Posted on 05/24/2010 7:06:30 PM PDT by STARWISE
U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens gave federal prosecutors one week to respond to ousted Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's request to delay his corruption trial.
Stevens on Friday told the government to respond by May 28. The trial of Blagojevich and his brother, Robert Blagojevich, is scheduled to begin June 3.
Rod Blagojevich's lawyers say the high court first should decide whether the federal honest-services fraud law is constitutional, because it's the basis of some of the charges he faces. A decision is expected next month.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
By Ashley Badgley Illinois Statehouse News
###
SPRINGFIELD — There are a few weeks left until the federal corruption trial of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich is scheduled to begin on June 3.
In a time when Illinois is facing a major budget deficit, the trial might have an effect on how voters view state politics, experts said.
Patrick Collins, the lead prosecutor in the federal racketeering trial of former Illinois Gov. George Ryan, said the state is going through "unprecedented times" with the Blagojevich trial coming up. He said there has been a major change in Illinois politics since the Ryan trial and conviction.
"The combination of the Ryan administration's problems and the Blagojevich administration's problems, that sort of one-two punch, I think has changed Illinois politics," Collins said.
Collins said the trial and the state of affairs in Illinois will leave voters with a chip on their shoulder when elections roll around in November. He said the alleged corruption of Blagojevich will also be a target for political campaign slams.
"I think this trial will leave a collective bad taste in the voter's mouth about Illinois government," Collins said. "I think, in some respects, it will be the fodder for campaign commercials and for talking points for politicians as they go into the Labor Day to November election cycle."
Roosevelt University political science professor Paul Green agrees with Collins and said the trial falls at a perfect time for politicians who want to use it in their campaign.
"Politically speaking, this trial could not come at a better time," Green said. "This will be during a whole summer, which is going to [have] pretty dull politics and it will probably end right as the campaign season beings after Labor Day...Every one will be able to follow [the trial] and use it for their campaigns."
Green said the trial will help Republicans who are seeking office, but Collins said with both Ryan and Blagojevich going to trial, the parties are pretty equal in the voters' eyes.
Green called the trial "hanging fruit" for the Republicans seeking office. However, he said that if Blagojevich does take the stand at trial, there could very well be Republican names in his testimony.
Overall, the alleged corruption charges and trial against Blagojevich are not going to change how the state feels about its politics, Green said. He said the state's image is already low.
"The good news is, no matter what (Blagojevich) says, how much further could the politics sink?" Green said. "Right now, we're below sea level. It's going to be very tough to hurt the image of Illinois politics."
Well, what do you make of this?
~~Ping!
If Blago was removed from office for soliciting a bribe why is the president getting a pass for offering a bribe to Sestak.
I do not understnad that at all.
Nobody’s talking for one thing.
Karl Rove and Greta are talking about it now.
Blago’s asking for something I think is reasonable.
~~~
Fitzgerald To Revise Blagojevich Charges
*snip*
According to The Christian Science Monitor, the law, which makes it a crime “to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services,” is a “powerful weapon in the arsenal of prosecutors seeking to root out all forms of public and private corruption. But the statute, critics say, fails to give fair warning of precisely which conduct violates the law.”
The Tribune reports that prosecutors, led by U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, “are relying on [the law]” for a number of the corruption charges against the former governor.
The revised indictment will separate out Blagojevich’s charges in order to allow the June trial to start on time, regardless of the outcome of the Supreme Court case, the newspaper reports. The issue of honest services fraud law as it relates to the former governor will be dealt with in a new filing, according to the U.S. Attorney’s office, The Tribune reports.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Reid Schar wrote in the court filing, “At this time, it is anticipated that any new charges would be based on the underlying conduct that currently encompasses the pending charges.”
Blagojevich’s attorney, Sam Adam Jr., denounced the U.S. Attorney’s office decision. “It seems to me they ripped a sitting governor out of his home and said he had conducted a crime spree that they had to stop, and now they’re saying there isn’t going to be any ‘honest services’ and they’re going to charge him with something different,” Adam told The Tribune.
“I haven’t seen this much backpedaling since Gerald Wilkins got dunked on by Michael Jordan. Now we have to wait until January to find out what he really did?”
http://www.mainjustice.com/2009/12/08/fitzgerald-to-revise-blagojevich-charges/
I've been wondering the exact same thing...
I have forgotten to eat today. Maybe that’s why I’m misreading so many articles..lol. I can’t make sense of this. I am suspicious of Justice Stevens.
Gotta eat! Gotta have protein! And brain food: fat!
;)
Stevens is just telling the Feds .. YOU . have a
week to agree/or not with the delay .. he’s NOT
going to make that decision (the wimp).
~~~~~`
“Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens on Friday gave federal prosecutors until next Friday, to respond to the Blagojevich brothers’ request. Lawyers for the brothers argue that Stevens has the authority to delay their trial in light of another anticipated Supreme Court ruling that they say could affect their case.
» Click to enlarge image
Former Gov. Rod Blagojevich and his brother are hoping the U.S. Supreme Court throws out a law under which they have been charged.
(Fox Chicago News)
Lauren Kaeseberg, a member of Rod Blagojevich’s defense team, and Michael Ettinger, Robert Blagojevich’s lawyer, said Stevens had three choices: He could have denied the brothers’ trial-delay request, granted it or required the government to answer it. Stevens took the last of those three options.
“We believe that means he sees this as not frivolous, and he’s going to decide it on the merits,” Ettinger said. “We’re somewhat cautiously hopeful he’ll do the right thing.”
The Blagojevich lawyers filed their “emergency application for a stay of trial proceedings” with Stevens earlier this week after U.S. District Judge James Zagel, who is overseeing the case, and the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the brothers’ requests to postpone the trial, which is set to begin June 3.”
Well I didn't forget to eat and I haven't a clue what it all means either.
Interesting question.
How come Blago can go to prison for offering jobs but not the guy who offered Sestak the SecNav slot?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Not a very good basis to decided on a delay of a case. IMO I think Blago has had enough time to make his TV appearances & it's time to face the consequeces of his ill ways!
I think it’s saying the Blagos want the trial delayed until after the USSC rules on the constitutionality of the federal honest-services fraud law.
If it’s unconstitutional, then the case gets trimmed down significantly, at the least.
Green called the trial "hanging fruit" for the Republicans seeking office. However, he said that if Blagojevich does take the stand at trial, there could very well be Republican names in his testimony.
Exsqueeze me, but not 'could very well be', but 'ABSOLUTELY will be''.
Because we lucky surfs in IL have this 'thing of ours' called La Cosa Nostra, oops I mean, 'The Combine'. (not much difference really)
They run everything and both parties are corrupt to the core. 'We' are trying to purge every Combine crony of Geo Ryan's (RINO-Convicted Felon, IL) and every RINO, but they're like GD herpes. They keep popping back up.
And I'm proud to say I never voted for that Bast**d Ryan once. Not for ANY State office he ever ran for. And yes, I even voted for the Dem for Gov against Ryan. The CONSERVATIVE, Pro gun, Pro Life, Pro family, Glenn Poshard.(1)(2)
(1) Daley hated him so he had to be the right guy
(2) If Poshard had won we may have had Concealed Carry in IL - we were 'that close' the previous year, but Ryan cut a deal with Daley after winning and that was that.
I can’t imagine you’re wrong.
Thanks. And on Concealed Carry I'm sure I'm not wrong. Waaaaaay back then I was not as politically astute as today (except I knew Ryan was scum and Poshard was the right guy(1)), but in the 'watering hole' I hung my suit coat at after work, the other 'regulars' were very astute. One 'older guy' (Business Owner) could arm a rifle company by himself. His house's basement was four walls of Rifles and Shotguns.
In the year before Ryan was elected we were two votes short in the IL Gen Assmly of havingConcealed Carry passed (the year before that it was like three votes), Ryan was supposed to guarantee those votes 'if elected'. But he needed Daley and his lackey's votes to pass that $10 Billion boondoggle for 'road building'.So he cut that deal with Daley and Concealed Carry went off to that netherworld where bills go to die -- committee, never to be sen again. And to boot Ryan passed some Pet Gun Control Laws of Daley's, like making it a Felony to have a loaded magazine anywhere near a handgun in your car or on your person, or a loaded shotgun in your back seat or rear of an SUV on your 1st Offense. Before that it was a misdeameanor.
Subsequently, I stopped drinking as much as started paying attention to Politics - and became addicted to it. And then I bought one of those scary looking Black rifles 'everyone' wanted to ban :-) [It wasn't in the original list of rifles included in the AWB]. And 'a bunch' of other guns too. I became a BATF Licensed Collector (and I'm still one).
(1) Daley never endorsed Glen Poshard, that was clue number one.
Then Daley said in a press conference that, "Ryan was someone he could work with". That was clue #2 and the clincher.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.