Cooperators in Blagojevich Probe

If you are just getting home from work, the transcript of Patrick Fitzgerald's press conference is available here.

The complaint (pdf) says the latest phase of the Blagojevich investigation began in early October, 2008 with information from "Individual A." The wires and bugs were in by October 21, 2008. The wiretap of Blagojevich's home phone went up on October 29. The details of the fruits of the wires and bugs and information received from Individual A begins on page 28.

The Complaint says Individual A is a subject but not a target, someone hoping for immunity and is associated with the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board. Individual A gave information about Fundraiser A, who is the chairman of Friends of Blagojevich.

Is Individual A John Wyma? I suspect so, because his lawyer says Wyma didn't wear a wire talking to Blagojevich and Fitz says in the complaint Individual A refused to have his conversations recorded. More indications this may be correct here.

Anyone else have any ideas on who the other little people are -- the fundraisers, advisors, etc? (We ran down the Senate Candidates here.)As for Rezko, his deal with Fitz may have fizzled. [More...]

Last week, he filed a motion with the court asking for a quick sentencing. Fitz said today his information differed from other witnesses, which as I mentioned in a comment earlier, makes him less valuable to the government. The Judge has set his sentencing for Jan. 6.

< No Sacred Cows | Monday Evening Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    That wire tap certainly went well! (none / 0) (#1)
    by Fabian on Tue Dec 09, 2008 at 06:46:11 PM EST
    Oct 29?

    Wonder how long they can use it before they have to renew the authorization?

    renewal (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by jedimom on Tue Dec 09, 2008 at 08:12:33 PM EST
    in the presser they said they renewed it mid November no?

    wiretaps are good for 30 days (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Dec 10, 2008 at 12:29:25 AM EST
    and can be renewed for additional 30 day periods upon applications to the judge for extensions, accompanied by affidavits, which include the results obtained so far.

    The complaint says a few of the wires/bugs were renewed.


    useless now (none / 0) (#2)
    by txpublicdefender on Tue Dec 09, 2008 at 06:57:52 PM EST
    I don't think it matters how long they can use it at this point since its disclosure makes it pretty much useles.  Of course, who knows?  It sounds like Blago was still using the phones to talk about calling off bribe offers even after the newspaper disclosed that he had been surreptitiously recorded.  He's not the sharpest knife in the drawer, to be sure.

    FWIW, I think a wiretap usually has to be renewed every 30 days, but it's been a while since I did any practice in federal criminal court.


    I figured you (none / 0) (#4)
    by Fabian on Tue Dec 09, 2008 at 07:09:22 PM EST
    can't just get a court order once and continue indefinitely.

    I just remembered that X-Files where Mulder is stuck in a cubicle monitoring a wiretap that made Beavis and B_tthead sound like intellectuals.  


    Seems like they got enough from Rezko (none / 0) (#3)
    by ruffian on Tue Dec 09, 2008 at 06:59:00 PM EST
    to dig heavily into that Health Facilities Planning Board that he liked to use to steer contracts to his pals. Something to watch - who is on that board, and how did they get there?

    Re who's on that board (none / 0) (#8)
    by andrys on Wed Dec 10, 2008 at 05:56:12 AM EST

    This is written by someone who does meticulous research work but can come to conclusions prematurely though people can judge for themselves what to take with a grain of salt.  She was an Obama supporter but has been on a tear about his Chicago activities for about half a year, I think.

      While I know this is not likely a welcome page for reading here, a lot of this will eventually be known (for what it's worth, if anything) because Fitzgerald is now focusing on this board and one other one, and it'd be better if we were ahead of the curve.  


    We need change on picking a senator (none / 0) (#6)
    by Saul on Tue Dec 09, 2008 at 09:31:40 PM EST
    when there is a vacancy for whatever reason in every state.  I say you must have a special election in each state.   This bit that a governor has the only say so in choosing someone that maybe none of the people want anyway is B@#@#it

    The people should be the only ones that get to pick their senator.  

    Good point (none / 0) (#9)
    by Slado on Wed Dec 10, 2008 at 04:25:42 PM EST
    17th Amendment states...

    When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of each State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

    This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

    I'd say this has as much chance of passing as a change to the electoral college.