Strong r’s. A’s flat almost to the point of becoming long vowels. Spit coming out on terminal t’s.
That’s as good a Chicago accent as I’ve seen a national show do.
I still remember the McDonald’s radio ad from a few years back that tried to present a New York accent, complete with dropped r’s, as a Chicago working class accent.
I know this is going to get me dumped on, but as an attorney I cannot help myself. Telling someone you are going to do something illegal is not illegal. I think they are going to have to produce evidence on the actual demands made to the senate candidates themselves, not the conversations of Blagojevich saying what he was going to do to an advisor.
I’ve been looking at the statutes and some case law. In some drug cases, a person does not have to take that extra step, the talk can be enough to amount to conspiracy, but absent that, it appears to me at this point that something more than talk has to be shown for a conviction. I’m not saying this to defend Blagojevich. I’m pissed off as the next guy at him because he’s more than distracting from the real important work that has to get done by Obama and the Congress, he’s actually hindering it. However, there are others mentioned in that affidavit by code name. First, since when do we indict people in the court of public opinion that way. We do now, but there’s no legal precedent for it in our history and no statutory or constitutional authority for it. It reminds me of that extra-legal practice of naming people “persons of interest”. The newsmedia love it, but it’s not legal. Second, being mentioned in someone else’s conversation is not evidence they had anything to do with anything. People are not being careful on that issue and it will be damaging to Democrats in future elections and needlessly so. Third, trash talk is not a crime. It looks to me like they’ll be able to get him on the Tribune and Cubs stuff, and maybe candidate 5, if they can prove that he or his advisors actually had conversations with candidate 5, but all the trash talk with advisors, I’m sorry, that alone is not conspiracy. That being said, they might have more evidence or get in before trial or plea. I’ll also note that there are only two counts and the complaint is only two pages. The rest is in the affidavit. They want folks to know it is 78 pages long, but that’s a political stunt. It’s a two count complaint. They might be right, but they still are fishing here except for the Tribune and Cubs incidents. I commented here because I am very surprised at Rachel Maddow, for whom I have scads of respect, that she played this little game and did not explain what I’ve just explained here. Democrats have to wise up here or IL will turn red based on on bad information and bad law by 2010.
Well, even if Blago doesn’t get convicted, he’s a thorough sleaze, grossly unpopular (70% DISapproval rate in Illinois currently) and Fitz has saved us Illinoisans from having a Blago-clone put in as Senator. I think that’s why Fitz jumped when he did — Obama said back in June he’d keep Fitz in place, so Fitz knew he had plenty of time. So even if this rough-draft complaint isn’t enough, I’m profoundly grateful, even if Blago walks. (PS He won’t -there’s 4 years of stuff against him, Levine’s been talking, and Rezko was about to…the grand jury’s going to hear a whole lot more than those 76 pages)
And I’m a Democrat! Imagine what the Republicans are saying. Now, suppose JJJr’s “emissary” was his dad…
December 10th, 2008 at
[...] there was some administrative (Blago)glitch last election – and after an unnecessary delay, Lieutenant Governor Pat Quinn finally gets [...]
December 10th, 2008 at
Strong r’s. A’s flat almost to the point of becoming long vowels. Spit coming out on terminal t’s.
That’s as good a Chicago accent as I’ve seen a national show do.
I still remember the McDonald’s radio ad from a few years back that tried to present a New York accent, complete with dropped r’s, as a Chicago working class accent.
December 10th, 2008 at
I know this is going to get me dumped on, but as an attorney I cannot help myself. Telling someone you are going to do something illegal is not illegal. I think they are going to have to produce evidence on the actual demands made to the senate candidates themselves, not the conversations of Blagojevich saying what he was going to do to an advisor.
December 10th, 2008 at
I think it’s a reasonable point Ellen Beth–that said, they didn’t release everything and this is all from the last month and a half.
December 10th, 2008 at
I’ve been looking at the statutes and some case law. In some drug cases, a person does not have to take that extra step, the talk can be enough to amount to conspiracy, but absent that, it appears to me at this point that something more than talk has to be shown for a conviction. I’m not saying this to defend Blagojevich. I’m pissed off as the next guy at him because he’s more than distracting from the real important work that has to get done by Obama and the Congress, he’s actually hindering it. However, there are others mentioned in that affidavit by code name. First, since when do we indict people in the court of public opinion that way. We do now, but there’s no legal precedent for it in our history and no statutory or constitutional authority for it. It reminds me of that extra-legal practice of naming people “persons of interest”. The newsmedia love it, but it’s not legal. Second, being mentioned in someone else’s conversation is not evidence they had anything to do with anything. People are not being careful on that issue and it will be damaging to Democrats in future elections and needlessly so. Third, trash talk is not a crime. It looks to me like they’ll be able to get him on the Tribune and Cubs stuff, and maybe candidate 5, if they can prove that he or his advisors actually had conversations with candidate 5, but all the trash talk with advisors, I’m sorry, that alone is not conspiracy. That being said, they might have more evidence or get in before trial or plea. I’ll also note that there are only two counts and the complaint is only two pages. The rest is in the affidavit. They want folks to know it is 78 pages long, but that’s a political stunt. It’s a two count complaint. They might be right, but they still are fishing here except for the Tribune and Cubs incidents. I commented here because I am very surprised at Rachel Maddow, for whom I have scads of respect, that she played this little game and did not explain what I’ve just explained here. Democrats have to wise up here or IL will turn red based on on bad information and bad law by 2010.
December 10th, 2008 at
oops, forgot to mention, I am not talking about the Rezko stuff in my comment. They clearly have more than trash talk among advisors there.
December 10th, 2008 at
Well, even if Blago doesn’t get convicted, he’s a thorough sleaze, grossly unpopular (70% DISapproval rate in Illinois currently) and Fitz has saved us Illinoisans from having a Blago-clone put in as Senator. I think that’s why Fitz jumped when he did — Obama said back in June he’d keep Fitz in place, so Fitz knew he had plenty of time. So even if this rough-draft complaint isn’t enough, I’m profoundly grateful, even if Blago walks. (PS He won’t -there’s 4 years of stuff against him, Levine’s been talking, and Rezko was about to…the grand jury’s going to hear a whole lot more than those 76 pages)
And I’m a Democrat! Imagine what the Republicans are saying. Now, suppose JJJr’s “emissary” was his dad…