December 10, 2008
STATE AG MAY FORCE BLAGOJEVICH'S HAND.... Mulling over the various options for Rod Blagojevich's future, the most obvious possibilities boil down to resignation or impeachment.
But there's another option to consider if the other two take too long.
If Gov. Blagojevich refuses to relinquish power and avoids impeachment, Attorney General Lisa Madigan is prepared to force his hand, aides said Tuesday.
The state's chief law enforcement officer is prepared to invoke an obscure Illinois Supreme Court rule under which the state's seven justices could vote to oust a sitting governor deemed unfit for office.
"The attorney general is prepared to take action but believes the Legislature should have a reasonable time to act," Madigan spokeswoman Natalie Bauer said.
Bauer did not specify a timeline for Blagojevich to resign or for the House and Senate to act on impeachment before she would get involved.
Apparently, the state legal provisions are a little murky when it comes to language. The state Supreme Court, for example, has authority to intervene in order to determine "the ability of the governor to serve." Would the state AG be able to make the case that Blagojevich is simply unable to serve? It's potentially tricky.
All of this would be moot if the impeachment drive moves quickly, but the Chicago Sun Times noted that lawmakers are concerned about "how evidence now held exclusively and tightly by federal prosecutors could be presented to a legislative impeachment panel before a Blagojevich trial."
Increasingly, it seems obvious that Blagojevich will leave office. It's only a matter of time and mechanism.
—Steve Benen 2:20 PM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (17)
not that has (or should have) any influence on lisa madigan's actions, but it should be noted that her father, michael madigan, is the speaker of the illinois house and a long-time opponent of blago.
she's also been mentioned as a replacement for both obama and for blago (in 2010).
she's a good ag, even if she -- like so many others -- is a poster child for the nepotism rampant in illinois politics (e.g., blago, son-in-law of dick mell; deb mell, daughter of dick mell; dd stroger, son of john stroger; richie daley, son of da mare; dan lipinski, son of bill lipinski, etc, etc, ect.)
Posted by: mellowjohn on December 10, 2008 at 2:31 PM | PERMALINK
While somewhat off topic, I was wondering why no commentary on the revelation that Jessie Junior was "Senate Candidate 5" who's emissary offered Blago a half million and was willing to go as high as a million dollars to secure the seat. Is it because you're afraid to?
As I pointed at Kevin's site at MoJo, the fact that Jessie is black will keep liberals and the media from pressuring him to resign. Judging by the laughable responses to my post only confirms my point.
So let me ask you good government liberals here, do you believe that Jessie should resign from his seat in Congress based on his attempts to buy Obama's Senate seat? If he refuses to resign, would demand that the Democratic Leadership of the House expel him for bring dishonor to his office and to the House.
If Obama believes that Blago should resign based on his conduct, do you believe that Obama should publicly state that Jessie should likewise do the "right thing" and resign? After all, if Blago was wrong in trying to sell Obama's seat, isn't Jessie Junior just as wrong for trying to buy it?
Posted by: Chicounsel on December 10, 2008 at 2:37 PM | PERMALINK
Re candidate #5
If Jr really is candidate #5 then of course he should resign or be thrown from office as well as being prosecuted. We do need to be sure though meaning confirmation from Fitzgerald or the FBI.
Posted by: etrimby on December 10, 2008 at 2:49 PM | PERMALINK
Chicounsel is as blind to reality as Blago. What's to be said about JJJr until there is something substantial to comment on? He's likely #5? OK, it might be bad, it might be nothing. There, I said the obvious.
As for Blago, I doubt Madigan is seriously considering actually going through with this action. It's more to smack Blago with the reality that his time is up - now.
I don't know what's more stunning - the level of his corruption, or his blithe refusal to recognize his situation. My money has him gone by end of day Friday. Then again, he might be loopy enough to stick around longer.
Posted by: JoeW on December 10, 2008 at 2:51 PM | PERMALINK
To me, it seems like the intent of the rule is to remove people who are mentally or physically incapable of doing the job. As Rod is back at work today, I don't think that applies to him.
In case people are curious and speak legalese, here is the rule.
Plus, if they invoke this rule they hand Rod a gift for his trial: insanity plea.
I think the only clear, clean route to resolving this is a speedy impeachment. Every other suggestion I've seen is tainted.
Posted by: doubtful on December 10, 2008 at 2:54 PM | PERMALINK
Well, if the wiretap evidence already cited in the criminal complaint can be produced and verified (and hopefully corroborated), that should be more than enough to vote an aye on impeachment, n'est pas? No further evidence necessary. It's not a criminal proceeding; it's an impeachment. Different standards. You can vote to impeach just because you don't like the guy.
Posted by: Churchyard on December 10, 2008 at 2:58 PM | PERMALINK
ABC is claiming JJJ is #5, attributing it to "federal law enforcment sources". But there are too many middlemen and maybes between JJJ and the taped conversation to call for resignation yet, IMO.
Why is impeachment not the OBVIOUS choice, and why hasn't it been done today?
Posted by: Danp on December 10, 2008 at 3:01 PM | PERMALINK
So let me ask you good government liberals here, do you believe that Jessie should resign from his seat in Congress based on his attempts to buy Obama's Senate seat?
Wow, for someone who uses a moniker with "counsel" in it presumably you would know the difference between hearsay and evidence, and between allegations and libel.
Sadly, your long history here is replete with examples that refute that wishful notion.
Here's what the Feds had to say about this:
But federal officials say the recordings did not pick up any conversations with Candidate 5 or the emissary. It's important to note that this is a third-hand statement: Blagovich is repeating what he says was the emissary's description of what Candidate 5 said.
If evidence ever shows beyond a reasonable doubt that Jesse Jackson Jr was directly involved in an influence-peddling transaction then it would be appr0priate to condemn him, call for his resignation, et al.
Until such a time, you're done spreading memes here.
Posted by: trex on December 10, 2008 at 3:03 PM | PERMALINK
So let me ask you good government liberals here, do you believe that Jessie should resign from his seat in Congress based on his attempts to buy Obama's Senate seat?
I'd like some evidence first, thank you. That's the way we do things in America (the real one, not the one Bush has conjured in your imagination).
As for JESSE Jackson's race, all I can say is that race didn't much help Bill Jefferson--he was stripped of his committee assignments, he was opposed by party leaders in his post-indictment primaries (and not even supported by the party in general elections), and Democrats roundly cheered when he lost to a Republican.
No, we don't make excuses for blatant corruption. If Jackson in fact offered a bribe for this seat (which looks very possible but has not yet been proven by any means), he will face comparable consequences.
Posted by: Mike B. on December 10, 2008 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK
Bad as this is -- corrupt, nasty, insulting, wildly stupid and totally wrong -- it is refreshing in a way to see an old time kind of political scandal of personal greed instead of the horrendous crimes against the people and the ruinous, hugely destructive impact on the Constitution that we have witnessed with Bush & Co. This gives a state legislature the opportunity to "model" appropriate and indeed essential behavior when an elected official executive runs amok: impeachment. Maybe other elected officials would notice. Maybe the people would be well served and empowered, shown again that they are not entirely helpless.
Posted by: SF on December 10, 2008 at 3:13 PM | PERMALINK
As far as B-Rod picking the Obama replacement Senator: Doesn't the Senate have jurisdiction over it's own affairs to wide discretion? Couldn't they simply decide not to accept a B-Rod choice into the Senate? States decide who to offer, but the Congress has the final say, right?
Posted by: Neil B ☼ on December 10, 2008 at 3:22 PM | PERMALINK
Wow, for someone who uses a moniker with "counsel" in it presumably you would know the difference between hearsay and evidence, and between allegations and libel.
Sadly, your long history here is replete with examples that refute that wishful notion.
When one considers that chicounsel got his law degree from a gumball machine, it's no wonder that he displays his ignorance and dishonesty on a regular basis. Tell us chicounsel, have you been hit with an ARDC beef for malpractice yet?
Posted by: DJ on December 10, 2008 at 3:27 PM | PERMALINK
I like the idea of Brago being ousted by the Il Supreme Court. It's quicker than either an impeachment attempt or legislation to authorize a special election. I'm a little mystified how a special election could be authorized anyway when Brago is still the sitting Governor.
Posted by: impeachcheneythenbush on December 10, 2008 at 3:36 PM | PERMALINK
Well, some say SCOTUS ruled that Senate can only appeal based on the USC specs, see http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/12/9/162531/780. But they don't have to keep him there once he arrives, so they could say: we won't take your pick.
Posted by: Neil B ☺ on December 10, 2008 at 3:59 PM | PERMALINK
I, too, think the fact that the Senate can refuse to seat a choice made by someone under such a cloud of suspicion (he even offered to appoint the FBI agent who had handcuffed him if he'd just let him go) is a good safeguard against such a happenstance.
Thank God!
And as for anything Blago said someone else said, that's hearsay, and, unless they have tapes of him saying it, Jackson Jr. is in the clear. However, if he or a staff member actually said something stupid, and it can be proved, then that person has some 'splainin' to do.
Ed
Posted by: Ed Drone on December 10, 2008 at 4:07 PM | PERMALINK
ChiCounsel:
So let me ask you good government liberals here, do you believe that Jessie should resign from his seat in Congress based on his attempts to buy Obama's Senate seat?
Why don't you worry about the Republican war criminals running the country rather than calling for someone's resignation based on hearsay?
Jackass.
Posted by: goethean on December 10, 2008 at 4:08 PM | PERMALINK
Impeach the Hairwad!
Posted by: The Galloping Trollop on December 10, 2008 at 4:10 PM | PERMALINK