Sunday Blagojevich Blogging
State Senator Lou Lang (D-Skokie) on Genson's request to call Emanuel and Jarrett as witnesses.
Genson is demanding the lawmakers subpoena Rahm Emanuel, Obama's incoming chief of staff, as well as longtime adviser Valerie Jarrett, saying Blagojevich can't get a fair impeachment hearing without them.Neither Genson or Fitzgerald run the impeachment hearing. Lang and his fellow Blagojevich supporters from 2006 run it. They owe Illinoisans an explanation why Blagojevich can't defend himself now. Don't blame Fitz. The Legislature can call whom they wish. They don't need Fitz's blessings.
"This is a smoke screen," said Lang, whose committee will meet again Monday. "He's asking for subpoenas of witnesses he knows the U.S. attorney does not want us to have, and I, for one, am not going to allow him to turn this into a circus or sideshow."
****
Rahm's word: Rahm the Enforcer
In her 2007 book about the Clintons, “For Love of Politics,” Sally Bedell Smith describes an incident in which an unnamed Clinton administration official colorfully denigrates then-Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York, at the time one of Washington’s most powerful Democrats, after Moynihan criticized Clinton’s transition.The disingenuous need Genson's cross examination.
“Big deal,” a ‘top administration official’ told Time magazine, adding, “he’s not one of us … he couldn’t obstruct us even if he wanted to. The gridlock is broken. It’s all Democratic now. We’ll roll right over him if we have to.”
Emanuel called the senator’s office after the story appeared, promising to fire whoever gave the quote to Time. A horrified Clinton echoed the promise, saying “We know it was someone who didn’t know us.”
But as the late senator’s personal papers showed, Emanuel’s promise was disingenuous, to say the least. At a dinner with the Time reporter, Moynihan was told that the “big deal” quote came from none other than Emanuel.
****
Legal Insurrection on the NY Times Clinton Blagojevich double standard.
Why the difference in treatment? Why not give Blagojevich the same presumption of innocence given President Clinton? Both Clinton and Blagojevich were accused of using executive power to garner campaign contributions, both were accused but not yet convicted of crimes while in office, and both presided over a government impeded by the scandals surrounding their offices.Tell me it ain't so.
Just a guess. In the Clinton case, the NY Times was protecting Clinton, so Clinton could not be thrown overboard. In the Blagojevich case, the NY Times is protecting Obama, so Blagojevich should go quickly and quietly.
12 comments:
So, Mr. Barr, from reading your blog you are in effect saying that the only reason we are in impeachment process is because of the Senate seat? Blagojevich is not being denied his chance of defending himself over the Obama seat, I believe that is coming if or when Blagojevich gets his day in criminal federal court. No need to call these two to impeachment hearings as there is plenty of other topics being discussed and considered for that, neither of these people have anything to do with. No reason in the world Rod can't come down and defend himself against these many other issues. Impeachment is something that has been being considered long before there was an Obama Senate seat to fill. Just what could these two people bring to or have to say about these other issues?
Fitz cited the sale of Obama's seat as the reason for bringing the compliant now instead of in the spring. Without that complaint there would be no impeachment now. Fairness says the Gov should be able to call them.
The Impeachment Committee does not wish to obstruct justice. I know that is a difficult concept for Republicans and their lackeys to comprehend (as evidenced by the actions of Bush, Cheney & Co. over the past eight years), but the course of action as called for by Rep. Lang is the correct one. Stop being an apologist for Gov. Sleazy!
Even the sleazy entitled to call witnesses. So who you just trying to protect here anon...the rot must really reach to the top if you the anon are coming out now.
I know that you're enjoying this drama Bill, but please stop clinging to the notion that the Governor has any rights to call witnesses in the impeachment process. It doesn't have to be fair, it is a vote of the legislature to remove the executive per the Illinois Constitution.
That is your explanation for why Blagojevich can't defend himself. He can ask his legislative supporters to help him make his case if he so chooses (and if he can find any volunteers). As someone quicker than I pointed out before: the Governor doesn't need a lawyer at these hearings, he needs a lobbyist.
Go figure.
Is this how you felt when Clinton was impeached 47th?
Is this how you'll feel if it reaches farther than Blagojevich?
Or are the limits on the Guv intended to insure it doesn't reach beyond Blagojevich?
Like the guy is the only rascal here?
The rest just virgins in the bawdy house of Illinois politics.
Bill, don't be obtuse.
This isn't a federal impeachment, it is a stae impeachment. Hint, different constitutions, different processes. Blagojevich has no rights and Genson was invited merely as a courtesy. No evidence is required. No cause must be shown. No witnesses need to testify.
Please remove the tinfoil. The General Assembly is only concerned with impeaching the Governor. The US Attorney will follow the larger investigation wherever it goes. That's his job, and it is a criminal investigation.
I agree that Blagojevich isn't the only rascal here, just the biggest one so far.
I realize the General Assembly has helped to confuse this issue with its "fair-trial-followed-by-first-class-hanging" process so far, but trust me, on Illinois Constitutional grounds, the GA needs only to vote the governor off the island to remove him from office.
Subpeonas and witnesses are a waste of time. He needs to be removed. On with it.
I agree that Blagojevich isn't the only rascal here, just the biggest one so far.
So why not bag 'em all? Let them turn on each other in testimoney instead.
*sigh*
The General Assembly has no jurisdiction beyond removing the governor.
Why don't you hold your conspiracy theories until the federal trial starts. It is obviouos you don't understand the impeachment process, so please take a break from soiling Illinoize with your poorly informed, poorly reasoned tripe.
It's tiring for the rest of us.
...rest of us...
On behalf of what cabal do you speak for 47th?
There's plots aplenty among Democrats in Illinos today.
I was presuming to speak for the evil cabal of Capitol Fax readers who've been encouraged by Rich to read the offerings here on Illinoize.
Your lame (and prolific) dribble makes this place less appealing every day.
Check the dribble Lou Lang had hanging in his window in 2006.
And he knew better....
Party over the People of Illinois and this is what we get.
Post a Comment