Posted on 08/20/2010 7:53:22 AM PDT by SmithL
Chicago (AP) -- Former Ill. Gov. Rod Blagojevich says all he's guilty of is some "political horse trading" and that if that's a crime, prosecutors need to charge every politician in America. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
We already know he’d sell his @ss for a vote.
“Former Ill. Gov. Rod Blagojevich says all he’s guilty of is some “political horse trading” and that if that’s a crime, prosecutors need to charge every politician in America. . . .”
Works for me.
The only difference I can see is the melamine content in their skin.
Wasn’t that the basis upon which the holdout juror refused to convict him - that he was no worse than all other politicians?
Do it NOW.
Exactly what should be done. Charge them all.
What, he openly admits it? Sorry, “horse trading” for a Senate seat is against the law, idiot.
“Former Ill. Gov. Rod Blagojevich says all he’s guilty of is some “political horse trading” and that if that’s a crime, prosecutors need to charge every politician in America.”
####
‘kay.
But we’ll still start with YOU, you arrogant annelid punk, with your radioactive bouffant.
Somebody out there is reading FreeRepublic...
"http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2572462/posts?page=167#167" - Blagojevich guilty on false statements count (jury hung on other 23 counts) - FR, 2010 August 18
I am not defending corruption by Blago by any means but, for instance, for the criminal, illegal "sale" of Senate seat to happen, the seller must have a buyer (who should also be prosecuted, unless being part of the "sting" operation)... but did Fitz produce any "buyers" during the trial, or evidence that transaction was about to happen? Or did he produce only the list of people Blago was "expecting" / daydreaming to be buyers in his recorded conversations with Robert? In Chicago people could easily take this to be a "thought crime". Of course, most pols are smarter than Blago and do the "sale" of favors through the third-party organizations or on a "deferred payout" basis (see Clintons, Gores, Cuomos, Kennedys...) - something which is just as, if not more, corrupt, but is considered a "horsetrading" and is technically "legal" unless hard evidence is found and prosecuted.
Fox news is still implying he’s “guilty” of something. I guess the American justice system really is just an excuse.
Good idea..Call me when we start laying brick...
His lawyer must be apoplectic. What part of "retrial" did Blago not understand?
He double dares Fitz to produce mo' evidence or mo' better "witnesses" than in the first trial - something that Fitz obviously and desperately didn't want to do, hoping he had enough to convict Blago without involving and jeopardizing people in "higher places" - and what made the case presented to the court / jury so weak:
No proof, no conviction, no surprise - Chicago Tribune, 2010 August 18, by Mary Schmich
Five weeks of arguments and testimony. Fourteen days of deliberations. And at the end of all that, a jury of six men and six women couldn't unanimously agree that the prosecutors made the case. He lied to the FBI? On that, they could concur. But corruption? Money wasn't shown to change hands. Explicit deals weren't caught on wiretap. The former allies who testified for the prosecution could be suspected of selfish motives. Key players never took the stand. It's hardly a surprise then that at least one juror — and I'd bet more — added up those insufficiencies and couldn't find him guilty. I wouldn't have voted to convict. It's easy to believe, even now, that Blagojevich strayed onto the wrong side of the law. But from the day U.S. Attorney Pat Fitzgerald, with the restraint of a blowtorch, laid out the indictment, too many people have confused the plausibility of crime with proof of it. Blagojevich was such a weak governor — vain, lazy, grandstanding, ineffectual — that it has been easy for the public to conclude prematurely that he was a corrupt one. In fact, suggesting that the proof was in short supply has been politically and socially perilous. The state legislature impeached Blagojevich on the fuel of Fitzgerald's fury. Consensus was born in the time that it takes to say "mob." It became fashionable to speak about Blagojevich as if he were evil on a par with a genocidal dictator. But in the past few weeks, as the trial went on, the public mood seems to have shifted. Gradually, it became OK to say that maybe the evidence was wanting, that though he might not be innocent, his guilt hadn't been proved. So a hung jury isn't as surprising today as it would have been even a few months ago. ..... ..... What has saved Blagojevich, if only for now, is lack of proof, which in the federal courthouse is far more powerful than prayer.
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.