Bottom Line: Obama and the Libs Have to Go

The posts have been few in recent weeks here at The Day After. Things have been busy at my day job, and I’ve had more than a few personal obligations to fulfil. There  just aren’t enough hours in the day. This blog is a recreational outlet for me and a nice, easy means to convey thoughts and ideas, as well as to vent frustration. Oh, the frustration.

That being said, I wanted to take a few minutes to post that in no way whatsoever have I gone soft on Obama and the liberals. I was asked recently if I had begun to embrace change and accept the fact that the liberals were here to stay. The person who asked, did so because of the sparse posting here. My answer was ” No way in hell – we have to run them out now. I’ll get back to it.”

Also there’s this. These guys, especially the ones in Washington, are up to so much lately that it’s tough to keep track of just exactly what they are doing. It’s almost like they’re bum-rushing us into socialism. So, without the benefit of unlimited free time for research, it’s difficult sometimes to decide which subject, event, or betrayal to post about. Lately it’s been what’s most important to me.

I thought about maybe taking this blog in only one direction instead of hopping around from subject to subject. My primary goals are to help shed light on the hypocisy and the corruption that Obama brought with him to D.C., and to get the Clinton machine, including Obama, out of there. Of course along the way we’ll have to address the antics of Pelosi, Reid, Frank, and Dodd.

So here we go…again.

Who are the Real Bad Guys Here?

My question is this: Just who is responsible for having the Wyden-Snowe Executive-Pay provision REMOVED from the stimulus bill and why?

From The Washington Independent

2/12/09 6:58 PM

The finance industry might be floundering, it might be broke, and it might be ringing the tin cup for federal help. But don’t say Wall Street has lost its sway over lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

Congress agreed on a final stimulus plan yesterday, but not before stripping out a provision forcing bailed-out banks to repay 2008 bonuses. Under the provision, sponsored by Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), companies receiving funding under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) would be forced to repay Washington for any 2008 bonuses in excess of $100,000, or pay a 35-percent tax on funds not returned. Wyden is vowing to continue the push to have it passed. From his statement:

Wall Street’s clout continues unabated in Washington, despite having wrecked our economy,” said Wyden. “I am unbelievably disappointed, but I want it understood that I will be back again and again to recover for taxpayers the exorbitant Wall Street bonuses paid for with TARP money.

It wasn’t supposed to play out this way.

In the wake of reports revealing that Wall Street firms doled out billions in executive bonuses — even after they’d accepted hundreds of billions of federal dollars — lawmakers had vowed to take steps to ensure that TARP funds weren’t going straight into the pockets of the same folks who’d run the banks into the ground.

Indeed, the Senate stimulus bill included several provisions — added as amendments during the floor debate — to do just that. One provision, sponsored by Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), would have capped executive compensation at $400,000. Another, sponsored by Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.), would have banned bonuses for the 25 highest-paid employees of companies receiving TARP funds. The Wyden-Snowe provision was included as well, but was sliced for reasons that still aren’t clear. The removal is strange, if only because the measure was expected to save the federal government more than $3 billion.

It’s unclear if the Dodd and McCaskill amendments made the cut. Apparently, a full 27 hours after a stimulus deal was announced, lawmakers are still haggling over the details of the bill.

And we sit back and allow people like Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Gary Peters, Steny Hoyer, Charles Rangel, et al openly go after the people who received their lawfully contracted bonuses by threatening to subpoena their personal information and by initiating incredible tax legislation. This  insane tax amounts to nothing more than the government stealing, yes stealing lawfully earned money. What’s next?  ( MSNBC story here)

This is outrageous.

We had better wake up and get these hypocrites out of our government while we still can.

Obama’s Hypocrisy Continues

 U.S. Rep. Hilda L. Solis, Obama’s choice for Labor secretary, faced new obstacles after lawmakers who were expected to vote on her confirmation Thursday abruptly canceled the hearing amid reports of back taxes owed by her husband.

Solis, a Democrat from El Monte, is at least the fourth Obama nominee whose confirmation has been complicated by tax troubles.

Public records show that since 1993, two state and 14 Los Angeles County tax liens totaling about $11,640 have been lodged against Sayyad and his business, Sam’s Foreign and Domestic Auto Center.

The documents indicate that $6,468 in county liens remained unresolved until Wednesday, when Sayyad paid off the balance, according to the Los Angeles County treasurer and tax collector’s office.

Solis’ nomination had already faced snags. In her appearance before the Senate committee last month, she appeared evasive in certain answers, leaving some GOP members unimpressed.

Then Republican senators suggested that her ties to a tax-exempt group that promotes unionization might pose a conflict of interest. Solis has denied any conflict and says she is within her rights to serve as an unpaid board member and treasurer of the group, American Rights at Work.

The group is a strong proponent of the Employee Free Choice Act, a bill that would make it easier for workers to form bargaining units. As a congresswoman, Solis has been a co-sponsor of the bill.

’nuff said.

 

Daschle, Just Another Democ”RAT” Thief

Fighting to salvage his Cabinet nomination, Tom Daschle pleaded his case Monday evening in a closed meeting with former Senate colleagues after publicly apologizing for failing to pay more than $120,000 in taxes. Obama said he was “absolutely” sticking with his nominee for health secretary, and a key senator added an important endorsement.

The White House both underscored the magnitude of the problem and tried to downplay it in the space of seven words. “Nobody’s perfect,” said press secretary Robert Gibbs. “It was a serious mistake. …”

Nobody was predicting defeat for Daschle’s nomination as secretary of health and human services, but it was proving an unsavory pill to swallow for senators who only last week confirmed Timothy Geithner as treasury secretary despite his separate tax-payment problems. It’s an issue that strikes a nerve among lawmakers’ constituents who are struggling with their own serious money problems.

Daschle, the former Senate Democratic leader, expressed his remorse in a letter to the Finance Committee, saying he was “deeply embarrassed and disappointed” about what he said was an unintentional failure to pay taxes that he owed. He recently filed amended returns for 2005-07 to report $128,203 in back taxes and $11,964 in interest.

Well hell, he said he’s sorry already. What’s the deal?

Karl Rove Subpoenaed

WASHINGTON – The House Judiciary Committee chairman subpoenaed former White House adviser Karl Rove on Monday to testify about the Bush administration’s firing of nine U.S. attorneys and its prosecution of a former Democrat governor.

Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., said the ongoing legal battle to get Rove and other former Bush administration aides to testify may have success with a new president in the White House.

Former President George W. Bush upheld Rove and two other senior aides who asserted they did not have to testify before Congress about their actions in the White House.

The legal dispute between the executive and legislative branches of government is before a federal appeals court.

Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin, did not return phone messages seeking comment.

The subpoena commanded Rove to appear on Feb. 2 for a deposition on the U.S. attorney firings and the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, a Democrat.

Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey named a special prosecutor in September to investigate whether former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, other Bush administration officials or Republicans in Congress should face criminal charges in the firings of the U.S. attorneys.

The inquiry followed the recommendation of internal Justice Department investigators who concluded that, despite administration denials, political considerations played a part in the firings of as many as four of the federal prosecutors. Conyers wants to know what role Rove played in the dismissals.

Siegelman has alleged his prosecution was pushed by Republicans, including Rove. The former governor was convicted on bribery and other charges and was sentenced to more than seven years in prison. He was released early, when a federal appeals court ruled his appeal raised “substantial questions.”

Conyers said in a statement that times have changed.

He said Bush’s position of “absolute immunity” was “rejected by U.S. District Judge John Bates and President Obama has previously dismissed the claim as ‘completely misguided,’” Conyers said.

“I have said many times that I will carry this investigation forward to its conclusion, whether in Congress or in court, and today’s action is an important step along the way.

“Change has come to Washington, and I hope Karl Rove is ready for it. After two years of stonewalling, it’s time for him to talk.”

Last July, Bates rejected Bush’s contention that senior White House advisers are immune from subpoenas, siding with Congress’ power to investigate the executive branch.

Conyers also has sought testimony from former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, and ex-White House chief of staff Josh Bolten — although only Rove was named in the new subpoena.

TITLE 28 > PART II > CHAPTER 35 > § 541

§ 541. United States attorneys

(a) The President shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, a United States attorney for each judicial district.
(b) Each United States attorney shall be appointed for a term of four years. On the expiration of his term, a United States attorney shall continue to perform the duties of his office until his successor is appointed and qualifies.
(c) Each United States attorney is subject to removal by the President.

It’s amazing that we have people like Democrat Charles Rangel, and Democrat Timothy Geitner Committing crimes against the American taxpayer in broad daylight and nothing at all is being done. Then we have a President who exercises his authority under Title 28 of the US Code and Democrat John Conyers vows to investigate until he can create evidence of illegal activity. Even worse, Democrat Conyers is not squeaky clean, dismissing his own violations as a “lack of clarity of communication”. He’s not fooling anyone.  Conyers is just as dirty as the rest of them.  Just another one.

In letters sent separately to the House Ethics Committee, the FBI, and the US Attorney’s office by two former aides of Conyers, they alleged that Conyers used his staff to work on several local and state campaigns and forced them to baby-sit and chauffeur his children.[8] In late December 2006, Conyers “accepted responsibility” for possibly violating House rules. A statement issued December 29, 2006 by the House Ethics Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) and Ranking Minority Member Howard Berman (D-Calif.), said that Conyers acknowledged what he characterized as a “lack of clarity” in his communications with staff members regarding their official duties and responsibilities, and accepted responsibility for his actions. In deciding to drop the matter, Hastings and Berman state: After reviewing the information gathered during the inquiry, and in light of Representative Conyers’ cooperation with the inquiry, we have concluded that this matter should be resolved through the issuance of this public statement and the agreement by Representative Conyers to take a number of additional, significant steps to ensure that his office complies with all rules and standards regarding campaign and personal work by congressional staff.

New York Senate Seat Vacancy Drama

DESPITE claims that he’s still undecided, Gov. Paterson is “certain” to pick Caroline Kennedy to replace Hillary Rodham Clinton in the US Senate, several unhappy contenders for the job have told friends and associates in recent days.

The contenders based their conclusion on the view that Paterson, after nearly two months of indecision, would “greatly embarrass” and “entirely humiliate” Kennedy, anger her prominent political family and even offend President-elect Barack Obama by picking someone other than President John F. Kennedy’s daughter.

As for the governor’s claim to be weighing a last-minute finalist, the contenders agree with a close Paterson friend who said, “It’s clear David is just trying to play mind games with the press.”

Some of the contenders warned, however, that the unelected Paterson, who must face the voters next year, could face a serious backlash from Democratic activists by choosing Kennedy, whose standing with the public, and with Democrats in particular, has been sliding in recent weeks.

US Rep. Carolyn Maloney of Manhattan, a would-be Clinton replacement who is backed by several women’s organizations, was the most publicly adamant in saying the fix was in, citing a scenario – first outlined in last week’s Village Voice – under which Paterson, in a deal with Mayor Bloomberg, a Kennedy friend, selects Kennedy in exchange for help for his own election bid next year.

Another potential candidate told The Post that he was convinced that Kennedy would get the job because Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, – who polls show is the public’s favorite to succeed Clinton – failed to line up the right replacement at the AG’s office.

“Andrew just couldn’t assure the governor that he could arrange for [Assembly Speaker Sheldon] Silver to provide an acceptable successor,” said the contender.

A third potential candidate claimed that Paterson’s repeated contention – told to the media in private – that there is no front-runner is “baloney.”

“It’s been a done deal from the start,” said the would-be candidate.

“David goes with Caroline with the understanding that Caroline, and her family and its resources, go with David next year. This stuff with Paterson saying he’s looking at other people is a crock,” the source continued.

Meanwhile, several Democrats pointed to Paterson’s already-declining public-opinion poll numbers to warn that selecting Kennedy could worsen his chances to be elected next year.

“The polls show Kennedy is not who the public wants, and every upstate newspaper has come out against her,” noted a longtime Democratic operative.

“Picking Caroline could turn into a disaster for Paterson,” he continued.

A little-noticed Marist College poll last week showed Paterson, who became governor last March after Eliot Spitzer resigned amid a hooker scandal, with a rapidly declining job-approval rating.

Sex sting to keep Wisconsin mayor(D) from inauguration

RACINE, Wis. — Racine Mayor Gary Becker’s plans to attend Tuesday’s inauguration have been canceled after he was charged in an Internet sex sting.

Becker had planned to attend a U.S. Conference of Mayors event in Washington over the weekend and then stay for the inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama.

But that was before he was arrested Tuesday night at a suburban Milwaukee shopping mall. Authorities said he went there to meet who he thought was a 14-year-old girl but actually was a state agent.

A criminal complaint filed against him Thursday included sexually explicit chats he had with the other person. He faces six felony charges and has been freed on $165,000 cash bond.

Becker’s defense attorney did not return a message left Thursday seeking comment on the charges.

City Administrator Ben Hughes said canceling Becker’s airline ticket and a four-night stay in an expensive D.C. hotel will cost the city hundreds of dollars. He said city officials learned this week that Becker chose the most expensive of three options – at $550 a night – when booking hotel accommodations.

The money for three nights will be refunded, and Midwest Airlines agreed to allow the city to use Becker’s $400 ticket for another official’s travel in the next 12 months, Hughes said.

The city also has removed Becker’s picture that had greeted visitors to the Racine Web site.

“With everything going on I felt it was not appropriate for his picture and his welcome to remain on the Web site,” said City Council President David Maack on Friday. Maack is serving as acting mayor.

Top city officials are planning to discuss Tuesday removing Becker from office if he does not resign.

Let’s play name that Party affiliation! While some other news outlets finally get to Becker being a Democrat, usually deep within the story, MSNBC or in this story, the AP, fails to mention the D word

The man who has taken over for Racine Mayor Gary Becker after his arrest on probable charges of pornography and solicitation of a minor say he needs to resign.

“I think it would be in the best interest of the city of Racine,” said City Council President David Maack in an exclusive interview on Newsradio 620 WTMJ. “We need to put this behind us.

Ever notice that when it is a Democrat involved, they always need to move on? If it is a Republican, they always say there needs to be more investigation, preferably back to 1st grade.

Charges are expected against Becker today, two days after his arrest on tentative charges of attempted second-degree sexual assault of a child, child enticement and possession of child pornography.

Authorities said Becker also was being held on tentative charges of exposing a child to harmful materials, using a computer to facilitate a child sex crime and misconduct in public office.

We need to put this behind us, though.

The Journal Sentinel says state officials had begun investigating Becker after he brought a personal computer to work and had City Workers try to fix it.

So, he is a complete moron, to boot.

Let’s see: if it is a Republican, such as Jack Ryan (solicited his wife for sex), Mark Foley (inappropriate emails with no sex involved), or Larry Craig (foot tapping, no sex), it is a national disgrace. But, a Democrat with actual child p0rn on his PC? Move on.

And let’s not forget a president credibly accused of sexual improprieties, sexual harassment…..you know this story.

Back to the story, it is interesting that MSNBC forgets to mention that it is 5 felony counts and a misdemeanor. The Journal Sentinel has good detail of how it all went down, including how Becker went off to meet with who he thought was a 14 year old girl.

Clinton vs Bush – Convictions

I recently ran across the following post from 2006 while doing research  on a different subject. Read along and ask yourself, ” do we really want these people back?” This is exactly why I along with other like-minded people rail against Obama and his policy of “change”.

I always tell liberals I will only discuss politics on a fact basis, not braindead tabloid trash accusations. Then I ask them “when I provide you with the easily obtained facts, will you have the courage to face the truth?” Then send him this list.

Number of Clinton administration individuals and business associates convicted of crimes during his Presidency – - 33

Number of indictments/misdemeanor charges: 61

Number of congressional witnesses who have pleaded the Fifth Amendment, fled the country to avoid testifying, or (in the case of foreign witnesses) refused to be interviewed: 122

STARR-RAY INVESTIGATION
Number of convictions 14

9 went to jail, a sitting Dem Governor was removed from office, a sitting President was impeached and disbarred.

SMALTZ INVESTIGATION
Guilty pleas and convictions in cases involving charges of bribery and fraud against former Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy and associated individuals and businesses: 15

During his presidency, Clinton associates were convicted of the following crimes:

Drug trafficking (3), racketeering, extortion, bribery (4), tax evasion, kickbacks, embezzlement (2), fraud (12), conspiracy (5), fraudulent loans, illegal gifts (1), illegal campaign contributions (5), money laundering (6), perjury, obstruction of justice.

Number of people associated with the Bush administration convicted of crimes. ZERO

The Clinton Legacy

GOP seats gained in House since Clinton became president: 48

GOP seats gained in Senate since Clinton became president: 8

GOP governorships gained since Clinton became president: 11

GOP state legislative seats gained since Clinton became president: 1,254

State legislatures taken over by GOP since Clinton became president: 9

Democrat officeholders who have become Republicans since Clinton became president: 439 as of 1998

Republican officeholders who have become Democrats since Clinton became president: 3

Since this time, Scooter libbey was convicted in 2007 of obstruction of justice, perjury,and making false statements.

Amazing.

Geithner – Just Another One

Obama picked Tim Geithner to be Secretary of the Treasury—talk about a bad vetting process.  has a slight tax problem. Namely, he’s not paying them – $42,702. Of all things for the new Secretary of Treasury to have problems with—taxes? Amazing. Could it have been an honest mistake? If so, then at worst he’s an idiot (who is about to handle $1 trillion of our money)

Geithner explained he was unaware he was technically considered self-employed while working at the IMF, an international organization that does not pay an employer share of Social Security and Medicare taxes.

He repaid about $43,000 in taxes and interest – some of it after an IRS audit, the rest after Obama transition vetters brought the arrears to his attention.

“All of his taxes have now been paid in full, and at no time was there any intention on Mr. Geithner’s part to avoid taxes,” a transition source said.

Oh it was all just a mistake, what’s the harm? I’m already accustomed to Obama putting these dirtbags to work, so I’m not even going down that path again. No, this time I just want to know where are all of those people who crucified Joe The Plumber about his $1,182.98 of outstanding personal income tax? Oh yeah, that’s right, Joe Wurzelbacher’s not a liberal, a democrat, nor a socialist – so he’s bad. I just hope that if I make a mistake on my taxes, somebody lets me know so I can just pay them off and laugh about it – no wait, I’m not a liberal, a democrat, nor a socialist either. Oh well.

Pay to Play in NY?

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — The corruption scandal engulfing Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich puts a spotlight on the nation’s only other vacant Senate seat — that of Hillary Rodham Clinton in New York.

New York Gov. David Paterson, who will choose Clinton’s replacement, can expect more intense scrutiny after Blagojevich’s arrest on charges that he tried to sell the seat vacated by  Obama.

The day Blagojevich was arrested, Paterson spokesman Errol Cockfield said the New York governor would “take any necessary steps to ensure that the selection of a new senator is not compromised in any way.”

But Cockfield did not identify any specific additional safeguards. A day later, Paterson said his process was unchanged: He’s looking for someone with integrity, with ideas to move the state, and a hard worker.

But in addition to a candidate’s qualifications, Paterson’s choice also needs to serve his own political and fundraising needs — both now and when he seeks election on the same 2010 ticket as the next senator.

Paterson needs a strong candidate who can raise plenty of money and attract important voting blocs in his quest to be elected to the job he fell into in March, when Eliot Spitzer resigned after it was revealed that he patronized a high-priced prostitution ring.

“This is a country with a two-party system, and politics will play a significant role” in Paterson’s decision, said Karl Sleight, former prosecutor and head of the New York Ethics Commission under Republican and Democratic governors. “Unlike any other job, you have to take that into consideration.”

So what should potential senators do to seek the job? Not a thing, Paterson said, other than demonstrating their qualifications.

AP Story

Obama Fundraising Scandal

Since it is apparently too much effort for the mainstream media (National Journal excepted) to be bothered to investigate what is potentially one of the largest campaign finance fraud scandals ever, we thought we’d set the table for them.  Here’s a “Cheat Sheet” if you will on how the story broke and what the important issues are:

1. In early 2007, Obama tells Silicon Valley mogul, Marc Andreeson, to “watch how I run my campaign – you’ll see my leadership skills in action”.   Which makes the following account all the more concerning.  Can we expect more of the same should Obama assume the seat in the White House?
2. Rumors begin to circulate that the Obama campaign is accepting foreign and other illegal contributions.  Atlas Shrugs blog breaks the story on July 23 and confirms the rumors.
3. On October 22, a citizen does his own investigative work and gives an online donation to the Obama campaign with a the fake name of John Galt along with a fake address.  Several bloggers quickly follow up on this story with their own investigative work and find that they too can donate to the Obama campaign with fake names and addresses.  Most disturbingly, foreign citizens were also able to donate using their foreign issued credit cards with fake foreign addresses.
4. By now, it has become common knowledge that the Obama campaign is the ONLY campaign to NOT disclose their “under $200″ campaign donor list.  No substantive reasons are given by the Obama campaign.
5. On October 24, it is confirmed by the National Journal that the Obama campaign has turned off address verification on their website.  This is highly irregular – in fact, it’s quite unheard of.  Essentially, turning off address verification (known as AVS) enables donors to fake addresses and circumvent donor limits.   This means foreigners can give illegal donations and motivated Obama supporters can exceed the $2300 campaign limit! As Internet and e-commerce professionals, we launch this blog to raise the issue of how highly irregular and potentially unethical it is to turn off online credit card address verification.
6. In light of the aforementioned and in light of the record $150 million haul Obama brought in during the month of September from over 600 thousand new, mostly unidentified, donors, this blog attempts to size the problem.  We calculated that over $181 million of Obama’s donations fall into the “potentially fraudulent” category.
7. On October 29, the Obama campaign is quoted favorably in the Washington Post as checking for fraud on the “back-end”. The Obama campaign did not elaborate on what this means and the Washington Post didn’t bother to ask.
8. Since the Obama campaign turned off the easiest and most obvious way to stop campaign finance fraud, this blog and the National Journal proceeded to explore other ways in which the Obama campaign could prevent campaign finance fraud.   We determined that the Obama camp could use IP addresses (unique identifiers for computers with geographic information) and BIN numbers (unique identifiers of credit cards with geographic information) to prevent fraudulent and foreign donations on the “back-end”. Unfortunately, all records indicate that the Obama campaign does NOT use these simple and cheap methods to prevent illegal donations.
9. With public pressure mounting on the Obama campaign to disclose his donor list (despite the apathy from the New York Times and Washington Post), Charlie Gibson of ABC News asks Obama why he won’t disclose his donor list.  Obama said it would be too difficult to process. RED FLAG!  Isn’t this the internet generation candidate?  Shouldn’t it be easy for computers to process these records?
10. It turns out that the answer is “Yes!”.  The liberal online publication, Slate, proves how easy it is to process the donor list.  The National Journal also proves how easy it is by talking to the bank that houses the Obama campaign records.

In summary, the Obama campaign is the FIRST and ONLY presidential campaign to turn off online address verification when raising money online.

The Obama campaign also chooses to not to use free or cheap tools that allow them to screen foreign IP address and foreign credit cards.

Finally, unlike the Clinton and McCain campaigns, the Obama campaign refuses to disclose their donor list.

It’s up to the reader to decide whether or not there is something unethical going on here.

Obama Shrugged – Shining a light on the Obama fundraising machine

Dodd Interview Censored

Tom Scott conducted the interview. WELI killed it. Now you can hear it.

Scott, one of Connecticut’s leading conservative voices of the past three decades, was the last local on-air voice at WELI-AM, once a fully-staffed Greater New Haven news station turned into a right-wing talk radio syndication outlet by owner Clear Channel Communications.

Scott hosted a weekday 5 to 7 p.m. drive-time talk show until Oct. 29. That was the day he taped a combative interview with U.S. Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut (pictured with Mutual Housing chief Seila Mosquera during a recent tour of New Haven’s Fair Haven neighborhood).

The interview focused on two controversies that have dogged Dodd recently: He received personal “VIP” loans from Countrywide Financial, a predatory lender he was supposed to be regulating as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. And he helped craft a $700 billion Wall Street bailout bill designed to spur new small-business and homeowner lending — but which turns out to be designed instead to enable banks to buy other banks.

Watching the TV news monitors in the WELI newsroom, Tom Scott, a former state senator and Congressional and gubernatorial candidate, had grown frustrated that reporters seemed to be going easy on Dodd. So he savored the chance to push Dodd on why, for instance, he won’t release the documents connected to his personal Countrywide loans.

The result was riveting radio. But WELI’s listeners never got to hear it.

Asked why the interview never ran, Todd Thomas, Clear Channel’s regional operations manager, said, “That’s something that happened behind closed doors.” He declined to comment further.

click here listen to the interview

Richardson Out

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson on Sunday announced that he was withdrawing his nomination to be Obama’s commerce secretary amid a grand jury investigation into how some of his political donors won a lucrative state contract.

Richardson’s withdrawal was the first disruption of Obama’s Cabinet process and the second “pay-to-play” investigation that has touched Obama’s transition to the presidency. The president-elect has remained above the fray in both the case of arrested Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and the New Mexico case.

A federal grand jury is investigating how a California company that contributed to Richardson’s political activities won a New Mexico transportation contract worth more than $1 million. Richardson said in a statement issued by the Obama transition office that the investigation could take weeks or months but expressed confidence it will show he and his administration acted properly.

“I have concluded that the ongoing investigation also would have forced an untenable delay in the confirmation process,” Richardson said. “Given the gravity of the economic situation the nation is facing, I could not in good conscience ask the president-elect and his administration to delay for one day the important work that needs to be done.”

A person familiar with the proceedings has told The Associated Press that the grand jury is looking into possible “pay-to-play” dealings between CDR Financial Products and someone in a position to push the contract through with the state of New Mexico.

State documents show CDR was paid a total of $1.48 million in 2004 and 2005 for its work on a transportation program.

Richardson ran against Obama in the Democratic presidential primary, but withdrew after a poor showing in the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary.

He is one of the most prominent Hispanics in the Democratic Party, having served in Congress and as President Clinton’s ambassador to the United Nations and energy secretary. As governor, he has kept up an international profile with a specialty in dealing with rogue nations. Obama also considered him to be secretary of state.

CDR and its CEO, David Rubin, have contributed at least $110,000 to three political committees formed by Richardson, according to an AP review of campaign finance records.

The largest donation, $75,000, was made by CDR in June 2004—a couple of months after the transportation financing arrangement won state approval—to a political committee that Richardson established before the Democratic National Convention that year.

In the Illinois case, Blagojevich is accused of trying to sell the Senate seat that Obama gave up to become president. Obama and two of his top aides have been interviewed by the U.S. attorney’s office pursuing the case but have denied any knowledge of such a scheme and have not been accused by prosecutors of any wrongdoing.

ONE PLUS ONE EQUALS 20 EXTRA VOTES FOR FRANKEN

by Ann Coulter
December 17, 2008

It’s bad enough that the Republican Party can’t prevent Democrats from voting in its primaries and saddling us with The New York Times’ favorite Republican as our presidential nominee. If the Republican Party can’t protect an election won by the incumbent U.S. senator in Minnesota, there is no point in donating to the Republican Party.

The day after the November election, Republican Sen. Norm Coleman had won his re-election to the U.S. Senate, beating challenger Al Franken by 725 votes.

Then one heavily Democratic town miraculously discovered 100 missing ballots. And, in another marvel, they were all for Al Franken! It was like a completely evil version of a Christmas miracle.

As strange as it was that all 100 post-election, “discovered” ballots would be for one candidate, it was even stranger that the official time stamp for the miracle ballots printed out by the voting machine on the miracle ballots showed that the votes had been cast on Nov. 2 — two days before the election.

Democratic election officials in the miracle-ballot county simply announced that their voting machine must have been broken. Don’t worry about it — they were sure those 100 votes for Franken were legit.

Then another 400-odd statistically improbable “corrections” were made in other Democratic strongholds until — by the end of election week — Coleman’s lead had been whittled down to a mere 215 votes.

Since then, highly irregular counting methods have added to Franken’s total bit by bit, to the point that Coleman is now ahead by only 188 votes.

As long as Coleman maintains any lead at all, Republicans don’t seem to care that Coleman’s advantage is being shrunk by laughable ballot “discoveries” and disreputable standard-switching from precinct to precinct — depending on which method of counting ballots is most advantageous to Franken.

Consider a few other chilling examples of Democrats thieving their way to victory over the years.

In 1974, Republican Louis Wyman won his race for U.S. Senate in New Hampshire, beating Democrat John Durkin by 355 votes. Durkin demanded a recount — which went back and forth by a handful of votes until the state’s Ballot Law Commission concluded that Wyman had indeed won by (at least) two votes.

Wyman was certified the winner by the New Hampshire secretary of state and was on his way to Washington when … the overwhelmingly Democratic U.S. Senate refused to seat Wyman.

Despite New Hampshire’s certification of Wyman as the winner of the election, this was the post-Watergate Senate, when Democrats could get away with anything — up to and including a prank known as “President Jimmy Carter.”

The U.S. Senate spent months examining disputed ballots from the New Hampshire election. Unable to come up with a method to declare the Democrat the winner that didn’t require a guillotine, the Senate forced New Hampshire to hold another election.

It was a breathtaking abuse of power. New Hampshire had certified a winner of its Senate election, but it was a Republican, so the Democratic Senate simply ordered a new election.

Demoralized Republicans stayed away from the race and, this time, the Democrat won the re-vote.

Even more egregious was the Indiana House race in 1984. On election night, the incumbent Democrat Frank McCloskey appeared to have won a narrow victory of 72 votes. But after a correction was made in one county, it turned out his Republican opponent, Richard McIntyre, had won by 34 votes.

McIntyre was certified the winner — which is when the trouble usually starts for a Republican.

Again, a majority Democrat House refused to seat the certified winner in a close election. I’m sure it was just a coincidence that the winner was a Republican.

Consequently, Indiana performed yet another recount of the entire district, which again showed that Republican McIntyre was the winner — this time by 418 votes. Now he was really asking for it. The nerve of this guy! Hey, buddy, do you mind? We’re trying to throw an election over here!

As The Washington Post reported at the time: There were “no allegations of fraud” in the recount and 90 percent of ballot disqualifications had been agreed to “by election commissions dominated by Democrats.”

So naturally the House refused to seat the Republican even though he had received the most votes (hereinafter referred to as “the winner”). The House proceeded to conduct its own recount. (If you haven’t detected a pattern by this point, please ask your doctor if Prilosec is right for you.)

This time, instead of ordering the district to hold another election, the Democratic House saved all concerned a lot of time and money by simply declaring Democrat Frank McCloskey the winner by four votes.

The vote-theft most like Minnesota this year was the infamous 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State. The Republican won the race on election night, but ballots favoring the Democrat kept being “discovered” until the Democrat finally eked out a majority. At that point, the recount was immediately halted and the Democrat declared the victor.

You would have to go back to Reconstruction to find an election that was stolen by the Republicans this way, but it’s all in a day’s work for the Democrats.

That’s why they were so testy about the 2000 Florida election. It was the one time in the last century Republicans wouldn’t let Democrats steal an election they lost by less than a thousand votes.

No matter how many times Democrats steal elections, Republicans keep thinking the next time will be different. Minnesota is famously clean, isn’t it? It must be different. It’s not different. It’s still the Democrats.

COPYRIGHT 2008 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE
1130 Walnut, Kansas City, MO 64106

WVOC – Emmanuel Poll

12/15/08

Monday 12-15-2008 7:18am ET

With Rod Blagojevich apparently preparing to step down as Governor of Illinois and and questions being raised over who was jockying for the Senate seat vacated by President Elect Obama we want to know…

 

 

Do you think Rahm Emanuel knows more than he letting on?

Yes, he hiding something. 100.00 %

No, he’s being truthful about the matter. 0.00 %

 

What is Obama Hiding?

Obama is refusing to answer any questions about the internal review he has ordered into Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s alleged efforts to sell his former Senate seat, saying he will do so when the examination is finished.

Obama’s staff has declined to respond to even basic questions, like who is conducting the probe, how long it will take, what issues are being explored and whether they are working with federal investigators. Obama has promised transparency throughout his service and to divulge contacts his staff has had with Blagojevich’s office in the coming days. But his staff has locked down on inquiries in the meantime.

The Obama transition team’s refusal to talk has contributed to a maelstrom around Obama’s incoming White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, a Chicago congressman likely to have been in contact with the governor, who was arrested this week in a corruption scandal. But Emanuel is not a target of the probe, according to people who have been briefed on the investigation.

Asked if any conversations between Emanuel and Blagojevich were captured on government wiretaps, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs said, “I honestly don’t know.” Other transition officials refused to respond to inquiries.

“What I want to do is to gather all the facts about any staff contacts that may have taken place between the transition office and the governor’s office,” Obama said. “And we’ll have those in the next few days, and we’ll present them. But what I’m absolutely certain about is that our office had no involvement in any dealmaking around my Senate seat. That I’m absolutely certain of.”

Another question that Obama’s staff didn’t answer is how he knows that his office had no involvement if he had yet to gather all the facts about conversations they had with Blagojevich’s office. Speaking on the condition of anonymity, transition officials said they do not want to release any information on the internal review until it is completed.

Republicans are using Obama’s silence over the contacts his aides may have had with the governor to criticize him.

“While it is encouraging that the president-elect has stated his office will disclose contacts with the scandal-ridden governor, it remains disappointing that his actions are in response to political pressure,” Republican National Committee Chairman Robert M. “Mike” Duncan said. “Americans expect the highest degree of transparency from their elected leaders, rather than promises of openness on the campaign trail.”

The normally press-friendly Emanuel has shut down reporters who’ve been trailing his every move trying to confirm if he’s the “president-elect adviser” referred to in the criminal complaint against Blagojevich.

The limelight has fallen on Emanuel because conversations secretly recorded by federal investigators suggest Blagojevich wanted to raised large charitable donations in exchange for a favor involving the Illinois 5th District congressional seat that Emanuel plans to vacate to work in the White House.

The complaint says that a week after Obama chose Emanuel as his chief of staff, Blagojevich told an aide that he wanted the unnamed “president-elect advisor” to be told of the governor’s interest in creating a nonprofit group, and “can you guys help him . . . raise 10, 15 million”?

Quoting Blagojevich talking about the adviser, it continues: “When ‘he asks me for the Fifth CD thing I want it to be in his head.’” The complaint says Blagojevich was trying to determine whether he had the power to appoint an interim replacement until a special election for Emanuel’s seat could be held.

Emmanuel – Death Threats?

Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, said today he wouldn’t go to the Chicago presidential transition offices in order to avoid reporters trying to ask him whether he had contact with Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich about the Senate seat vacated by Obama’s election.

A spokesman for Emanuel said he later showed up at the office, apparently able to sneak out of the house without being seen by reporters waiting to ask him questions.

Meanwhile, late today a spokesperson for Emanuel confirmed in an email that an Associated Press story saying that he is not a target of the investigation is “accurate.” Questions remain, however, over his contacts with Blagojevich and his staff, and Emanuel has still not said whether or not he’s been contacted by the FBI for questioning.

Emanuel has refused to comment as to whether he is the un-named presidential adviser cited in the FBI affidavit filed in the Blagojevich case. “You’re wasting your time,” Emanuel told a Chicago Sun Times reporter . “I’m not going to say a word to you. “

U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald says there is “nothing in the complaint” that implicates Obama but the affidavit suggests someone from the Obama camp was in touch with Blagojevich or his aides.

Back at his home, Emanuel appeared “beet-red,” according to an ABC News cameraman.”I’m getting regular death threats. You’ve put my home address on national television. I’m pissed at the networks. You’ve intruded too much, ” Emanuel said, according to the cameraman.

An aide for Emanuel said late Friday afternoon that Emanuel did not make any remarks about receiving death threats. “While we appreciate this camera man’s active imagination, this report is inaccurate,” said Sarah Feinberg. Responding to Emanuel’s comments, ABC News went back and double-checked with the camera man and stands by the story.

It’s apparent that the Obama camp has circled their wagons and are not saying anything until the full transcript is released. This is a common tactic used by intelligent criminals to give them time to get their stories straight. They’re waiting to see who’s named and what they said, then they will start talking. Do not be surprised when everything they say at that point appears to to fit in or be overly consistent.

Forget the Judicial process – Lt. Gov. calls for Impeachment

The lieutenant governor has joined a bevy of lawmakers in demanding that Blagojevich be impeached, saying he has become an embarrassment to the state and can no longer lead. His approval rating plummeted to a shockingly low 8 percent.

“When you have no confidence from the people, in a democracy there’s nowhere else to go but to resign,” Lt. Pat Quinn said Thursday.

The impeachment push was part of a riveting political drama that extended from Illinois to Washington.

I nkow that Blago is dirty – no question about it. I have a lower burden of proof that the court does though. One point that everybody seems to be overlooking is that Blago has not been convicted of anything. He is still the sitting Governor, with all of his constitutional power – like it or not.

This investigation was halted by the feds before anything other than conspiracy actually occurred. There’s still a trial yet to come. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt – that’s what the feds have to show. I’m absolutely positive that there’s more to this case than we’ve been shown, but the fact is Hot Rod is innocent until proven guilty.

“His approval rating plummeted to a shockingly low 8 percent.” another reason Quinn is calling for impeachment or resignation. If we should get rid of people for low approval ratings, then most of Congress needs to go too. What are they at ? 9 %?

KHAQ removes Blago – Obama story from website

A related November 5 story at KHAQ in advance of the Obama-Blago meeting is no longer available at KHAQ’s site. It has been taken down from the related web site, and I believe its Google cache has also been removed.

“this is (in) the newspaper from Quincy, IL from KHQA, a CBS affiliate

find it here

The Blagojevich Timeline

The Voloch Conspiracy

The Blagojevich Timeline: Everything Fits Easily Except Obama’s Monday Denial.

Most people have misunderstood the timeline of the Blagojevich Senate scandal. Pretty much everything fits except Barack Obama’s statement yesterday that he knew nothing about it.

If we didn’t have Obama’s denial to contend with, the actions of all the parties, including those purporting to speak for Obama, are consistent with Obama and his staff learning about Blagojevich’s corrupt plans on Monday, Nov. 10.

Consider the timeline, as revealed in the complaint and press reports:

1. On the weekend of Nov. 8-9, Obama lets it be known that his choice for Senate is Valerie Jarrett. Aides tell WLS-TV in Chicago and CNN, which announces Obama’s choice on Sunday. Nov. 9.

2. On Monday, Nov. 10, Blagojevich holds an incredible 2-hour conference call with multiple consultants: “ROD BLAGOJEVICH, his wife, JOHN HARRIS, Governor General Counsel, and various Washington-D.C. based advisors, including Advisor B,” discussing his corrupt schemes. He follows this with two calls with Advisor A.

3. That very night, Monday, Nov. 10, at 7:56pm, CNN reported:

Two Democratic sources close to President-elect Barack Obama tell CNN that top adviser Valerie Jarrett will not be appointed to replace him in the U.S. Senate.

“While he (Obama) thinks she would be a good senator, he wants her in the White House,” one top Obama advisor told CNN Monday.

Over the weekend, Democratic sources had told CNN as well as Chicago television station WLS-TV that Jarrett was Obama’s choice to fill his Senate seat.

So what happened? The likeliest scenario is that one of the many participants in Blagojevich’s Monday phone calls either floated his plans to the Obama transition team to assess their response or tipped off the Obama camp about the reckless ideas that Blagojevich had planned.

In any event, within hours of Blagojevich substantially expanding his circle of confidants, the Obama camp withdrew Jarrett’s name from consideration and attributed that withdrawal to the President’s wanting Jarrett in the White House. And the Obama staffers went out of their way to depict this as Obama’s choice, rather than Jarrett’s, which would have been more common. The report claims Obama’s involvement in the decision and suggests a direct effort to undercut the idea that Obama was pressuring Blagojevich to appoint Jarrett.

4. Moreover, by the next day, Tuesday, Nov. 11, Blagojevich already had received his answer from the Obama camp that no quid pro quo would be forthcoming: “ROD BLAGOJEVICH said he knows that the President-elect wants Senate Candidate 1 for the Senate seat but ‘they’re not willing to give me anything except appreciation. F**k them.’”

5. On Wednesday, Nov. 12, Blagojevich pitched his corrupt bargain idea to an SEIU Official who, according to Ben Smith, is President Andy Stern. Stern agreed to convey the offer to the relevant actors. Blagojevich understood Stern to be contacting Jarrett herself, the co-chairwoman of the Obama transition team:

109. On November 12, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with SEIU Official, who was in Washington, D.C. Prior intercepted phone conversations indicate that approximately a week before this call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH met with SEIU Official to discuss the vacant Senate seat, and ROD BLAGOJEVICH understood that SEIU Official was an emissary to discuss Senate Candidate 1’s interest in the Senate seat.

During the conversation with SEIU Official on November 12, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH informed SEIU Official that he had heard the President-elect wanted persons other than Senate Candidate 1 to be considered for the Senate seat.

SEIU Official stated that he would find out if Senate Candidate 1 wanted SEIU Official to keep pushing her for Senator with ROD BLAGOJEVICH. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that “one thing I’d be interested in” is a 501(c)(4) organization.

ROD BLAGOJEVICH explained the 501(c)(4) idea to SEIU Official and said that the 501(c)(4) could help “our new Senator [Senate Candidate 1].” SEIU Official agreed to “put that flag up and see where it goes.”

110. On November 12, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with Advisor B. ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Advisor B that he told SEIU Official, “I said go back to [Senate Candidate 1], and, and say hey, look, if you still want to be a Senator don’t rule this out and then broach the idea of this 501(c)(4) with her.”

6. The complaint doesn’t say whether Stern contacted Jarrett or other members of the Obama transition team, but it is likely that he did. Whether Stern was horrified by Blagojevich’s corrupt idea and wanted to warn Obama or intrigued by the deal and wanted to assess its chances, I can’t think of a good reason why Stern wouldn’t have conveyed the idea to the Obama camp.

7. On Thursday, Nov. 13:

ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked Advisor A to call Individual A and have Individual A pitch the idea of the 501(c)(4) to “[President-elect Advisor].” Advisor A said that, “while it’s not said this is a play to put in play other things.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH responded, “correct.” Advisor A asked if this is “because we think there’s still some life in [Senate Candidate 1] potentially?” ROD BLAGOJEVICH said, “not so much her, but possibly her. But others.”

8. If, as seems likely, Individual A then pitched Blagojevich’s corrupt bargain to the “President-elect Advisor” and that advisor is Rahm Emanuel, as has been suggested by others, then Emanuel would then have known of the bribery attempt.

9. By 6:10pm on Friday, Nov. 14, CNN is reporting:

Valerie Jarrett tells CNN contributor Roland Martin that President-elect Barack Obama offered and she accepted a position in the Obama administration – she will be the Senior Adviser to the President and Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Liaison.

10. Nov. 14 to early December: After occasionally feeding speculation about who might fill Obama’s seat, the Obama transition team suddenly goes remarkably silent about his preference.

11. On Nov. 23, Obama’s “senior adviser David Axelrod appeared on Fox News Chicago,” answering a question about the Senate seat.

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

Note the language used. While on Nov. 9, Obama staffers were telling multiple news outlets whom Obama wanted for his Senate seat, by Nov. 23, Axelrod was distancing Obama not only from any individual choice, but he used the pejorative term “kingmaker” to emphasize Obama’s avoidance of any even marginally corrupt influence. It is likely that Axelrod had in mind the corrupt bargain that Obama’s camp had already turned down.

12. On Tuesday, Dec. 9, Obama denies personal knowledge of the corrupt proposal.

“I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening.”

As I’ve said before, as with Bill Clinton, Barack Obama’s words should be read carefully to see what he is saying and not saying. Apparently, Obama started to say that “we were not” “aware of what was happening,” but corrected himself by saying that “I was not aware of what was happening.”

That language leaves open the possibility that his staff was aware, but he personally was not. But why would Obama’s staff withhold information from him? I assume that Obama is telling the truth about not having spoken to the governor himself, since that might be easily refuted.

CONCLUSION:

From the evening of Nov. 10 until yesterday, Blagojevich, Obama, and his transition team acted in ways that are consistent with a knowledge of Blagojevich’s bribery attempt and a rejection of that attempt. What doesn’t fit easily with the timeline is Obama’s statement yesterday.

It should be noted that it is not a crime to fail to report a bribery attempt. The federal misprision of felony statute would seem to make it a federal crime to fail to report a federal felony:

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. 18 USC s.4.

But case law has conclusively determined that mere non-reporting is not enough. Active concealment or the acceptance of a benefit for concealing is required.

Yet, looking at this timeline of Blagogate, it seems quite possible that someone in the Obama Camp is either lying or at least not revealing what they know. I also find it hard to believe that Obama’s closest advisors were hiding major corruption from him, especially as he was making decisions about where to place Senate candidates such as Jarrett.

Something important is missing from this story. Let’s hope that, whatever it is, the absent fact or explanation will allow the narrative to fit Obama’s denial more naturally.

Since by all accounts, the Obama camp refused Blagojevich’s bribery attempt, it would be extremely unwise to lie about it. Remember, it’s not the crime that trips you up; it’s the cover-up.

UPDATE: My parsing of Obama’s statement above gets some strong support from this LA Times interview, noted by Byron York:

It hasn’t gotten a huge amount of coverage, but Obama did an interview with the Los Angeles Times yesterday. He said he had never talked about the Senate seat with Rod Blagojevich. But when he was asked whether his staff had, he clammed up. From the interview:

Q: Have you ever spoken to [Illinois] Gov. [Rod R.] Blagojevich about the Senate seat?

Obama: I have not discussed the Senate seat with the governor at any time. My strong belief is that it needed to be filled by somebody who is going to represent the people of Illinois and fight for them. And beyond that, I was focused on the transition.

Q: And that was before and after the election?

Obama: Yes.

Q: Are you aware of any conversations between Blagojevich or [chief of staff] John Harris and any of your top aides, including Rahm [Emanuel]?

Obama: Let me stop you there because . . . it’s an ongoing…. investigation. I think it would be inappropriate for me to, you know, remark on the situation beyond the facts that I know. And that’s the fact that I didn’t discuss this issue with the governor at all.

So I was correct that Obama was indeed drawing a distinction between what he knew and what his staff might have known.

As I said above, there is something missing here. It wouldn’t surprise me if Obama staffers were working with the prosecutors (from the week of Nov. 10th on), a possibility suggested in comments below. But it would surprise me if Obama staffers went to the feds without telling Obama.

An Antidote to the Poison of Corruption

Thursday June 5, 2008

CHICAGO (AP) — U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald says prosecutors respect 16 guilty verdicts handed down by jurors Wednesday against Tony Rezko even though they filed 24 against the political fundraiser.

Fitzgerald talked to reporters after the verdicts were read and called the Rezko trial “an antidote to the poison of corruption.”

Fitzgerald also lauded the jury, saying the only way to fight corruption is with the strength of honest people.

Fitzgerald refused to discuss Senator Barack Obama or Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, whose names were brought up at the trial.

Fitzgerald said critcial pieces of evidence at the trial were the wire tap and testimony from Levine and Ali Ata, a longtime friend of Blagojevich.

Illinois lawmakers’ Exercise in Futility

SPRINGFIELD, ILL. (AP) — Despite worries about Blagojevich’s plans for the vacant Obams U.S. Senate seat,
Illinois lawmakers won’t meet until next week to consider removing his
power to fill the seat.

Lawmakers plan to convene Monday and vote on filling the vacancy by special election.

Legislative aides said Wednesday that they’re sticking to that schedule. They say it’s not possible to convene sooner.

Some fear Blagojevich might go ahead and name a senator before
Illinois legislators change the law. Some U.S. senators are urging him not
to do that.

But a spokesman for House
Speaker Michael Madigan notes Blagojevich could do that no matter when
lawmakers meet. Any change in the law would have to go to the
governor’s desk and he could delay it if he wanted.

Well this is interesting. I still hope Blago appoints a republican. Why should he still be a loyal dem? They’re running away from him as fast as they can. I know Obama’s loving this. Over a month to until the inauguration, and all hell’s broken loose. I do believe that this is just a teaser for the next four years.

The Obama lie

Asked what contact he’d had with the governor’s office about his replacement in the Senate, President-elect Obama today said “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening.”

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

An Obama Transition Team aide says that Axelrod misspoke on Fox News Chicago.

Axelrod on December 9, 2008 issued a statement saying. “I was mistaken when I told an interviewer last month that the President-elect has spoken directly to Governor Blagojevich about the Senate vacancy. They did not then or at any time discuss the subject.”

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

But wait! There’s more! this is an article from November 5, 2008…

Who will fill Obama’s senate seat?

By Carol Sowers
Wednesday, November 05, 2008 at 10:39 a.m.
CHICAGO, ILL. — Now that Barack Obama will be moving to the White House, his seat in the U.S. Senate representing Illinois will have to be filled.

That’s one of Obama’s first priorities today.

He’s meeting with Governor Rod Blagojevich this afternoon in Chicago to discuss it.

Illinois law states that the governor chooses that replacement.

There’s already been speculation about his selection…from Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. of Chicago’s south side who co-chaired Obama’s presidential campaign, to recently-retired state senate president Emil Jones, to the governor himself…

Now – are both Axelrod and Carol Sowers making the same story up? No way. As this thing unfolds, Obama’s name is just going to keep coming up. All of these people are dirty and it will come out eventually.

Look at all of the other dirtbags that Obama denied association with, but it came out that in fact he did have associations  – Antoin “Tony” Rezko, Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Emil Jones, Rashid khalidi, Michael Pfleger, ACORN. How about all of the Clinton people and the Clintons themselves? The best thing for Blago is to start naming names. Of, course the Obama camp is already saying that  Blagojevich may try to weave a web of lies to include Obama.

Illinois Gov. Blagojevich, thrown under bus, can still fill Obama’s seat

Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich could still appoint someone to fill Obama’s U.S. Senate seat despite charges that he tried to barter it away for cash or a plum job in what prosecutors call “a political corruption crime spree.”

But it would take a lot of nerve and Blagojevich would have to hurry because state lawmakers are racing to snatch away his power to appoint a new senator and put it in the hands of voters.

“No appointment by this governor, under these circumstances, could produce a credible replacement,” U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin said Tuesday after the governor was arrested on charges of conspiring to commit fraud and soliciting bribery.

Until state lawmakers call a special election, though, Blagojevich still has the power to fill the Senate seat left vacant by the Obama.

“He is still the sitting governor of Illinois today, now, and that is not something we have any say in or control of,” U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald said in unveiling corruption charges against the 52-year-old governor.

Obama was not accused of any wrongdoing. “I had no contact with the governor or his office, and so I was not aware of what was happening,” the president-elect said.

Prosecutors stepped in and had the governor arrested because he was on “what can only be called a political corruption crime spree,” Fitzgerald said.

Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, said he is prepared to call the Illinois House into session as early as Monday to set a special election to fill the seat. Illinois Senate President Emil Jones said he had something similar in mind.

In Washington, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., made it plain he didn’t want to seat anyone under such a cloud, saying the charges “are appalling and represent as serious a breach of the public trust as I have ever heard.”

Reid , Durbin, Obama – way to go, just throw the guy under the bus. Keep on talking. This guy’s already shown that he has lot of nerve, now that you’ve disowned him why should he stay loyal to you, the democrats? I hope he appoints a republican for that seat – just to show that he can do it.

Democrat Governor Arrested

Illinois Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich and his Chief of Staff, John Harris, were arrested today by FBI agents on federal corruption charges alleging that they and others are engaging in ongoing criminal activity: conspiring to obtain personal financial benefits for Blagojevich by leveraging his sole authority to appoint a United States Senator; threatening to withhold substantial state assistance to the Tribune Company in connection with the sale of Wrigley Field to induce the firing of Chicago Tribune editorial board members sharply critical of Blagojevich; and to obtain campaign contributions in exchange for official actions – both historically and now in a push before a new state ethics law takes effect January 1, 2009.

Blagojevich, 51, and Harris, 46, both of Chicago, were each charged with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and solicitation of bribery. They were charged in a two-count criminal complaint that was sworn out on Sunday and unsealed today following their arrests, which occurred without incident, announced Patrick J. Fitzgerald, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, and Robert D. Grant, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Both men were expected to appear later today before U.S. Magistrate Judge Nan Nolan in U.S. District Court in Chicago.

A 76-page FBI affidavit alleges that Blagojevich was intercepted on court-authorized wiretaps during the last month conspiring to sell or trade Illinois’ U.S. Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama for financial and other personal benefits for himself and his wife. At various times, in exchange for the Senate appointment, Blagojevich discussed obtaining:

A substantial salary for himself at a either a non-profit foundation or an organization affiliated with labor unions;

Placing his wife on paid corporate boards where he speculated she might garner as much as $150,000 a year;

Promises of campaign funds – including cash up front; and

A cabinet post or ambassadorship for himself.

I tell you now – all of these guys are dirty – this only is the tip of the iceberg. BTW, Didn’t he just threaten Bank of America yesterday?

the rest of the story here…