2 ways Fitzgerald could have used the Blago case for partisan advantage

[Bucky]

1- He could have pushed to indict Blago before the election.
2- He could have waited until after Blago appointed a Democratic senator

Fitzgerald has no history of injecting partisanship into investigations of corrupt officials. The fact that Blago was auctioning off the senate seat right now might suggest the urgency of Fitz having to act when he did. Had he waited another week, the Dems might have a tainted senator in their caucus. That certainly would have been more in the Republicans' interest.

[Captain Hilts]

1. Stop being logical!!!!

[Bucky]

4. should I be outraged instead?

I'm willing to be outraged. I'm just waiting for something worth getting outraged over.

[H2O Man]

13. Exactly.

It's dangerous. So dangerous, that it fits perfectly into "the plot." We need paranoid fantasies now, without any basis in fact.

[WeDidIt]

2. There IS a history of political awareness to his prosecutions

That he insures he is not interfering in the political process demonstrates a cognizance of how his actions could inadvertently harm the political process. This shows a high caliber of character on his part.

[GarbagemanLB]

3. He's a Bush lackey!!!

:rofl:

[zulchzulu]

5. Fitzgerald DID USE the Blago case for partisan advantage

He was sitting on the evidence for almost two months. If you think he didn't know that the story wouldn't get linked to Obama by the media, then you don't know how his brand of showmanship and politics is played.

This Blago story fits in nicely for the media with a 40-day hole to fill like the 40 days between the Mississippi and the Pennsylvania primaries. They pulled out the Reverend Wright story out to fill in space and keep the Ken and Barbie news monkeys busy.

Fitzgerald has been banging on Blago's head for a couple years. He's overplaying his hand again like he did with the Rove case and Blago will walk away like Rove did.

Fitzgerald is a Republican. His Dudley Do-Right schtick is about him. If he really cared, he would be broadcasting daily that Obama had nothing to do with Blago's antics. I'm sure he has a TV to watch the mainstream media doing all they can to bring suspicion into the mix.

[Median Democrat]

9. So, Why Have Both Obama and Durbin Said They Want To Re-Appoint Him?

Indeed, Obama announced his support for Fitzgerald before he was elected. Conversely, Fitzgerald did receive some backlash for his role in the Scooter Libby trial.

[onenote]

10. sitting on the efvidence for two months? You have a faulty calendar

The charges in the complaint that caused Fitz to act when he did related to activity occurring after October 2008. Indeed, the complaint is divided into two sections, one discussing activity prior to October 2008 and one discussing activity after October 2008. THe two principal developments that occured after October 2008 were the pressuring of the Tribune to fire people in exchange for government assistance and the proposed extortion of financial or other consideration in exchange for the appointment of a replacement senator. The wiretaps that led to the collection of the evidence that bolsters the complaint were not authorized until late October and then again in late november. The evidence upon which the complaint is based was collected as recently as last Friday.

[zulchzulu]

17. The wiretaps happened over 30 days ago and Fitz wanted the revelations held until a couple days ago

You may want to lay roses before Fitzgerald's feet, but I don't buy it.

He's a showman and, as several experienced prosecutors have mentioned, he's given out too much in the case that Blago's legal team will declare they can't get a fair trail. Fitz loves the cameras and his case will be as blown as his case he had with Rove.

His timing with this case is also very suspect... to anyone paying attention to how he works.

[onenote]

20. the wiretaps were producing incriminating evidence as recently as last friday

You build your case for as long as you can and then weigh the balance between acting on the evidence and risking injury in fact against allowing additional evidence to accumulate. While one might argue that Fitz acted too early (I don't think so), there is no way you can argue he acted late.

[H2O Man]

14. Mr. Fitzgerald

is not a republican. Saying so tends to discredit anything else you say on the topic, as it is no more accurate than saying he plays professional basketball for the NY Yankees.

[Zynx]

18. This, if leaked, would have had tremendous impact on the election.

It would have made the whole narrative before the election about Chicago corruption. This is the single least damaging time it could have possibly come up. It will be totally forgotten by the end of January when we are pushing 8% unemployment.

[camera obscura]

19. Wrong. The Blago story couldn't have broken at a better time.

Before the election - it would have killed Obama.

After the inauguration - it would have been fresh in the media/Republicans' minds and dogged all his actions during his first 100 days.

Fitzgerald doesn't have any obligation to hold the medias' hands and lead them through the case.

I don't know if he's a Republican and I don't care. He did the right thing.

[Jersey Devil]

6. Fitz, like all US Attorneys, is supposed to resign before the inauguration

It is a long tradition that all US Attorneys resign before the inauguration of a new president (especially of the opposite party) so that the new President can choose who serves in his Justice Department.

Fitzpatrick has not tendered a letter of resignation to my knowledge.

So now he has indicted a Democratic Governor on the eve of the end of his term as US Attorney. This establishes a reason to keep Fitz, a Republican, on the job as US Attorney long after all other Republicans have resigned and left office. Obama cannot fire him if he fails to resign. Fitzpatrick has made himself bulletproof.

So how is that not political?

[AZ Criminal JD]

11. You don't know what you are talking about

There is no tradition of US Attorneys resigning in advance of a new President no matter what the party. Bush's Attorneys did not resign in advance of Clinton and Clinton's US Attorneys did not resign in advance of Bush. In both cases they were replaced. Clinton was criticized because he fired all of Bush's US Attorneys when he took office. Bush II replaced Clinton's over a period of time.

[Hokie]

12. Appears to be a traditon started under Reagan

Both Clinton and Bush replaced almost all of the attorneys in the first few months.
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar/23/nation/na-talking23

[AZ Criminal JD]

16. There is no "tradition"

The poster said the US Attorneys had a tradition of putting in letters of resignation when the new president took over. That is false. They have been replaced (as in fired) when a new president had replacements.

[yodermon]

21. FITZ IS NOT A REPUBLICAN. JFC.

:banghead:
oh, and it's FITZGERALD.

[Catherine Vincent]

7. Patrick J. Fitzgerald is an awesome prosecutor!

If any prosecutor that deserves to be put on a pedestal, it should be him!

[Uncle Joe]

8. On the other hand, he could've indicted before or waited until after

President Elect Obama and Vice-President Elect Biden met with Al Gore in Chicago, this surely gave the corporate media an excuse to ignore reporting on the impact of that meeting.

But cosmically it happened on the same day.

[Critters2]

15. If it kept Blago from naming our next US Senator, then I'm grateful for the timing.

Some here keep forgetting that this is more than a political game to Illinoisans. We have a corrupt governor. We don't need a corrupt US Senator as well!

[Uncle Joe]

22. My question was, why couldn't it have been sooner as well?

I have no doubt this is more than a political game to Illinoisans as well, but if you totally discount politics in all considerations, it only leads to more corruption, "say hello to the new boss, same as the old boss," or something like that.