Complaint is here. Fascinating reading.Patrick points out the insanity of Blago thinking he was going to run for prez. Dickerson is unsatisfied with Obama's response. I'm cutting slack. For now. I'd hope these guys would be more explicit later, though.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Uggh, Slate is already using the "What didn't he know, and when didn't he know it" headline. This isn't going to be treated like a potential Watergate, is it?
Of course it is. He talked with the Governor! No, wait, he didn't! Clearly this small ambiguity is an impeachable offense.
Blago-gate. That'll be the name. I'm sure some enterprising editors are already envisioning the headline. Cast of characters are being prepared as we speak. Axelrod = Haldeman? Did he misspoke then? Or is he lying now? Will the president-elect ask him to resign?
God, I'm depressed already. This can't be happening, can it? He's not even in office yet. Please tell me I'm being paranoid about nothing.
Peter
You know whats funny? Is the friggin pool reports that we keep hearing about. Drudge, Tapper, and Scherer at time are trying to push the "Obama's lying" meme when the truth is all any good journo would have to do is go through all of the pool reports to see if Obama ever met with Blago. Hell Ben Smith as Coates pointed out has been tracking whether the man has gone to church or not since election day, so I am pretty sure he still has the archives of the pool reports. Mind you all of the imperical evidence points to Obama coming out of this smelling like roses and looking like a hero. Lets, for a moment, take as truth that Obama met with Blago. Here is what the imperical evidence would show in my opinion.
1. Obama meets with Blago to recommend Valerie Jarrett
2. Blago says he wants Obama to pay to play
3. Obama says thanks but no thanks.
4. Blago starts making threats about naming other people if Obama doesn't pony up
5. Obama says phuck you to Blago and names Valarie Jarrett to his White House Staff.
I mean its Blago's own words that tell us that Obama's people weren't playing ball. And we do know that he was referring to Valerie Jarret. And we do know that she took her name out of consideration and joined Obama's WH team. I am really anxious to see how Sean Hannity can twist those simple facts into a negative light. Its almost impossible. But of course he probably won't touch it because, well, they are FACTS. He and every other two bit talking head will just focus on the bogus "Obama's lying" meme without taking the next step of trying to explain WHY he might lie about talking to a guy when its pretty easy to find out whether he did or didn't and when he obviously refused to bow to Blago's demands.
Now mind you thats the WORST case scenario based on the indictment handed down yesterday. But the jackoffs in the press want to focus on if Obama lied about meeting Blago. Funny that none of them are accusing Axlerod of lying or just misspeaking. No, its all about whether Obama lied. And again I don't think its too hard to go back through the pool reports. But the press is going to be on a 4 to 8 year witch hunt against Obama. I guess they are gonna use all that inner "Sherlock Holmes" they have been saving up for the last 8 years. Its funny and sad all at the same time.
Here is what lets you know how shady the media are right now though. Here is a link that I found yesterday that had the full video of the FoxNews appearance by Axlerod which showed the full exchange where he started off saying that he hadn't even talked to Obama about the Senate seat and didn't want to speak for him, before he said Obama met with Blago. So why is it today that the video that showed THAT exchange has been taken down, but the video showing the rest of Axlerod's appearance is still up? I am about to get fitted for my tinfoil kangol
http://progressillinois.com/2008/11/23/axelrod-on-fcs
What I want to know is when any of those bastards will write a story about the many lies of George Bush. But I'm not holding my breath.
That's some awfully weak sauce from Dickerson, and the saddest part is that it's not even unusual.
PeterGuillam - You are being paranoid about nothing.
Seriously, I'm getting deja vu. This is going to be like Ayers, where the media screams and wails for a week, then does a poll, and realizes that a)Obama has done nothing wrong, and b) the public does not give a crap.
Will the Republicans hold on to this for months? Of course, they are still trying to flog Rezko. But I don't think its going to harm Obama any. And its not going to be Watergate.
I must admit that the MTP quote:
"The last thing I want to do is get involved in New York politics. I've got enough trouble in terms of Illinois politics"
sounded strange to me at the time he said it, and it's interesting to recall it now. I wonder what he meant when he said that? It could be anything, but it's got me thinking.
Maybe Obama knew Blago was an ass to begin with, and he had a general sense that Blago was stirring the shit pot over this nomination. I'm not sure where the line gets crossed btw a greasy backdoor handshake and extortion (or something illegal) in the world of politics and senate seat nominations, but perhaps Obama thought it was the former and just wanted to stay out of it. That might explain any hesitation he has now that it's turned to illegal business. All speculation of course; just airing my thoughts.
Dickerson's first column yesterday was pretty complimentary of Obama.
http://www.slate.com/id/2206349/
I guess that was before he "discovered" that Axelrod interview. Suddenly it's no longer about how Blagojevich himself basically exonerated Obama in his oh-so-colorful language, instead about who lied about when and if Obama ever met the governor.
I usually like Dickerson's stuff, but I think his inner "wow, a potential presidential scandal, I could be the next Woodward and Bernstein" is showing here.
Tessa
Everybody knew about Blago being investigated. He was featured in one of the McCain "Chicago politics" attack ads. It wasn't a secret. And here is the thing people are failing to point out. What if Obama or members of his staff are material witnesses? They CAN'T talk about the case then. And to me after reading the indictment its higly likely that somebody in the campaign was contacted by Blagojevich and probably dropped a dime on him
Blago referred to Obama as an individual with strong Oedipus issues. Any sane person, which does not include large parts of the right wing punditocracy(CLOWNocracy), is going to have to acknowledge that Blago was given the impression that Obama was not going to pony up to his demands.
I didn't feel Blago spreading the Obama love. In fact Blago hates Obama because Blago had dreams that he was going to be President this coming January.
I've been watching Blago since 1994 as I live a few miles from this asshat. Not particulary bright. Not very charismatic. No clue as to "ethics". All hair and little brains.
He married the sexy daughter of a Chicago Ward boss and basically was handed his three elected jobs.
In some sense he strikes me as a high functioning autistic with limited social skills, no real friends, and an all encompassing ego and belief that he is entitled to power.
He shares many qualities with Sarah Palin. A complete belief in his own destiny and a willingness to lie about anything. It is pathological. If he told me it was a bright and sunny day I would step outside to check.
Trying to shake down the President Elect of the United States over a Senate seat is almost beyond belief. Blago may actually be able to plead diminished capacity or insane by virtue of hairspray overdose.
Don't blame me. I seldom ever vote for Republicans, but I voted for Blago's opponents in the Democratic primaries and the general election.
To quote that Psychotic Religious Englishman Oliver Cromwell to the Rump Parliament:
You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately ... Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!
I think Rahm dropped the dime on Blago to Fitzgerald and I don't think they can ' comment' on it now.
Of this, I am sure: the President-elect, once he realized what Blago was up to said,
HELL NO.
And worked with his folks to keep himself above it all and out of it, all the while trying to put the shiv in Blago.
He's not about to let someone like Blago hurt him.
BTW, Blago will NOT be resigning. He'll have to be thrown out.
@sgwhiteinfla
Yes I know about the prior Blago investigation. I guess that could have been what Obama was talking about on MTP (He made the commment as if everyone knew what he was referring to). But I wonder if Obama (and his team) knew that Blago was skating close to the line of legality over the sentate seat nomination, or if they believed he was just being an ass.
@IrishPirate
When the story broke (I had never seen a picture of Blago before) I joked to my husband: "Who would trust someone who wears their hair that way?" Fawuuu that's some bad hair!
If Obama met with Blago, the reporter pool knows it. If Obama spoke with Blago, the FBI knows it and Fitz knows it.
I think that once Blago's demands were made known to Obama or Rahm Emmanual, they reported it to Fitz, who they knew was investigating Blago. They arrested Blago while this scheme was still in the talking stage, which makes the conviction harder, because just having this talk (which they had on tape already) would have de-legitimized whoever was ultimately appointed to the Senate seat. Imagine what would have happened if these taped conversations came out AFTER someone was appointed by Blago to the Senate. No matter who it was, or how it came about, that Senator would be tainted. And if that Senator was someone who was seen as an ally of Obama, (and just being a Dem would be enough for that), the question would be out there that Obama paid for the seat.
Obama has been out in front of this problem from the beginning, and has successfully cut Blago off at the pass, before he could extort his administration and cast a cloud its integrity.
I don't have my blog because I am not good enough yet at picking topics that other folks want to hear and I don't have the time to devote to it yet. But I post at daily kos from time to time when I have the time and a topic comes up that I know a lot of people might be talking about. Here is my take on "Blago Gate"
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/12/10/9748/2068/821/671418
When the story broke (I had never seen a picture of Blago before) I joked to my husband: "Who would trust someone who wears their hair that way?" Fawuuu that's some bad hair!
There was a congressman from Ohio a few years back that had awful hair and got sent to the pokey for corruption. Don't remember the name, but I can't get his awful hair out of my mind.
My guess is what the MTP comment meant was that Obama is "supposed to" have an interest in who takes "his" seat -- i.e.: press feels like he should have say in it and this will be a 'test of his leadership,' and that announcement has not been made.
It may also mean that he knew of the investigation, or, more likely, it didn't. But even if it did, was he supposed to say, "Well, I wish the governor hadn't asked me to pay for Valerie Jarrett, especially when the FBI is taping his calls, as he may or may not know?"
OTOH, I'm sure Patrick Fitzgerald would have been very happy if the PE, without notes or checking his records, had submitted to on-air questioning about a range of matters that Fitz was careful not to delve into.
Dickerson needs to find a job.
Ezra Klein compared Rahm Emanuel being the whistleblower to a plot point in The Soprano:
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=12&year=2008&base_name=the_case_for_rahm
And a commenter scolded him for not giving SPOILER ALERT. Heh. Nice to know TNC is not the only having problems with spoiler-phobics.
I'm not really buying the Rahm-dropped-the-dime story for some reason. Especially since the wiretapping must have started pretty early, no? Before Rahm was named COS?
Fitzgerald's comments at the press conference, as he outlined Blago's "ambitions", were as if to say, "observe the madness." Blago, with a good lawyer, could get off on insanity charges. Would that be a first, to argue insanity as a defense for corruption charges?
There was a congressman from Ohio a few years back that had awful hair and got sent to the pokey for corruption. Don't remember the name, but I can't get his awful hair out of my mind
You must be talking about James Traficant.
sgwhiteinfla, the portions of Morning Joe I watched included the response from Obama's people that Axlerod misspoke. I am almost certain Obama has nothing to do with all this, and even if they had a conversation regarding the appointment (as referenced rightly or wrongly by Axlerod) it would probably show up in a wiretap. But there is reason to question it because Alxerod stated it first and when there was nothing that makes a conversation look bad, whereas now, having a conversation would at least bring up questions.
I thought the treatment on Morning Joe was fairly evenhanded, he didn't pull this Markos crap like saying "don't be surprised, it is what democrats do". Scarborough did bring up scandals involving Republicans
DougEMI
You and I just have a different opinion of what is even handed. The only person who kept bringing up the fact that Axlerod said he misspoke was . Not only that Joe Scarborough got to quoting FoxNews and Karl Rove using false equivalencies that the media would be questioning Obama about this if he was a republican. The irony was rich of course considering that Joe Scarborough is in the media as is FoxNews as is Karl Rove now. Karl Rove has never been taken to task about the Valerie Plame issue and Bush commuted the guy who was held to account's sentence with no media blowback. Harold Ford Jr. had to repeatedly remind Scarborough that Obama endorsing the guy for Governer did not mean they were friends and he finally got Scarborough to shut up when he brought up Tom Delay. The repeated intended impression to me was that Obama was lying about meeting with Blagojevich and I don't take that as being fairly even handed. But thats just my opinion
I wish Axelrod hadn't use the word "misspoke". There's just something .... vaguely sinister about that word, vaguely conspiratorial or something. But I'm not sure what a better word would be. He was "misinformed"? He didn't have all the information at the time? He was making a wrong assumption about the president-elect's schedule?
Aghh, nope, nope, everything sound sinister, actually. This is just something that will be dissected and prodded over and over again.
How stupid can you get ? I mean, how can this guy govern anything, much less a big-sized state, with this level of (non-)intelligence.
The karmic irony is almost intoxicating. The wingnuts might not agree, but Obama basically ensured the ethics bill sailed through, and that set in motion a chain of events leading to this....
I wish Obama would inject himself into more state politics if this would be the result - of outing corruption...
But the fact that Scarborough had voices on his show can be seen as even handed. If the parties were flipped and the show was Countdown, Olby would be showing every picture he could find with the republican equivalents of Obama and Blago smiling in each others company. Olbermann's guest wouldn't be a republican to call him on his shit, but would be Jonathan Alter who would accuse the admin of throwing the republican version of Axlerod "under the bus". Then it might be followed up with a GOP Hall of Corruption.
For how much I dislike Olbermann, I do find redeemable things in his show and his counterparts on the right. They tend to bring up things before they hit the greater media because their standards are lower and I don't mean this necessarily in a bad way. They don't seem to be as bound by needing two named sources or whatever their editors require. Also, much of the media is fact driven, sometimes to the point of press release regurgitation. People like Olbermann can delve more deeply into motivations.
Even Maddow was making allusions to Obama sounding Bush-like last night and Ed Schultz is doing so today. On these points, I think both these liberals are wrong. I don't think it is wrong for Obama to not comment much on an impending criminal trial that he has nothing to do with.
Obama has called for Blagojevich to step down. Its funny that everybody was calling for Obama to make a snap judgement on the situation as if he somehow knew it was coming. But these are the same Republicans who NEVER asked for Ted Stevens to step down before he actually went to trial. And they are the same ones who gave Stevens a standing ovation and are lobbying for him to be pardoned by GWB. They don't give a damm about corruption. They are simply using the situation to try to tar and feather Obama and the media is a willing accomplice.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/12/10/12626/492/938/671309
By the way Doug, I think KO used to invite Republicans but they would never come on his show. Rachel Maddow invites them and they consistently snub her as well. FoxNews gets Democrats to come on not because they have legit shows, but because they have the highest market share. But the difference between their shows and say a Bill O show to me is that they don't just jump on every percieved controversy. They are choosy about the topics they flog and in general they are right when they call Republicans out. Mind you Rachel Maddow has called out Democrats as well and she even called out Obama because he said he wanted to put more troops in to Afghanistan. Where as Sean Hannity was using Blagojevich to say yet again that Obama associates with "radicals".
The calls for Blago to step down also came from Schultz, and right after he said it, he broke in saying Obama had called for it.
Many politicians don't call for immediate resignation just because of charges, Blagojevich even stated he wanted to be in the Senate because it would be much easier to fight off the charges as a Senator. Once Stevens was convicted, most of the top Republicans wanted him the hell out.I have heard Democrats pusing the innocent until proven guilty thing to such an extreme that they didn't want people refering to Clinton's Ark successor as a felon until the appeals process was exhasted.
The saddest thing is that this shows many people on both sides of the divide don't really give much of a shit about corruption. Democrats in Illinois knew Blagojevich was dirty but reelected him. Republicans in Alaska knew the same thing and came very damn close to it as well.
I don't know if it is true, but another commenter here said Olbermann didn't want Republicans on because he didn't want his show to have a Crossfire feel to it. He will have republicans on if they are pushing a book calling conservatives fascist or are spilling on the Bush admin. I haven't seen much of Maddow's show, but I know she has Buchanon on there a lot and isn't simply there to be Obama's waterboy.
Oh great, now Michael Scherer is complaining about Obama's "ongoing investigation" dodge and comparing it to Valerie Plame, Jack Abramoff and Ted Stevens. So what's up, Obama? What is he hiding? Why won't he say anything? Bla bla bla.
Why is Scherer the only one blogging about this in TIME? Where's Karen Tumulty?
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/12/10/the-ongoing-investigation-thing/