Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Wednesday, June 30, 2010


The news of this Blagojevich trial being presented to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs yielded a response very reminiscent to the responses Gibbs gave when asked about alleged offers made by the White House to Joe Sestak and Andrew Romanoff. Gibbs, once again, pleads ignorance and says he won't comment on the trial. When reporter Ann Compton reminds Gibbs that he said something in direct opposition to the testimony of SEIU official Tom Balanoff, who under oath testified that he was sent to Blagojevich by Obama, he stonewalls.......again.

Gibbs' response is predictable.

h/t to Impeach Obama


This Blagojevich trial is really starting to give off some serious Chicago political stink. In the latest example, the one man that ties both Barack Obama and Blagojevich together - Tony Rezko - may end up not testifying. Presiding judge James Zagel is stating that he doesn't think Rezko would be a good witness for either side. Obama emissary and SEIU emissary to Blagojevich, Tom Balanoff's testimony is expected to have some influence on whether Rezko ends up becoming a witness. I find it rather peculiar though, that a judge would strongly recommend that an individual so involved with the details of a corruption trial not be called as a witness.

Rezko was convicted on 16 of 24 felony charges involving fraud and kickback schemes.

Said Zagel via the Tribune:
It’s still not certain whether Rezko will testify, but at a hearing before testimony resumed today, U.S. District Judge James Zagel strongly suggested that Rezko would make a lousy government witness.

Zagel said there was a word to describe witnesses like Rezko who damage whatever side calls them to testify. That, said Zagel, “generally explains why they’re not called.” Zagel refrained from actually saying what the word was, leaving the suggestion it was less than polite.
At issue is a letter written to Blagojevich by Rezko while the latter was in jail. The letter allegedly states federal officials were pressuring Rezko to make up stories against Blagojevich.

It is at minimum very curious that Zagel would recommend that prosecutors not call Rezko in light of one of the phone conversations between Blagojevich and his Chief of Staff, John Harris earlier in the trial. In that recording, Blagojevich said the following - found on page 17 of 49 on lines 32-34:
32 ...compared to
33 even Obama, you know, I believe I'm more
34 pristine on Rezko than him.
Listen to the actual recording HERE.

It strikes me that if the prosecution were not concerned about protecting Obama but in convicting Blagojevich, they would want Rezko's testimony based on those statements. When Blago said he's more "pristine on Rezko", it inherently meant that he was at least somewhat dirty when it came to Rezko. Is the prosecution contemplating avoiding Rezko not because he couldn't help them get a conviction of Blago but because he could expose Obama's level of involvement.

Read it all.


One thing that continues to become more obvious is that Barack Obama knew much more about the discussions involving his soon-to-be vacated Senate seat in 2008 than many are comfortable with. We may be able to start counting the judge in the Blagojevich corruption trial among them. In April, Blago's attorneys filed a motion to subpoena Obama. In particular, they focused on a two hour interview he reportedly gave to FBI investigators after Blago's arrest. The motion was heavily redacted but due to a software glitch, the redacted portions were revealed.

U.S. District Judge James B. Zagel denied that motion. Subsequent requests made by defense attorneys to get access to the summary notes of that interview were also denied. Now we're finding out that Judge Zagel's ears almost seem hypersensitive to the name "Obama".

Via the Chicago Tribune:
Sheldon Sorosky, one of Rod Blagojevich’s lawyers, has been trying to drag President Barack Obama into the fray this afternoon, asking union official Tom Balanoff whether the FBI asked him about campaign money going to Obama.

Prosecutors objected, as they have so often during cross-examinations, and U.S. District Judge James Zagel said Sorosky should only ask in general what the FBI had said to Balanoff.

Sorosky tried the question again, using Zagel’s recommended wording. “I know that won’t be objected to,” Sorosky said, causing the nearby Blagojevich to laugh.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Based on the recorded phone conversations and the testimony of more than one witness under oath, Obama lied about his contacts with Blagojevich. I'm not an attorney but this should warrant more scrutiny of Obama - not less - about what he knew regarding the sale of his senate seat.

See for yourself.

Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Doug Ross
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
News Real
Pajamas Media
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive