Update: (2) Dec 15
Emanuel Under New Scrutiny Over Blagojevich
The Chicago Tribune and New York Times did not suggest any wrongdoing by Emanuel, citing sources as saying the Obama aide had presented suggested names to take over the seat without offering any inducements to Blagojevich.
SOURCE: NEWSMAX
Update: (1) Dec 14
Obama’s chief of staff had talks with Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s administration about potential candidates to fill Obama’s former Senate seat , the Chicago Tribune reported. if true, it again raises a question that Obama has deflected this week: whether anyone on his staff had contact with Blagojevich about his choice for the Senate seat.
After the election, Emanuel called Harris back to add the name of Democratic Attorney General Lisa Madigan to the approved list, the source said. Fox News
The Blagojevich scandal is hot issue in the media today Friday 12, and more than likely will be headline news for many months if not years! The Plot thickens!
Rahm Emanuel, the President-elect’s new Chief of Staff, and Jesse Jackson Jr, the co-chairman of his presidential campaign, both faced new revelations about their possible involvement in the scandal.
Fox News Chicago reported that Mr Emanuel, a Chicago politician who won the Illinois Governor’s former congressional seat, may have been captured on FBI wire-taps discussing the fate of Mr Obama’s vacated US Senate seat with Rod Blagojevich.
The TV station said Mr Emanuel had “multiple conversations” with the Governor, who is accused of trying to “sell” the open Senate seat for a Cabinet post or lucrative top foundation job. The report said the Governor was given a list of Senate candidates acceptable to Mr Obama. Because the FBI was secretly taping Mr Blagojevich in recent weeks, Mr Emanuel’s conversations may have been recorded, Fox News Chicago said.
A group of ethnic Indian businessmen with ties to Mr Jackson and Mr Blagojevich reportedly held a lunch on October 31 and discussed raising $1 million for the Governor’s campaign to encourage him to pick Mr Jackson as Senator, the Chicago Tribune said.Raghuveer Nayak, a major Blagojevich donor who also has ties to the Jackson family, then co-sponsored a fund-raiser for the Governor on Saturday attended by Mr Blagojevich and Jesse Jackson Jr’s brother Jonathan, the newspaper said.
Mr Nayak, a leader of Chicago’s Asian community, owns a string of surgery clinics and was once involved in a land deal with Jonathan Jackson.
Mr Jackson Jr met Mr Blagojevich at 4pm on Monday to discuss his interest in the Senate seat.
SOURCE: The Times
This could really be embarrassing for Barack Obama no matter if he has no wrong doings with Blagojevich and could stick around for next four years!
Emanuel delivered a list of “acceptable” candidates, the source told the newspaper. The list named Obama adviser Valerie Jarrert, Illinois Veterans Affairs Director Tammy Duckworth, state Comptroller Dan Hynes and U.S. Rep Jan Schakowsky of Chicago, the source told the Tribune.
After the election, Emanuel called Harris back to add the name of Democratic Attorney General Lisa Madigan to the approved list, the source said.
Fox News
Wishful thinking on your part. How, if there are no ties to Obama, would this be embarassing to him for four years? Hell, Bushie, the Big Dick and Rummy ginned up a whole war, and they’re not embarassed in the least.
There are already ties to Barack Hussein by way of his Chief of Staff and co-chairman of his presidential campaign and the rest of his pay to play pals in Chicago!
How can you defend such a group of crooks as the pay to play politicians diogenes?
Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell (dem) criticized Barack Obama for not being more upfront about the Illinois corruption scandal.
Now, he said, the story will continue to dominate the media’s attention.
I’m not defending any pay for play politicians. They deserve to have the book thrown at them.
A Fox TV station saying somebody had telephone conversations means nothing. It “MAY” have been this, it “MAY” have been that.
And it “MAY” have been very above-board, too.
All accounts so far seem to indicate that, if someone from Obama’s incoming administration spoke with Blagojevich, all they did was lobby for an Obama replacement without any offer of pay for play. And when Blago got off the phone, he said (and I’m paraphrasing) “Those guys want this seat for nothing? F*** them. F*** Obama.” If that’s the case, then Obama’s folks did exactly what we should want them to do, i.e. they didn’t pay for play.
The other thing to consider is that often prosecutors ask parties involved in the investigation to please avoid public comment so as to not gum up the works. Supposedly, this same prosecutor did just that with the Bush White House during the whole Scooter Libby fiasco. (You remember him, right? The prison con who was the Big Dick’s chief of staff right there in the Bushie White house?)
Hey, I guess if Rahn Emanuel IS criminally responsible in all this, somehow, then the Obama administration has officially tied the Bush administration in chief-of-staff corruption scandals!
There are WAY to o many IFs and MAYs right now to start and spread rumors.
Two simple words in the English language … “Tony” and “Rezko.”
It occurs to me that, if the Tribune changes hands (I love the smell of bankrupt newspapers in the morning!), we may actually get some probing reports on Obama’s Springfield days and on his many connections with “affordable housing” racketeers.
Questions for Barack!
1 – “Did you communicate directly or indirectly with Blagojevich about picking your replacement in the U.S. Senate?”
2 – “Why didn’t you or someone on your team correct your close adviser David Axelrod when he said you had spoken to Blagojevich about picking your replacement?”
3. “When did you learn the investigation involved Blagojevich’s alleged efforts to ‘sell’ your Senate seat, or of the governor’s impending arrest?”
4 – “Did you or anyone close to you contact the FBI or U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald about Blagojevich’s alleged efforts to sell your Senate seat to the highest bidder?”
5 – “Did federal investigators interview you or anyone close to you in the investigation?”
6 – “When did you and Blagojevich last speak and about what?”
7 – “Do you regret supporting Blagojevich?” Source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16465.html
The Questions above sounds like reasonable ones for Barack to answer now and not later waiting to find out what is on the wiretapping tapes! If Obama wants to prove himself and his staff to be clean then he would answer such questions without delay and that would slow down the rumors that you diogenes is saying that the media is spreading!
As you can see that I’m not in bed with Barack as you and MSNBC is!
Someone kick my a_s for voting for Obama. Never will vote for another black man. This man has not set a good example.
“Never will vote for another black man.” Oh, sure you will. Your mistake was in voting for a guy about whom no one knew anything! There’ll be lots of black candidates for high office in our future, men and women who won’t be “shallow, ignorant, and self-absorbed” … who’ll be nothing like Baby O, in other words.
I think farside said exactly what he meant, luke. Nice of you to try to keep the racism out of GTP’s little corner of the world — AGAIN! — but too late. Remember, GTP approved farside’s post.. and GTP rarely approves posts that don’t conform with his way of thinking. (Anything I post that he can’t think of an argument against he deletes.)
I hope you noted that I don’t have anything warm running down my legs for Obama as you and MSNBC does diogenes! LOL
Oh, I don’t know that farside’s a racist and wouldn’t much care if he were. I just don’t like to think of people voting against worthy black candidates on the basis of O’s inadequacy.
Yep yep yep.
“Never will vote for another black man.”
Nuthin’ racist there, man!
And no doubt you’re right, GTP; no emissions for Obama comin’ from a proud white man like your fineself. Nope, you got warm stuff running outta the back of yore overalls, because you be too full of it.
Maybe the following page will help diogenes understand something! How can a white person be racist against another white person like Obama? Anyone can go get a tan!
http://catsden.wordpress.com/2008/12/13/true-colors-debate-builds-over-whether-obama-can-be-black-with-a-white-mom/
Almost “anyone can go get a tan”. Even you, I guess, GTP.
Now why don’t you try to go out and get a non-racist sense of “humor”?
You’re a sick redneck. Who, to make matters worse, thinks he’s funny.
You really get off on N jokes, don’t you?
You’re the racist, look who has the trademark of name calling, yes thats right look in the mirror!
I think he’s pretty funny, too.
Here’s the deal. If prejudice is always and everywhere evidence of racism, then everyone is a racist. I’m sure you recall Jesse Jackson’s “footsteps” remark, for example. Prejudiced? Of course. Sound prejudice, in fact. Racist? You tell me.
Same with voting. A particular prejudice may or may not be reasonable, but everyone is prejudiced. People vote for or against a candidate on the basis of party affiliation, ethnic background, a goofy litmus test issue, a religious background that may be completely irrelevant, and so on. Some economizing process is called for on the way to the voting booth. It’s unavoidable. People are more or less informed, never fully informed. I’m sure that, in the past, I’ve voted against the better man, and even against the man whose politics are closer to mine, simply because there’s a “D” after his name; most of the time, though, “D” stands for “drip,” and my rule of thumb reduces the chance of electing a drip. Now, re the effectiveness of a prejudice against voting for a black candidate, get Bayesian for a second. If all you know about a candidate is that he’s black, do you think he is more or less likely to be part of a corrupt, big city political machine? More or less likely to favor mandating race-based preferences? More or less likely to have “failed upward” in school and the job market? More or less likely to support demoralizing and job-killing handout programs? Exactly. What I want to avoid is the case where the prejudice yields the *wrong* decision, where the black candidate really is better qualified but is nixed because of a prejudice that’s usually reliable. I want to reduce “Type 2 errors,” where the assumption that a black candidate is just another grievance-mongering kleptocrat is mistakenly accepted.
In O’s case, this cuts both ways, incidentally. A lot of uninformed people, black and white, voted for him merely on the basis of race, a lot more than voted against him.
Yes, people discriminate all the time, whenevr they make choices. Making choices based merely on an R or a D is assinine, but excusable. Making decisions based on race is not — or, at least, it’s not supposed to be in this society.
And GTP, I take proud in name-calling when it’s calling out racists like you. You’re the idiot who allows racist comments like “Never will vote for another black man.” You’re the idiot who responds about “Anyone can go get a tan”.
Being narrow-minded from a political perspective is one thing. Being a narrow-minded racial bigot is another. You’re the latter, and you’ve repeatedly proven it. even when you (incorrectly) suggest I must be black, because I call you out for being a racist.
I’m as white as you. Just not nearly as stupid as you.
“Making choices based merely on an R or a D is assinine [sic], but excusable. Making decisions based on race is not — or, at least, it’s not supposed to be in this society.”
In other words, the 97% (or whatever it was) of black voters who went Obama all soberly weighed the pros and cons beforehand. Unless they just voted D reflexively, in which case they’re “assinine.”
Hater!
why should any one worry about filling the seat obamma had as a senator,he didn`t even fill it himself.just stick an emty7 suit in it and it will be filled the same way it was