Blago Corruption Trial: Blago Says His Fate’s “In God’s Hands,” Jury Members’ Names Withheld Until After Verdict, Doubt Cast on Obama’s Truthfulness (video)
Posted By Vicki McClure Davidson on July 29, 2010
Former Gov. Rod Blagojevich's trial has concluded, jury is now deliberating
Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s trial is now over and the jury has just begun their real work: reaching consensus on a verdict.
They’ve asked for a transcript of the trial. Plenty of time for us to get more popcorn…
ABC: Blago’s Attorney Angers the Judge over Closing Statements in Corruption Trial
Associated Press: Blagojevich: My Fate Is “In God’s Hands”
From Chicago WLS-AM News, Blago jury deliberating, asks for transcript:
…Jurors asked Judge James B. Zagel on Thursday for a transcript of one of the closing arguments in the case, but he denied the request, saying closing arguments are not evidence.
Some experts believe a verdict won’t come for at least several days in the complicated case. Two carts full of evidence were wheeled into the jurors’ meeting room when they began deliberations Wednesday, agreeing to meet from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on weekdays.
“Since the trial has gone faster than expected, I don’t think they will be in as much of a mindset of, ‘let’s get out of here,”‘ said Michael Helfand, a Chicago attorney who followed the trial but has no link to the case.
And while they’re deciding, they will be in a cocoon of privacy. They’ll get no e-mail messages from “the King of Japan” or expletive-laden voicemail messages on their phones, like the ones Zagel has received. No chance of Facebook postings using their names, either.
The ubiquity of e-mail and social networking and the Internet Age-urge for everyone to express their opinions were among the reasons Zagel cited when he prohibited the release of the 12 primary and five alternate jurors’ names until after a verdict.
Withholding juror names is more common in trials involving alleged mobsters or terrorists, for security reasons, and media organizations contested Zagel’s ruling. But the judge maintained that the jurors’ ability to impartially decide an “inarguably” high-profile case could be impaired by unsolicited interruptions.
There’s also the danger someone could alter a juror’s ability to think clearly, Zagel said recently. If jurors “picked up a phone and heard a spewing of profanity – that could have a mood-altering impact,” he said. In the judge’s final ruling, he acknowledged that inappropriate contact of jurors is not a new issue, but said the risk was greater because of the “astounding” pervasiveness of e-mail and social media.
[...]
Eight jurors are white, three are black and one is Asian-American.
Zagel says he’s less worried about “crackpots” than a pervasive belief among Americans that “their opinion somehow counts” on any subject – and that non-crackpots couldn’t help trying to persuade jurors with reasoned argument.
He said a bigger risk in the Blagojevich case was not only the trial’s high visibility but that so many people felt a personal link to the twice-elected governor – either as one-time constituents or as viewers who watched him as a reality TV contestant or other TV shows.
“We are dealing here with perhaps millions of people who voted for the defendant, who may feel betrayed by the defendant,” Zagel said. “This is not … something that happened to someone else.”
The ousted governor, 53, has pleaded not guilty to 24 counts, including trying to sell or trade an appointment to President Barack Obama’s vacated Senate seat for a Cabinet post, private job or campaign cash.
His brother, Nashville, Tenn., businessman Robert Blagojevich, 54, has also pleaded not guilty to taking part in that alleged scheme.
From FOX News, Blago: His Fate Now In The Jury’s Hands:
Blago walks up the the gaggle of media cameras in the federal courthouse, and says tells he wants to express his deep appreciation and gratitude…Many people have come up to us to express their wishes and prayers…having been governor it’s very gratifying to me when people thank me, it’s very meaningful and gives me perspective…to know that when I was governor good things happened, he said.
Now, we need to express appreciation to the juror, Blago said. Patti and I have great confidence and fate. He said he and Patti always have a deep and abiding faith in God.
Robert Blagojevich talked briefly to the media, after a little coaxing… he says he’s anxious but hopeful…that his relationship with his brother Rod is still “strained”.
Video from earlier in the month…
FOX, Sean Hannity & Michelle Malkin: Barack Obama is Revealed as a Corrupt Chicago Politician and a Liar in Blago Case
From Wall Street Journal, Law Blog, At Very End, Blago Case Gets, Yes, Even Stranger:
After the spectacle that was Monday, closing arguments finally took place on Monday in the corruption trial of former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich.
Ol’ Blago took it from all sides. In his closing, Assistant U.S. Attorney Reid Schar summed up the evidence against Blagojevich and rebutted the implication from Blagojevich’s lawyers that the federal government was out to get their client.
“I don’t now how you put a price on damage Rod Blagojevich has caused,” Schar said, according to this account from the Chicago Sun-Times. “I know how you start to pay off the debt.” Click here, also, for the Chicago Tribune story.
But defense lawyer Sam Adam, Jr. (pictured), also stuck it to Blago, saying he had “absolutely horrible judgment in people,” calling him “silly,” “insecure,” and not the “sharpest knife in the drawer,” but insisting he’s not corrupt. The jury is slated to get the case on Wednesday, after Judge James Zagel reads the instruction.
To a large degree, and perhaps to no one’s surprise, Wednesday belonged to Adam, who delivered what sounds like one of the more entertaining, rambling, funny, bizarre closing arguments to hit the Chicago federal courthouse in a long, long time.
One of Adam’s main arguments: all the information contained on the wiretap recordings was nothing more than just that: talk. “If you put Joan and Melissa Rivers in a room, you wouldn’t get that much talk,” he said, bringing peals of laughter to the courtroom.
From Back to Basics, Blago trial produces no bombshells but casts doubt on Obama’s truthfulness:
…Obama has clearly not told the whole truth in the past about his involvement in trying to get Jarrett to replace him, and the degree to which he pushed her.
After Obama was elected, his transition staff released a memo two days before Christmas, after he had arrived in Hawaii for vacation. The memo downplayed Obama’s desire for Jarrett to be named by Blago to his seat, and said that his statements on Dec. 11 were true.
“I had no contact with the governor’s office. I did not speak to the governor about these issues. That I know for certain,” Obama said on Dec. 11, 2008.
The Dec. 23 memo from Greg Craig, who went on to become White House Counsel, said that “the President-Elect had no contact or communication with Governor Blagojevich or members of his staff about the Senate seat.”
“In various conversations with transition staff and others, the President-Elect expressed his preference that Valerie Jarrett work with him in the White House,” the Craig memo stated. “He also stated that he would neither stand in her way if she wanted to pursue the Senate seat nor actively seek to have her or any other particular candidate appointed to the vacancy.”
But it seems clear from testimony in the Blago trial that Obama did “actively seek” to have Jarrett put into his Senate seat.
Obama made contact with Blago staff or associates – through his own staff or surrogates – several times in the days leading up to the Nov. 4, 2008 presidential election and in the days following.
On Nov. 2, 2008, Rahm Emanuel, who went on to become White House chief of staff, called Blago chief of staff John Harris to tell him that Obama wanted a “close friend” appointed to the seat. Harris testified June 22, 2010 that he understood this to be a reference to Jarrett.
This contact was not mentioned in the Craig report.
On Nov. 3, the night before the election, Obama himself called Tom Balanoff, head of the Service Employees International Union state chapter, and told him that while he preferred to see Jarrett come to work for him at the White House, she wanted to be a senator and she fit the qualifications. Balanoff told Obama he would take the recommendation to Blago.
This contact also was not mentioned in the Craig report.
Between Nov. 6 and Nov. 8, the Craig report said that Emanuel “had one or two telephone calls with Governor Blagojevich.”
“Mr. Emanuel recommended Valerie Jarrett because he knew she was interested in the seat,” the Craig report stated. But the report also said that Emanuel learned “in further conversations with the President-Elect that [Obama] had ruled out communicating a preference for any one candidate.
Obama, the Craig report said, “believed it appropriate to provide the names of multiple candidates to be considered, along with others, who were qualified to hold the seat and able to retain it in a future election.”
The report also said that “Jarrett decided on November 9, 2008 to withdraw her name from consideration as a possible replacement for him in the Senate and to accept the White House job.”
But this narrative is contradicted by testimony in the trial last month by Harris, who said that John Wyma, a lobbyist who was close to Blago and Emanuel, called him on Nov. 10 with a message from Emanuel. Wyma told Harris that Obama “would be thankful and appreciative” if Jarrett was named to the Senate seat.
If true, this is the most blatant and aggressive push for Jarrett to have come from Obama, and it would have come after the Craig report said Jarrett had withdrawn her name from consideration.
The report also states that Emanuel and Harris spoke four other times between Nov. 5, the day Emanuel accepted the job as White House chief of staff, and Dec. 8, but that no quid pro quo was discussed.
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs has refused to discuss these discrepancies.
The discrepancies raise obvious questions about why Obama and those who work for him would not tell the whole story, especially if no wrongdoing occurred. The fuller story, combined with other back room politicking by Obama after he was elected, has tarnished Obama’s claim during the election to stand for a different kind of politics.
Obama articulated his claim to have a higher ethic on the same day he denied any involvement with Blago, on Dec. 11, 2008.
Additional:
Frugal Café Blog Zone: Gee, That Was Fast: In Chicago, Blago’s Corruption Trial Wrapping Up, Jurors Will Begin Deliberating (video) and Blagojevich: Jury Selection Continues, Blago Tweets Before Corruption Trial Begins, His “Harry Potter” Final Celebrity Apprentice Appearance (video) and Priceless: Profanity Bleeps Working Overtime on Blago’s Curses of Obama over Senate Seat (video)
Chicago Tribune: Blago a lone hyena, not a political lion
CNN: Verdict Watch in Blagojevich Trial
Chicago Sun-Times: Blagojevich trial early end a gift to Democrats
NPR: Democrats Catch Break With Blago Trial Ending, But Now There’s Rangel
WSIL News: Debt-Ridden Blagojevich Curses Obama
Gateway Pundit: Blago Trial: Obama Called SEIU Leader About Jarret For Senate Seat
Doug Powers, Michelle Malkin: Friday Audio Dump: Blagojevich Cursing Obama Over Senate Seat
About the author
[...] Blago Corruption Trial: Blago Says His Fate’s “In God’s Hands,” Jury Members’ Names Withhe… [...]