cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Veteran Advisor

Re: Blago vs Illinois

  OK, PROVE that he lied.

 

  And while your at it, produce one of his articles from BEFORE THE TRIAL, and not from some anonymous source or from the prosecution's team, proving that the claim was made before the trial, and by whom.

 

  It's put up or shut up time.

Frequent Contributor

Re: Blago vs Illinois

I proved it in my last post.  I remember when he was first elected and he said he was going to live in Chicago so he could be there for his daughter's bedtimes.   You say he wanted "more mula" from the state.   There it is, Blago lied. (Thanks for the help proving it.)

So if I find a Schoenberg article dated BEFORE THE TRIAL where he speaks of Blagojevich hiding in the bathroom to avoid having to make decisions, but doesn't give the name of his source, you won't accept it as truth?   I really doubt if Schoenberg would (literally) name the source in his article.

Veteran Advisor

Re: Blago vs Illinois

  I asked you to prove it, and you provided your right wing memory recall as proof, and none for the supposed article. Sorry, but that's not good enough. But, I'll give you another chance to try again, as you have yet to provide any proof besides your memory.

Senior Advisor

Re: It is my understanding

That you folks think Blago is guilty and the only reason he wasn't found guilty on the other 23 counts is because one lone juror is stupid or corrupt. The question is was there a crime committed or not? And did the prosecution prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.?

 

You already have the lone juror guilt, what should be her sentence?

 

 

Frequent Contributor

Re: Blago vs Illinois

 

 

Obviously  my memory is better than yours.   (You do live in Illinois, don't you?)

 

I've looked in the archives at the State Journal-Register.  The Search function only goes back 14 days, then you have to use the Archives and use dates for the Search  I used "Blagojevich hiding in the bathroom" for the Keywords and 1/1/2006 to 8/20/10 for the dates to be searched.   2 "hits" came back , one dated in 2004 (not even in the range I was searching) and the other dated in 2006.  The short paragraghs that were listed made me think that was not the correct article (not listed as a Bernard Schoenburg article) and it wanted me to "buy" the rest of it. 

Schoenburg (I have miss-spelled his name in some of my previous posts,  I apologize)  has his e-mail listed in the paper.  I may email him over the weekend and see if he will  confirm whether it was in one of his articles before the trial.

 

If he responds with an article DATED BEFORE THE TRIAL, will you accept that even if he does not name/reveal his source?

 

Don, I think the "sentence" for the juror should be having to act as the "press secretary" and travel with  Blago for the next 6 months.

Veteran Advisor

Re: Blago vs Illinois

  It would be pretty hard to find that article, considering he (Robert Greenlee) said that only during the trial. He was Blago's Deputy Governor, and resigned the day after Blago's arrest. He was implicated in trying to exert pressure on the Tribune to get them to get rid of some editors, and rolled over for the prosecutor because of it. He was also Deputy Governor A, and Senate candidate #4 in the transcripts of the wiretaps, according to the FBI.

  Blago did say he wanted to "see his daughter and kiss his baby", and that was in reference to his flights to and from Springfield during the budget negotiations, and caught flack because of the cost of the flights. He worked out of a downtown Chicago office near his home, or his home,, and did spend some overnights in Springfield, although sporadically. The normal workweek is 3 days anyway, so as long as he was still able to conduct the state's business, who cares where he slept at. He also didn't use or need the huge staff that is on hand at the Governor's mansion, so he probably saved us a few bucks there.

  Yea, my memory must stink, because I thought the cost for the flights was $6000, and it was $5800.

 

  Just heard on the news tonight that the jurors' voting was secret, but that the jury foreman thinks he might know who was the potential holdout, but wouldn't name the person. So, ole Fox "News" made up the missing info to their liking, because why would he tell one media entity and not another???

Senior Contributor

Re: Blago vs Illinois

"He's out of office because of the intentions of his rivals, plain and simple."  Tom that is so typical of todays partisan politics and sounds a lot like Hillary's claim of a vast right wing conspiracy in her attempt to explain all her and her husband's problems. That's like shooting yourself in the foot and then trying to blame it all on the gun manufacturor. You seriously don't think Blago's actions had anything to do with his down fall?  I'm betting you voted for Blago based on your comments. 

 

"Heck, he had the power to appoint someone to the seat, and did, and he was just trying to appoint someone that would do something for him, just as any politician would, and has time and again. If that's not the case, how come republicans don't appoint democrats to empty seats?????????"   Tom don't you think Dems and Repubs aften appoint someone in their own party as a way of helping their party maintain power?   No doubt their is often some paybacks involved to help get one on board to help pass legislation or to help get a person to be a team player but it appears Blago was doing this for per$onal gain.

 

Don I don't think Blago was guilty on all counts and honestly don't know enough about the evidence to make such a claim but based on his comments from the wire taps he sure looks guilty of trying to sell the Senate seat and the jury was all in agreement as well on that count except for the one juror.  Nor do I think the lone hold out juror is guilty of anything although I think that possibility is in the back of many people's minds simply because we are talking Chicago politics and know anything is possible.

 

I think the foreman could easily tell who the lone hold out juror was based on their lengthy discussions during deliberations.  

Senior Advisor

Re: Blago vs Illinois

Dag , as participants in this forum, we both know that a compelling argument can be made with vast agreement amongst the readers. This particular thread is an example of that. Most agree that he must be guilty. Some not. TYhat does not  validate the remarks.

 

Yet in a court of law it is necessary to find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.. So the court  should not have any trouble with proving guilt. Yet there doesn't appear to be any rock solid evidence that confirms his guilt. Or that even a crime was committed. What was the misdeed and was it consumated. You and I can speculate on the possibility of robbing the bank, but if we don't rob it they have trouble getting a conviction.. Trying to sell a seat is not selling the seat. And negotiating in political matters is the way it works. In the halls of congress all the time. Nobody get imprisoned for selling their vote during the horse trading process.

 

So if you can find evidence of a quid pro quo or money exchanging hands I will join yuou. But until that happens the burden of proof is on the prosecution.

Senior Contributor

Re: Blago vs Illinois

"Yet in a court of law it is necessary to find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.. So the court  should not have any trouble with proving guilt. Yet there doesn't appear to be any rock solid evidence that confirms his guilt."  

 

I have to disagree Don.  I've seen a couple of different jurors interviewed on TV (not on FOX) and both said that it was a very complicated case but that there was compelling evidence in their opinion for several of the charges including the main charge of attempting to sell the senate seat.  One juror said he had to keep going back and re-reading the judgwes instructions and refering to the legal differnences between racketeering and another similar crime (embezzlement maybe) which name I don't recall at the moment.   I have also seen some big name laywers both ex-prosecutors and defense attorneys and they said some of these charges made against Blago are amongst the hardest crimes to prove.  You bring up a good point about no money changing hands which also makes it harder to prove guilt although I believe it is not required for them to prove the crime was committed.

Veteran Advisor

Re: Blago vs Illinois

  It's pretty hilarious the little amount of info you ACTUALLY know about this whole thing. The investigation started BEFORE Blago was even elected the first time, and was centered around paving contractors, and alleged possible contract awards/various forms of kickbacks in the future. Guess who Blago ran against??????? The Atty Gen for the state of IL., that was of course a republican, that was in convicted Governor Ryan's camp, who also went into overdrive with spending state money for roads, with the same group of paving contractors. Coincidence? Hardly.

  If I voted for Blago, and I did twice, the first time is because I know WAY TOO MUCH about Carl Hawkinson, and the second was because of Topinka and Burkett( a DePage County screwball) as I thought it was the better choice. Besides, the last time I checked, I didn't need some pretend "independent" right winger from Iowa, approval. The same "independent" that gets miffed when he thinks somebody types ill of his fellow right wingers, and jumps to their defense, all while professing his "independent" position.

  Who cares whether it was one person or three, that is the way the jury works. If the prosecutor didn't like that juror, they could have dismissed him/her for cause. If it's some "left-wing coverup' like all the right wing extremists here think, take it up with the REPUBLICAN prosecutor that DIDN'T dismiss that juror if there ACTUALLY WAS A CONFLICT, or some sort of potential bias.

  Let me guess, the right wing wants to do away with juries now, too.