Posted By: Michael Sweeney
Jan. 5, 2009
Dear Madame Fleur—
Stonecipher asked me to take a shot at responding to your Jan. 2 post to us about some clarifications regarding the whole bubbling Blagojevich cauldron. Complicated, it may be…but impenetrable, it is not – so, let’s take a little stroll through the circumstances here…
From within the center of the "Blago-sphere" here, it can mean walking a fine line as we report on (and, yes, cackle a bit about) the doomed ending arc of our embattled Governor, Rod Blagojevich. (In fact, at this point I feel I oughta program my word processing software to automatically add "embattled Governor" every time I start to type the words "Blagojevich" or "Governor"…)
First of all, if we use some shortcuts in Blago pieces because we assume that the story’s getting old or has already been fully reported and read, we can potentially create misunderstandings in some readers. On the other hand, if we delve into the entire story’s depths each time we bring it up – even for a simple update or as background to a quick joke – we can potentially turn off and lose those who are just looking for the latest details. You see how it can go…
By now, non-Illinoisans (or even non-obsessed state residents) may actually be wondering A) Why – post-Dec. 9 bail aside – Blago is back sitting in the Guv’s chair?…and B) What’s next? Your questions – on Emanuel, Jarrett, other potential Senate replacement candidates, the effects of the overall scandal on local Dems, and the status of the city – take it another level deeper into the fully expanded background that is state politics here and the effects of corruption on it. Let’s start with those first two big questions…
Blago is still our Governor because – despite the Feds’ tapes and the headline-making arrest last month – he has not even been indicted (much less convicted) yet. US Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald acted when he did – perhaps before an easily-prosecuted crime took place – because he did not want the Guv’s "crime spree" of seemingly corrupt behavior to spill over into the US Senate after he made the replacement pick. (He also acted to stop the already-suspected Blagojevich’s actions from potentially being smeared over whoever he DID pick for the seat – whether they or their "people" had actually tried to cut a deal with B-Rod for the appointment or not.)
The arrest on the 9th (as well as the release of the phone and office tapes) was both a humiliating, pressuring move as well as a sort of a bluff by the Feds, trying to forestall any further corrupt actions by the Governor and perhaps get him to step down or at least cut a deal. But – much like the eventual appointing-Burris move – Blago’s stonewalled, moving-ahead response showed that he indeed has mucho cojones. "C’mon," he seemed to say, rocking back on his heels like a cocksure, taunting Tony Montana, "you got NUTHIN’ on me…"
The "What happens next?" question is a little more complicated. So far, the state Attorney General, judiciary, and legislature have not been able to solidify immediate suspension, stripping-of-powers, or impeachment moves against Blagojevich – but an ongoing impeachment process is likely to continue. And, so, while that goes on, B-Rod still is allowed the privileges and duties of his elected office. Which, of course, includes appointing the replacement to President-Elect Barack Obama’s Senate seat…
Now, onto your direct inquiries. Yes, incoming Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel (who also happened to succeed Blago as US Congressman representing the IL 5th District I’ve lived in the past 20 years) talked to Blagojevich about the Senate replacement pick, probably in general terms (but also likely mentioning that family friend – and known IL quantity – Valerie Jarrett might be Obama’s top choice). But there doesn’t seem to be any indication that any sort of deal was discussed. And the expression of the Obama side only offering "appreciation" for Blago’s consideration came from the (embattled, of course) Governor himself, as captured on the tapes. In fact, rampant speculation (perhaps started by leaks from the Feds) is that Emanuel may well have dropped a dime about B-Rod’s attempts at swinging a deal. (Of course, the Feds were already spools and spools of tape deep into the Blago investigation by then.)
As for Jarrett – a former Deputy Corporation Counsel under Mayor Washington, then Deputy Chief of Staff under Mayor Daley, and a 10-year chairperson of the Chicago Transit Board – she had already removed her name from Senate-replacement consideration well before the Guv’s arrest. It is believed she preferred the more background roles as co-chairperson of the Obama-Biden Transition Project and then Senior Advisor to the new President.
As for what other candidates – or which candidates’ "people" – had conversations with Blago, it seems clear that there were several. Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. has even admitted that he was the "Senate Candidate 5" mentioned in the Feds’ tape transcripts – although he denies any wrongdoing or even any discussions about possible questionable deal-making. Former IL state Senate President Emil Jones – also one of the (sing it along with me, everyone: embattled!) Governor’s main remaining recent allies – is also almost certain to have been involved in discussions about cutting some sort of deal. The speculation about those figures have damaged their reputations at least a bit.
Also, there is no IL state law requiring that any appointed office-holders be from the elected official’s political party. However, the fact that Governor is a Democrat all but guaranteed that Obama would be succeeded by a fellow Dem. (Actually, currently all statewide elected officials in IL are Dems; it makes you wonder if B-Rod’s considerable cojones were mucho enough to allow him to consider making a big-bucks deal with any GOPers…)
At this point, even one-time Blago stalwarts (like the still-serving – until next week – Senate Prez Jones) are no longer backing the still-well-coiffed Governor. And, while other Dems (Repubs, too, in this often "Pay for Play" state of a well-greased bi-partisan "Combine") may well get sucked into the Blago vortex as the Feds unleash more tapes and reveal more evidence, it remains to be seen who – if anyone – this may involve.
Then, it comes down to Chicago…which may be, as old-time corrupt Alderman Paddy Bauler said, "ain’t ready for reform." But, neither is it a wide-open, gangster-run town, either. Although – much like his father, "Da Mare" – Mayor Richie Daley has seen assorted sloppy underlings (or even former elected protégés, such as City Clerk Jim Laski or City Treasurer Miriam Santos) go down to corruption charges, no one has ever been able to even sniff close enough to the Mayor to put a dent in his huge election victory totals. The accepted wisdom is that – just like the old man – he unconsciously "allows" things to go down, unconnected to him, of course, and without even any need for deniability…but, if any of these figures get sloppy or greedy and then get caught, well, the mayor can just sadly shake his head and call himself surprised and disappointed. The city keeps on working – look at all the nice, fresh black wrought-iron fences and fountains! – and no one really expects things to change…
…However, you also wondered how we would restore the reputation of the city and its pols – and the answer to that one, my friend, is about to be Inaugurated as our President. Sure, I’ve even argued that Barack Obama is not the "traditional" "Chicago politician" that comes to mind when you hear names like "Daley," "Vrdolyak," and "Rostenkowski," but, still, he DID build his career and reputation here and is definitely a reflection of some of the aspects of local politics. And since – despite almost no connections to the Blago mess or even the modern remnants of "the Machine" – most right-wing blowhards are still going to want to try and tar Obama with the "Chicago" brush, might as well let him transcend it, showing that not all Chicago pols – even the younger ones, like Blago – are pinky-ring-wearing pick-pockets (or, in Blago’s case, even "alleged pick-pockets").
I guess we’re sort of TOO USED to stuff like this at various levels here, cuz…on we go, shaking our heads, somewhat amazed or disappointed, but also sure that things will sort themselves out and we can eventually get on with our lives. The fact that it’s about a 95% chance that our next Governor will be a Democrat (or, perhaps a newly minted GOP former Dem, like Paul Vallas) shows NOT that we’re blindly following one party (only a little more than a decade ago, the GOP controlled all the statewide offices), but that currently all of the highly respected, top-level pols in the state – such as Lisa Madigan or Dan Hynes or even Bill Daley – are from that party. We may well wish – about 93% of us, anyway – to kick out the bumbler in charge now (who happens to be a Dem), but…well, we sure ain’t gonna throw out all the babies with that rotten, smelly bathwater.
Thanks again for the interested questions; hope this makes things a bit clearer. (And, BTW, made a passing reference to this on our radio show a few weeks back…but the IL-MT political connection lately (trivially, anyway) may well be guys who are missing fingers; you have Senator Jon Tester (minus three), we have Rahm Emanuel (missing part of one), both the result of accidents with meat grinding and cutting equipment when they were younger…Funny how you notice things like that.)
Take care,
Michael
For more coverage of Illinois politics, look for my regular posts here on The Stonecipher Report. (And, for a free subscription to my twice-weekly e-mail column on politics and pop-culture, "And, in the News…" send a note to: m_l_sweeney@hotmail.com)
Recent Comments