Blagojevich on the ropes

The Illinois House of Representatives voted 114-1 today to impeach Gov. Rod Blagojevich. The matter now goes to the state Senate, which will try the case and decide whether to remove Blagojevich from office.

38 Comments

  1. ICTisInferior
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

    Bye Bye Blago! Resign now and spare yourself the embarrasment. I just hope the voters vote out the moron who voted no. He’s a black representative who probably is in cahoots with Roland Burris.

  2. BlueJay
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 1:09 pm | Permalink

    What he did was unethical but not illegal. And it isn’t anything most politicians do but don’t get caught at.

    I point out that Larry Craig is still in the Senate. Why do the Dems have to out goody two shoe the scum of the Earth?

  3. Raptor
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 1:24 pm | Permalink

    unethical but not illegal? ahhh, I see BJ is in his customary state of total denial of facts.

    Lessee..the governor was ARRESTED AND CHARGED by the FBI for violation of federal laws involving conspiracy to commit mail fraud, wire fraud and bribery.

    nope..no laws broken here…just ethics. Dream on, bj…dream on…

  4. Posted January 9, 2009 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

    Time for Blogo to leave the building …

  5. fleettwood
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

    “I point out that Larry Craig is still in the Senate.”

    I don’t think blasting homos is helpful.

  6. StevenEDavis
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

    “Lessee..the governor was ARRESTED AND CHARGED by the FBI for violation of federal laws involving conspiracy to commit mail fraud, wire fraud and bribery.”

    While I believe Blagojevich is likely guilty as charged, in the U.S., one is not effectively guilty until one is CONVICTED.

  7. Regular
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

    …glub glub Blago, your ship is sinking…

  8. BlueJay
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    The more I hear about this guy, the better I like him. I don’t know why he has to be sacrificed to what, placate the cons? To hell with them.

  9. Mr_Kia
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    What’s the spin?
    That since he didn’t actually take the money it wasn’t illegal?

  10. Raptor
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 4:39 pm | Permalink

    oh brother….a democrat could be caught red handed killing school children, and bj would claim a “vast right wing conspiracy” or something equally ridiculous. Let’s see bj defend John Wayne Gacy, shall we?

    Face it, bj…a democrat got caught. Accept it rather than making ridiculous excuses for his actions.

  11. JMWalker
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 4:50 pm | Permalink

    Can you say goodnight, Blogo?

  12. Phantom
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 4:50 pm | Permalink

    Looks like the Illinois SC says his appointment is legal.

  13. JMWalker
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 4:51 pm | Permalink

    BJ, Blogo’s a scum bag. Politicians who do what he did deserve to be put out to pasture, regardless of party.

  14. GMC70
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 4:52 pm | Permalink

    Buh-buy, Blago.

    If the Illinois legislature wanted to avoid the “taint” of an Senator appointed by Blago after he tried to “pay to play” Obama’s former seat, they should have impeached and removed Blago before he made the appointment of ‘Tombstone’ Burris (have you seen this guy’s monument to himself?).

    The Democrats in the Senate, of course, made sure that the scandal was kept in the headlines by going through the elaborate dance of refusing to seat Burris, until they, uh, caved and seated him (something they legally had to do anyway – duh. Let’s not let a little thing like the law get in the way).

    The Democrats in the Senate, and Illinois, could not have handled this worse. Congratulations.

  15. BlueJay
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

    “BJ, Blogo’s a scum bag”

    Oh I don’t know. I heard him talking today about what he had done and tried to do for Illinois. And he DID manage to get reelected to he must have been doing a competent job.

    Now, if Ted Stevens had won in Alaska. There is a very good chance that Sarah Palin would have used her capacity as Governor to assume that Senate seat as a stepping stone in her political career. There was much talk about it and the cons were all for it. You tell me how that is different from what Blogojevich did.

  16. BlueJay
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 5:00 pm | Permalink

    That question is not just for Walker.

    How is what Palin might have done any different fromwhat Blogojevich might have done?

  17. BlueJay
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 5:02 pm | Permalink

    Plus the guy has fire and aint afraid of a fight.

    We need more Dems like that. I guarantee you we will see that the cons are gonna take as much advantage of getalong Obama as they possibly can.

  18. lindainks55
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 5:14 pm | Permalink

    I heard him talking today about what he had done and tried to do for Illinois. And he DID manage to get reelected to he must have been doing a competent job.

    ——

    bush has told us what he has done for us too, without ever mentioning what he did to us. Plus, bush was reelected. You think this same criteria means bush did a competent job?

  19. george
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 5:16 pm | Permalink

    Blogo was having a bad hair day and wanted to make a few bucks, like the other Chicago politicians do. He just got caught.

  20. BlueJay
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 5:20 pm | Permalink

    I’m only defending the guy to the extent of asking how what he was thinking of doing is any different from what Sarah Palin was thinking of doing.

    It was within his duly elected duties to appoint whoever he wanted to a vacant Senate seat. He apparently wanted to see what he could get out of it. It would have been the same with Palin.

  21. Regular
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 5:26 pm | Permalink

    #
    BlueJay
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 5:20 pm | Permalink

    I’m only defending the guy to the extent of asking how what he was thinking of doing is any different from what Sarah Palin was thinking of doing.

    It was within his duly elected duties to appoint whoever he wanted to a vacant Senate seat. He apparently wanted to see what he could get out of it. It would have been the same with Palin.
    ———————
    That’s not the only thing Blago is in trouble with the FBI.

    There are pay/kickbacks (donate to my campaign fund) from Illinois government contracts, sweetheart deals on appointments and positions in the Illinois government.

    And, that’s just what has been released. Who knows what else Blago has been up to.

  22. WAR
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 5:27 pm | Permalink

    I’m betting that one dissenting vote was the high bidder on that Senate seat that was for sale when Blogo got busted.

  23. fleettwood
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

    Cosmo, I found the guy with the crystal ball.

    It’s BlowJay. He know what Palin was going to do. Ask him about the flooding.

  24. mopar
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

    I’m wondering who the 1 vote was.

  25. Regular
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 5:43 pm | Permalink

    Milt Patterson, a Democrat, also from Chicago, was the one dissenting vote, saying he did not feel it was his job to impeach the governor.

    The Guardian

  26. bth
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 7:07 pm | Permalink

    I notice that Democratic Sec State Jesse White refused to sign the appointment. White knows about corruption – he has had to try to clean up the corruption left behind by George Ryan, whose corruption in both the Sec State office AND as governor.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Ryan

  27. Regular
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 7:19 pm | Permalink

    bth
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 7:07 pm | Permalink

    I notice that Democratic Sec State Jesse White refused to sign the appointment. White knows about corruption – he has had to try to clean up the corruption left behind by George Ryan, whose corruption in both the Sec State office AND as governor.
    =======================
    Yet another detraction by a Lib. It’s off-topic and irrelevant to the thread.

  28. Mary_Caruso
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 7:40 pm | Permalink

    Reg, you think the only posts that are revelant are your own.

  29. lindainks55
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 7:43 pm | Permalink

    How much relevance to any thread topic is there to leveling criticism of other poster’s comments?

  30. Regular
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 7:59 pm | Permalink

    #
    Mary_Caruso
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 7:40 pm | Permalink

    Reg, you think the only posts that are revelant are your own.
    ==========================
    Nuances not withstanding, I can pretty much identify what is meant to be a detractor and what isn’t.

  31. dadman
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 8:06 pm | Permalink

    I found an interesting Link . . . . [ http://www.live-tv-bar.com/index.php?mid=13 ] if you see the menu on the Left hand side of this site .. and scroll down till you see “News” .. at the very bottom of that section .. you’ll see a link called “Ramattan – Israel” ( Palestinian News Agency ) . . . . that link will take you to — 24/7 no-interrupted – audio and visual – of the Gaza sky-line .. where the battle is taking place . . . . this is very sobering . . . yall have a goodn

  32. JMWalker
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 8:48 pm | Permalink

    BJ, Palin’s not involved with this. This is about an idiot abusing his power. The fact he got re-elected says much about the voters. Remember the moron caught with 90 grand in his freezer? He got re-elected. Like Barnum (or someone) said, “there’s a sucker born every minute”, and a lot of em vote . . . both Republican AND Democrat.

  33. BlueJay
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 8:54 pm | Permalink

    I beg to differ Walker.

    And you did not answer.

    Sarah Palin is just dumb enough that she might have made the blunder of arrogantly taking the seat Ted Stevens. It was within her right if the opportunity arose. More politely, she would have resigned and let her Lt. Governor appoint her.

    Quid pro quo.

    How is it ok when they do it?

  34. JMWalker
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 9:08 pm | Permalink

    BJ, You are entitled to your opinion.

  35. Phantom
    Posted January 9, 2009 at 10:52 pm | Permalink

    Dems., unlike repubs are not all intertwined members of ‘the collective’, so they do not all speak with one voice, on virtually any matter.

  36. BobChi
    Posted January 10, 2009 at 5:40 am | Permalink

    Larry Craig is not still in the Senate. His term expired a week ago, and his elected successor holds that seat. What Craig did was in the area of personal sexual shenanigans, which spoke poorly of him, but had nothing to do with using his office to auction off favors for big money.

    I find it totally amusing the way people on this blog rush to defend/attack Republicans/Democrats because of their own personal biases when these things happen. There are plenty of corrupt ones in both parties – call it the same both ways or you have no credibility.

  37. Monkeyhawk
    Posted January 10, 2009 at 5:58 am | Permalink

    Back when Patrick Fitzgerald was prosecuting Scooter Libby all the CONs said he was out of control. Now that he’s after a Democrat, he’s the rod and the staff of the law that comforteth them.

    (sigh)

    I’m pretty sure, as conspiracy laws are written, Blogjevich is probably guilty of something illegal. (But then, I’m not a big fan of conspiracy laws.) “Rod” (it sounds so much more macho than “Rodney,” doesn’t it?) is simply a stupid politician. Politicians talk about the stuff he talked about all the time, but they do it a bit more subtly.

    Impeachment is appropriate because it’s a political, not legal, judgment. He’s clearly politically untenable by now.

    Without the political overtones, Fitzgerald is free to pursue the legal issues we’ll see if Blogojevich is a crook or merely an arrogant fool.

  38. GMC70
    Posted January 11, 2009 at 12:20 am | Permalink

    But then, I’m not a big fan of conspiracy laws

    Of course, given your writing on the AG thread, it’s clear you don’t understand conspiracy law.