If convicted, I think Rezko is a big problem for the Illinois Governr Rod Blagojevich. I don't think the trial has affected Barack Obama. As I maintained since before the trial started, and now is the case, Obama's and Rezko's relationship was not an issue in the charges against Rezko.
Chicago Sun Times reporter Mark Brown reports that even though Obama emerged unscathed from the Rezko trial, a conviction is likely to have a negative effect on him in November if he is the nominee. Here's why:
Rezko is still every bit as much a problem for Obama as when this trial started in early March, just not more so, which seemed the stronger possibility back then.
....In the first place, Obama would have to play the renunciation game again, having failed to completely turn against Rezko the last time he was given an opportunity to do so.
Back on March 14 when Obama visited the Sun-Times' editorial board to put to rest lingering questions about their dealings, Obama was asked if he still considered Rezko a friend.
"Yes," he answered, "with the caveat that, obviously, if it turns out the allegations are true, then he's not who I thought he was. And I'd be very disappointed with that." Obama even said he was "saddened" for Rezko and his family.
Brown continues with some advice for the Obama team:
At that very same interview, though, Obama was also still deferential to his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and we know how quickly that changed.
Obama's advisers might want to start working up some stronger language now, unless he just wants to recycle the "outrageous . . . appalling . . . offensive . . . inexcusable" that he used when he set Wright adrift last week.
The prosecution never brought out in the trial, as it alleged in pre-trial filings, that some of the allegedly dirty money raised through Rezko ended up in Obama's campaign coffers. That's good for Obama. I also think the testimony about Obama attending a fundraiser for Auchi is a non-issue for Obama. Brown ends with the caveat:
Given the overly-secretive way that U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve runs her trials, there always exists the possibility that she has made and sealed some yet-to-be-revealed ruling that kept Obama-related testimony out of the trial. Sooner or later, that could still come out.
Brown lists the times Obama's name came out at the Rezko trial, saying he thinks he got all of them, but he did miss this one. While it's not about misconduct by Obama, it does show he's worked with lobbyists in the past to push for legislative action.
Rezko most likely will be a blip on the radar screen for Obama. But, if Rezko's convicted and if Obama is the nominee, I suspect McCain's allies, particularly 527 groups, will try to wrap up Wright and Rezko in a tidy package with a bow tie to show Obama lacks judgment and there's a pattern of it.
As I wrote here:
Obama says voters who are concerned about his judgment should view his involvement with Rezko as "a mistake in not seeing the potential conflicts of interest."
Obama says despite his mistakes (engaging in personal real estate deals with someone under criminal investigation who was a contributor to his multiple campaigns for public office and involved in politics -- and his failure to spot the potential conflicts of interest) voters should "also "see somebody who is not engaged in any wrongdoing . . . and who they can trust."
I think that's a fair statement of what voters should ask themselves. For me, I see someone who is not engaged in any wrongdoing, but the trust issue gives me pause.
In other words, it's fair to ask whether whether he's too naive and whether personal loyalties might again impair his judgment on some issue.
As for me, I'm hoping for Rezko acquittal. It would be a resounding rejection of the Government's use of snitch witnesses. The Government offered Stuart Levine a sentence reduction from guidelines of life in prison down to 67 months in exchange for telling the truth (the truth according to the Government, of course)about Rezko.
From life in prison to 67 months, and all he has to do is tell the truth -- the Government's truth -- that Rezko was a crook too.
Levine sounds like a disgusting, pathetic, broken man. The Government, in propping him up to bring down Rezko, is stooping to his morally bankrupt level.
The other key witnesses against Rezko, like Ali Ata, also got sentencing breaks in exchange for their testimony against Rezko.
As to the Sun Times report that Judge may not agree to a reduction to 67 months for Levine, she can't give him more without allowing him to withdraw his guilty plea and go to trial himself. The plea agreement (pdf)was under Rule 11 [c][1][c], meaning:
The plea agreement provides for a Rule 11©© agreed-upon sentence of 67 months. (See paragraph 22 on page 53.) Should the judge not agree and want to give him more, he gets to take his plea back.
Rezko's lawyer, Joseph Duffy, will either start his closing argument mid afternoon today or tomorrow.
All of TalkLeft's Rezko coverage is available here.
