By: Warren

Warren — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:32:46 +0000

@Rich: These are plausible accounts and may well be true. I am checking with the reporters who did the Trib story to see what they think the meaning is. The Emanuel issue is up in the air and we all need to see what shoes drop. If the Fox News Chicago source is correct, then Emanuel did have discussions with Blago.
I am open to these possibilities but will not assume them without evidence.

By: Rich

Rich — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:26:49 +0000

Warren —
As Jayhuck has pointed out, the Chicago Tribune story does not say that Blagojevich spoke to Obama during the past year. It simply quotes Blagojevich as saying “We have had some discussions about a process which we’ll share … if all goes well.” Note that Blagojevich didn’t say “I” have had discussions, he said “We” have had discussions. This would seem to indicate that the discussions involved underlings, not Blagojevich or Obama.
As for the victory celebration, there were over 100,000 people present and it was open to anyone who wanted to attend. If Blagojevich was there, there is no evidence that he spoke with Obama or that they even saw each other.
I have read the criminal complaint, and I don’t see anything in there which establishes that Blagojevich or his advisors had any discussions with Rahm Emmanuel or anyone else in the Obama camp about Blagojevich’s demands. Advisor A and Advisor B clearly are Blagojevich advisors, not Obama advisors. The complaint makes six references to “President-elect advisor,” but in each instance it is in the context of Blagojevich wanting to get a message to that person (p. 72-73). I see nothing in the complaint which establishes that Blagojevich’s advisors ever spoke to “President-elect advisor.”
As for the “suck it up for two years” comment, it most likely refers to the fact that Blagojevich has two years remaining in his term as governor. His advisors were telling him that he wasn’t going to get anything from Obama. Then they suggested that they could get something from SEIU (“something” being the position of National Director of the Change to Win campaign), and then SEIU could take credit for getting Blagojevich to appoint Obama’s choice for the Senate seat. But even if SEIU could do that, Blagovjevich would not be able to take the job for two years — hence, the comments about sucking it up and “promises for something two years from now.” Those were hypothetical promises, and there is no evidence that they were even discussed outside of Blagojevich’s circle.
Finally, Obama’s “legalistic denials” are carefully worded because he is still verifying who on his team may have had contact with Blogojevich’s people and what was said. It’s obvious that there must have been some contact on some level, because Obama wanted to make his preferences known to Blogojevich. Obama knows that he had no contact with Blogojevich, and I am certain that he knows of any contact that his closest advisors may have had, but he needs to identify everyone on his team who may have had contact and what they said.

By: Jayhuck

Jayhuck — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:49:55 +0000

BTW Warren – That Chicago Tribune article you use as proof that they have talked in the last year doesn’t say any such thing. It gives no date for their last discussion and doesn’t even talk specifically about the last time they talked. I’m assuming you are trying to infer something from the article?

By: Jayhuck

Jayhuck — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:41:32 +0000

Blago said alot of things Warren 🙂

By: Warren

Warren — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:05:54 +0000

The WashPo article has at least two factual flaws: Obama has spoken to Blagojevich within the last year and Blago was at the victory celebration (or at least he said he was the next day - listen to his description of it in the first minute of this clip).

Comments on: Fox News reports on Blagojevich efforts to bribe Obama advisors – Focus on Emanuel

By: Warren

By: Rich

By: Jayhuck

By: Jayhuck

By: Warren