Rezko trial a civics lesson, not the Crime of the Century

Political junkies with a special interest in Chicago and Illinois are hyperventilating these days over the prospect of a criminal trial that they say will expose the underbelly of our government officials in a way that has never been done before.

When Antoin Rezko goes on trial in U.S. District Court in Chicago (barring any unforeseen last-minute complications, jury selection will begin Monday), we’re going to see how dirty our political culture really is, and we’re going to be so outraged that we’ll throw the bums out of office.

We're even going to see how the “golden child” of Democratic politics, presidential hopeful Barack Obama, is tainted his ties to “the Chicago Machine,” and his aspirations of living in the White House are going to be flushed down the toilet by the time this trial is over.

What we all need to do is stop and catch our breath, so that we can think about this situation a bit more rationally.

It is true that this trial will provide a good technical grasp of how politics is done in Chicago, since the bulk of Rezko’s defense is that he was merely engaging in the same activities other lobbyists perform. Prosecutors say he stepped way over the legal line between legitimate influence peddling and criminal behavior, particularly when he arranged for the appointment of certain people to government posts allegedly knowing of their intent to commit extortion.

But I can easily envision a trial that delves into such technical material that it loses the interest of the general public, even though it is bound to get big play in the newspapers and on television newscasts (where time constraints will result in stories so short and lacking in detail that no one will really understand what is going on).

Detail. That is what a trial like this is really about.

We get to pick up on some details that may smudge the reputations of some political people. But their careers will survive, no matter how much federal prosecutors are determined to push for criminal convictions.

Any testimony related to Obama is going to be minor – of less importance to people interested in good government but of major significance to people searching for something that can be exaggerated into political scandal.

My view of this upcoming trial (which will probably last about two months and I wish I could spare the time in my life to cover it) is tainted by the fact that I still remember the last major political corruption trial that gave us a view of the way people influenced government officials.

It was MSI.

That’s Management Services of Illinois, a long-defunct Springfield, Ill.-based consultant to state government agencies. Specifically, they received a contract to do work for the Illinois Department of Public Aid by which they would go through records and search for instances where a Medicaid recipient might have some sort of medical insurance – which would then allow the state to play the role of collections officer and seek reimbursement.

What was seen as criminal was the amount of money the company got for their work, much of which later turned out to be worthless as the so-called insurance policies were usually long expired.

Prosecutors contended the reason MSI was over-paid by $7 million for their work was because of all the campaign contributions and other favors the company’s officials provided to the then-Republican majority that ran Illinois government.

I still remember the testimony how the company’s CEO devoted a Saturday afternoon to visiting Gov. Jim Edgar’s “log house” in the Springfield suburbs to help our low-tech governor set up his new computer, which the CEO helped him to purchase at a discount.

I still remember the day Edgar himself had to take the witness stand in U.S. District Court in Springfield and testify that he knew nothing of the personal motivations for why MSI officials wanted to help him.

Not even when he had a personal dinner with the executives, and each of them pledged a $10,000 contribution to his re-election campaign in 1994. He claimed to be unable to recall specifics, and said the dinner meeting was just giving “some face time” to potential supporters.

The trial also brought out stories of executives providing mid-level state agency officials with fine cuts of steak and lobster, trips to the Super Bowl and to Mexico, and even to an Arkansas strip joint where the defendants gave the state employees a few hundred dollars in cash each so they wouldn’t have to spend their own money while ogling the girls.

Some of these details have stuck in my mind, while others I had to go look up. The point is that much of the trial also delved in the technical workings of the Illinois Public Aid Department to such a degree that defense attorneys and prosecutors literally had to put together a glossary for jurors so they would understand all the legalese being spewed about.

There was a very strong sense that the jury in that case was overwhelmed with testimony and ultimately found two corporate executives and two mid-level state officials guilty without really understanding what they were guilty of.

I can easily see the same thing happening during the next few months with the Rezko case.

Prosecutors say Rezko was a man who used his personal ties to political people – including Gov. Rod Blagojevich – to persuade companies to pay him significant amounts of money in order to get their desires approved by the government.

That, in and of itself, is NOT illegal, unless you have such a narrow view of what government should be doing that you want to find it all improper.

Prosecutors say the amounts of money involved and the degree to which he would lean on government officials to get his clients’ desires accomplished goes far beyond any legitimate activity by a government lobbyist (a.k.a., legislative affairs consultant, in government geek-speak).

Court documents related to the case make mention of Rezko’s ties to a “Public Official A,” and tell stories that would appear to indicate that this official knew full well, and approved, of the scale to which Rezko’s lobbyist activities reached.

Some officials say “Public Official A” is the legal pseudonym used to refer to Blagojevich, who is not as of yet facing any criminal charges in connection with the matter.

But the “Blagojevich Bashers” of the world (they are a large breed of rural politicos who resent a Chicago governor, supplemented by the many Dems offended by Blagojevich’s arrogant style of governing) want to believe this is just the first step toward the eventual indictment of Gov. Rod.

Rational people ought to wait to hear what comes out of the trial before they start accusing Blagojevich of anything resembling illegal activity.

Back during the summer of ’97, there was a feeling among some political junkies that Edgar’s reputation would be forever sullied because of the embarrassing stories of his ties to government people, and that some people on his own personal staff would wind up doing jail time as well.

That never happened.

When federal prosecutors in Springfield tried to ratchet up their case and go after high-ranking Illinois Public Aid Department officials, including the director, they were unable to prove anything resembling criminal behavior.

Then-Public Aid Director Robert Wright did wind up having to resign a couple of months later (to pursue “personal opportunities,” in government geek-speak), but no one on the governor’s staff ever got indicted. No one on then-Illinois Senate President James “Pate” Philip’s staff was prosecuted either, even though stories came out that his chief of staff knowingly deceived Illinois State Police investigators when they asked for details about computer equipment provided by MSI executives.

It could wind up being more of the same with Rezko.

Political junkies will get a few hard details that provide for stories to be used to ridicule the governor’s judgment. Trial spectators would do well to pay close attention to any details about gifts Blagojevich ever received.

Whenever political people reminisce about MSI (most of the general public has long forgotten the case), they still bring up the testimony about the $5,600 worth of steak and lobsters given to Philip, his chief of staff and an aide, and to longtime Republican powerbroker William Cellini.

Oddly enough, Edgar didn’t get any steaks or lobsters. He had to settle for the new computer and some special software providing information about horse breeding – a topic that Edgar and first lady Brenda had a special interest in.

What will really hurt Blagojevich is that any details about his political ties will dump all over his campaign talk from the past about how he was going to be a serious government reformer.

In both 2002 and 2006, he used his GOP opponents’ ties to former Gov. George Ryan (who now is an inmate at the minimum-security work camp located adjacent to the federal maximum-security prison in Terre Haute, Ind.) as a way of tarnishing them.

He claimed he was the solution for clean government, even though people who really understand politics always knew it was ridiculous to think of Blagojevich as a reformer. No son-in-law of a Chicago alderman is going to want to reform things – his priority is going to ensure that the pieces of the government pie are distributed to different interests.

But to those naïve sorts who actually held out hope that Blagojevich was a good-government type, their delusions will be trashed. That’s probably for the best. We’re better off understanding that Blagojevich is not, “St. Rod.” He’s just a politico, no better or worse than any other.

-30-

Originally posted at www.ChicagoArgus.blogspot.com