Obama Met With Blagojevich On November 5th And Senate Candidate #5 Is Jesse Jackson Jr.

God I love the Internet! How quickly and easily information comes out about the hot topics of the day! Here we are, just one day after Rod Blagojevich got arrested for his Chicago-style corruption, we’ve got an ID on one of the players.

We also have information that Barack Obama was indeed “in contact” with Blagojevich about who would take the vacated Senate seat.

According to a November 5th story by Carol Sowers of KHQA Channel 7:

Now that Barack Obama will be moving to the White House, his seat in the U.S. Senate representing Illinois will have to be filled. That’s one of Obama’s first priorities today. He’s meeting with Governor Rod Blagojevich this afternoon in Chicago to discuss it. Illinois law states that the governor chooses that replacement. There’s already been speculation about his selection…from Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. of Chicago’s south side who co-chaired Obama’s presidential campaign, to recently-retired state senate president Emil Jones, to the governor himself.

So, Obama’s comment about not being in contact with Blagojevich doesn’t seem entirely truthful anymore and it is becoming clear that David Axelrod did not “mis-speak” during an interview with ABC about Obama having talked with Blagojevich.

And we know who Candidate #5 is. Jesse Jackson Jr., one of Obama’s earliest supporters. Candidate #5 does not look good in the criminal complaint filed against Blagojevich by Patrick Fitzgerald.

“In a recorded conversation on October 31, 2008, Rod Blagojevich described an earlier approach by an associate of Senate Candidate Five as follows: ‘We were approached “pay to play.” That, you know, he’d raise me 500 grand. An emissary came. Then the other guy would raise a million, if I made him (Senate Candidate 5) a senator.”

According to the affidavit, it looks like Senate Candidate #5 was willing to pay $1 million for the Senate seat and Blagojevich was seriously considering it.

You can access both complete articles on-line here:

Ill. Governor Meeting With Obama Today (Story has been removed)
Carol Sowers
KHQA
November 5, 2008

Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. Is ‘Senate Candidate 5′ In Blagojevich Criminal Complaint
Chris Fusco, Tim Novak and Natasha Korecki
Chicago Sun-Times
December 10, 2008

UPDATE: Apparently, the Carol Sowers story from connecttristates.com has been removed. However, the story was linked by several other websites inculding the politico.com, Gateway Pundit and others. Here is a screenshot of the webpage before it got removed:

Here is the Press Release from the Illinois Government News Network that confirms the November 5th meeting:

Governor Blagojevich Congratulates President-Elect Obama And Discusses U.S. Senate Seat
IGNN
November 5, 2008

So, Who’s Corrupt Now?

It isn’t just pundits on the right who are asking this question and pointing out the obvious. Even the leftist-leaning MSNBC has now acknowledged that the Blagojevich scandal may have opened up some flood gates that cannot be easily closed.

In a “First thoughts” editorial, Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Carrie Dann look at some major points of the issue:

*** So who’s corrupt now? Since his election last month, Obama and his team have masterfully choreographed every cabinet announcement, press conference, and meeting for maximum effect — until yesterday, that is. On a day when the agenda was a meeting with Al Gore on energy and climate change, all hell broke lose after Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) was arrested for allegedly offering Obama’s Senate seat for some kind of payment in return. It didn’t tell us anything new about Blagojevich (he had been straddling the ethical line for some time), or Illinois politics (Blago could become the state’s fourth governor in 40 years to go to prison), or even Obama (who is in no way implicated in the government’s report). But it does begin to advance a GOP argument that the Democrats — who campaigned against a Republican “culture of corruption” — are no longer so innocent themselves. Are the ethical and legal issues that have recently dogged some Democrats (William Jefferson, Tim Mahoney, Charlie Rangel) beginning to approach what we saw in the last few years from Republicans (Larry Craig, Duke Cunningham, Mark Foley, Bob Ney, Don Sherwood, Ted Stevens, etc.)? And while the term “culture of corruption” gets thrown around a lot, the fact is that a state possibly having four governors go to prison in 40 years is most definitely a culture of corruption. … *** The impact on Obama: As for the scandal’s impact on Obama, no doubt that it will be embarrassing for him and his incoming administration, even though the president-elect isn’t implicated here (in fact, the affidavit makes it crystal clear that Obama and his team weren’t willing to play ball). We’re probably going to see a top Obama aide — Rahm Emanuel, Valerie Jarrett? — on tape with Blagojevich. And that shouldn’t be too surprising (after all, why wouldn’t you return your governor’s phone calls in this post-election period?) But Obama also didn’t help himself with his initial comment yesterday on the matter. Unlike other Illinois Democrats, he didn’t condemn Blagojevich’s actions, if true. Instead, he said he was “saddened and sobered” by the news, adding that it wasn’t appropriate to comment on the issue. But then he later did comment, saying, “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening.” Yet that contradicted an interview last month by Obama adviser David Axelrod, who said that Obama had spoken with Blagojevich about the vacancy. Axelrod issued a statement last night saying that he was “mistaken” in that interview. Team Obama’s initial response yesterday to the scandal seemed par for the course: During his two years on the campaign trail, Obama often swung and missed on his initial statement regarding a controversy — Bitter-gate and Jeremiah Wright come immediately to mind — before finding a better response 24 to 48 hours later. … *** Why didn’t Dems do something earlier? Republicans have themselves a talking point they will constantly throw in Obama’s face (and Rahm’s and Axe’s), simply because they are all Chicago pols. This means Obama will always have to look more transparent than usual and, well, less Chicago-y. The one criticism, by the way, that really could stick to the entire Illinois Democratic political establishment: passivity. It was a running joke for years that Blago had a corrupt side, so why didn’t more Democrats step up. Sure, politics is politics, and sometimes you have stand by folks who you THINK are corrupt but you can’t prove it since no one wants to sound like Joe McCarthy. Still, the passivity here is something that will likely tug at many Illinois Democrats. Could they have done something sooner?

MSNBC, an outfit that tried everything in its power to hide vital information about Barack Obama during the campaign, is being forced into reporting the contradictions of people like David Axelrod. Even now they are trying to shield Obama and in this editorial made the claim that “the affidavit makes it crystal clear that Obama and his team weren’t willing to play ball.” That’s not entirely true. There were several references in the affidavit that suggest Obama aids were in some sort of negotiation with Blagojevich. Section 107 notes specifically that an option involving “Change to Win” would not have Obama’s “fingerprints” all over it. If there were no involvement by the Obama team, why would anyone be worrying about “fingerprints” of Obama’s involvement?

Those are the three major points so far. I am sure that as more information comes to light and we learn the names of people like “Advisor A” and so forth, that the major points will change or simply be magnified into larger issues.

But the part about “Obama will always have to look more transparent than usual and, well, less Chicago-y” is absolutely true. He is under a microscope now, moreso than ever.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

First Thoughts: So Who’s Corrupt Now?
Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Carrie Dann
MSNBC.com
December 10, 2008

Michelle Malkin: The Democratic Culture Of Corruption

You knew someone was going to say it. You knew someone was going to point out that the Democrats, despite their promise in 2006 of cleaning up the “culture of corruption,” have engaged in every bit as much corruption as they claim the Republicans have, maybe even moreso now that the Illinois Senate Seat scandal has broken. But, because of the hypocrisy that seems to be inherent in the Democrat party, nobody would admit to the wrongdoing or nor take any steps to clean up their own house.

And now, Rod Balgojevich has led those chickens home to roost. Michelle Malkin, writing for Townhall, gives us some great insight on the matter:

Democrats and the media can no longer rest on the old rationalization that Blago is an exception to the “we’re cleaner than thou” rule. 2008 was the year of Democratic Reps. William “Cold Cash” Jefferson, Charlie “Sweetheart Deals” Rangel, and former Detroit Mayor Kwame “Text Me” Kilpatrick. It was the year Democratic Massachusetts State Senator Dianne Wilkerson got caught stuffing bribes from an FBI informant down her shirt. It was the year 12 Democratic leaders and staffers in Pennsylvania’s state Capitol were stung in a massive corruption scandal involving cash, sex and abuse of public office. And it was the year of multimillion-dollar embezzlement scandals at Democratic satellite offices of ACORN and the SEIU.The Democrats have met the culture of corruption, and it looks like it ain’t just elephants among the jackasses soiling public office.

The Dems need to shut up about corruption in other people’s houses until they clean up their own. And given the wonderful start to the Obama Administration, they had better do it soon.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

The Democratic Culture Of Corruption
Michelle Malkin
TownHall.com
December 10, 2008

Congress Finally Acknowledges Some Of The True Culprits Of The Credit Crisis

Former Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac executives were scheduled to be questioned about their roles in the sub-prime credit crash. Names like Leland Brendsel, Daniel Mudd and Franklin Raines as well as Richard Syron are being mentioned.

These are the people who should have been hauled before Congress back in September-October when the House and Senate were discussing the failed bailout of Wall Street. Maybe now we can get some real answers to the problem and Congress will see that the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act needs to be repealed if we really want to clean up the entire mess.

From CNN:

“The companies made irresponsible investments, costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars,” said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., committee chairman. “Their own risk managers warned time after time of the dangers of investing in subprime market, but those risks were ignored.” The companies have drawn criticism from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle for taking on too much risk, exacerbating the credit crisis when the housing market declined. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., during his recent failed presidential bid, said Fannie and Freddie were the “catalyst – the match that started this forest fire.” The publicly traded but federally backed companies together control or guarantee about $5 trillion in mortgage loans. They purchase large amounts of home loans, bundle them together and divide them into securities that can be sold to investors.

I’m gald to see that people like Franklin Raines (who made over $90 million in personal income off of these high risk, sub-prime loans) are finally being brought before the cameras so that the American people can see who profited by this whole thing and why.

You can access the original blog entry on-line here:

Fannie, Freddie Ignored Warning Signs
David Goldman
CNNMoney.com
December 9, 2008