As I have been saying, we are all playing a little guessing game. I love to guess too, I guess that makes me a pundit. From my experience with Fed Court it is wise to remember that the prosecutors only give up the information they have in small pieces so as not to tip their hand. Trial is where the real case comes out. What we have been given is the document that led to arrest. It is not the “case in chief.” But it does seem safe to say that Barack Obama is probably not directly involved in this particular case. I don’t think you can say Team Obama is out of the woods. As I said to the Obots we know there are taped conversations not released. What they say and the nuances on those tapes will be important - for both sides. We also have no clue about other information obtained. Just that Fitzgerald thinks that he can convict B of trying to sell a seat.

It is possible that the arrest came because of a fact that was not discussed much in last day or so - that Fitzgerald went to a judge for authorization for wiretaps. Those taps probably came with strings attached limiting the authority for the taps. So he may have wrapped it up as soon as he had the case he had outlined to the judge.

This is ALL speculation on my part, but Fitz’ future may be in a bit of flux as Obama is able to fire him as well as promote him. He is said on some sites to want to stay in Chicago and bringing a high profile case to trial may help keep him in place as the political risk of firing him increases.

Fitzgerald may also be stepping in to prevent a crime he discovered in progress. He has been investigating Blago and Chicago for years. Perhaps he was made aware of this and jumped quickly.

I am certain of one thing: This isn’t good news for anyone who has been politically active in the Chicago machine since 2002. I don’t believe this is the material he has been working on since he nailed Rezko. I think this is supplementary. Be patient I am sure there will be more.

Jim

My biggest fear is that Obama will “promote” him to a bigger postion that will re-assign him away from probing corruption in Chicago. I dont know if some one could fill Fitzgerald’s shoes. I highly doubt it.

Volokh Conspiracy has an interesting timeline posted on their site. The argument presented about the timeline is that Barack Obama knew of the alleged scheme early and distanced himself from it. The author feels it is not a crime simply to fail to report a bribery attempt. The question the author has is essentially Nagarajan’s point: why did Obama tell a clumsy lie when he had (apparently) acted within the law?
This returns us full circle. We just don’t know enough about the circumstances to make a judgment. We are all commenting on the first filings of an important criminal case (and the reaction to those filings) and need to be cautious about how far we take our conclusions.
I believe that my essential point remains valid despite challenges: Blago felt comfortable approaching the Obama camp with a very questionable deal, if not an outright illegal proposal. They don’t appear to have reported it and seem to have, at the very least, heard him out and offered him “apreciation”.
There will be more to come. Bet on that.

I’d tell you to keep spinning but you are already dizzy. You don’t like the fact that Obama is named in a federal indictment of a man who felt he could get improper favors from him. Like I said, let’s see where this leads. The only tinfoil hats around here are worn by those who refuse to accept the reality of Chicago politics and Barack Obama’s role in said politics. Nothing that has come out today implicates Obama but it sure doesn’t “exonerate” him either.

Have you ever given pause to think about the fact that Obama realized that Blagojevich was asking him to “pay to play” ? And did not report this to the Federal authorities and instead simply dropped Valerie Jarret’s name from contention ? And allowed Rod to continue merrily with his bidding…

What is it that i hear about “complicity in a crime” ? Hmm… staying silent about a crime that is about to happen doesnt exactly reflect well on a politician, let alone a President elect, does it ? Heck, it could possibly be illegal.

Keep your eyes open - dont be so oblivious to what is happening. There is a reason that Axelrod retracted his statement about Obama having a conversation with Blagojevich saying that he “misspoke”.

He does not even want to leave the impression that Obama spoke to the Governor about this appointment. It would lead to more inconvenient questions, such as ” why the hell did the President elect NOT REPORT a bribery attempt to the Feds ?”

Just because he refused to play doesnt leave Obama off the hook. He willingly looked the other way after realizing that the Governor was looking for a bribe/favor/whatever you want to call it.

There are some interesting questions to be answered. Being condescending to your political opponents is not always a good strategy.

“Should the state members of the Electoral College cast their votes for Mr. Obama in the face of such overwhelming evidence, and without verification of Mr. Obama’s eligibility, they would be committing treason to the Constitution,” said Schulz.