Obama's House of Cards Already Falling Apart

The Policy Project ^ | 11 December 2008 | Patrick gibson

[NorthShoreGibby]

Last night, Fox News in Chicago was already reporting that Rahm Emmanuel personally met with the governor "on several occasions" to discuss the patronage Senate seat being vacated by Obama. This is getting very sticky already. There are already many cracks in Obama's story, and rumors range from suggestions of his complicity and knowledge to suggestions that his camp blew the whistle on the Blagojevich crime spree. Was the crime stopped before it had an opportunity to implicate Obama? (video)

[sarasota]

Keep posting this with the link you provided above!

[Zevonismymuse]

Keep posting this with the link you provided above!

Here we go:

Tell Blago to Stand Strong

[romanesq]

The law says that intent is sufficient for conviction so Blago is going to be in trouble anyway.

[Kevmo]

Obama’s House of Cards Already Falling Apart
***and none too soon.

[D-fendr]

If you have knowledge of a felony - solicitation of a bribe for example - you have to notify the authorities. THAT’S Obama’s problem.

[SalukiLawyer]

If you have knowledge of a felony - solicitation of a bribe for example - you have to notify the authorities.

You can't lie to investigators if you talk to them, or actively hide evidence (obstructing justice) but I'm not aware of a general requirement to inform (with certain exceptions like mandated child abuse reporters). What are your thoughts on this?

[roses of sharon]

BUMP, BECAUSE I LIKE THE HEADLINE.

[Arizona Carolyn]

I have no doubt they called this thing before it got any deeper, likely because it was getting dangerous for Obama. Question is, who in the Chicago district is perhaps not fully onboard with Fitzgerald and compromising his investigation?

[Henchster]

"I think an Obama supporter in either the Justice Dept or the FBI tipped off the Obama camp before they made a deal with Blago."

BINGO! We have a winner. Tell me this timeline is just coincidence:

Fitzpatrick gets wiretap subpoena from Federal judge. Gets tons of juicy data including the Obama team trying to setup a deal.

Federal judges are the dominion of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Our friend Patrick "Leaky" Leahy, a proven squawkbox of confindential information, meets with Obama's future AG appointee Eric Holder. Leahy leaks to Holder that a Federal judge has authorized a wiretap of Blago.

Holder informs Obama and guess what? In the next 24 hours, the Obama camp pulls back from Blago, the story is leaked to the press, and Obama's pick Jarret starts claiming she never wanted the job.

The next day Blago is arrested because Fitz realizes his investigation has been compromised by "someone."

My guess is Fitz is REALLY pissed off and if you thought Scooter got a whipping, wait until he finds out who blew his stakeout.

[D-fendr]

IANAL, I’ll defer to you.

Here’s a statue that was posted on other threads. Appreciate your opinion:

18 US Code Sect.4 - Misprison of Felony- Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

[classified]

Gosh! I feel more sorry for the leaker than Obama! He has to be sitting around now, thinking how could I be sofaking stupid! $HIT!!!!!

[Henchster]

You thought the Plame leaker pissed Fitz off, just THINK of the troops he’s deploying to seek out and hose down whoever leaked this, and the timeline sure points to “Leaky” Leahy.

[classified]

Yes well the leak here intentionally derails Fitz’s investigation. This really pisses him off. Fitz in the Plame case found out early on, who leaked her name, but continued to persue the case to get someone in the administration on something. That ended up being Libby. I hope he is truely going to persue this investigation all the way to the top.

[SalukiLawyer]

I just cracked my Federal Criminal Code and Rules, and, sure enough, your cite is correct on misprison of felony, right on page 497. I guess I have missed that because I have never seen such a charge ever brought in my 20 years of criminal practice. We've all see the feds get testy when someone lies to them in the course of investigation, however (e.g. Martha Stewart).

So you're at a party and someone sells a quantity of crack. You leave, shaking your head in disgust. Next day the FBI comes and arrests you because you didn't report it? So you're right and I was wrong. Thanks for teaching me something new. (I still don't know if a real prosecution would be brought on that alone, though. I'm thinking it might be a more defensible case than most.)

[D-fendr]

Thanks for your reply. It’s very helpful to hear from the real world, I just got the statute from another thread.

Again, IANAL, but I would think that criminal investigations on the federal level of political office holders has it’s own set of rules and complications - and in Chicago no less.

It may be that politics matters almost as much as the laws, and affect what is applied where. Also, the possible PR hit of media discussions with “legal experts” on whether “there may have been violations of statutes” carries its own penalties.

thanks again..