Blagogate? Is Rod Blagojevich trying to take Obama down with him?

Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
12,404
Reaction score
1,936
Points
0
Redactions Revealed: The Six Secrets You Need to Know From the Obama Subpoena Request | NBC Chicago

Redacted parts of the subpoena seem to indicate as much From the link:

1. Obama may have lied about conversations with convicted fraudster Tony Rezko

2. Obama may have overtly recommended Valerie Jarret for his Senate seat

3. A supporter of President Obama may have offered quid pro quo on a Jarrett senate appointment

4. Obama maintained a list of good Senate candidates

5. Rahm Emanuel allegedly floated Cheryl Jackson's name for the Senate seat

6. Obama had a secret phone call with Blagojevich
Of course, who can believe any accusation coming from Blago?

However.... The testimony under oath of the union official is troublesome.

What say you?
 

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
56,427
Reaction score
19,001
Points
2,250
Location
The Land of Funk
Blago has absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by taking on Obama. It's highly likely, given the nature of Chicago politics and the web of relationships, that his claims have a basis in truth.

I doubt the judge will force Obama to testify, however. Bill Clinton's dismal deposition has pretty much made all subsequent Presidents above the law in that aspect.
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
84,931
Reaction score
16,985
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
Bill Clinton's dismal deposition has pretty much made all subsequent Presidents above the law in that aspect.

actually, all presidents prior to clinton were immune from being forced to testify in civil suits. in all other such cases, the cases were stayed pending the president's term in office.

his deposition wasn't 'dismal'... it just should never have been allowed to be held until after he was out of office.

and you wouldn't really care what blago was alleging... you'd want to believe that whatever it is, president obama must be guilty.
 

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
56,427
Reaction score
19,001
Points
2,250
Location
The Land of Funk
and you wouldn't really care what blago was alleging... you'd want to believe that whatever it is, president obama must be guilty.


Incorrect. I don't relish the though of the country having an ugly legal proceeding involving a sitting President. Regardless of party, such situations are incredibly damaging to the Country. Obama is bad enough already on foreign policy (in addition to his horrible domestic agenda). Humiliating and weakening him further only emboldens our enemies.

No rational person would like to see that happen.

But if Blago's allegations are correct, Obama should be impeached. It's worse for the country to have a President who committed a crime in the White House.
 
Last edited:

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,123
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
What is this lawsuit about? I mean specifically. I hadn't heard that Blago was going to trial over anything.
 

LibocalypseNow

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2009
Messages
12,337
Reaction score
1,361
Points
48
Well if the President was involved with the selling of his former seat,there could have been some serious laws broken. Personally,I do feel that this President along with his lackey Rahm Emanuel were involved with the selling of his former seat. I'm pretty sure Blago will take the fall for this though. It's Chicago-style thug politics at its worst unfortunately. The truth will never see the light of the day on this one. It is very sad but it is what it is.
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
84,931
Reaction score
16,985
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
and you wouldn't really care what blago was alleging... you'd want to believe that whatever it is, president obama must be guilty.


Incorrect. I don't relish the though of the country having an ugly legal proceeding involving a sitting President. Regardless of party, such situations are incredibly damaging to the Country. Obama is bad enough already on foreign policy (in addition to his horrible domestic agenda). Humiliating and weakening him further only emboldens our enemies.

No rational person would like to see that happen.

But if Blago's allegations are correct, Obama should be impeached. It's worse for the country to have a President who committed a crime in the White House.

if that were true, the right wouldn't have spent 70 million dollars investigating a failed land deal... (10 times the amount they spent on investigating 9/11).
 
OP
M
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
12,404
Reaction score
1,936
Points
0
Well if the President was involved with the selling of his former seat
I doubt that's what it was.... If he was involved at all, it was thumb screwing, not anything friendly. They are rivals, like opposing Mob bosses, not friends. So it went something like, "Give Jarrett the seat or I'm burying you" and Blago said "Go fuck yourself" and now look -- he's getting buried!
 

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
56,427
Reaction score
19,001
Points
2,250
Location
The Land of Funk
Whatever. I represented my viewpoint; I was not in charge of investigating Clinton.

In any case, this thread is about Obama, not Clinton (who lied under oath and abused the power of his office to sexually exploit subordinate employees - not exactly admirable qualities, whatever pass the Left wishes to give him).
 

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
56,427
Reaction score
19,001
Points
2,250
Location
The Land of Funk
Well if the President was involved with the selling of his former seat
I doubt that's what it was.... If he was involved at all, it was thumb screwing, not anything friendly. They are rivals, like opposing Mob bosses, not friends. So it went something like, "Give Jarrett the seat or I'm burying you" and Blago said "Go fuck yourself" and now look -- he's getting buried!


That's why Obama most likely won't be held accountable. The art of politics involves exercising power without leaving any fingerprints. Very difficult to approve abuse thereof.
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
84,931
Reaction score
16,985
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
Whatever. I represented my viewpoint; I was not in charge of investigating Clinton.

In any case, this thread is about Obama, not Clinton (who lied under oath and abused the power of his office to sexually exploit subordinate employees - not exactly admirable qualities, whatever pass the Left wishes to give him).

funny... i don't think clinton abused his power or sexually exploted monica lewinsky. the only person who exploited monica was her purported 'friend' linda tripp who violated the trust of a younger woman who looked up to her.

who hurt monica lewinsky more?

i wouldn't think much of bill as a husband. i thought he was a fine president.

and the right hasn't stopped since the day obama was elected president... *shrug*
 

Lonestar_logic

Republic of Texas
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
24,542
Reaction score
2,226
Points
205
Whatever. I represented my viewpoint; I was not in charge of investigating Clinton.

In any case, this thread is about Obama, not Clinton (who lied under oath and abused the power of his office to sexually exploit subordinate employees - not exactly admirable qualities, whatever pass the Left wishes to give him).

i don't think


No shit!
 

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
56,427
Reaction score
19,001
Points
2,250
Location
The Land of Funk
If an executive in a corporation had sexually used a subordinate employee the way Clinton did Lewinsky, that person would have lost a sexual harassment case and the company would have been liable for a large settlement. The way the Clintons tried to smear Lewinski as a stalker and to destroy her life is an extreme abuse of power. It's disgusting that NOW protected him.
 
Last edited:
OP
M
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
12,404
Reaction score
1,936
Points
0
Bill Clinton's dismal deposition has pretty much made all subsequent Presidents above the law in that aspect.

actually, all presidents prior to clinton were immune from being forced to testify in civil suits. in all other such cases, the cases were stayed pending the president's term in office.
Like Whitewater this is a criminal matter though, and Blago, clown that he is, is still entitled to due process. As you very well know as a defense attorney, there's a great deal of latitude in the discovery process.

The judge can compel the President to testify in this deposition. Whether he will or not, or If Obama will try to claim executive privilege, are the open questions.

At minimum, Blago will have a appeal point if Obama doesn't testify.
 
Last edited:

G.T.

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
77,568
Reaction score
12,469
Points
2,180
lmao at Clinton sexually exploited Lewinsky. She saved the dress. She didn't wash cumstains off of her dress I mean......that say sa bit about her prowess. They sexually exploited each other.

A side note, I wouldn't give three shits if a President ass-fucked Madonna in Air-Force one.
 

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
56,427
Reaction score
19,001
Points
2,250
Location
The Land of Funk
I wouldn't either. The issue is an executive using a subordinate employee. The fact that Monica was saavy enough to save evidence doesn't give Clinton a pass on exploiting a staffer.
 

SuMar

VIP Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
1,864
Reaction score
328
Points
63
Obama is probably as guilty as Blago. Doesn't matter though, Obama will get a free pass and Blago will take the fall.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
120,378
Reaction score
35,220
Points
2,220
Obama is probably as guilty as Blago. Doesn't matter though, Obama will get a free pass and Blago will take the fall.

Auchi to Rezko to Obama is an interesting double play buried by the LMSM
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top