be public!!!
read the document… it talks about the fact that he still owns the information (so much about cia control)… they are accepting and working the agreement… since the data is second hand it cant be used to convict… and what you generally get from thsi documetn is a peek into these organizations that the ny times and other agenda places will never give you…
you learn that everything in his book is accurate… that they worked hard to put out as much as possible…
and that the 30,000 pages of information is being released slowly to the public…
who doesnt pay attention or care… the sword and the shield is the book… it will blow you away with whats in it, and thats only the stuff they can let out now…
many many many things have been taken from this document..
including the locations of weapons caches in eurpoe AND the US… which were removed. (and included tactical nukes). and lots of other things.
there is a huge history out there that mitsu never gets to see… beacuse mitsu has his head in teh fishbowl they want him to.
THE KGB IN AFGHANISTAN:
DEFECTOR’S DOCUMENTS SHED NEW LIGHT ON SOVIET WAR
http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/02/kgb-afgh.html
compare this information to what you can pull from the times…
then go to something like pravda, novosti… and look for the same information…. you will find the times will match them more than it has real information.
for many of the conflicts and things we talk about today… there is a shadow history that is public, but not incorporated into the discussion..
huxley, I appreciate what you are saying.
We just can’t speculate however. We should state the facts as we know them.
I am usually one who stays out of identity politics.
To me the issues need to be:
1) Obama apologize for his past economic positions that have had people divesting (in preparation for the capital gains tax rate increase) and bracing and buckling for his policies.
2) Obama should say he really does understand economics now and for the good of the country looks forward to working with all Congressional members to sign a bill lowering the corporate tax rates, capital gains tax rates and all income tax rates.
3) He should tell the American public emphatically that as a country with the second highest corporate tax rate (of the major economic powers) it is hurting american jobs and companies to have to work in this anti-busines type climate. We need to re-invigorate a) investment b) capital transfers c) confidence.
Each day that passes with this fear of the economic future and low confidence is BECAUSE of Obama’s stated positions.
Where’s Batman when you need him?
Well, I thought I was statings facts as I know them! It matters to me that while Obama is probably not guilty of wrong-doing with his shady associates, he does lie about the nature of his associations.
Good luck with your plan. I can’t think of any apologies Obama has ever made for getting things wrong, e.g. the surge.
True to form, he misleads and lies about what he said, and blames others for misstating his positions and distracting America.
I predict we will see more of this behavior.
did some research into the back.. .
Rod Blagojevich… full real name…
Milorad “Rod” R. Blagojevich
he is the second serbian american to be elected governor of any state… (the other is Voinovich – has expressed opposition to the creation of an independent “public integrity” office to police members of Congress)
He has been the target of multiple federal investigations[4][5] and has historically low approval ratings within Illinois; Rasmussen called him “America’s Least Popular Governor.”[6]
[the info has already been cleaned up and updated for the pjublic consumption since he is now in the light – amazingly fast… look at the wiki changes thing!]
you read his biography, and his father was a serb immigrant.. there is absolutely no information on his mom…
Through his father-in-law’s connections, Blagojevich clerked for Chicago Alderman Edward Vrdolyak.[14] Blagojevich then took a job as Cook County Assistant State’s Attorney (assistant prosecutor) under State’s Attorney Richard M. Daley,[14]
Edward Robert Vrdolyak is now a convicted felon… and he is a croatian… (serb and croatian… hmmm) He pled guilty to federal charges of Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud and Mail Fraud and is currently awaiting sentencing.
so add him to the list with rezko… just so give contrast. http://www.newsweek.com/id/167601
When he took office, he was challenged at almost every turn by a rebellious group of aldermen led by Edward R. Vrdolyak. The Council Wars made Chicago a national spectacle for its hostilities over race and the blunt bigotry voiced by whites about black politicians.
Chicago enjoys a loftier image these days, as its residents talk giddily about a new Western White House in Obama’s Hyde Park neighborhood on the South Side. Today those five Northwest Side wards that snubbed a black mayoral candidate all went for Obama. The city’s white mayor, Richard M. Daley, was an early cheerleader of the Obama candidacy. Even his campaign manager, David Axelrod, is a former Chicago Tribune reporter. The sort of bigotry preached by some of the bare-knuckled white politicians a generation ago has fallen into disrepute. Vrdolyak, incidentally, pleaded guilty earlier this week to his part in a kickback scheme.
so we have a link to daley and back again to obama.
mitsu… how about some harvard research to compliment my work rather than quote propaganda from american pravda the times?
Vrdolyak earned the nickname “Fast Eddie” because of his skill in back room dealmaking
so i guess that these guys were not as naive as mitsu says… that he is just the odd man out of a very corrupt machine in which what he was doing had been business as normal for so long among social democrats (menshiviks), that they forgot that they had not converted the country fully yet.
by the way… in case mitsu says that Vrdolyak was a republican… he wasnt…
Vrdolyak’s 1987 vote totals were very low among black voters, a constituency necessary for success as a Democrat. In light of these factors, as well as his growing unpopularity among Democrats, Vrdolyak joined the Republican Party in September 1987
Vrdolyak has long been the source of controversy, beginning with an attempted murder charge in 1960.
when they cant win as one, they switch sides…and mitsu will then say… look at the evil (r) because he doesnt know his history!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
now blog has a wife… who curses like a bankock whore left there by some white slaver… she is the daughter of richard mell…
by the way… if you take some time to look at the history… you will find that these guys are nearly all related… they are playing the old dynasty game while pretending something else, and we are too stupid as we abort our own future contributions!
Mell is the chairman of the Rules Committee (and was at one time aligned with Vrdolyak)
“Mell was a driving force behind Blagojevich’s successful gubernatorial campaign in 2002. However, in 2005, Blagojevich and Mell had a public feud when Blagojevich shut down a landfill owned by a distant cousin of Patricia Blagojevich for environmental problems. It was later revealed that Mell had served as an advisor to the cousin. Legislation was eventually passed giving the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency more authority over landfills and preventing relatives of top Illinois officials from owning landfills.”
and here is how the machine works
In 2007 Mell failed to re-register his extensive firearms collection, as required by Chicago’s gun control law, a law which he helped to write. Mell, along with Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, proposed a one-month amnesty, where the gun registry would be re-opened. Pistol registration was closed in 1982 and the window only allowed guns registered before then, so all new registration attempts were rejected.
they make up even temporary laws to help each other!!!
care to connect the dots to obama?
“The Fifth Congressional District, in which Blagojevich lived, had long been represented by the powerful Democrat, Daniel Rostenkowski, who served as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. Rostenkowski was defeated for reelection in 1994 after pleading guilty to mail fraud”
have you noticed that almost everyone around these people have convictions for fraud and really bad things?
and youcan connect blog with jackson senior “in the late 1990s when he traveled with Jesse Jackson to Belgrade in the former Yugoslavia to negotiate with President Slobodan MiloÅ¡ević for the release of American prisoners of war”
ah… so the violated a law too… as they are not legal to negotiate that.. (forgot what law – same one pelosi violated).
but isnt it odd that all these guys also have lots of these trips to soveit despots and such where tey can privately talk without US monitoring their own?
“During the primary, state Senator Barack Obama backed former Attorney General Burris, but supported Blagojevich after he won the primary, serving as a “top adviser” for the general election.[19] Future Obama senior adviser David Axelrod had previously worked with Blagojevich on Congressional campaigns, but did not consider Blagojevich ready to be governor and declined to work for him on this campaign.[19] According to Rahm Emanuel, he, Barack Obama, Blagojevich’s campaign co-chair David Wilhelm, and another Blagojevich staffer “were the top strategists of Blagojevich’s 2002 gubernatorial victory,” meeting weekly to outline campaign strategies.[19]”
wilhelm later backpeddled like axelrod.
though whats interesting is that one could think that smoeone clean would last a second in this cesspool… if they were really clean this group of manipulative collusive assholes would get them out..
it bodes bad either way… either you have a dirty person posing as clean… or a clean person so stupid an blind that they cant see whats in front of them. either way, its bad.
in contradciton to the repor that obama was not on his side
He convinced Democratic state senator James Meeks not to launch a third party run by saying that he would attempt to lease out the state lottery to provide education funding.[26] Blagojevich was endorsed by many Democratic leaders (with the notable exception of Attorney General Lisa Madigan, who claimed it was a conflict of interest since her office was investigating Blagojevich),[27] including then-Illinois Senator Barack Obama, who endorsed the governor in early 2005 and spoke on his behalf at the August 2006 Illinois State Fair.[19]
august 2006… when did the investigation start?
Other notable actions of his term include a strict new ethics law and a comprehensive death penalty reform bill that was written by now-President-elect Barack Obama (when he was serving as an Illinois State Senator) and the late U.S. Senator Paul M. Simon. Organized labor and African-Americans have become Blagojevich’s staunchest political supporters.[26] In 2008, he told a group of African-Americans that he sometimes considered himself the first African-American governor of Illinois
but obama wasnt working with him closely… looks like he was VERY close, and now the times is making sure that others pass the party line through people like mitsu, who want to be right more than they want to know and empirical.
there is tons more… but of course… i can hear la la la from the fish bowl.
Stuart Levine (left), the government’s star witness in the Tony Rezko trial, testified he paid former Chicago Ald. Edward R. Vrdolyak (right) bribes to win government contracts for clients.
http://www.freerepublic.com/^http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/rezko/848854,levinetest031808.article
one small group working the african and union communities, obama was part of it, and so he is the only clean person in this cesspool.. so clean that he never ever decided to drop a dime and call the FBI and get rid of these violaters of the public trust…
nope.
he got their help…
and the only thing we dont know is what he gave them or promised them in return (or if they were ordered by their handlers).
none of this little click did ANYTHING for free!
as the tape quotes clearly show
found him here… very intersting..
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
RUSSIAN THREATS TO UNITED STATES SECURITY IN THE POST-COLD WAR ERA
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:G6oWZs-MqSUJ:ftp.fas.org/irp/congress/2000_hr/hr_012400.htm+mitrokhin+Blagojevich&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us
very interesting document…
it covers the soviet cover story for the missing nuclear bombs that they cant find…
here we have a Russian general saying that they were lost or not being able to be accounted for, we have a leading environmental activist from Russia verifying his story, and we have our government publicly going along with the Russian Government’s total denial they had ever built them.
The following year, Mr. Chairman, March 19, 1998, I invited General Alexander Lebed to Washington. He testified before my committee. Again he was under terrible pressure from the Russian Government. Again he said–he stood by his claims that these devices were unaccounted for and that we in America should be troubled because those who want to harm us are the ones that those generals and admirals who are disgruntled would sell those devices to.
even more interesting when you know that this small pool of politicians were sociopathically guilt free corrupt… and made trips back to the old country..
let me know if this information… changes your minds a bit about everything going on now?
he’s going to tell you as the highest
ranking GRU defector in the history of the Soviet Union or
Russia, his job when he worked under cover as a TASS
correspondent at the Soviet Embassy in Washington was to locate
sites where materials could be dropped. And, in fact, that’s an
issue I know this committee is going to explore with him.
So now we have the highest ranking GRU defector reinforcing
the possibility of what both Lebed and Yablikov said and, in
fact, saying it was his understanding that these drops could
include small atomic demolition munitions as well as the
possibility of other September or August of this past year,
August 1999, Dr. Christopher Andrew published his book that you
referred to called, “The KGB, the Sword and the Shield, the
Mitrokhin Files.” This book, as you pointed out, is based on
the 8 years of collecting Mitrokhin’s handwritten notes about
secret KGB files.
I met with Dr. Christopher Andrew from Cambridge University
at a private dinner in September of last year. I asked him to
testify before my committee which he did in October. Dr. Andrew
flew over from London and he brought with him Oleg Gordievsky.
Gordievsky is the highest ranking ever KGB defector from
Russia. He was the station desk chief for the Soviet KGB in
London. He currently is in a witness protection program in
Great Britain. The two of them testified before my committee,
Mr. Chairman. And what did they say? They said in the Mitrokhin
files one of the things Mitrokhin documented was a deliberate
plan by the KGB to preposition military caches of weapons,
hardware, and devices in Europe and in North America. These
devices were intended to be used by agents who would be
prepositioned in our country to blow up dams, bridges, ports,
to cause significant unrest inside of our territory.
When I asked Dr. Andrew whether or not there were specific
sites named in the United States, he said Mitrokhin only had
time to take notes on a sampling of the kinds of cases the KGB
was working on. And he said he wasn’t interested in documenting
every single location of every single device that the KGB had
put forward. Because there are literally hundreds of them all
over the world. He did document four sites so that no one could
question the authenticity of what he was saying, it just
happens that one of those sites was in Switzerland and three
were in Belgium.
thats it… too many connections… too many lies… too much to post to even give a scratch of what is missing from all the converstaions, that is not missing in the conversations that these in the top of the state are having… right now, a whole lot of the things he was not taught, falsely taught, believed from the left… are all being taken apart and shown to be false…
all this is KNOWN… and if its not part of the conversation, then the conversation is invalid!!! its not considering all that are part of it.
imagine how obama feels now knowing that the russians put nukes in the US? (they were located and i can tell you how… the search was hidden by basic science you all read about!!!! )
The presence and continued flourishing of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, and the rest do perform a genuine service. They allow America to believe it has a meritocracy, even though there is no genuine known merit about it. Perhaps one has to have taught at or otherwise had a closer look at these institutions to realize how thin they are. I myself feel their thinness so keenly that, on more than one occasion, I have, by way of informing one friend or acquaintance about another, said, “He went to Princeton and then to the Harvard Law School, but, really, he is much better than that.”
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/857lzqko.asp
mitsu likes them since they are all his ‘class’…
Art,
Dude!
Your coefficient is off the charts!
I find myself skipping your reading material… Just so you know…
Concise has it’s merits.
Huxley,
I believe your prediction will hold true. Just so you know.
well taken… NEO kill em!!! history no one knows and influences those in state will remain secret… its too much of a slog to try to pass it on…
as for concise… then read this
blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/12/10/blagojevichs-big-conference-call-and-valerie-jarretts-clean-break/?mod=blog
Among the hundreds of hours of conversations involving Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich secretly recorded by the FBI since Oct. 22, one phone call is drawing particular scrutiny among politicos, journalists and others in Washington. It was a marathon conference call on Monday, Nov. 10.
………………….
Callers discussed the possibility of ambassadorships, which are made by the president. They talked about an appointment for Mr. Blagojevich as head of the Department of Health and Human Services, also made by the president. They explored the idea of getting Mr. Obama to use his clout to put the governor’s wife on corporate boards. And they discussed a deal involving the Service Employee International Union, which would be asked to install Mr. Blagojevich over one of its top political groups in exchange for the union getting to tell Mr. Obama that it was delivering the open U.S. Senate seat to his favorite candidate.
http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2008/oct/30/local/chi-obama_successoroct31
oct 31…
“I just don’t want to jinx him and I don’t like the karma of me thinking that far ahead,” Blagojevich said of Obama’s prospects in Tuesday’s election. The governor added, “We have had some discussions about a process which we’ll share … if all goes well.” Gov. Rod Blagojevich
>class
My “class” is middle class, like most of my classmates at Harvard, and most of my friends now. The Ivy League used to be the province primarily of the wealthy — since they vastly increased financial aid it’s more representative of America as a whole. I’m not sure what you’re imagining, Artfldgr, when it comes to the sort of people at these schools, I’d be curious to know what you think we’re like, really.
I don’t particularly think Harvard is the best school in the world — I had and have many complaints about it. It is true that it’s very selective, in that most of the top students apply and it’s the most sought-after college, and I have to say that I found my classmates very interesting, thoughtful, kind, and insightful people, for the most part. My classes were a bit less consistently high quality, in my opinion. The people that rather odd article lambasts are the high achievers … not everyone who goes to an elite college is a high achiever, in the sense of getting straight-A’s, going to Harvard Law, blah blah blah. I personally found those people usually much less interesting than my classmates taking more unusual courseloads or focusing on activities outside of academics. They were, perhaps, less likely to be on the fast track to success later on, but they were great conversationalists and in their later lives they did what they could to give back to their communities and their country.
It’s a little bit of generalizing Mitsu,
Data points to the elite liberals giving ‘less’.
I won’t spend the time to point you to studies…
Just wanted to make you aware of the actual ‘statistics’.
>Data points to the elite liberals giving ‘less’
I’m not really sure what you mean by that — giving less money? Or what?
I’m talking about the fact that many of my friends ended up doing things like going into public service, teaching, etc. I’m not making generalizations about everyone who went to an Ivy League school.
Artfldgr — I’m back to skipping your posts entirely.
Please think of this as more of a conversation than a political journal or your personal blog, i.e. avoid long posts, avoid multiple posts, link rather than quote, and edit for the benefit of the reader’s experience.
Which of these isn’t true:
A. Blag was blatantly selling political favors to the highest bidder and did so out of habit to the extent that he didn’t believe he could possibly be caught — even though he knew he was being investigated by one of the most aggressive, effective corruption probers of our time.
B. Over a five-year investigation, a very well seasoned attorney general — one who’d obtained a conviction against a sitting vice president’s aide — could not find a smoking gun until now.
Both cannot be true. Since we know B is true, we have to conclude that Blag could not have been blatant.
It looks much more like Blag was a very careful political operator who tip-toed up to the edge of the law and may well have crossed over it in terms of explicitly exchanging political favors.
Something is amiss in the shock and outrage. Dismay is very well in order, but the idea that a governor would expect to get to trade a senate seat for an ambassadorial appointment just is not a shocker and anyone who thinks it is hasn’t been reading the newspaper for a very long time or is in denial.
I recall that much of the initial coverage had Blag “selling” the senate seat.
Turns out that’s not exactly the case. Looks a lot more like he was trying to “trade” it for something.
Either would be corrupt, but we need to be precise when make allegations that destroy someone’s career.
Then there’s Obama’s alleged proximity. That doesn’t add up either.
Why would he outright deny having contacts if, in fact, he had had them, which would be perfectly normal.
If Obama had anything to hide, would he give himself the easy buffer of saying, my staff and I had contacts, of course, as would be expected, but we never offered nor received any political favors.
And again, if Fitz couldn’t find a smoking gun with Obama’s fingerprints on it in five years, what in the world makes Obama-haters think he has found one now?
Who said Fitzgerald has a smoking gun?
Where do you get off calling people “haters”?
Hux: Are you suggesting some of the posters here don’t hate Obama?
The smoking gun is the tape of Blag making offers. Are you even reading the newspaper?
Mitsu wrote, I’m not really sure what you mean by that – giving less money? Or what?”
Less in charity. They like government to take other people’s money and spend it. They give less of their own to charity than conservatives. There are two major studies that showed this. Sorry this is the first you’ve heard of this. They haven’t been debunked.
Bogus Man,
We ‘dislike’ Obama’s stated policy positions. We ‘dislike’ the people who have fomented hate and bombed buildings that he has associated with for years. Launching a campaign in Ayer’s house has been ‘downplayed’ by leftists but you have to admit it says something about Obama.
Obama’s stated policy positions have people divesting from the market in preparation for the coming capital gains tax rate increases and have people hunkering down and bracing and buckling themselves up for the really hard times.
That might make people say ‘strong’ words about Obama because he is very inexperienced and economically illiterate, but you won’t be convincing anybody here that he is right on his stated policy positions by calling us ‘haters’.
We see so much hate from the left and made up fake stories from ABCCBSNBCCNN and ignored stories – journalism has been declared dead by myself on a number of occasions. But does that mean I ‘hate’ any one person in the media.
No.
We care deeply about the issues Bogus Man. We would like you to educate yourself on the issues and actually ‘understand’ us instead of mischaracterizing the way we feel and think on issues.
BTW,
I have not stated so recently but I’m a ‘centrist’.
I may be far to the right of the majority of people in power (including Bush, and most in Congress) but politically speaking I truly am a centrist.
By definition if I keep calling for Congress to spend the same amount nominally for the next 10 years and reprioritize what it spends on things with that same dollar amount that is a centrist.
Libertarians want a CUT in government to the tune of 80%. That is far right. Anarchists who want NO government is even further right.
But to spend the same amount – that is centrist.
John McCain was the true centrist in this race as he was calling for a freeze in government spending except for veterans benefits
Obama IS far left as this government has already increased spending to the tune of double digits over the last 8 years and Obama didn’t think that was enough and has called for more federal government spending.
It’s really black and white (sorry for the pun) and isn’t really debatable with me. Lefties today are so far off the charts and nowhere near the center.
The English Language means something. Words have meaning.
And again, if Fitz couldn’t find a smoking gun with Obama’s fingerprints on it in five years, what in the world makes Obama-haters think he has found one now?
Bogey Man — That’s the smoking gun that you were talking about and I was referring to. The one with “Obama’s fingerprints on it.”
Yes, I read the papers (online). Yes, you are a troll.
>give less of their own money
Oh, I’m not particularly surprised by this. However, it appears that the primary factor is religion: religious people tend to donate more to charity, and since the 80’s, religion has become more of a predictor of conservatism, mostly because of the Republican strategy of appealing to the religious right. Note that in the case of Jimmy Carter (who himself is a born-again Christian), religious people voted for him in large numbers. I suspect if you did a poll of Carter’s voters you would have found they gave quite a bit to charity due to their increased religious affiliation.
But even comparing liberal religious Americans versus conservative religious Americans, you still find that conservatives give more.
Of course the conceit among the liberal religious is that they give more than the conservative religious. Not so.
Studies showing conservatives give more charities have been debunked.
The studies ignore important distinctions, the biggest being the difference between giving your money to the church you belong to or giving it charities that help needy people.
Conservative giving outside of church is lower, on average, than liberal giving to charities, the studies show.
It is telling, though, how far and wide the meme spread in the mainstream media that conservatives are more generous.
It would also be helpful Bogey Man, to be reminded that Fitzgerald’s conviction of Scooter Libby came without an originating crime for which Libby is supposed to have been guilty of obstructing.
I dont think Obama is connected either and I dont think that is what this thread is about.
Bogey Man — At this point I see no reason to trust anything you say or respond to you further.
Your choice Hux. I’ll keep responding to you, because whether or not I trust you is utterly irrelevant. In fact, the less “trustworthy” your remarks, the easier they are to debunk. I enjoy debunking.
Harry: Libby obstructed the investigation, not the crime. Obstructing crime is a good thing, remember.
My understanding is that he lied to investigators.
“Conservative giving outside of church is lower, on average, than liberal giving to charities, studies show.”
Which studies would those be? I prefer sources to unsubstantiated self-serving assertions.
Bogey Man: if you enjoy debunking so much, please provide a link to the studies you cite about conservative giving.
By the way, why doesn’t giving to churches “count?” Of course, religious people are going to do some of their charitable giving to churches, and if you take that away from the total you will end up with a lower figure. That’s a form of cherry-picking. There is no question that some of what churches do with the money is to help the homeless and the needy and that sort of thing. Not all churches are run by corrupt televangelists.
I seem to recall, by the way, that a large portion of Obama’s charitable giving was to Reverend Wright’s church.
According to this:
http://philanthropy.com/free/articles/v19/i04/04001101.htm
you are right that conservative religious people give more than liberal religious people, but liberal religious people give almost as much. The biggest determinant of giving is whether you’re religious or not.
And, interestingly, secular conservatives give the least of all groups.
From Mitsu’s link (which I read back when the generous conservative myth first started working it’s way through the mainstream media):
“Religious liberals give nearly as much as religious conservatives, Mr. Brooks found. And secular conservatives are even less generous than secular liberals.”
This is what Brooks research shows, not what someone is surmising or extrapolating.
As for whether tithing is different from supporting a charity: sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t. I think it’s clear, though, that it’s a worthy distinction and one that clearly offsets the purported charity gap.
I see the *Biden Rule* is in effect here.
Simply make a statement without real documentation – or a statement that’s even completely untrue – and expect everyone to take your word for it.
“The biggest determinant of giving is whether you’re religious or not.”
–Mitsu
C’mon, Mitsu, that is rather ridiculous! As ridiculous as any generalization. I grew up with an awareness of my religion but vague observance. I love my religion and am proud of it because of all I have learned about its history and culture, and I’m sure it informs my values to some extent, but I don’t give based on it. I give more because of an example set by my father, and the good feeling it gives me. People give for all different reasons — some because of religion (i.e. tithing), some when illness hits family members or close friends and awareness increases re: research needs; some whose great empathy moves them to give; and some who just believe that if life is good to you, you give back.
Scottie: what sort of documentation does your statement have? What sort were you expecting me to provide?
I referred to Mitsu’s link. Read the link and if you have any contrary evidence, bring it on.
>C’mon, Mitsu, that is rather ridiculous
I’m talking about the results of the survey, not my own speculation. In the survey, religion was by far the most significant factor, according to the study in question.
Was an Obama Team Member on Blagojevich’s Conference Call?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,465891,00.html
Case Confirms Rezko Is Talking With Prosecutors
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/10/AR2008121003232.html?hpid=topnews
on another note… http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/10/russia
when this and a bunch of other things collide…
its going to be interesting…
remember, the peopel we are talking about are copying the political system that the last link is commenting about…
mitsu,
conservatives, AND religious people give more… while more non practicing and non religious populate our prisons… there is a reaons that the worlds largest mass murders all were sociailsts!!!!
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html
Sixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.” The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives.
— Although liberal families’ incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).
— Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.
— People who reject the idea that “government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality” give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.
contradicting mitsu’s reason blaming the religion and conservative mix on bush.. (always blame)
mitsu:since the 80’s, religion has become more of a predictor of conservatism, mostly because of the Republican strategy of appealing to the religious right.
The single biggest predictor of someone’s altruism, Willett says, is religion. It increasingly correlates with conservative political affiliations because, as Brooks’ book says, “the percentage of self-described Democrats who say they have ‘no religion’ has more than quadrupled since the early 1970s.”
of course… mitsu cant blame democrats own behaivior.. everything mitsu doesnt like is from the right…
mitsu takes the position of nader: Ralph Nader, running for president in 2000, said: “A society that has more justice is a society that needs less charity.”
however, i was poor… i have grown up eating the cheese… not having money so had to not attend school. i know what its like to live in the south bronx during the race riots being one of the only whites there… and having my future taken away for social justice purposes… you see. our being refugees from the same system that mitsu wants, meant we had nothing… and even worse i was an oppressor class, and my sister wasnt.. so i attended bronx science, and no college after woudl take me bcause i couldnt mee the liberal definition… my sister is now going for her third set of phds… even though she is only three years younjger than me… there is still money for her.
so mitsu cant see the truth of how things are. (mitsu doesnt realize that mitsu is upper middle class, not middle class. mitsu… when you are a member of a 4 person two earner family making a combined salary of 35k then your middle class)
, however, warns: “If support for a policy that does not exist … substitutes for private charity, the needy are left worse off than before. It is one of the bitterest ironies of liberal politics today that political opinions are apparently taking the place of help for others.”
given i work in a medical library… i can list out links to lots of studies
since quotes put me in trouble…
Who Gives and Who Doesn’t?
Putting the Stereotypes to the Test
abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=1
“when you look at the data, it turns out the conservatives give about 30 percent more.” He adds, “And incidentally, conservative-headed families make slightly less money.”
“You find that people who believe it’s the government’s job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away,”
Finally, the single biggest predictor of whether someone will be charitable is their religious participation.
“The religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly non-religious charities.”
from other studies
Of those surveyed, those who live in conservative households donated an average of $3,255 to charities outside of places of worship during the past year. By comparison, moderate households donated $2,926 and liberal households donated $1,879.
The survey found conservatives gave, on average, $1,841 to their places of worship during the past year – compared with $1,115 for moderates and $499 for liberals.
so this helps clear up mitsus point and the other..
religion increases your charity and love of fellow man liberalism takes it away…
since in each case, liberals are the lowest donators to charities, or to their own religions…
and also to explain why mitsu things that the situation is not what it is..
while conservatives give more than their peers, they are less likely to spread the word to others about their giving experiences.
Among liberal donors, 84 percent said they had recommended a charity to friends, family, or colleagues. That compares with 75 percent of moderates and 59 percent of conservatives.
so basically they give less, and crow/brag more…
[which, by they way is a key violation of the religious teachings if they are christian… for jesus said that you should do good works and not seek reward for them… for those who seek reward for them in this life, need not reward for it in the after life. so those who actually attend religion and not a personal version, tend to not tell others of the good work they do… this makes sure that its a pure good work in the eyes of everyone and god. while the liberal is giving to get social reword. end justifies the means… the end is to get reward, nto help, since they give less, and crow more… conservatives are trying to do whats right, not because they get something from it)
Charity’s Political Divide
philanthropy.com/premium/articles/v19/i04/04001101.htm
“Some people will always say that government spending (based on taxes) is necessary to pay for things that private charity will not,” he writes. “This may be true. But we must remember that taxation has some very destructive consequences for communities and for the nation as a whole. Charity, in contrast, has only the upside.”
Peter Schweizer: Liberals Are More Selfish Than Conservatives
http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/Peter_Schweizer/2008/06/02/100864.html
Drawing on extensive attitude surveys, Schweizer’s “Makers and Takers: Why Conservatives Work Harder, Feel Happier, Have Closer Families, Take Fewer Drugs, Give More Generously, Value Honesty More, Are Less Materialistic and Envious, Whine Less . . . and Even Hug Their Children More Than Liberals,” which comes out this week, says liberals are much more likely than conservatives to think about themselves first and are less willing to make sacrifices for others
and last.
WaPo: Conservatives are Happier Than Liberals. Go Figure.
newsbusters.org/blogs/kristen-fyfe/2008/10/24/wapo-conservatives-are-happier-liberals-go-figure
A Happiness Gap: Doomacrats And Republigrins
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/23/AR2008102303473.html
is it any wonder that miserable people see the world miserably.
Artfldgr. Brevity is the soul of wit.
Surprise, surprise.
The same guy who spent years slicing and dicing the numbers to come up with the idea that conservatives are more generous than liberals also finds that conservatives are “happier.”
He’s probably on firmer grounds with his latter observation, but it’s nonetheless meaningless.
The same type of surveys have been taken globally.
The happiest people: Nigerians. The least happy? Norwegians and Japanese.
What does that tell us?
No more than we should already know: Happiness is thoroughly relative. The concentration camp survivor feels elated having cheated death. The well-fed, stunningly beautiful, intelligent, wealthy housewife contemplates suicide because her husband doesn’t pay enough attention to her and she’s putting on weight.
Happier?
How about sillier?
For many, ignorance is bliss.
We can see your unhappiness clearly.
I usually don’t make personal comments. But wow it’s evident.
Thank you Art for the information. Powerful documentation. There is only one thing liberals can do. Be more generous!
Stop hurting the economy with your policies! It hurts good people!
Aw, this was an extremely good post. Taking the time and actual effort to make a really good article… but what can I say… I hesitate a whole lot
and never manage to get anything done.
my blog – We Vibe 4 Plus