Thursday, August 26th, 2010
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
BLOWHARD PROSECUTORS V.S. BLOWHARD BLAGOJEVICH WHO’S GUILTY?
The score right now stands at former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich 23, federal prosecutors 1. The feds charged Blagojevich with everything but the kitchen sink, including shaking down a children’s hospital and selling the U.S. Senate seat formerly held by President Obama. With twenty-four felony counts against him, and after all the melodrama and hype by the prosecutors, he was convicted of the least serious change, and that could well be thrown out on appeal. So what do we have here — prosecutors gone wild?
A number of newspapers are sharply criticizing lead prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, editorializing that this grandstanding justice department lawyer was on a personal vendetta to bolster his own overblown ego. From day one, Fitzgerald has been “over the top” with his prejudicial pubic statements about the case.
When Blagojevich was first charged, Fitzgerald arranged to have the sitting governor arrested before dawn, like some thug accused of violent crimes, ready to blow town at a moment’s notice. At his grandstanding press conference, the U.S. Attorney spoke of “what we can only describe as a political corruption crime spree,” accusing Blagojevich “of the most appalling conduct” that would have “Lincoln rollover in his grave… It was a truly new low,” Fitzgerald told the nation.
Blagojevich’s single conviction was based on a statement that he made to the FBI about everyone who contributed to him, and how much was given. Blagojevich said he tried “to keep a firewall between politics and government.” Basically, he gave a stock denial to any crime. So federal agents asked him if he broke the law — and just like any child who is caught with his hand in the cookie jar, he said “no.” By saying” I’m innocent; I didn’t do it,” an accused becomes guilty of making a false statement. What happened to one’s Fifth Amendment right to protest one’s innocence?
You could do so in good faith before Supreme Court Justice Scalia took dead aim at the issue. He challenged a defendant’s right to declare that the charges are false, which most assumed was a basic presumption under the constitution. Before 1998, saying “I didn’t do it” was a denial under the Fifth Amendment that prohibited prosecutors from piling on charge after change of false statements, regardless of whether a crime even took place. Then Scalia turned loose in the case of Brogan v. United States, tongue lashing the defendant’s attorney by saying in effect: “Either answer the FBI agent’s question or say absolutely nothing.”
So now, without the “exculpatory no,” prosecutors routinely pile on charges that, in effect, add five years to every sentence. Simply by saying “no” to the question of whether you did it can send you to jail even if it is proven that you are innocent of the crimes themselves. Sounds absurd? It happens all the time. So without Scalia’s decision in the Brogan case, the Governor would not have been convicted of the one false statement charge.
Respected New Orleans columnist and television commenter Clancy Dubois summed up one’s option this way. “If you are a public official in Louisiana, do not talk to the FBI. Not under any circumstances. Not even if you are innocent and have nothing to hide. Especially if you are innocent and have nothing to hide.” Many share his conclusion. Being innocent is irrelevant when answering questions from the FBI. Simply being questioned by the FBI puts the suspect or even the innocent witness in peril.
Even if you know nothing of, never heard of the alleged crime, and honestly tell them so, the FBI can say you are lying, you can get sent jail — and the citizen has no recourse!
Let’s be clear. Governor Blagojevich is far from being a saintly victim of a prosecutor’s wrath. In my opinion, Blagojevich is an egotistical, narcissistic, blowhard who doesn’t know how to keep his mouth shut. The day after his one count conviction, Blagojevich compared himself to a superhero at the Chicago Comic Book Convention, and sold his autograph and photo for $80.
The guy has no shame. And he shoots his mouth off a lot, lacing his private conversations with numerous expletives. He is certainly not alone among politicians in being profane. But nothing specific was laid out, no bribe offers, no plans; the guy was simply talking. Is there a crime here? Even so, is it a federal crime? If being a blowhard politician who exaggerates, and make false promises is a crime, we’d better loosen parole requirements and let thousands of convicts go free to empty up cell space to accommodate blowhards. Hmm, should that include blowhard Fitzgerald?
As the federal government continues its propensity to make any number of acts on the local level federal crimes, it diminishes its role as a model of fairness and justice. In this sense, it has become a travesty of the principles on which this country was founded.
More specifically, blowhard Fitzgerald’s self-serving shoot first and think later tactics have diminished his effectiveness at serving the people, which, of course, is what he took an oath to do.
Does he retry Blagojevich? A number of national newspapers are saying no. The Washington Post editorialized: “Fitzgerald brought unlimited resources and the power of the federal government to the case. He is entitled to drag the ex-governor back into court. But the prosecutor took his shot and lost. He should stand down before crossing another fine line — the one that separates prosecution from persecution.”
The Wall Street Journal went even farther calling for Fitzgerald to be fired. “Fitzgerald is a willful prosecutor who throws an exaggerated book at unpopular defendants and hopes at least one of the charges will stick, even as he flouts due process and the presumption of innocence when the political winds are high. If Mr. Fitzgerald doesn’t resign of his own accord, the Justice Department should remove him — especially after such other recent examples of prosecutorial bad faith.”
Fitzgerald purposely violated prosecutorial ethics by making inflammatory statements, and by selectively releasing material that made Blagojevich look bad without presenting the whole picture. Just as Michael Nifong, the infamous prosecutor in the Duke Lacrosse Case was disbarred by the North Carolina State Bar because of his inflammatory remarks, Fitzgerald’s actions, and those of his Chicago staff should face the same scrutiny and the same possible sanctions.
The former Illinois governor is far from being a sympatric figure or one who engenders much public compassion. But perhaps the verdict in his case is a sign that jurors, for good reason, are becoming more willing and able to distinguish unbecoming and even venal politics from official corruption, fraud and obstruction. And here’s the good news. We are guaranteed at least another year of Blagojevich-o-rama. We get the hair, the goofy Elvis imitation, the defiance, the whole shebang. If the sequel is as dramatic as the original, I can hardly wait.
*****
“Therein is the most dangerous power of the prosecutor; that he will pick people that he thinks he should get, rather than cases that need to be prosecuted.” Justice Robert Jackson
Peace and Justice
Jim Brown
Jim Brown’s syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers and websites throughout the South. You can read all is past columns and see continuing updates at www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9 am till 11:00 am, central time, on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com. The show is televised at http://www.justin.tv/jimbrownusa
Has anyone given any thought to the possibility that the jury in this case was “tampered with” by the “Obama Whitehouse” (aided and abetted, of course, by the U.S. Department of “Injustice”, which threw Fitzgerald “under the bus”)? Blago knows where the bodies are buried, and his “going public”, whether on the witness stand (he didn’t take the stand) or otherwise, ie. in public, after his conviction on “the other” 23 Counts. People who could have been impacted include Tony Resco, Eric Holder, Valerie Jarret and, of course, Barak Hussain Obama. I din’t know “the count” on each of the 23 “hung” counts, but most of them were 11 to 1, with a female juror being the sole holdout. All “they” needed to do was compromise one juror, which is what appears to have happened. I believe something CRIMINAL and CROOKED occurred here, and I’m not talking about what Blago did. Ashton O’Dwyer.
You don’t see the WSJ and WaPo in such editorial lockstep very often. On one hand it was only 1 juror but that juror did vote to convict on 1 count. On the other hand the Government really holds all the cards in a criminal prosecution so the fact even 1 held out on the other counts is significant. I can recall 2 federal cases where jurors that did not properly deliberate were tossed and that did not happen here.
Given all the political headaches Blago gave Obama I can’t see any scenerio where a sitting President with nothing to gain and everything to lose would put the fix in for idiot such as him. Quite the opposite is true in fact.
sop
Fitzgerald is nothing more than an abusive sleazebag Prosecutor who has long overstayed the Job.
Its just Like Letten in Louisiana – they have press conferences and then order copies of all of the broadcast. These people are appointed and the Government has stopped all over site of the actions. This is based on the fear that the Local Prosecutors will cry Political interference.
These jobs should be for a single term and continually changing as the process was originally designed so fiefdoms and and egomaniac prosecutors can not cover up friends misconduct and attack other political Parties misconduct.
We need to look no farther than David Vitter in Louisiana to see that Letten ignores Vitters conduct and the public suffers.
And not matter what lying to the FBI is not a Crime – what happened to the United States Constitution and your rights against self incrimination.
What do you do when the FBI asks you – “When did you stop beating your wife”
Jim Brown has put in simple cogent terms our dilemma: the forces of the government have become our nemesis. Jim’s characterization that Blagojevich is an abhorrent buffoon and Fitzgerald an elitist fascist is absolutely correct. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights allows any us the right to be an asshole as Blagojevich and Fitzgerald most certainly are. For the government to have contrived such an inane, subjective, definition of what a lie is, gives way for abuse; that an autocrat such as Fitzgerald will employ this device to advance the government’s canard should be expected.
The acuity of Mr. Brown’s analysis has provided me with a templet from which to segue into an analogous observation; that of the Porteous Impeachment proceedings, here referred to as the:
JACKASS JUSTICE DEPARTMENT VS JACKASS JUDGE
Porteous should never have been appointed a Federal Judge, much less anointed a State Judge by way of the then DA Mamoulides’ political machine at the time. And let’s not forget that it was former La. Senator John Breaux who sponsored this reprobate at the urging of Kyle France and John Mamoulides. The notion that the interviews by the FBI of Marcotte, Creely and Gardner concerning Porteous ‘s character were responsible for Porteous’ advancement to the Federal Bench is absurd, if not just plain silly. By law, due deligence requires the FBI to canvass the community. I suspect they did and were either given responses by individuals who would not paint a negative picture of Porteous’ conduct; or, others who described him as the ass he is. In the end, Breaux was responsible regardless of the FBI report, I know it and you know it. Porteous, what a jackass he is: a shameless drunk; a moocher of money, meals and liquour; a whoremonger supreme; a freeloader for hunting,and fishing trips and gifts; unethical and immoral to the core to have extorted money from his “friends” and fail to recuse himself in the face of an obvious conflicts. These degenerate character traits are despicable but are not necessarily substantive reasons to impeach. It is not surprising that there were and are colleagues who would disapprove and want to have him removed, you know, he’s not one of us; the public may think we’re like him ! Judge Edith Jones let her personal dislike of Porteous, dictate the course of this now waning cause. Not to mention the untold MILLIONS, 10’s of MILLIONS, that have been expended in this farce as compared to the costs of his retirement. Righteous principle is costly indeed.
The government jackasses had occasions to indict and prosecute Porteous on criminal charges (Wrinkled Robe and Bankruptcy Fraud ) but did not. Conviction on either matters would have been sufficient to advance an Article of Impeachment to be adopted. Who made the asinine decision not to prosecute ? It has to be either the the US Attorney’s office here in the EDLA or the Justice Department in Washington. Now that Mr. Jonathan Turley has intervened as one of Porteous’ lead attorneys, the over-zealous incompetence of the jackass Justice Department has become exposed. What were these government assholes thinking, that Porteous’ conduct as the premiere jackass of the 24th JDC here in Jefferson Parish would suffice as the metal to convict in a Senate trial to impeach a Federal Judge; only the 7th time in US History ! Well, it could, given the fact the genesis of this debacle is still in play, Edith Jones wants Porteous off the bench; and the jackasses of the Justice Department have done her bidding to date. Bias it not the foundation for a competent prosecution.
For myself I’m enjoying the ratcheting up now that Turley has enrolled as counsel; the new revelations of Marcotte’s influence on other Judges; and the support of Slabbed by continuing to allow me and others to comment on everything Porteous.
Will Porteous squeak out of this with a deal, his retirement; or will there be a trial which results in Porteous’ impeachment. Malthide, Placide, Pelican and I are planning a party with plenty of Rebel Yell and popcorn. We can’t wait !
Well fifthcircuitjoke this is for you: In the event you are asked: ” When’s the last time you beat your wife ?” Take a cue from one of Porteous’ favorite assholes, crony lawyer Lenny Cline, who when answering incriminating questions replied: ” I HAVE NO RECOLLECTION, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.” And it was this repetitive answer that the jackasses of the Justice Department allowed this jackass friend of Porteous to cover-over in his depositons concerning his giving Porteous an expensive shotgun and prepaid cruises, and no telling what else. Lenny Cline who was the beneficiary of large monetary judgements in Federal Court, rendered by Federal Judge Porteous, which produced large fees.