Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict?

Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

celticlord2112 -> Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 6:43:15 AM)
Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? Now here's an interesting scenario: Blagojevich escapes conviction because he didn't actually "sell" the Senate seat. If he's not convicted, would it still be proper for the Senate to refuse to swear in whomever he might appoint? What if the 30-day time period Fitzgerald has to bring an indictment lapses and there's no indictment? The Illinois Constitution mandates the General Assembly specify by law under what circumstances a sitting Governor may be declared incapacitated and removed from office (an option I believe the Illinois AG is exploring); barring that, it would require an impeachment proceeding with two-thirds of the state Senate voting to convict before Blagojevich could be removed. All of which may explain his seeming brazeness when he knew he was being investigated--even with a substantial amount of incriminating evidence, if there aren't any "overt acts", it is entirely possible the most of which Blagojevich might be found guilty is being outrageously rude, crass, and profane.

DomKen -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 7:27:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 if there aren't any "overt acts", it is entirely possible the most of which Blagojevich might be found guilty is being outrageously rude, crass, and profane. Which you should be relieved to find out aren't illegal.

housesub4you -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 7:36:56 AM)
I have the 78 page indictment on a PDF file, there are 2 charges and the rest is explaining why. There is more than enough to convict, the old Gov is searching for a plea deal, because if he gets more than 7 year sentence (which he should) he can't go to a min security prison and will be thrown in with the rest of the crooks.

corysub -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 8:00:57 AM)
He has already been convicted in the "court of public opinion". His career is over, thankfully.

SilverMark -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 8:06:04 AM)
I am fairly sure there is enough evidence as is according to the indictment but, as it proceeds someone involved will turn to save himself and the Gov. goes down! It seems rats do love to leave a sinking ship!

Termyn8or -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 8:52:33 AM)
If you think about it, just what would they convict him for ? I skimmed the article but did not see anything about a specific code or statute. I could be mistaken, but in that light : First of all bribery comes to mind. However the bribe did not happen. So would that be soliciting a bribe ? If that is an acual violation of written law then so be it. Note that I do not condone these actions in any way, but there is still a defense. Fairness to the guilty seems to be the MO these days so let's take a look. Taking money to take a certain action by a politician is bribery, however that is not resolved. First of all there is no proof that he would have appointed the person with the biggest bribe. Alternatively it would be within his power to require money simply for private audience with him to discuss the matter, i.e., why you are better for the job. Try to get a little powow with a senator or congressman without money and see how far you get. Or any governor for that matter. No matter how he managed to do it, if he were able to collect money from more than one person he knows he can only appoint one. Then it can be argued that it does not constitute bribery by definition. Now define lobbyist. I think it's a damn shame that people really can think that this is the proper way to do business in the government, but that is how it is done. The only problem with this guy is he simply doesn't have much upstairs, and I don't know who to blame for that. Or perhaps there is no blame, we should thank his Parents, teachers and other influences for his actions. They brought to light a very ugly side of US politics, something that goes on all the time. Just like Obama not keeping his preacher in a box, I just don't think we are electing the smartest people. I am not going to name names, but I think there are at least a half dozen people who post regularly on OTD here who would be better qualified for President or governor than these two. This because I can see motives behind some of the seemingly stupid things they do, and as much as I don't like what I see in that regard, some of the things they do really are stupid. I think what will wind up happening is that with the plethora of plethora of laws written, they will find something like "improper conduct" and it may be a misdemeanor at that. Then some may want to really slam him for letting the cat out of the bag so to speak. T

housesub4you -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 9:07:00 AM)
Send me an email and I will send you the PDF there is more than enough to send his ass to jail

celticlord2112 -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 9:11:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SilverMark I am fairly sure there is enough evidence as is according to the indictment but, as it proceeds someone involved will turn to save himself and the Gov. goes down! It seems rats do love to leave a sinking ship! The question, as I understand it, is whether or not the evidence laid out in the complaint (and it's a complaint, not an indictment--Fitzgerald has 30 days to secure an indictment) establishes the "overt acts" necessary to prove a crime was actually committed.

housesub4you -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 9:13:43 AM)
there are 2 charges which have more than enough evidence to prove, want a copy message me off chat and I'll sent you the 78 pages

celticlord2112 -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 9:21:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: housesub4you there are 2 charges which have more than enough evidence to prove, want a copy message me off chat and I'll sent you the 78 pages I have the document, and have skimmed it. It is a damning complaint, but even the most damning complaint is but one side of the story, and a guilty verdict only comes after both sides make their case. Blagojevich's conduct is disgusting--there is no argument there. I have no trouble believing he would have "sold" the Senate seat had Fitzgerald not intervened. However, one cannot be prosecuted nor convicted for what one "would have" done, only for what one has done. Thus the question--is the evidence enough? I certainly hope it is, but, truth be told, no one knows for certain until (or if) there is a trial.

housesub4you -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 1:05:21 PM)
Yes..... skimmed..... yes..... that explains alot of your comments

Musicmystery -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 2:25:29 PM)
quote: If you think about it, just what would they convict him for ? I skimmed the article but did not see anything about a specific code or statute. As the governor has not yet committed the crime, he will most likely be tried for conspiracy.

celticlord2112 -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 2:41:13 PM)
quote: he will most likely be tried for conspiracy. And therein lies the question of sufficient evidence. As seemingly damning as the tapes are, do they establish the "overt acts" frequently necessary to prove conspiracy, or even to prove "general intent" to violate the law? Just saying to one's advisors and confidantes one expects to be named to a Cabinet post as quid pro quo for appointing a specific person to the vacant Senate Seat is not necessarily a criminal act by itself. There is a veritable mountain of evidence--but will it prove the same things to a jury that it seems to prove in the media?

bestbabync -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 3:48:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: ORIGINAL: housesub4you there are 2 charges which have more than enough evidence to prove, want a copy message me off chat and I'll sent you the 78 pages I have the document, and have skimmed it. It is a damning complaint, but even the most damning complaint is but one side of the story, and a guilty verdict only comes after both sides make their case. Blagojevich's conduct is disgusting--there is no argument there. I have no trouble believing he would have "sold" the Senate seat had Fitzgerald not intervened. However, one cannot be prosecuted nor convicted for what one "would have" done, only for what one has done. Thus the question--is the evidence enough? I certainly hope it is, but, truth be told, no one knows for certain until (or if) there is a trial. you have been convinced he had intent...i believe a jury will concur.....he will more than likely be tried & convicted of conspiracy, just like MM stated.

celticlord2112 -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 4:06:46 PM)
quote: you have been convinced he had intent...i believe a jury will concur.....he will more than likely be tried & convicted of conspiracy, just like MM stated. Clarification: I believe he had it in his heart to "sell" the Senate seat. Based on just the complaint it certainly appears as if there was "intent" (mens rea) to do this. Where I have doubts is whether or not the evidence establishes beyond a reasonable doubt not just the intent (not a crime) but an actual action necessary to sustain a conspiracy charge. Is his conduct morally reprehensible? Certainly. Will a jury find his conduct criminal? Possibly. What intrigues me are the various scenarios that play out if a jury should not find his conduct criminal. Could he survive impeachment? If he is not convicted and not impeached--or perhaps until one or both of these events occur--could the state AG persuade the Supreme Court of Illinois to declare him incapacitated and force him to step aside? If those efforts fail, can the Senate refuse to seat his appointee indefinitely? (from a Constitutional perspective, it can, but whether that is politically wise or even viable is a different question.)

E2Sweet -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 4:10:11 PM)
[sm=beatdeadhorse.gif]

bestbabync -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 4:10:27 PM)
what about "Conduct Unbecoming"? is there a possibility that he could be impeached without the criminal conviction, based solely on his conduct? i think it is possible. well i hope it is possible for him to be impeached at the very least!

sambamanslilgirl -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 5:32:36 PM)
there's more to this than just "selling" Obama's Senate seat - you also have him bribing the Tribune Co to fire members of the editorial staff who didn't write favorable opinions and withholding money to a children's hospital unless a "donation" was given. not mention - his wife is heard on those tapes too.

bluepanda -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 5:38:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 Now here's an interesting scenario: Blagojevich escapes conviction because he didn't actually "sell" the Senate seat. If he's not convicted, would it still be proper for the Senate to refuse to swear in whomever he might appoint? Well, if he does try to fill the seat, I think it's very likely the Senate will refuse to seat whomever he appoints. And if it gets to that point, that's exactly what I hope they have the stones to do. But I don't think it will come to that. I think he'll be "persuaded" to step down from office without making an appointment. He's all bold and blustery and talkin' large today, but he's just establishing a bargaining position and he knows it. He's looking for the best deal he can get, and trying put himself in a position of strength while he works it out.

bestbabync -> RE: Are Blagojevich tapes enough evidence to convict? (12/11/2008 7:10:21 PM)
there is a professional ethics violation called Conduct Unbecoming which i believe Blago is very guilty of! the unbecoming conduct being the attempted extortion and all of the above. Ha! i agree with bluepanda in that the senate will refuse to seat whomever Blago appoints.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625