They are coming out of the wood work and stacking up in order, Let's see which one shall we take first? Rezko's three paragraph statement written from jail stating that he believed he transmitted quid pro quo from a lobbyist to a public official. Whereby the lobbyist would hold a fundraiser for the official in exchange for a favorable official action. But the public official rejected the offer. But the public official denies any such conversation. In other words Rezko bribed Obama, Obama turned him down, but Obama says it never happened? It's a he said, he said situation.
Or could it be connected to another problem. Blago has been asking for months to get notes or memo's from FBI agents who interviewed Obama after Blago's arrest. But prosecutors have told the judge they have met their legal obligation for discovery and they don't need Obama's testimony for Blago's trial. Even though there could be an aspect of Obama's testimony, whether he authorized a deal with Blago to put in Obama's friend Valarie Jarrett as replacement for his seat. The question being did Obama deputize a union official to act for him in order to fulfill Blago's demands for rewards? This I think personally is the closest to quid pro quo of all four possibilities.
Then we have Romamoff last September being offered a job by Jim Messina, White House Chief of Staff. This job was for him not to run for primary, so Micheal Bennet could run.
Last but not least we have Joe Sestak being offered a non paying position by Bill Clinton. If that makes any sense.
Perhaps President Obama wouldn't have some many problems if he hadn't offered anybody anything. The teflon kid can't keep afloat if he keeps playing these games. Eventually something is going to catch up with him and maybe it already has. Too many questions and not enough answers. Marna
No comments:
Post a Comment