Blagojevich Indictment Delayed

By TChris, Section Corruption Cases
Posted on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 11:55:18 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Patrick Fitzgerald's office filed a motion today seeking a 90 day extension of time to indict Rod Blagojevich. According to the motion (no link presently available):

The government has been conducting a diligent and thorough investigation in this case, but the investigation includes multiple defendants and potential defendants as well as thousands of intercepted phone calls, and additional factors warranting an extension of time (as cited in the government’s Attachment) exist. The government cannot complete its investigation and appropriately conclude the investigation within the time allowed under Section 3161(b) of the Speedy Trial Act as currently extended.

The juicy details in the attachment were filed under seal, keeping them from the curious public to avoid compromising the investigation. [more ...]

The motion represents that Blagojevich does not oppose the extension. That's not surprising. It would be unusual for a defendant to be anxious to be indicted, and Blago seems determined to hang onto power as long as he can. Delay only benefits that desire.

The motion also represents:

In the most recent set of Title III intercepts, thousands of phone calls were intercepted between late-October 2008 and early-December 2008. In addition, this investigation has used confidential witnesses. In addition, multiple witnesses have come forward in recent weeks to discuss their knowledge of criminal activity in relation to the ongoing investigation.

The tantalizing reference to "potential defendants" and to "multiple witnesses" coming forward "in recent weeks to discuss their knowledge of criminal activity" suggests that individuals who fear their own indictment are seeking to preempt prosecution by coming forward to rat out Blago. If that's true, there may be more accusations of wrongdoing presented to the grand jury than those contained in the original complaint.

< Blago Asked IL Rep. Danny Davis To Accept Senate Appointment Before Offering It To Burris | It's New Year's Eve >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Blagojevich Indictment Delayed | 19 comments (19 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Excellent analysis (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by Jeralyn on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:04:46 PM EST

thanks, TChris.

But on the other hand (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by Saul on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:08:38 PM EST

seems to me the more time you give Fitz to investigate the more he will have on you. If Blago knows an indictment is forthcoming any way I would want it with the least amount of ammunition against me. I thought the law said he had 30 days to bring an indictment or its over.

More time for Rezko to bargain? (none / 0) (#6)
by Cream City on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:08:34 PM EST

Rezko will need to... (none / 0) (#14)
by Salo on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:27:47 PM EST

Bargain with juicier information. He's not the only person informing on illinois democrats anymore.


: jersey or issues? (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by Fabian on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 03:02:59 PM EST

From BTD's post on partisan loyalty over issue advocacy.
The party in power is usually the one that gets into trouble. If they get into really big trouble, they can become the minority party - see Ohio 2006/2008 for example. If Mark Dann(D) had been sheltered and defended earlier this year(2008) by the Democratic governor, would the Democrats have gained as many seats as they did in Ohio?
The Ohio Republicans were ones tarred with the corruption and scandal from 2004 on. Better to preserve the contrast than to give voters a reason to think that the Democrats are no better than Republicans.

The reason an extension of time is needed (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by Peter G on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:43:30 PM EST

is that the arrest triggered a speedy trial clock. Normally the only time limit on indictment is the statute of limitations -- no problem here. It was Fitzgerald's own unusual decision to execute a pre-indictment arrest that put him under court-controlled deadlines.

Is it your opinion Fitzpatrick had (none / 0) (#5)
by oculus on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:49:54 PM EST

the Governor arrested in advance of an indictment to pressure the Governor (1) to resign and/or (2) to not make the Senate appointment? Any other reasons for the arrest?


In my silly opinion . . . (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by wurman on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:37:23 PM EST

Mr. Fitzgerald went with the high profile, much hyped arrest in order to "smoke out" the other ratz scurrying around in their dark places.

Looks as if it worked--really worked.


Well Yeah (none / 0) (#10)
by squeaky on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:00:19 PM EST

Rezko is singing again, evidentially solitary was not his thing...


Not really interested in Rezko (none / 0) (#11)
by Fabian on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:19:28 PM EST

Other elected officials - I'm all ears.

Rezko is largely a known quantity. It's the unknowns that are exciting.


Once his information... (none / 0) (#13)
by Salo on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:25:36 PM EST

Becomes less exclusive he needs to provide more dirt to fitz to be able to stay out of jail. Blago makes that price heavier for rezko. Blago must have a great deal knowledge about every deal in Chicago himself. Rezko may be force to tell more. However why the dems are joining the anti blago chorus and all that it risks is beyond my understanding.


: Sometimes (none / 0) (#15)
by Fabian on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:48:12 PM EST

it's best to cut the dead weight loose. I'm not sure that this is exactly the situation with Blagojevich, but the almost unanimous response to the indictment announcement was one of confirming what people already suspected.
So...
You have someone who isn't popular, is widely seen as a bad actor and possibly corrupt even before the indictment and people are running as fast as possible away from him. This is hardly much of a surprise. Plus Fitzgerald has a reputation of building solid cases, not engaging in wild witch hunts.
I suppose Democrats could rally round Blagojevich now and then scamper for cover later, but apparently the man doesn't inspire that kind of loyalty.

Known Quantity? (none / 0) (#17)
by squeaky on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 05:09:34 PM EST

If that were so, Fitzgerald would have left him in solitary and he would have not had his sentencing postponed indefinitely.


: We know Rezko is dirty. (none / 0) (#18)
by Fabian on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 08:03:59 PM EST

Who else is dirty that we don't know about? People greeted the Blagojevich indictment with such a lack of surprise. It's hard to imagine that Blagojevich was completely alone in cashing in on his political clout if his MO was such an open secret.
Wherever money changes hands, there will be people looking to get their cut. Just Blagojevich? All by his lonesome? Very doubtful.

wow! (none / 0) (#3)
by jedimom on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 12:13:27 PM EST

so, if Fitz is delaying, this must be why he is handing over some of the wiretap tapes to help with the impeachment, to get Blago out, Quinn in and a Senator appointed?

Is there anyone else who... (none / 0) (#7)
by EL seattle on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:22:41 PM EST

... might be getting into deeper trouble here? Or was Blagojevich a one-man tango team? If everyone winds up pointing fingers at him (and him alone) for every sort of crime, it may start to appear like he's become jiust a convenient scapegoat for a corrupt system.

This is playing out a bit suspect (none / 0) (#9)
by ericinatl on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 01:37:39 PM EST

The tapes that have been leaked so far don't indicate an actual crime was committed. Blago was arrested before an indictment. And now the indictment is delayed. It almost seems like the point was to take down Blago politically, rather than criminal prosecution.

While it's true that certain possible defendants are coming forward to avoid prosecution, it's also possible it's a lot of bluster from someone who is, after all, a Republican justice department attorney (who perhaps is trying to get back into the good graces of the Republican party, after Plamegate).

Why didn't Nixon (none / 0) (#12)
by Salo on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 02:20:34 PM EST

Simply use a us attorney to do his wire tapping of democratic politicians. What stopped him?

: Umm...probable cause (none / 0) (#19)
by ruffian on Wed Dec 31, 2008 at 09:57:47 PM EST

that the Dems had committed a crime?