Illinois Gov. Blagojevich taken into federal custody

[Allereli]

Indicted for trying to sell Obama's Senate seat

I can't bother with the formatting right now:

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/politics&id=6545958

[Some Rogue]

Been following this closely this morning since I live here...Chicago politics at it's finest.

This guy has been a crook from day one. I hope they finally get him. How stupid do you have to be to be this blatant when the guy you took over for got sent to prison for corruption too?

[DeV]

It's about goddamn time. Illinois politics and its one party rule with corruption as the catalyst. It is as bipartisn as it can get. First Ryan, now Blago(not yet convicted, but one can hope); perhaps they'll share a cell.

[BigWorm]

Too in a row, baby! Seriously, what a dumb fuck.

[g++]

Yah he should have really been more discrete about being corrupt like all the rest of the governors.

[Parkbandit]

Chicago style politics.. plain and simple. Seriously, how fucking stupid is he? He might have been the ONLY person that didn't know he was under investigation.

[g++]

Was just reading on CNN apparently even though he is under arrest for corruption...he technically should still be the person that gives out the senate seat. LOL

[Parkbandit]

Was just reading on CNN apparently even though he is under arrest for corruption...he technically should still be the person that gives out the senate seat. LOL

Not sure that is the case. The FBI decided to arrest him now to prevent him from having a say in whoever takes that Senate seat.

Not sure about the letter of the law, but I'm relatively certain he won't have any power in naming anyone to take that position now.

[DeV]

You don't get a 13% approval rating by being good at your job.

Patrick Fitzgerald, who is good at his job, is serious business. Nice having him on the case.

[Some Rogue]

Not sure that is the case. The FBI decided to arrest him now to prevent him from having a say in whoever takes that Senate seat.

Not sure about the letter of the law, but I'm relatively certain he won't have any power in naming anyone to take that position now.

Nope, according to Illinois law, he can appoint someone while he is in jail. This is why the House is moving to impeach him ASAP.

[g++]

Nope, according to Illinois law, he can appoint someone while he is in jail. This is why the House is moving to impeach him ASAP.

Devils advocate here...he could technically appoint someone who is impeaching him correct?

[Some Rogue]

Well the whole House is involved, so one appointment wouldn't do much really.

[Clove]

Was just reading on CNN apparently even though he is under arrest for corruption...he technically should still be the person that gives out the senate seat. LOLCan't Obama pardon him?

[Parkbandit]

Nope, according to Illinois law, he can appoint someone while he is in jail. This is why the House is moving to impeach him ASAP.

Did they actually put that into the law.. or is there just no mention of such a circumstance, which makes it 'legal'?

Chicago makes New Orleans politics look 'clean'.

[NocturnalRob]

One big question now is whether Blagojevich retains the right to name Obama's successor if he remains in custody or even under indictment. The answer is yes, according to Fitzgerald.

Jay Stewart, executive director of Chicago's Better Government Association, agreed. He said Blagojevich retains the right to fill the senate vacancy until he's out of office, which won't happen unless he quits or is removed from office by impeachment.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/09/illinois.governor/index.html

also...$4,500 bail? wtf?

[g++]

Can't Obama pardon him?

Obamas whole presidential campaign was a hugely elaborate scheme to score 20k cash and a cushy position as Illi comptroller upon the sale of his senate seat.

[BigWorm]

Did they actually put that into the law.. or is there just no mention of such a circumstance, which makes it 'legal'?

Chicago makes New Orleans politics look 'clean'.

Pretty sure it has something to do with this thing called due process.

[Stanley Burrell]

WHAT HAPPENED TO CAPITALISM AMERICA?!!!

Obviously, this is a step towards the social republic Obama is secretly building. One should be allowed to obtain money by selling goods in all shapes, sizes and seats. Patrick Fitzgerald A.K.A. the Grand Inquisitor must be stopped or the Domino Effect will truly take its place and the Al-Qaeda Iraqis will send their Vietcong sheepherders to molest us.

I hope he tried to sell it on eBay. That would be frickin' awesome.

[Stretch]

You can't trust anyone whose eyes are that close together.

[Keller]

The FBI decided to arrest him now to prevent him from having a say in whoever takes that Senate seat.

I'm certain he won't have any power in naming anyone to take that position now.

Is this where Daniel adjusts his sig and follows you around like a puppy re-posting this quote?

[Clove]

Obamas whole presidential campaign was a hugely elaborate scheme to score 20k cash and a cushy position as Illi comptroller upon the sale of his senate seat.Whatever. There's only one more day left on eBay and I've got the bid bitches.

[Drunken Durfin]

I was in court in Chicago yesterday. We came out at lunch and the news crews were frigging everywhere. Not knowing what was going on, my first though was "damn, opening arguments in our case were not THAT good."

Needless to say, there is quite a lot of elevator buzz going on at the courthouse. If I hear any good inside chatter I'll post it.

[Tsa`ah]

Blagojevich can appoint anyone up until the point of resignation, conviction, or impeachment. Sadly, our congress is too fucking inept to do anything. They'll squabble back and forth about which to do first. Remove the power of appointment (which probably can't be done without a Constitutional Convention ... fuckers) or impeach. By the time they agree on anything, he'll be convicted and it'll be election time.

At this point, only an idiot would accept the appointment. That's not to say there isn't a safe guard. The US senate is self governing. It's not likely they would seat any Blagojevich appointee unless he (Blagojevich) was cleared of all charges.

If convicted, Blagojevich will be the third IL governor imprisoned on corruption charges connected with said office, the fourth IL governor imprisoned in the last 50 years.

The sad thing is that this guy has been under investigation for a few years now, and they waited until he tried to sell off a senate appointment ... which coincidentally happened after a ballot measure for a constitutional convention failed. A convention that would have put a recall measure up for a vote.

This isn't a Chicago thing, nor is it a dem or republican thing ... this is just flat out corruption. Shaking down Chidrens Memorial for a fucking contribution and then trying to pull the funding when they wouldn't play.

Fuck him, Fuck Ryan ... put them in a cell together and let them fucking rot ... and then round up those that put in bids for the seat and make it a lemon party.

[Seizer]

My only guess on why he was so blatant on his selling of the seat, is that most corrupt people now a days seem to get a pass by the media to continue on. Or at least be able to dodge the bullet fairly well without any blood being spattered on them. In my opinion they are all corrupt and need to be removed from office and have average citizens running this country like the founding fathers intended. Nor should being a politician, be a full time job. It should be a requirement that you have held a real job, paid real bills, be able to balance a checkbook and continue to hold said real job after you are elected. While acting as a legislator is your part time job with part time pay, and not all these cushy perks they get.

[Jorddyn]

Obamas whole presidential campaign was a hugely elaborate scheme to score 20k cash and a cushy position as Illi comptroller upon the sale of his senate seat.

I thought it was a scheme to steal diamonds?

[Clove]

...have average citizens running this country like the founding fathers intended.I'm very skeptical that the founders intended this. Do you have sources?
Nor should being a politician, be a full time job. It should be a requirement that you have held a real job, paid real bills, be able to balance a checkbook and continue to hold said real job after you are elected. While acting as a legislator is your part time job with part time pay, and not all these cushy perks they get.Disenfranchisement anyone?

[Parkbandit]

Holy shit.. JUST when I thought the hilarity of this couldn't get better.. it does:

FBI investigators said telephone intercepts showed that Mr Blagojevich had been offered campaign cash by a man who was interested in taking the seat.

Federal agents quoted by ABC News named Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr as the man who offered Mr Blagojevich the money.

In transcripts of telephone conversations released by the FBI on Tuesday, Mr Blagojevich is quoted saying that a man referred to by officials as Senate Candidate 5 would "raise me 500 grand. An emissary came. Then the other guy would raise a million, if I made him a Senator".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7773717.stm

Wasn't Jesse Jr. the Co-manager of Obama's campaign?

:rofl:

[Clove]

This thread just went 5 stars.

[BigWorm]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7773717.stm

Wasn't Jesse Jr. the Co-manager of Obama's campaign?

:rofl:

Original source (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/ConductUnbecoming/story?id=6431739&page=1) for that quote. Probably the most in depth coverage I've seen so far.

Looks like Blagojevich was pissed because Obama didn't offer to bribe him in exchange for filling the seat with someone of Obama's choosing.

[Parkbandit]

Original source (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/ConductUnbecoming/story?id=6431739&page=1) for that quote. Probably the most in depth coverage I've seen so far.

Looks like Blagojevich was pissed because Obama didn't offer to bribe him in exchange for filling the seat with someone of Obama's choosing.


There were a couple of quotes from the Obama camp that said they were in talks with Blagojevich regarding Obama's replacement.. only to have that retracted yesterday with the old 'I must have been mistaken, Obama hasn't been in communication with Blagojevich regarding the empty senate seat'. It made me laugh.

I wonder how often this actually happens.. and if Blagojevich was just so fucking stupid to get caught doing it.

[ClydeR]

There were a couple of quotes from the Obama camp that said they were in talks with Blagojevich regarding Obama's replacement.. only to have that retracted yesterday with the old 'I must have been mistaken, Obama hasn't been in communication with Blagojevich regarding the empty senate seat'. It made me laugh.

If there were any conversations like that, then they're on tape now. The FBI had microphones around Blagojevich in addition to having his phone bugged.

[Parkbandit]

If there were any conversations like that, then they're on tape now. The FBI had microphones around Blagojevich in addition to having his phone bugged.


I am only going by what is being reported:


But there are clearly some uncomfortable questions for Obama. Asked Tuesday in Chicago whether he had been in contact with Blagojevich about the job, Obama said, "I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening."

But Axelrod said on Chicago television Nov. 23 that the two had spoken. Asked if Obama had expressed a preference, Axelrod said he had not, but also said: "I know he's talked to the governor. And...there are a whole range of names, many of which have surfaced, and he's, I think he has a fondness for a lot of them."

On Tuesday, Axelrod said: "I was mistaken when I told an interviewer last month that the president-elect has spoken directly to Gov. Blagojevich about the Senate vacancy. They did not then or at any time discuss the subject."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2008/12/10/blagojevich-arrest-puts-obama-ties-spotlight/

[Tsa`ah]

Only Fox and yourself are running with that angle.

[Parkbandit]

Only Fox and yourself are running with that angle.


Wait.. are you saying it's not true? What angle exactly are you referring to Shit4Brains? Did he or did he not say what is quoted? It's not like anyone is making it up. He made a statement.. Blagojevich got indicted.. he retracted it.

But of course... there's no way The One would ever, ever be involved in such slimy politics.

[Tsa`ah]

No more than any other politician. Then again, the US Attorney has already stated no involvement by Obama or his team.

Distance from the distraction becomes the name of the game at this point.

Again, this is just another angle someone fed you ... an angle you're choosing to run with. It's more of the same and it's nothing more than sour grapes at this point.

You lost, now suck it up cupcake.

[Parkbandit]

No more than any other politician. Then again, the US Attorney has already stated no involvement by Obama or his team.

Distance from the distraction becomes the name of the game at this point.

Again, this is just another angle someone fed you ... an angle you're choosing to run with. It's more of the same and it's nothing more than sour grapes at this point.

You lost, now suck it up cupcake.

I lost? You are a fucking nutcase Shit4brains. How exactly did I lose anything?

It's been pointed out that the Obama Spokesman retracted a statement. Nothing more, nothing less.

There are no sour grapes on my part.. more like your head stuck up Obama's ass to where you can't see facts.

But hey.. if you want to "win", feel free Shit4brains. You really, really showed me.

[Tsa`ah]

I'm not even touching that melt down ... you proved everything with the first two words.

[Hulkein]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/09/illinois.governor/index.html

also...$4,500 bail? wtf?

Bail is only set to assure the person will show up (he has a good argument that he isn't going anywhere given his high profile status) and to ensure public safety (he isn't accused of anything violent).

[Parkbandit]

I'm not even touching that melt down ... you proved everything with the first two words.

Here Shit4Brains.. I realize you are hung up with FOX NEWS BEING SO EVIL:

Here.. allow me to show you how fucking stupid you are and always have been:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_081210.htm

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/12/questions-arise.html

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/12/09/axelrod/index.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/10/AR2008121001472.html?hpid=topnews

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=33447

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122887072661893231.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Obama_Blagojevich/2008/12/09/160079.html?s=al&promo_code=7403-1

http://beltwayblips.com/story/obama_i_never_spoke_with_blagojevich_axelrod_obama/


Maybe it's not JUST me and Fox news?

Dumbfuck.

[Stretch]

Bail is only set to assure the person will show up (he has a good argument that he isn't going anywhere given his high profile status) and to ensure public safety (he isn't accused of anything violent).

^

He did have his passport taken away though.

[Gan]

... Tony Rezko...


Since no one has mentioned that name in this thread yet. And I've heard it on story after story on NPR and the national news.

That guy is like a bad penny. He keeps turning up!

[Hulkein]

^

He did have his passport taken away though.

Good.

[Sean of the Thread]

Here Shit4Brains.. I realize you are hung up with FOX NEWS BEING SO EVIL:

Here.. allow me to show you how fucking stupid you are and always have been:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politics/bulletin/bulletin_081210.htm

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/12/questions-arise.html

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/12/09/axelrod/index.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/10/AR2008121001472.html?hpid=topnews

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=33447

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122887072661893231.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Obama_Blagojevich/2008/12/09/160079.html?s=al&promo_code=7403-1

http://beltwayblips.com/story/obama_i_never_spoke_with_blagojevich_axelrod_obama/


Maybe it's not JUST me and Fox news?

Dumbfuck.


http://www.clanpot.com/slutamis/pics/pwned.jpg

[Drunken Durfin]

I wonder how often this actually happens.. and if Blagojevich was just so fucking stupid to get caught doing it.

I would put good money on "more often than most people imagine."

Blagojevich was a total idiot about it.

And for those people who actually believe that Obama was totally clueless about all this: Please wake up and smell the corruption that is the U.S. Government. Everyone has a skeleton at that level, just ask Gary hart.

[Clove]

And for those people who actually believe that Obama was totally clueless about all this: Please wake up and smell the corruption that is Illinois politics.Fixed

[Drunken Durfin]

Are you claiming that a rampant vein of corruption does not run through all the levels of our government?

[Clove]

Are you claiming that a rampant vein of corruption does not run through all the levels of our government?I'm saying that this is specifically an Illinois politics issue. Though since you bring it up, I think you'd be hard pressed to prove that national politics is generally corrupt.

[Keller]

But of course... there's no way The One would ever, ever be involved in such slimy politics.

What I'm grateful for is that the feds arrested Blogovavevahvich so that he can't name Obama's successor anymore.

[Drunken Durfin]

Generally corrupt? Maybe not. Riddled with corruption like Bonnie and Clyde's last get away car, highly likely.

If you take the hundreds of news stories on corrupt government officials and apply the "these are the one that got caught" filter, you have the potential for thousands of corrupt activities going on across the U.S. You never hear about the ones who get away with it.

[Clove]

Hundreds? Over what time line are you making this assumption?

[DeV]

But of course... there's no way The One would ever, ever be involved in such slimy politics.I'm beginning to believe that corrupt Illinois politics factored somewhere into him wanting to get the fuck out of Illiniois politics as quickly as possible, hence the surprisingly early run for the White House. Just my opinion though.

[Drunken Durfin]

Hundreds? Over what time line are you making this assumption?

I am not in a position to do a search at the moment, but I am certain that if you spent a couple of hours in Google, Lexis/Nexus and the like you would discover 300+ incidents over that past three to five years. Even if you limited your search federal and state level positions. ignoring city level officials.

[Tsa`ah]

Here Shit4Brains.. I realize you are hung up with FOX NEWS BEING SO EVIL:

Here.. allow me to show you how fucking stupid you are and always have been:

....

Maybe it's not JUST me and Fox news?

Dumbfuck.

No, it's generally you and Fox. Well Fox and the right wing mouth pieces that are broadcast over media you can keep up with. So, no ... it's not you, you're incapable of drawing a line between two points on your own.

This is all inconsequential though.

I really can't see where the connection is considering ....

ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that the consultants (Advisor B and another consultant are believed to be on the call at that time) are telling him that he has to “suck it up” for two years and do nothing and give this “motherfucker [the President-elect] his senator. Fuck him. For nothing? Fuck him.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH states that he will put “[Senate Candidate 4]” in the Senate “before I just give fucking [Senate Candidate 1] a fucking Senate seat and I don’t get anything.” (Senate Candidate 4 is a Deputy Governor of the State of Illinois).

Or

In a conversation with Harris on Nov. 11, the charges state, Blagojevich said he knew Obama wanted Senate Candidate 1 for the open seat but “they’re not willing to give me anything except appreciation. Fuck them.”

Or

Amid the baseless speculation, neither noted that Obama is not in any way implicated in the case; the criminal complaint, as prosecutor and U.S. attorney Patrick Fitzgerald noted during a same-day press conference, "makes no allegations about the president-elect whatsoever -- his conduct." Indeed, during the press conference about Blagojevich's arrest, which occurred after the comments by Brewer and Isikoff, Fitzgerald cautioned the press to "not cast aspersions on people for being named or being discussed or if you learn they're being interviewed."

Or

Fitzgerald said "we make no allegation" that Obama was aware of Blagojevich's attempt to leverage the appointment.

Or maybe some facts that seem escape you.

1. Roddy's office was bugged.
2. Roddy's phones were tapped.
3. It's probably safe to assume text and e-mail were being monitored.

Had there been any involvement, Obama's head, as well as JJ Jr's, would be up on the block as well ... or at the very least named in the complaint. Maybe you should read it.


What I'm grateful for is that the feds arrested Blogovavevahvich so that he can't name Obama's successor anymore.

He still can ... though it's not likely to do much good unless it's J Fucking C.

[Clove]

I am not in a position to do a search at the moment, but I am certain that if you spent a couple of hours in Google, Lexis/Nexus and the like you would discover 300+ incidents over that past three to five years. Even if you limited your search federal and state level positions. ignoring city level officials.Since you were originally referring to federal level politics, I'm wondering why you're now including state and local incidents?. 300+ for Federal and State officials (considering the scale) isn't much of an accusation (even if you're allowing for a larger undetected group).

[Clove]

What I'm grateful for is that the feds arrested Blogovavevahvich so that he can't name Obama's successor anymore.




He still can ... though it's not likely to do much good unless it's J Fucking C.http://www.248am.com/images/fail.jpg

[Parkbandit]

I'm saying that this is specifically an Illinois politics issue. Though since you bring it up, I think you'd be hard pressed to prove that national politics is generally corrupt.

I would love to believe this.. but I don't. I think Blagojevich is just really, really stupid and arrogant and thought he was above the law. Most corrupt politicians aren't this foolish.

[Parkbandit]

No, it's generally you and Fox. Well Fox and the right wing mouth pieces that are broadcast over media you can keep up with. So, no ... it's not you, you're incapable of drawing a line between two points on your own.

This is all inconsequential though.

I really can't see where the connection is considering ....

ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that the consultants (Advisor B and another consultant are believed to be on the call at that time) are telling him that he has to “suck it up” for two years and do nothing and give this “motherfucker [the President-elect] his senator. Fuck him. For nothing? Fuck him.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH states that he will put “[Senate Candidate 4]” in the Senate “before I just give fucking [Senate Candidate 1] a fucking Senate seat and I don’t get anything.” (Senate Candidate 4 is a Deputy Governor of the State of Illinois).

Or

In a conversation with Harris on Nov. 11, the charges state, Blagojevich said he knew Obama wanted Senate Candidate 1 for the open seat but “they’re not willing to give me anything except appreciation. Fuck them.”

Or

Amid the baseless speculation, neither noted that Obama is not in any way implicated in the case; the criminal complaint, as prosecutor and U.S. attorney Patrick Fitzgerald noted during a same-day press conference, "makes no allegations about the president-elect whatsoever -- his conduct." Indeed, during the press conference about Blagojevich's arrest, which occurred after the comments by Brewer and Isikoff, Fitzgerald cautioned the press to "not cast aspersions on people for being named or being discussed or if you learn they're being interviewed."

Or

Fitzgerald said "we make no allegation" that Obama was aware of Blagojevich's attempt to leverage the appointment.

Or maybe some facts that seem escape you.

1. Roddy's office was bugged.
2. Roddy's phones were tapped.
3. It's probably safe to assume text and e-mail were being monitored.

Had there been any involvement, Obama's head, as well as JJ Jr's, would be up on the block as well ... or at the very least named in the complaint. Maybe you should read it.



He still can ... though it's not likely to do much good unless it's J Fucking C.

Once again Shit4Brains.. simply read my first post you stupidly took so much offense to. I merely posted the story as a funny moment.. you are the one that became indignant at me (and Fox News) for making such an outlandish statement. You were once again proven to be stupid.. now go chew a crayon.

[Keller]

http://www.248am.com/images/fail.jpg

See also: http://forum.gsplayers.com/showpost.php?p=852932&postcount=10

[Clove]

That's really weird because I don't watch Fox News. CNN has been running the story.

[Clove]

See also: http://forum.gsplayers.com/showpost.php?p=852932&postcount=10Yes, I know.

Tsa'ah (once again)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v412/Jemah/funnies/missingthepoint.png

BTW you're never getting paid if you don't PM me some times and places you can meet.

[Keller]

Once again Shit4Brains.. simply read my first post you stupidly took so much offense to. I merely posted the story as a funny moment.. you are the one that became indignant at me (and Fox News) for making such an outlandish statement. You were once again proven to be stupid.. now go chew a crayon.

What I'm grateful for is that the feds arrested Blogoayoyovich before he could name Obama's successor.

Oh, and how's the view in your window-less glass house?

[Keller]

BTW you're never getting paid if you don't PM me some times and places you can meet.

NYC. Bar of your choice. Between 12/30 and 1/5.

[CrystalTears]

I thought it was for silvers.

[Keller]

I thought it was for silvers.

Fine.

Give them to CT and she can repay me in her own ways.

:wasntme:

[Drunken Durfin]

Since you were originally referring to federal level politics, I'm wondering why you're now including state and local incidents?. 300+ for Federal and State officials (considering the scale) isn't much of an accusation (even if you're allowing for a larger undetected group).

My initial post referenced the U.S. Government, and by that I meant the government as a whole for the United States. My subsequent post, for clarity, referenced "all levels of our government," which would include people down to county assessors and the like. After all, this all started with a Govenor. I have not had a civics class since 9th grade, but I am pretty sure that is a state position, not federal. Also, I did not include local officials, as you claim I did above. The quote was "ignoring city level officials," and by that I meant Local. We simply had a misunderstanding of terms.

However, if you want to limit the group to Federal (limiting my initial intent when I used the phrase "U.S. Government"), I still stand by by accusation: In the past three to five years there have been hundreds of incidents of corruption reported.

[Parkbandit]

That's really weird because I don't watch Fox News. CNN has been running the story.


How do those sour grapes taste!?

[g++]

No, it's generally you and Fox. Well Fox and the right wing mouth pieces that are broadcast over media you can keep up with. So, no ... it's not you, you're incapable of drawing a line between two points on your own.

This is all inconsequential though.

I really can't see where the connection is considering ....

ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that the consultants (Advisor B and another consultant are believed to be on the call at that time) are telling him that he has to “suck it up” for two years and do nothing and give this “motherfucker [the President-elect] his senator. Fuck him. For nothing? Fuck him.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH states that he will put “[Senate Candidate 4]” in the Senate “before I just give fucking [Senate Candidate 1] a fucking Senate seat and I don’t get anything.” (Senate Candidate 4 is a Deputy Governor of the State of Illinois).

Or

In a conversation with Harris on Nov. 11, the charges state, Blagojevich said he knew Obama wanted Senate Candidate 1 for the open seat but “they’re not willing to give me anything except appreciation. Fuck them.”

Or

Amid the baseless speculation, neither noted that Obama is not in any way implicated in the case; the criminal complaint, as prosecutor and U.S. attorney Patrick Fitzgerald noted during a same-day press conference, "makes no allegations about the president-elect whatsoever -- his conduct." Indeed, during the press conference about Blagojevich's arrest, which occurred after the comments by Brewer and Isikoff, Fitzgerald cautioned the press to "not cast aspersions on people for being named or being discussed or if you learn they're being interviewed."

Or

Fitzgerald said "we make no allegation" that Obama was aware of Blagojevich's attempt to leverage the appointment.

Or maybe some facts that seem escape you.

1. Roddy's office was bugged.
2. Roddy's phones were tapped.
3. It's probably safe to assume text and e-mail were being monitored.

Had there been any involvement, Obama's head, as well as JJ Jr's, would be up on the block as well ... or at the very least named in the complaint. Maybe you should read it.



He still can ... though it's not likely to do much good unless it's J Fucking C.

I have found a patented method to save time reading your posts. First I read PB's post then I close my eyes and Imagine your handle with PB's post quoted and you saying "I DISAGREE" then I skip your 1000 word post and move on.

[Clove]

And for those people who actually believe that Obama was totally clueless about all this: Please wake up and smell the corruption that is the U.S. Government. Everyone has a skeleton at that level, just ask Gary hart.Hmmmm. So by this we're supposed to assume "all government in the US". Ignoring your misuse of U.S. Government (which is Federal, not a government in the U.S.), your reference to "that level" and Gary Hart all support a Federal Government assumption.

Give the hundreds of thousands of State and Federal government employees, I'm sure it would be easy to find a few hundred corrupt individuals.

[Clove]

However, if you want to limit the group to Federal (limiting my initial intent when I used the phrase "U.S. Government"), I still stand by by accusation: In the past three to five years there have been hundreds of incidents of corruption reported.You can stand by it all you like, I'd like to see proof of your assertion.

[Seizer]

I'm very skeptical that the founders intended this. Do you have sources?Disenfranchisement anyone?


Very disenfranchised by the empty suits. They don't listen. They think they know what is best for us, because I was elected, and raised 2 million dollars pandering to groups, that I now have to listen to these groups pleas more than my own constituents, because after all you only voted for me.

Federalist paper #53.

No man can be a competent legislator who does not add to an upright intention and a sound judgment a certain degree of knowledge of the subjects on which he is to legislate. A part of this knowledge may be acquired by means of information which lie within the compass of men in private as well as public stations. Another part can only be attained, or at least thoroughly attained, by actual experience in the station which requires the use of it. The period of service, ought, therefore, in all such cases, to bear some proportion to the extent of practical knowledge requisite to the due performance of the service. The period of legislative service established in most of the States for the more numerous branch is, as we have seen, one year. The question then may be put into this simple form: does the period of two years bear no greater proportion to the knowledge requisite for federal legislation than one year does to the knowledge requisite for State legislation? The very statement of the question, in this form, suggests the answer that ought to be given to it.

[Clove]

Very disenfranchised by the empty suits. They don't listen. They think they know what is best for us, because I was elected, and raised 2 million dollars pandering to groups, that I now have to listen to these groups pleas more than my own constituents, because after all you only voted for me.

Federalist paper #53.

No man can be a competent legislator who does not add to an upright intention and a sound judgment a certain degree of knowledge of the subjects on which he is to legislate. A part of this knowledge may be acquired by means of information which lie within the compass of men in private as well as public stations. Another part can only be attained, or at least thoroughly attained, by actual experience in the station which requires the use of it. The period of service, ought, therefore, in all such cases, to bear some proportion to the extent of practical knowledge requisite to the due performance of the service. The period of legislative service established in most of the States for the more numerous branch is, as we have seen, one year. The question then may be put into this simple form: does the period of two years bear no greater proportion to the knowledge requisite for federal legislation than one year does to the knowledge requisite for State legislation? The very statement of the question, in this form, suggests the answer that ought to be given to it.
They're discussing the fact that some requisite experience for a legislator can only be attained from within the legislative body the legislator is serving in; therefore appropriate term lengths need to be established so there is enough time for a legislator to learn and serve effectively.

[Tsa`ah]

Once again Shit4Brains.. simply read my first post you stupidly took so much offense to. I merely posted the story as a funny moment.. you are the one that became indignant at me (and Fox News) for making such an outlandish statement. You were once again proven to be stupid.. now go chew a crayon.

So what you're saying is, surprisingly without a jpg, you were just running with something you heard without checking the facts .... gotcha. That aside, it's par for course with you.

[Keller]

surprisingly without a jpg

I lol'd

[Apathy]

... Tony Rezko...


This needs to be quoted for future reference.

[Drunken Durfin]

Hmmmm. So by this we're supposed to assume "all government in the US". Ignoring your misuse of U.S. Government (which is Federal, not a government in the U.S.), your reference to "that level" and Gary Hart all support a Federal Government assumption.

Give the hundreds of thousands of State and Federal government employees, I'm sure it would be easy to find a few hundred corrupt individuals.

I posted a clarification of terms and restated my opinion based on such and yet you still saw the need to post this, harping on issues that have already been addressed? If you want to move forward in an adult conversation it is generally a good idea to keep it linear.


You can stand by it all you like, I'd like to see proof of your assertion.

Before I spend two or three hours pulling cases to prove my position how about we agree on some parameters?

- Federal officials only, no state or local government.

- Case references back 5 years (long end of my initial statement)

[Clove]

I posted a clarification of terms and restated my opinion based on such and yet you still saw the need to post this, harping on issues that have already been addressed? If you want to move forward in an adult conversation it is generally a good idea to keep it linear.Well when you backpedal you can expect shit for it.




Before I spend two or three hours pulling cases to prove my position how about we agree on some parameters?

- Federal officials only, no state or local government.

- Case references back 5 years (long end of my initial statement)Sure but you'll have to define official. The Federal government employs 1.8 million people (excluding the postal service). Hundreds of reports over 5 years wouldn't be much of a statement. For that matter you'll have to define corruption too.

But in an effort to spare you hours of research, let me put 10 minutes into it and refer you to the IRS, which along with the FBI places a high priority on investigating public corruption:

http://www.irs.gov/compliance/enforcement/article/0,,id=118214,00.html

Yes, over a 5 year timeline hundreds of corruption investigations (and convictions) can reasonably occur. 1.8 million employees? A pathetic ratio.

[Drunken Durfin]

Well when you backpedal you can expect shit for it.


Explaining a misunderstanding is hardly backpedaling, especially when I have not changed my stance at all. You seem to want to foster confusion because you refuse to believe how wrought the U.S. government is with corruption.


Yes, over a 5 year timeline hundreds of corruption investigations (and convictions) can reasonably occur. 1.8 million employees? A pathetic ratio.

Again with your misinterpretaion of who I am talking about. I asked in the last post that we agree on some parameters and without discussing them you ran off half-cocked...again.

I am not claiming that every employee of the Federal Government is in this pool, I am referring to Officials, and by officials I am talking elected and/or appointed individuals with high level decision/policy making ability. The list below illustrates the kinds of charges and people that I am referring to.

http://drunkendurfin.webs.com/corrupt01.jpg

[Stanley Burrell]

I still think anything short of slavery for economic gain is renegotiable, somehow, under our current buy-and-sell democracy. I don't want him to find a way out of this, but he fucking will. Sorry.

[RichardCranium]

Report: Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr.'s supporters tried to raise money for Ill. Gov. Blagojevich

CHICAGO (Associated Press) -- According to a published report, businessmen with ties to both Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson discussed raising $1 million for Blagojevich as a way of persuading him to appoint Jackson to President-elect Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat.

Citing unnamed sources, the Chicago Tribune reports in a story for Friday's editions that businessman Raghuveer Nayak (RUG'-oo-veer NAY'-uk) and Blagojevich aide Rajinder Bedi (RUJ'-in-dur BEH'-dee) told attendees at an Oct. 31 meeting that they needed to raise $1 million for the governor to make sure Jackson was appointed to the Senate.

Nayak is a Blagojevich supporter who is also close to the Jackson family. Bedi has also been a Blagojevich fundraiser.

Jackson's attorney said while Jackson discussed the Senate seat with Nayak, he never asked him to do anything.

___

Information from: Chicago Tribune, http://www.chicagotribune.com

[Clove]

Explaining a misunderstanding is hardly backpedaling, especially when I have not changed my stance at all. You seem to want to foster confusion because you refuse to believe how wrought the U.S. government is with corruption.It wasn't a misunderstanding. "U.S. Government" refers to the Federal Government, not any government in the United States. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt between the possiblility that you didn't know what you were talking about, or you were changing your position. I apologize if I was mistaken.




Again with your misinterpretaion of who I am talking about. I asked in the last post that we agree on some parameters and without discussing them you ran off half-cocked...again.

I am not claiming that every employee of the Federal Government is in this pool, I am referring to Officials, and by officials I am talking elected and/or appointed individuals with high level decision/policy making ability. The list below illustrates the kinds of charges and people that I am referring to.

http://drunkendurfin.webs.com/corrupt01.jpgExcellent. The 109th Congress has 535 voting members and 5 non-voting members. 16 investigations (which aren't even indictments) is hardly evidence of a general corruption.

Of course we haven't gotten into the appointed positions yet which according to the 2008 Plum Book is over 7,000.


This publication contains data (as of September 1, 2008) on over 7,000
Federal civil service leadership and support positions in the legislative
and executive branches of the Federal Government that may be subject
to noncompetitive appointment (e.g., positions such as agency heads and
their immediate subordinates, policy executives and advisors, and aides
who report to these officials). The duties of many such positions may involve
advocacy of Administration policies and programs and the incumbents usually
have a close and confidential working relationship with the agency
head or other key officials.We wouldn't want any of these to be corrupt.

We haven't touched on the Diplomatic Service or the judicial branch yet.

A couple hundred investigations/indictments a year simply isn't enough evidence to support your poorly reasoned position.

[Parkbandit]

So what you're saying is, surprisingly without a jpg, you were just running with something you heard without checking the facts .... gotcha. That aside, it's par for course with you.

Show me again where I was wrong Shit4Brains? Here was my post:


There were a couple of quotes from the Obama camp that said they were in talks with Blagojevich regarding Obama's replacement.. only to have that retracted yesterday with the old 'I must have been mistaken, Obama hasn't been in communication with Blagojevich regarding the empty senate seat'. It made me laugh.

I wonder how often this actually happens.. and if Blagojevich was just so fucking stupid to get caught doing it.


Oh.. wait.. it was 100% correct.. unlike the really stupid post that followed:


Only Fox and yourself are running with that angle.

I think you've proven without a doubt you are indeed a Shit4Brains Tsa'ah.. but that's nothing new to anyone who even attempts to read your drivel.

Here's your jpg.. actual xray.

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e6/belike53/shit_for_brains_kerry.jpg

[Parkbandit]

Report: Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr.'s supporters tried to raise money for Ill. Gov. Blagojevich

CHICAGO (Associated Press) -- According to a published report, businessmen with ties to both Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson discussed raising $1 million for Blagojevich as a way of persuading him to appoint Jackson to President-elect Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat.

Citing unnamed sources, the Chicago Tribune reports in a story for Friday's editions that businessman Raghuveer Nayak (RUG'-oo-veer NAY'-uk) and Blagojevich aide Rajinder Bedi (RUJ'-in-dur BEH'-dee) told attendees at an Oct. 31 meeting that they needed to raise $1 million for the governor to make sure Jackson was appointed to the Senate.

Nayak is a Blagojevich supporter who is also close to the Jackson family. Bedi has also been a Blagojevich fundraiser.

Jackson's attorney said while Jackson discussed the Senate seat with Nayak, he never asked him to do anything.

___

Information from: Chicago Tribune, http://www.chicagotribune.com



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2Tt-WbAtjU&feature=related

My favorite quote is: "An impossibility to an absolute certainty" and how he announciated every syllable. He has the "gift" just like his Daddy.

[Keller]

Top 11 Ways to Profit off of a Senate Seat that Blogovavovoivevich was Going to Try Next

11) Posting it on Craigslist, but in the "therapeutic massage" section (to throw off suspicion).

10) Blackmailing Illinois voters: "Either you send me $5 million or I appoint Alan Keyes."

9) Appointing self to the Senate, finding a dishonest guy to appoint Illinois governor, explaining to him how valuable it can be to have a Senate appointment to dole out, and offering to resign from the Senate for half that.

8) Inventing device that converts wife's money-grubbing ambition into green energy.

7) Bouncing back from Fox's rejection of reality TV show called "The Appointee" by convincing Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers to commit, swaying network executives.

6) Appointing himself, then becoming the first corporate sponsored Senate office: This vote brought to you by K-Mart!

5) Going on The Price is Right, guessing price of Senate seat right on the nose.

4) Dividing up the term and selling it to multiple people as time-shares.

3) Appointing Rick Lazio, and arranging for his wife to run against Lazio, win, establish herself as a well-regarded, detail-oriented centrist with a reputation for 'toughness', then run for President.

2) Appointing Patrick Fitzgerald to Senate, avoiding thousands in legal fees.

1) Trading it for Superbowl tickets. Do you know how hard those are to get?!


From: http://www.culture11.com/article/34032?from=feature

[Drunken Durfin]

The 109th Congress has 535 voting members and 5 non-voting members. 16 investigations (which aren't even indictments) is hardly evidence of a general corruption.

. . .

A couple hundred investigations/indictments a year simply isn't enough evidence to support your poorly reasoned position.

First, that graphic was not meant as proof of my point. It was meant to illustrate the type of people that I mean to include in the search. I thought that was made clear by the caption I put above it. Second, you keep using the phrase "general corruption" and "generally corrupt," when I never have in an attempt to put a broader spin on my initial statement. I have already addressed this:


Generally corrupt? Maybe not. Riddled with corruption like Bonnie and Clyde's last get away car, highly likely.

First we have a disagreement about the term "U.S. Government." You feel that it, by my definition, is too large so I reduce the scope to fit your more limited "Federal Government" and stand by my statement. Then you decide that this is still too large, throwing out the 1.8 million employee number to try and dilute my claims and I attempt to narrow the scope yet again. In an answer to this you inflate my intended pool again, dropping the 1.8mil down to 7,000, but with the "We haven't touched on the Diplomatic Service or the judicial branch yet" tag which will increase the pool even more. At this rate I don't feel that we will ever reach a common scope. I keep trying to narrow the field, to appease you, and you keep inflating it in an attempt to make my "hundreds" accusation seem like a drop in the bucket.

As a result I have still not sat down and spent any serious time researching the numbers to give you a report that will be to your satisfaction. Honestly, I doubt that anything will, you seem to be convinced that corruption only exists in "Illinois politics" as you sated in the "fixed" version of my post that you so hastily penned. You can continue to look at the governing body of the U.S. through rose colored glasses, that is your right, but the fact remains that corruption runs rampant throughout. It rears it's ugly head when you take a narrow slice of the pie, and is even more prevalent when you look at the system as a whole.


For those of you watching who are no so intent on convincing yourselves that our government is made up of good people who only on rare occasions would fall and take part in corrupt activities, I submit these numbers that I found with minimal effort:

- In 2004-2005, the FBI has convicted more than 1,060 government employees involved in corrupt activities, to include 177 federal officials, 158 state officials, 360 local officials, and more than 365 police officers.

- In FY 2005, the Public Corruption Program saw a 25% increase in public corruption cases investigated, resulting in 890 indictments, 759 convictions, and 2,118 cases still pending.

Source: http://www.fbi.gov/aboutus/transformation/pubcor.htm

[Clove]

First, that graphic was not meant as proof of my point. It was meant to illustrate the type of people that I mean to include in the search. I thought that was made clear by the caption I put above it. Second, you keep using the phrase "general corruption" and "generally corrupt," when I never have in an attempt to put a broader spin on my initial statement. I have already addressed this:



First we have a disagreement about the term "U.S. Government." You feel that it, by my definition, is too large so I reduce the scope to fit your more limited "Federal Government" and stand by my statement. Then you decide that this is still too large, throwing out the 1.8 million employee number to try and dilute my claims and I attempt to narrow the scope yet again. In an answer to this you inflate my intended pool again, dropping the 1.8mil down to 7,000, but with the "We haven't touched on the Diplomatic Service or the judicial branch yet" tag which will increase the pool even more. At this rate I don't feel that we will ever reach a common scope. I keep trying to narrow the field, to appease you, and you keep inflating it in an attempt to make my "hundreds" accusation seem like a drop in the bucket.

As a result I have still not sat down and spent any serious time researching the numbers to give you a report that will be to your satisfaction. Honestly, I doubt that anything will, you seem to be convinced that corruption only exists in "Illinois politics" as you sated in the "fixed" version of my post that you so hastily penned. You can continue to look at the governing body of the U.S. through rose colored glasses, that is your right, but the fact remains that corruption runs rampant throughout. It rears it's ugly head when you take a narrow slice of the pie, and is even more prevalent when you look at the system as a whole.


For those of you watching who are no so intent on convincing yourselves that our government is made up of good people who only on rare occasions would fall and take part in corrupt activities, I submit these numbers that I found with minimal effort:

- In 2004-2005, the FBI has convicted more than 1,060 government employees involved in corrupt activities, to include 177 federal officials, 158 state officials, 360 local officials, and more than 365 police officers.

- In FY 2005, the Public Corruption Program saw a 25% increase in public corruption cases investigated, resulting in 890 indictments, 759 convictions, and 2,118 cases still pending.

Source: http://www.fbi.gov/aboutus/transformation/pubcor.htmI'm not attempting to broaden any scope; you just seem ignorant of the scale of those involved in government entirely. And I'm sorry if anyone here sees a distinction (besides yourself) between "riddled" and "generally" corrupt, please explain it to me. If anything "riddled" implies more corruption than "general".

Wow. The FBI convicted 177 Federal Officials in 2005. About the same numbers I provided in the IRS Public Corruption statistics. That doesn't even comprise 1 percent of the Federal Government. That isn't riddled. That isn't general. It isn't anything but proof that there are criminals in every segment of society. Congratulations.

You can do weeks of research if you like, the statistics are already there and there isn't compelling evidence our Federal government is riddled with corruption. Put down the John Grisham books and read some non-fiction for a change.

[Tsa`ah]

I'm saying that this is specifically an Illinois politics issue. Though since you bring it up, I think you'd be hard pressed to prove that national politics is generally corrupt.

This popped up in the USA today. Ten years, 1998-2007 ... public corruption convictions ... thousands of them.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-12-10-corruptstates_N.htm

[Clove]

This popped up in the USA today. Ten years, 1998-2007 ... public corruption convictions ... thousands of them.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-12-10-corruptstates_N.htmYeah, I don't think anyone was surprised that Louisiana fared worse than Illinois. North Dakota is pretty funny though.

Again, thousands of convictions over a decade, when considering the scale of government in the U.S. isn't much of a rotten core.

[Drunken Durfin]

I'm not attempting to broaden any scope; you just seem ignorant of the scale of those involved in government entirely. And I'm sorry if anyone here sees a distinction (besides yourself) between "riddled" and "generally" corrupt, please explain it to me. If anything "riddled" implies more corruption than "general".

Wow. The FBI convicted 177 Federal Officials in 2005. About the same numbers I provided in the IRS Public Corruption statistics. That doesn't even comprise 1 percent of the Federal Government. That isn't riddled. That isn't general. It isn't anything but proof that there are criminals in every segment of society. Congratulations.

You can do weeks of research if you like, the statistics are already there and there isn't compelling evidence our Federal government is riddled with corruption. Put down the John Grisham books and read some non-fiction for a change.

Alright, what numbers from what segments of the government would be enough to satisfy you?




p.s. I don't read Grisham, history books make up 80% of my reading habits. At this moment I am reading "The Civilization of the Middle Ages" by Norman Cantor. (http://books.google.com/books?id=0qiYM2_HhJgC&dq="The+Civilization+of+the+Middle+Ages"+by+Norman+Cantor&pg=PP1&ots=poF1sCRTyx&source=bn&sig=jr3Ym85DCCTcOihAELhah6ZTavk&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result#PPA561,M1)

[Clove]

Alright, what numbers from what segments of the government would be enough to satisfy you?




p.s. I don't read Grisham, history books make up 80% of my reading habits. At this moment I am reading "The Civilization of the Middle Ages" by Norman Cantor. (http://books.google.com/books?id=0qiYM2_HhJgC&dq="The+Civilization+of+the+Middle+Ages"+by+Norman+Cantor&pg=PP1&ots=poF1sCRTyx&source=bn&sig=jr3Ym85DCCTcOihAELhah6ZTavk&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result#PPA561,M1)Why, were you thinking of manufacturing some? You're incorrectly assuming that I'm interested with any particular level of government. I'm not; but you ought to use apples to apples comparisons. You can't discuss the federal government and then include stats from State and local governments.

Ultimately you can't convince me that our government is "riddled with corruption" because there isn't any evidence to support it. Granted there is more corruption beneath the surface of what's detected, but when the FBI has made public corruption its priority behind terrorism I personally think it's safe to say we're catching a good deal of it. In any case you're going to have to do better than cite that under 3% of Congress is under investigation. You can say that there is corruption in our government, but you can't claim that it's "riddled" with it.

[Drunken Durfin]

Why, were you thinking of manufacturing some? You're incorrectly assuming that I'm interested with any particular level of government. I'm not; but you ought to use apples to apples comparisons. You can't discuss the federal government and then include stats from State and local governments.

Ultimately you can't convince me that our government is "riddled with corruption" because there isn't any evidence to support it. Granted there is more corruption beneath the surface of what's detected, but when the FBI has made public corruption its priority behind terrorism I personally think it's safe to say we're catching a good deal of it. In any case you're going to have to do better than cite that under 3% of Congress is under investigation. You can say that there is corruption in our government, but you can't claim that it's "riddled" with it.

I have provided cites thus far and would do so as well with any future posts. I have been pleased with this conversation thus far, even though we are in disagreement, because no one has resorted to "sandy vagina" or "you are an idiot idiot" type comments. Suggesting that I would "manufacture" numbers is insulting.

I am attempting to directly respond to your comments, and all you are doing is dodging and throwing up smoke. I asked you a very simple question to help me identify the particular "apples" you want me to compare. I also included a request for "numbers" so that we could get away from subjective phrases like "riddled". You responded to neither.

Claiming that there is not any evidence to support my claim is a ridiculous head in the sand attitude.

Not working with me and answering my questions so that I can provide direct responses is evasive.

You are completely unwilling to even entertain the thought that I may be right, or even close. This "I'm right, you're wrong and you can't prove otherwise" attitude you have taken paints a mental picture of a child with their eyes shut and their hands over their years chanting "neiner neiner neiner" so that they don't have to hear something that upsets them.

[Daniel]

Why, were you thinking of manufacturing some? You're incorrectly assuming that I'm interested with any particular level of government. I'm not; but you ought to use apples to apples comparisons. You can't discuss the federal government and then include stats from State and local governments.

Ultimately you can't convince me that our government is "riddled with corruption" because there isn't any evidence to support it. Granted there is more corruption beneath the surface of what's detected, but when the FBI has made public corruption its priority behind terrorism I personally think it's safe to say we're catching a good deal of it. In any case you're going to have to do better than cite that under 3% of Congress is under investigation. You can say that there is corruption in our government, but you can't claim that it's "riddled" with it.

This is retarded reasoning. If corruption wasn't a problem then the FBI wouldn't have put it as the second priority after Terrorism.

[Clove]

This is retarded reasoning. If corruption wasn't a problem then the FBI wouldn't have put it as the second priority after Terrorism.Retarded reasoning would be your assumption that corruption isn't a problem unless it reaches high levels. The FBI is doing their job and since they have the breadth of jurisdiction it makes them an appropriate agency to place public corruption high on their priority list.

[Clove]

I have provided cites thus far and would do so as well with any future posts. I have been pleased with this conversation thus far, even though we are in disagreement, because no one has resorted to "sandy vagina" or "you are an idiot idiot" type comments. Suggesting that I would "manufacture" numbers is insulting.

I am attempting to directly respond to your comments, and all you are doing is dodging and throwing up smoke. I asked you a very simple question to help me identify the particular "apples" you want me to compare. I also included a request for "numbers" so that we could get away from subjective phrases like "riddled". You responded to neither.

Claiming that there is not any evidence to support my claim is a ridiculous head in the sand attitude.

Not working with me and answering my questions so that I can provide direct responses is evasive.

You are completely unwilling to even entertain the thought that I may be right, or even close. This "I'm right, you're wrong and you can't prove otherwise" attitude you have taken paints a mental picture of a child with their eyes shut and their hands over their years chanting "neiner neiner neiner" so that they don't have to hear something that upsets them.I would entertain it if you had support. The IRS and FBI don't support your assertions. I'm not evasive at all, in fact I did your job for you (in all of five minutes) by pulling up the most recent three-year trend in public corruption indictments from the IRS source.

You don't seem able to entertain the possibility that you've exaggerated from the beginning of this discussion. Corruption exists; neither of us deny that, but you've elevated it to a higher proportion than it really is.

[Daniel]

That's a pretty weak rebuttal. The FBI investigates all kinds of things that are a "problem". They also choose to devote more resources to corruption than the others, like say "Child pornography" or "Human Trafficking".

I'd say that suggests that corruption is rampant enough to require those resources not that "It's safe to say that we're catching a good deal of it".

[Clove]

That's a pretty weak rebuttal. The FBI investigates all kinds of things that are a "problem". They also choose to devote more resources to corruption than the others, like say "Child pornography" or "Human Trafficking".

I'd say that suggests that corruption is rampant enough to require those resources not that "It's safe to say that we're catching a good deal of it".Or it could suggest that the FBI considers public corruption more damaging to our society at large. Or it could be that the FBI figures it has a better crack at catching corrupt politicians in this country rather than child pornography or human trafficking which tends to endure because it occurs largely offshore. Or it could be a variety of reasons; but your reasoning that because the FBI is looking harder for it, it must be a problem is- naive; but then again you're all we've come to expect of years of government training.

[Drunken Durfin]

I would entertain it if you had support. The IRS and FBI don't support your assertions. I'm not evasive at all, in fact I did your job for you (in all of five minutes) by pulling up the most recent three-year trend in public corruption indictments from the IRS source.

You don't seem able to entertain the possibility that you've exaggerated from the beginning of this discussion. Corruption exists; neither of us deny that, but you've elevated it to a higher proportion than it really is.

I am entertaining the possibility and attempting to find a common ground from which I can start pulling together numbers. I have asked you more than once to give me an exact list of what you want me to limit my statement to. You refusing to do so makes it look like you are afraid of what I might turn up once REAL research begins, not five minutes worth of searching on one website

I am tired of going in circles with you.

[Clove]

I am entertaining the possibility and attempting to find a common ground from which I can start pulling together numbers. I have asked you more than once to give me an exact list of what you want me to limit my statement to. You refusing to do so makes it look like you are afraid of what I might turn up once REAL research begins, not five minutes worth of searching on one website

I am tired of going in circles with you.It isn't my job to make your argument for you. You can pull numbers from any credible source you like. Personally I think that would have been the FBI and IRS, which has so far been provided. Information isn't your problem, it's the inability to put the information into a perspective, context or scale.

[Daniel]

Or it could suggest that the FBI considers public corruption more damaging to our society at large. Or it could be that the FBI figures it has a better crack at catching corrupt politicians in this country rather than child pornography or human trafficking which tends to endure because it occurs largely offshore. Or it could be a variety of reasons; but your reasoning that because the FBI is looking harder for it, it must be a problem is- naive; but then again you're all we've come to expect of years of government training.


That's it Clove. Resort to Ad hominem attacks when you're so obviously failing at making your point. That government line has popped up a few times recently. Have you guys come up with some sort of policy to insult me when all else fails? I'd suggest you re-think it because it's really weak.

It's idiotic to say that corruption is not a [b][i]widespread[b][i] problem when it is the second priority after terrorism, or a bigger priority than everything else that happens in this country behind terrorism.

You're right in that there are several factors that influence those priorities, but it does *not*, in any circumstances, imply that corruption is under control.

How anyone can say that in a year where several major political figures have been embroiled in scandals is beyond me, but this is just taking it a bit far don't you think? Let it go.

[Daniel]

From the FBI's Website:



"The FBI also works to combat corruption in the public sector—our top criminal priority—because, as the Director pointed out in his remarks, “democracy and corruption cannot co-exist.”

Currently, the FBI has more than 2,500 open public corruption cases, an increase of more than 50 percent since 2003. During the past two years alone, more than 18,000 public officials have been convicted.

“The FBI,” Mueller said, “is uniquely situated to address public corruption. We have the skills to conduct sophisticated investigations. But more than that, we are insulated from political pressure. We are able to go where the evidence leads us, without fear of reprisal or recrimination.”

In the end, Mueller said, “it does not matter if the corruption is national or local … if it is millions of dollars or merely hundreds. There is no level of acceptable corruption.”"

/thread

Shut the fuck up already.

[Clove]

From the FBI's Website:



/thread

Shut the fuck up already.Which pretty much supported my weak rebuttal to your weak point. The FBI isn't calling the problem rampant either, they stated (as I did) that they're the best agency for the job, and even a little bit of corruption is bad.

An average of 9,000 corruption investigations in two years when you consider the magnitude of federal, State and local government is a drop in the bucket. So if you can't bring in any evidence of widespread corruption, you can STFU as well Daniel.

[Daniel]

18,000 convictions and a 50% increase in cases is not "widespread".

Wow.

[Sean of the Thread]

I think Daniel won this argument.

[Clove]

18,000 convictions and a 50% increase in cases is not "widespread".

Wow.One would expect an increase of cases with an increase in focus. And no, it isn't wide-spread. There are over 18k police departments in the United States (corrupt police officers are included in those statistics). There 1.8 million federal employees. God knows how many State and local officials. So 18,000 convictions over two years throughout the United States is not an indication of wide-spread.

[Clove]

I think Daniel won this argument.Only because he slept through ratios in Business math. According the FBI over 15k murders occurred in the US in 2007. Murder must be rampant.

[Drunken Durfin]

It isn't my job to make your argument for you. You can pull numbers from any credible source you like. Personally I think that would have been the FBI and IRS, which has so far been provided. Information isn't your problem, it's the inability to put the information into a perspective, context or scale.

How are you still not getting it?

I was not asking you to make my argument for me. I was asking you for RULES so that I can present my argument to your satisfaction.

[Clove]

How are you still not getting it?

I was not asking you to make my argument for me. I was asking you for RULES so that I can present my argument to your satisfaction.How are you still not getting it? I already gave them to you; make apples to apples comparisons and try to keep a sense of scale. Numbers have already been provided, and I've continually pointed out that in proportion to the size of our government the number of convictions or investigations aren't alarming.

[Parkbandit]

That's it Clove. Resort to Ad hominem attacks when you're so obviously failing at making your point.

This moment of humor was brought to you by the letter H.. for HYPOCRITE.

The only way it could possibly be funnier is if I posted it.. but I'm not nearly that stupid.

[Drunken Durfin]

I give up.

[Parkbandit]

How are you still not getting it? I already gave them to you; make apples to apples comparisons and try to keep a sense of scale. Numbers have already been provided, and I've continually pointed out that in proportion to the size of our government the number of convictions or investigations aren't alarming.


Not sure I would agree with you there... the corruption is very alarming. You can argue that it isn't widespread.. if you define widespread to be the majority maybe.. but the amount of corruption in our government is very alarming.

[Keller]

This moment of humor was brought to you by the letter H.. for HYPOCRITE.

The only way it could possibly be funnier is if I posted it.. but I'm not nearly that stupid.

What amazes me is that we're still talking about this guy. Didn't the feds arrest him almost a week ago to prevent him from naming Obama's successor?

[Clove]

Not sure I would agree with you there... the corruption is very alarming. You can argue that it isn't widespread.. if you define widespread to be the majority maybe.. but the amount of corruption in our government is very alarming.It's your prerogative to be alarmed, but as I've continued to point out even at the big, scary numbers that have been posted these incidences comprise much less than 1% of the government. An indication that corruption exists; but does that really surprise you?

Most of the people you live and work with are genuine and honest, what makes you think elected or appointed officials are any different?

[TheRunt]

It's idiotic to say that corruption is not a [b][i]widespread[b][i] problem when it is the second priority after terrorism, or a bigger priority than everything else that happens in this country behind terrorism.

So terrorism is more widespread than political corruption? I think Clove had it right when he said the FBI focuses on what would do the country the most harm. Just because they focus on it doesn't mean its widespread just means it has the potential to do the most damage. To bring it down to a local level would you rather the police focus on the people selling reefer or the murderer/rapist/etc? Which one is more widespread do you think? I'm not saying political corruption isn't widespread I think quite a few politicians are corrupt myself but what I believe isn't proof and yourself or Durfin hasn't show proof that it is so.

[Sean of the Thread]

Did you really just say "reefer"?

[Daniel]

So terrorism is more widespread than political corruption? I think Clove had it right when he said the FBI focuses on what would do the country the most harm. Just because they focus on it doesn't mean its widespread just means it has the potential to do the most damage. To bring it down to a local level would you rather the police focus on the people selling reefer or the murderer/rapist/etc? Which one is more widespread do you think? I'm not saying political corruption isn't widespread I think quite a few politicians are corrupt myself but what I believe isn't proof and yourself or Durfin hasn't show proof that it is so.

I'll qualify the following statements with I'm drunk and it's 3am and I don' thave the energy to look @ real numbers, but I guarantee you that we spent more money on narcotics enforcement from 1981 to 2001 then we did anything else. That pretty much invalidates the statement you're trying to make. As for not showing proof, 18000 convictions in a 5 year period is pretty fucking widespread. I don't care if it's 1% of all employees or not, because the vast majority of these "officials" aren't even in a position to be corrupt.

[Daniel]

This moment of humor was brought to you by the letter H.. for HYPOCRITE.

The only way it could possibly be funnier is if I posted it.. but I'm not nearly that stupid.

Yea. I totally didn't see that coming. PB jumping into a thread to say some dumb shit about me. Man..you totally caught me off guard! I saw the quote in Keller's post and I thought..maybe it was directed against someone else..but man was I wrong!

[Gan]

Yea. I totally didn't see that coming. PB jumping into a thread to say some dumb shit about me.

Yea, I imagine its frustrating when someone turns your own tactic against you.

:whistle:

[Parkbandit]

Yea. I totally didn't see that coming. PB jumping into a thread to say some dumb shit about me. Man..you totally caught me off guard! I saw the quote in Keller's post and I thought..maybe it was directed against someone else..but man was I wrong!


Sorry if you don't like me calling you out Daniel. Here's an idea.. go a day without saying something retarded in the political folder and I won't have to be so meanie poo to you.

And you even posting this.. with such a rich and vibrant history of doing the same exact thing.. proves my point once again.

Lastly, does this mean you have me on ignore? That's so jpegish...

[Daniel]

Yea, I imagine its frustrating when someone turns your own tactic against you.

:whistle:

Irony.


Sorry if you don't like me calling you out Daniel. Here's an idea.. go a day without saying something retarded in the political folder and I won't have to be so meanie poo to you.

And you even posting this.. with such a rich and vibrant history of doing the same exact thing.. proves my point once again.

Lastly, does this mean you have me on ignore? That's so jpegish...


x2

And no I don't have you on ignore PB. Unlike you, I don't get my vagina all sandy when people say things on an internet board. I just read the thread last page first, like I usually do.

[Tsa`ah]

Sorry if you don't like me calling you out Daniel. Here's an idea.. go a day without saying something retarded in the political folder and I won't have to be so meanie poo to you.

And you even posting this.. with such a rich and vibrant history of doing the same exact thing.. proves my point once again.

Lastly, does this mean you have me on ignore? That's so jpegish...

:lol2: :lol2: :lol2: ....

The thought that you, of all people, calling someone out ... or even being proven correct ...

[Sean of the Thread]

Odd. I read threads from the last post backwards as well.

[Parkbandit]

The thought that you, of all people, calling someone out ... or even being proven correct ...

:lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

The thought that you, of all people, would even bring this up after being proven wrong time and time again....

Epic failure. In your words.. "You lose"

[Parkbandit]

And no I don't have you on ignore PB. Unlike you, I don't get my vagina all sandy when people say things on an internet board. I just read the thread last page first, like I usually do.

Indeed unlike me... since I don't have a vagina.

[Daniel]

Indeed unlike me... since I don't have a vagina.

Rofl.

Okay. My bad. :(

[Gan]

Irony.
Exactly