Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Must-listen audio
Next Post: A pause for the cause…
Posted in:
• Press conference is over.
• Genson said he is Considering a challenge to the validity of the state’s impeachment standards in the federal courts
• “The constitution, the laws are lacking” (referring to the lack of standards beyond just 60 votes)
• “this is a real witch hunt”. (referring to the public climate not the hearings)
• “Minimum standard should be clear and convincing or even reasonable doubt”
• Genson on why he is asking for a state subsidy: He is entitled to be represented by the attorny general”
• 2:36 pm - “my client may or may not testify… He was planning to make a statement Friday but maybe not until next week…
• 2:32 pm - Genson: “What we have seen so far is insufficient… It’s just not right”
* 2:25 pm - The governor’s attorney Ed Genson is planning to hold a press conference at the Statehouse “blue room” in a few minutes. You can listen to the live stream at Springfield Public Radio’s WUIS by clicking here.
Please, confine your comments only to the press conference. We’ve got tons of threads for other stuff. Thanks.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:25 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Must-listen audio
Next Post: A pause for the cause…
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Trouble with the audio. WUIS just ended the coverage.
Comment by Mad Brown Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:32 pm
WMAQ Chicago has a video feed from the Blue Room.
Comment by Commonsense in Illinois Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:37 pm
Oh. I thought Gensen sounded like an orchestra.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:38 pm
Sam needs to stay home…
Comment by Commonsense in Illinois Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:47 pm
Since when is political fundraising within the scope of the Governor’s official duties? And although awarding appointments and contracts is within the scope of his official duties, awarding them illegally is not. The conduct alleged is far beyond any for which the AG is required to defend him.
Comment by My Kind of Town Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:47 pm
Gensen will need to do a better job than he is doing right now. This is political. Illinoians want Blagojevich out. Yet Gensen doesn’t get it, and he is presenting Blagojevich as though he is in court and a victim, instead of a powerful governor. This won’t sell.
Gensen needs a lot more straight talk without the legalese. He will need to be less combative. The more he fights, the angrier we will become. What Gensen needs to do right now is pacify those of us who want Blagojevich’s head - to turn away emotion and cut the Governor some slack for now.
But Gensen isn’t doing that. We don’t want to hear him when he does this. He is like a fish out of water, trying to defend a shark cornered by a hateful crowd.
This is going to backfire by souring our moods further, and I expect the General Assembly will catch this mood and cut him off before they get hurt by it all.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:48 pm
So the SC doesn’t hear the AG’s argument. Gensen is demanding this and that. And so what if he wins. If the Governor get off the hook for everything, so what? You cannot take back the things he said on the wiretaps. Whether they are deemed illegal or not, the Governor will never enjoy a favorable rating again, and how can you govern and have a staff of people when they won’t trust you?
I understand Gensen’s line of thinking, what he’s saying, what he’s doing…but what I don’t get is what is the Governor’s angle in continuing to be the Governor of Illinois? If Bill won’t support him as Governor, I can’t imagine who will!
And if Gensen gets his hands on ANY public funds, OMG! THAT would be a new low for Illinois.
Comment by BandCamp Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:49 pm
Witch hunt? The public feels betrayed. They don’t want him burned at the stake. They just want him to go away from the office of governor.
To me it seems Genson owns these proceedings. Why is this being allowed?
Comment by Cheswick Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:51 pm
The worst is asking for Illinoians to pay for this. Gensen is utterly tone deaf. I think Illinoians will be willing to pay for The Rope, and executioner, or a padded cell. It is a slap in the face to see a overpaid defense attorney defend a corrupt governor on our dime.
Gensen is talking smack.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:51 pm
I wonder if Rod suggested Genson’s strategy to try and get the state to pay him.
Comment by Lurker Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:53 pm
The AG is not the governor’s attorney, she is the attorney general for the PEOPLE of Illinois.
Comment by tanstaafl Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:54 pm
I suspect it doesn’t matter even Gensen’s arguments are “right” or “wrong.” What will work here — and what Gensen appears to be doing — is confusing the issue.
If there’s enough confusion around the idea of political versus legal, the air will deflate from the balloon. Blagojevich will go back to work — in the real, “I’m back at work” sense — and it really, truly, will be business as usual.
Insidious — but clever and devastatingly effective.
Comment by Macbeth Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:56 pm
Gensen is actually very smart. He realizes the mountain he must climb and so he must play every single angle available. It’s like grasping at straws. He knows this is not a criminal court, but that’s all he’s done for the last 44 years and that’s all he has so that’s how he’s going to treat it. He has absolutely nothing to lose because this thing is definitely headed to the Senate. It’s just going to take longer than everyone else in the state had hoped.
Comment by Downstate Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 2:59 pm
Great coverage. Thanks Rich. I feel dirtier now than I did when RB was arrested. A Governor (who through polling has basically zero support from his “people” in IL), through a grandstanding attorney (who wants to tie up a process for months, for what gain? oh, his own), is making Illinois the total joke of the nation. The guy on the morning video Rich gave us said something like, “what a great place to live.” He was speaking to IL/Springfield.
Smile Illinois. We’re a joke. And collectively (pointing at Chicago), we put him there…TWICE!
Comment by BandCamp Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:02 pm
Someone needs to come out for the committee and explain to the media why Gensen is full of bleep. The committee process needs to be explained in VERY simple terms and Gensen painted as the bad guy. They need to move fast before the media decides Gensen is their guy and starts promoting his cause instead.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:05 pm
In the event that Genson’s invoices are not picked up by state taxpayers, does this give him the necessary cover to drop Blago as his client? We’ve all been wondering how the guv would foot the bill for his representation, considering his well-documented financial problems.
Comment by The Doc Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:05 pm
This whole process is just a free “Choose Ed Gensen as your criminal attorney commercial.” Good for him, bad for Blago but there really isn’t anything even Clarence Darrow could do-so why not do for yourself.
Some good might come out of this mess. Illinois finally gets an honest Governor-at least for a year.
Comment by Phineas J. Whoopee Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:05 pm
There is a tradition of lawyers who are good in one context being not so good in another. Gensen is a criminal defense attorney, and you can see that in the press conference. But this isn’t a criminal proceeding, and some tactics, like arguing about the standards of proof and appealing to federal courts, are non-starters. Gensen may not have been the best choice (and may not stick around if there’s no money)
Comment by Muskrat Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:06 pm
Great smokescreen by Gensen.
This will simply illustrate the circus this matter is/will become.
It would be a travesty to require the taxpayers to pay to represent an individual who appears to be violating the public trust.
Comment by plutocrat03 Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:06 pm
He would have to take a cut in pay if he is appointed Special AG. Am I wrong? The SAG doesn’t get an unlimited funds.
Comment by He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:09 pm
Exactly right. The longer this process goes on the longer Rod stays gainfully employed. It is not inconceivable that the courts will mandate a special assistant attorney general in either the Senate or court cases or both. The court could issue a TRO on impeachment until the attorney issue is litigated. Federal court is notorious for issuing continuance after continuance. They can argue for months as the public becomes bored and tired and moves on to the next story. This could drag on for quite a while. Rod may end up out of office or in the can or both but it won’t be this month or next or the one after that.
Enjoy the show.
Comment by Bill Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:09 pm
Genson said he is Considering a challenge to the validity of the state’s impeachment standards in the federal courts.
–
Does he even understand what his histrionics imply with that claim?
Essentially, he wants to challenge the state’s Constitution, which has been upheld by the voters twice since adoption in the 70s?
Good luck. Why would Federal courts even care what goes on in a state capitol between the Legislative and Executive branch? No Federal laws are being violated by these proceedings.
…And, no, it’s not a witch hunt. It’s a governor hunt, and more than 70% of the state has its dayglo orange camo on.
Comment by Rob_N Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:11 pm
What Genson has going for him is most people aren’t going to think the politicans judging the Gov are any better.
The victim frame could work.
Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:14 pm
My advice to the committee regarding Gensen:
1.) Show that you are polite, but will not be swayed by his arguments. Prevent him from driving the agenda. Recognize his arguments as antics to confuse and force debate. Do not bite at the comments he gives. Stay focused.
2.) Ask politely if he is finished whenever he finishes a point. This will confirm that you are listening, willing to hear him, yet recognizing how he is wasting time.
3.) He wants to trip up the committee with arguments and debates. Hold your breath, remember why you are there - and let him babble without taking the bait.
4.) Get the job done. The sooner this is out of your hands, the sooner Illinoians will return to supporting each of you politically. Sorry, but right now, a lot of people hate you for what you represent. Remove that stain!
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:18 pm
VM, what Genson should not be doing is getting advice on how to best represent his client from you or any other commenter on this blog.
Comment by anon Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:22 pm
All of this is entertaining, embarrassing, electrifying - but, more importantly, it’s destroying the functioning of our state government. It’s costing us millions of dollars in increased interest rates. It’s holding up important legislation. It’s one thing to have the world (yes, the world) laughing at our state because of the governor’s actions and big hair; it’s another when, in February, we have 6 inches of snow and there’s no money to plow the state highways. Our governor’s belligerence may be both funny and annoying now, but it is creating situations for the future that will effect the well-being, even the lives, of residents of Illinois. If someone is on trial for murder, they aren’t allowed to roam the streets and commit further murders. Something has to be done to protect this state and its residents from this man, and soon.
Comment by Linda Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:26 pm
anon…pay attention. VM is giving advice to the committee, not Genson!
Comment by Fed Up State Employee Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:31 pm
The committee needs to politely (and quickly) shut him up and explain to the media that Gensen has no clue what he is doing (and the media needs to relate that to the public).
The danger is that the media will go with Gensen’s frame and completely confuse the public as to what the hearing and impeachment process is all about: determining if the Gov. has violated his oath and needs to be removed. Period. Edgar and Netch should be all over the news explaining that this is the recall provision of the State Constitution, not a trial.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:36 pm
I’d love for a bookie to lay odds on the chances of a federal court ordering a temporary restraining order on a state legislature in the middle of impeachment hearings.
While Genson, Blago Sphere and others are talking about the 6th and 14th amendments, they should remember to look at the 10th.
This is a state issue and state issue only. The feds really have no jurisdiction.
Comment by From the Sidelines Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:37 pm
==VM, what Genson should not be doing is getting advice on how to best represent his client from you or any other commenter on this blog. ==
Right.
I’ll give him bad advice then!
What Genson should do!
1.)Demand that Illinoians pay you first to show their sincerity to impeach Blagojevich - “No cash up front - you people mock me!”
2.)Claim that Blagojevich has rights - “There is a huge asterisk at the bottom of the words to the swearing in ceremony. It claims that he’s allowed to break at least two laws every year.”
3.)Claim Blagojevich is insane - “My client has the mind of a small child, raised by wolves in Grant Park!”
4.)Claim double-jeopardy - “The Governor cannot be submitted to double-jeopardy without first completing the first round of questions. Alex Trebeck will be my first witness!”
5.)Don’t change clothes, eat garlic and onions - “This committee stinks!”
6.)Make up words - “I declare this committee to be in violation of the YOUNPFOOT Conference of 1764! Damn your eyes!”
7.)Flatter the Committee - “Ms. Currie, you look like a spring flower in those mules! I’d swear they make you look twenty years younger!”
8.)Claim Obama knows everything - “I’d love to tell you the reasons Blagojevich said those things, but Barack made me promise…”
9.)Act stupid - “Huh? What? Can you repeat for me your question? I think I’m going deaf, and as incompetent as my client!
10.)Pay the off - “Listen friends, I’m sure you’d like to ask Santa for that special little something, right? My client has a direct line to the North Pole!”
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:40 pm
===Genson said he is considering a challenge to the validity of the state’s impeachment standards in the federal courts===
Eddie Genson, con-con advocate. A difference of opinion here between him and his client, it seems.
Comment by The Doc Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:43 pm
==I’d love for a bookie to lay odds on the chances of a federal court ordering a temporary restraining order on a state legislature in the middle of impeachment hearings.==
Ask Blago, maybe he’d consider taking up his old job. He does need the money, after all.
Comment by anon Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:45 pm
Gensen is doing what is called diversionary tactics. Just keep the subject matter in chaos with attention on other things. I have a lawyer friend in Alabama and he says it’s a good thing that Gensen and Blagojevich aren’t in Alabama. All the time we were talking he was laughing his a– off. Laughing stocks indeed.
Comment by WAR DOG Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:51 pm
Since when does the Gov need an atty to represent him at the hearings? He can show up and represent himself if he’s that broke.
By the way, did ya’ll catch the exchange between Careen Gordon and Genson…
Comment by Slugo Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:52 pm
So Genson happears to have no grasp of federal constituional law. This should be interesting.
On his payment issue he has two problems.
Payment for representation flows from the State Employee indmenifaction act. The Act could allow for payment of fees if the AG refused to represent. First problem, the act only applies to represenation in Civil proceedings 5 ILCS 350/2. neither impeachment nor a criminal case is a civil proceeding. Second, even if the impeachment somehow was a civil proceeding, there is no duty to represent where the act or omission which gave rise to the claim was not within the scope of the employee’s State employment or was intentional, wilful or wanton misconduct. This would pretty much cover all of the Gov’s conduct.
I would suggest Genson buy a lottery ticket to cover his fees. Somone’s going to win, and it might as well be him? besides he has a better chance of getting money that way.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:53 pm
To: Macbeth
““I’m back at work” sense — and it really, truly, will be business as usual.”
Yeah…gov goofy’s staff has been saying it’s: ‘business as usual’. You’d think they MIGHT want to re-phrase that; apparently not.
Comment by sal-says Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:53 pm
watching today made me ashamed. Madigan said he would not trample Rod’s rights, but the committee did exactly that. I’m no lawyer, but the committee and Currie looked terrible. Genson is playing to the propective Jury in a criminal case saying how unfair the General Assembly is treating him (and they are being unfair–what is the standard to impeach–they pull it out of their butt)? I’m no fan of GRod but this is a democracrty and his press conference was just saying he isn’t getting any democracy out of this group.
Comment by Sprfld Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:55 pm
Now I know that the governor is broke. If this is the best that he can get, it must be all that he can afford.
Genson has no idea what venue he is in, what rules of evidence and applicability apply, or what the State Constitution has to say about removal of a state official from office.
His appearance before the Committee and before the press today was an embarassment.
Comment by Capitol View Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:57 pm
Why do they even allow Genson in the room? I thought the House proceeding was like a grand jury and the hearing in the Senate was the trial. Why give him a free shot at slowing down the process? The Governor will have his hearing before the Senate.
Comment by Draggin' Slayer Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 3:57 pm
To Sprfld - haven’t you been paying attention the “rules” are what the committee say they are period. This is polotical process remember. The news conference was bullbleep. His own “dog & pony show”.
Comment by anon Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:16 pm
I wasn’t able to hear the press conference.
Did anyone in the media ask Genson if he sees any conflict of interest representing Blagojevich when he is a Blagojevich appointee as an IHPA trustee? (And Blago’s other lawyer Sorofsky was appointed by Blago to chair the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority) Is he collecting a paycheck from the state for that position? Any sort of reimbursement at all?
Heck, if the House wanted to they could try to bring Genson into the impeachment proceedings if the House wanted to explore the Crossland allegations about political firings at the IHPA since Genson is/was a named co-defendant on Crossland’s civil suit along with Lon Monk, Julie Cellini and others when he claimed Monk forced the IHPA trustees to fire him for political reasons.
The law suit:
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:Vx28ad-wu40J:www.bettergov.org/pdfs/crosslandsuit.pdf+crossland+blagojevich&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=10&gl=us
The old story:
http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/Maynard.Crossland.Gov.2.330156.html
Of course that would undoubtedly embarrass Tom Holbrook so I doubt the House will willingly discuss this stuff but it sure would be interesting.
Will Carl Draper be a witness in these impeachment proceedings?
Comment by hisgirlfriday Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:17 pm
What is Genson’s track record, same a Blagoof’s in court? Why would the Impeachment Commitee bow to this clown in the first place? Sounds like he’s using Blagoof tactics except there is no 25K price tag attached he wants a blank check.
Comment by Dan S, a Voter, Taxpaer & Cubs Fan Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:18 pm
Surely, this has potential for the same kind of hoopla that the (first) OJ Simpson trial had many years ago — especially if the fed versus state conflict has any teeth.
If I were a history or poly sci teacher, I’d be loving every minute of this.
Comment by Macbeth Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:21 pm
I just looked up Chutzpah in the dictionary + it said ‘Ed Gensen.’
ASking the citizens of Illinois to pay for his antics???
Maybe he’s just as ‘delusional’ as GRod. Good Match.
SHEESH!
Comment by 312 Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:22 pm
The public is used to the type of impeachment procedings we have had twice in our lifetimes (at least in mine) in Washington, where there is a standard for impeachment and where some semblance of legal procedure is used. I was in D. C. going to law school during Watergate and interned on Capital Hill. Later, my faculty advisor from that time defended Bill Clinton on the floor of the Senate. This is the type of thing the public more or less expects and Gensen is exactly right in trying to put it into that type of framework. That’s what I would do in that position. The more he makes it look like a “railroad station” the better for his client. Everyone knows the outcome is pre ordained, so you might as well go down swinging.
Comment by MikeintheSuburbs Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:22 pm
For those Genson is raising irrelevant points at these hearings, I dont think he would disagree. However, as Bill Baar stated earlier, the point is to introduce some balance into the reporting of this case. Innocent until proven guilty isnt a standard which applies to everybody except the governor. It applies to all.
Comment by anon Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:23 pm
Genson is doing what a defense lawyer does — questioning everything, challenging, obsfucating, delaying…..it’s what they do!
Comment by SouthernGirl Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:25 pm
Van Man, the advise for Gensen is priceless!
Comment by Speaking at Will Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:29 pm
No court, state or federal, is going to touch this.
Genson is following the oldest lesson in lawyership: If you have the facts, argue the facts. If you have the law, argue the law. If neither the facts nor the law support you, argue real loud!
Comment by Cogito Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:31 pm
Anon said: “Innocent until proven guilty isnt a standard which applies to everybody except the governor. It applies to all.”
For the last time, the impeachment process is not about innocence or guilt. It is a political vote on whether or not to remove the governor from office. It has no bearing on the federal case against him. No one need argue whether he is guilty of anything. All that needs to occur is a vote on his removal from office. No cause, no recourse if it is “unfair.” It’s politics in its purest form.
No due process. No rights whatsoever. It is a straight up-or-down vote in both chambers, with 2/3 of the Senate required to vote for his removal.
Like the ridiculous special election bill, this circus in Springfield has been poorly managed from its late inception. Call the question already and get this to the Senate.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:34 pm
From all the world wide headlines concerning the Supreme Court throwing out the case against him, the Governor was a big winner today.
Comment by True Observer Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:39 pm
for a lawer, this is what is called a “can not lose” situation. I hope Rod loses the millions he screwed others for to a lawyer…oh, sweet justice.
Comment by You Go Boy Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 4:52 pm
If Blago appointed Gensen to a board, did he give the standard $25K or was that waived in lieu of future representation? If the latter, Rod has already blown through the $25K, thus Gensen has to ask the state to pony up.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 5:20 pm
All of this is just fine with me. The more Blago and Gensen try to smear the Fed’s it just may make Fitz a bit more zealous when bringing up future charges. Even if this episode goes away for Rod, which it won’t, there are still 4-5 years of other stuff the Fed’s are working on. I would not want a PO’ed, energized Fitz gunning for my behind.
Comment by Big Mama T Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 5:54 pm
I believe it is legally possible for a State Constitution to be unconstitutional under the U S Constitution. Therefore, federal courts could have jurisdiction.
Whether the impeachment process is civil. criminal, or political, I don’t think its a far stretch for the Governor to expect and ask for due process. It might be hard to argue that a paid public official doesn’t have a property interest in their job.
If Genson can convince the world of Law and Order watchers that certain minimum stsndards must be met, then he will have changed the question that is beibg debated.
For all you “hurry up and hang him” advocates, I suspect thie is exactly why Madigan is being so careful. With no strict rules for how it should be done, do it carefully, methidically and fairly.
Comment by steve schnorf Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 6:13 pm
The outcome of the House Impeachment hearings was decided well before the committee was even formed. Ed Genson knew this before he came to Springfield. His strategy is not to prevail in this matter, but rather to illustrate the lack of fairness of the House process despite his best efforts. I’m amused by the commentators who want to give him strategic advice on how to better win over the committee. He doesn’t expect to win. Instead he expects to be repeatedly rebuffed. “Witch Hunt”, “Kangaroo Court”, “farce”, etc….he’ll use whatever rhetoric he can to swing public sentiment a little back in the Governor’s favor. The real impeachment trial will be in the Senate and he’s laying a foundation to improve his chances in that chamber.
Comment by Budget Watcher Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 6:13 pm
They are going to hand this issue to the Senate and the Senate will try it, Genson or not. In the meantime, as Sal said, agency directors and the Rod regulars are starting to get a second wind. Rod, after all, is going to win this and they’ll make everyone pay for this PR lynching.
Forget about the concrete magnate’s cooperation, Rezko’s cooperation, Kelley’s change of heart and all the folks who are coming forward to talk to the feds. Rod’s been railroaded, he’s still the guy, his field operation is still better than anyone elses and he’s 2for2!
At least, that’s what seemed to be circulating among his folks today. Hoffman and Brandon Phelps may even recant their calls for him to resign! Just you watch
Comment by Ms Port Belly Mushroom Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 6:50 pm
My comment comes in the form of a question to the Governor’s attorney: During the press conference Atty. Genson stated, that a number of snippets of conversation over several months shouldn’t be enough to offer an impeachment hearing. Atty Genson, please tell us then how many actions recorded that reflect inappropriate conversation and/or possible misdeads/actions should the citizens of Illinois need to be subjected to….hundreds, thousands, how many, before such action is warranted. My opionion is that any one of the actions that we have been provided with regarding the Governors own recorded words should be enough to warrant further review. Simply because the Governor hasn’t been brought to impeachment status in the past, doesn’t mean his actions didn’t earn it…only that the Legislators were in fact attempting to do their duties correctly, ethically, and as responsible citizens and politicians themselves. Please try to remember Atty. Genson,you are not in a court of law and grandstanding and pontificating before the committee will not sway them in carrying out the duty set before them. As a final note, no Atty. Genson, I do not believe that the citizens of Illinois should have to pay you to represent the Governor, as you have said this is going to be “fun” the representing of the Governor….great, enjoy yourself, but not on our dime…do it pro bono and have all the “fun” you want. With the financial situation the the State of Illinois currently finds itself in…closing historic sites and State parks…of which tourism is the number 2 income revenue generator…I feel that the citizens of Illinois have been abused enough.
Comment by Sbear Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 7:14 pm
People seem to forget that Rod has pulled a number of illegal actions for which he could have been impeached. Remember his expansion of health care, making up his own procedures regarding legislation telling JCAR to stuff it, etc., etc. If you think that this impeachment will be only about what he was arrested for think again.
Comment by Big Mama T Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 7:24 pm
Steve Schnorf is right that the US Constitution, with its due process clause, can trump state constitutions. However, it’s important to identify what process is due for impeachment.
We’ve been saying that impeachment is political, not judicial. That’s ture, but it’s probably better to think of it as a legislative matter. There’s very little due process in legislative matters — the GA does not have to notify every affected party before it passes a law, for example.
As a result, I don’t think that a federal court would even consider intervening in this impeachment, especially for the reasons Genson claims. Federal courts strike down state laws all the time, but that’s based on the substance of the law, not the process. For most part, courts will not review legislative procedure. And the questions raised by Genson are all about procedure.
Comment by the Other Anonymous Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 7:54 pm
VM - Please, PLEASE, send a copy of your recommendations to the members of the committee.
You are, as usual, right on the money. And Anon -
to quote our fearless leader, RM, “Bite (us all).”
Comment by Disgusted Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 8:07 pm
I hope Genson does go to federal court, and the case gets appealed. I would love to see what Easterbrook or Posner would do to him.
Any lawyer familiar with the federal 7th Circuit knows Genson is either ignorant about them or bluffing.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 8:13 pm
There is no requirement anywhere that impeachments be upheld by a standard of proof of beyond a reasonable doubt (the criminal standard), nor even by clear and convincing evidence. Most constitutions do not specify a burden of proof standard.
Further, the removal from office is not the same as a criminal conviction. It is more akin to an employer firing an employee. Although a governor has more rights to his employment than an ordinary employee (Illinois is an at-will employment state), he does not have a right to that employment that is supported by a particular legal standard of proof. The evidence merely has to satisfy the senate that it is sufficient to convict, once the House files articles of impeachment.
There is no way that a federal court will stop the impeachment process in order to protect Blago. This would border on the frivolous, and Genson should use caution before filing such a motion in federal court.
Comment by Cowgirl Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 8:15 pm
47th ward — i want to say that you made my point, but, stopping short, i’ll say that you missed my point. I dont disagree with your points. This isnt a court of law. However, Genson just began to try this in the court of public perception. The governor has been getting pummeled for 8 days. People know that there are two sides to every story, but its hard to remember that when you are being force fed one side without balance.
Its not about procedure, or how BFC showed Genson how she can run a committee with a iron fist. Its about calling into question the fairness of the process for all to see. Today is the beginning of the deceleration of this whole thing. For those of you who think that we will ring in the new year with Governor Quinn, I suggest that you temper your expectations.
Comment by anon Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 9:48 pm
“The constitution, the laws are lacking”
Well…
We can agree on that.
The IL Const. is a floater (and not a Baby Ruth floater either)
Comment by Bruno Behrend Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 10:29 pm
OMG!!! Bruno Behrend and Steve Schnorf agree on something!!!
I believe it is legally possible for a State Constitution to be unconstitutional under the U S Constitution. Therefore, federal courts could have jurisdiction.
Nothing would be more delicious than a “Federally Mandated Constitutional Convention.”
Call it the “Banana Republic Exception.”
I agree with Blagojevich on almost nothing. But if, through some fluke of partial credit and genetic mutation, he brought down this awful Constitution, he will have performed a service for mankind. (not to mention Illinois)
Comment by Bruno Behrend Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 10:38 pm
Genson stands to lose a good portion of money if he cannot protect Governor Blagojevich’s job. Expect a fight.
Comment by Gabriel Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 10:52 pm
Genson’s just winging it and playing for the cameras to sway public opinion (good luck with that) and potential future clients (free advertising).
I’m glad I don’t cover courts any more. You’ve never seen such scenery-chewing bad acting as you do with an unprepared lawyer or one who doesn’t have a case. Even in bench trials.
Is there a Bad Acting Class in law school?
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Dec 17, 08 @ 10:58 pm
Thank you to Emil Jones for not letting the bill come to a vote so the citizens of Illinois could have recalled a louse like Rod on their own. We, the citizens, could have thrown this rat out without the legislature becoming involved. God, I feel like throwing up. I’ve lived in Illinois for over 50 years. I really don’t like being here anymore.
Comment by Jechislo Thursday, Dec 18, 08 @ 12:38 am
“Genson on why he is asking for a state subsidy: He is entitled to be represented by the attorny general”
Told ya. I asked this question repeatedly last week and if it was answered, I was called stupid.
Comment by Nick Ponton Thursday, Dec 18, 08 @ 1:53 am
I think Genson knows he is going to lose the impeachment, his goal is probably to drag it out as long as he can to allow Rod to draw pay as long as he can and to raise enough dust to cast a taint on the fairness of the jury when the REAL trial comes about and Rod’s freedom is on the line instead of just his job.
Comment by Honest Abe Thursday, Dec 18, 08 @ 8:31 am
Why is Rod fighting this. I thought he wanted out ?
Comment by Maggie Thursday, Dec 18, 08 @ 8:34 am
Nick, I answered this question earlier in the thread withotu cast aspursions on you.
Although the theory has no legal support or good faith rational, I will leave it to you to select the adjective to describe the point.
Comment by Ghost Thursday, Dec 18, 08 @ 8:35 am
Honest Abe, if Genson were looking to drag this thing out, I think his strategy may backfire. MJM is not the sort to make impulsive decisions and welcome a broad range of outsider opinions on how the Illinois House should conduct its business. Among the legislators there is a similar distaste for lectures by outsiders, especially lectures that suggest serious wrongdoing on behalf of those who want impeachment. The articles will be in the Senate by Christmas.
Comment by Quizzical Thursday, Dec 18, 08 @ 8:43 am
I found this on a website concerning the U.S. Constitution on impeachment (note the last sentence):
” . . . impeachment is simply the process by which the individual can be charged with an offence - they are innocent until proven guilty. And it also doesn’t mean that they will be removed from office. It simply means that they will face a formal trial in the Senate.
Impeachment proceedings can be brought for any offence - there is no requirement in the Constitution that it can only be for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors”; these are merely the circumstances under which removal from office is obligatory - although, because the process is so cumbersome and time-consuming, it is rarely used and is limited to “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors”.
The whole business of impeachment gave those writing the Constitution no end of headaches. There was a strong voice saying that it was unwise to allow the President to be impeached, because it would make him too dependent on the (partisan) legislature, particularly as, at that time, they were the people that elected him in the first place. But Benjamin Franklin disagreed, suggesting that impeachment was better than the alternative - assassination! His view prevailed, although they further struggled over the wording of the conditions for removal from office - in the first draft, it was “neglect of duty, bribery, maladministration and corruption”.”
Comment by Captain Flume Thursday, Dec 18, 08 @ 8:50 am
==MJM is not the sort to make impulsive decisions and welcome a broad range of outsider opinions on how the Illinois House should conduct its business.==
If MJM thought he had a choice on this matter then he’s incredibly foolish.
Comment by Gabriel Thursday, Dec 18, 08 @ 8:51 am
GirlFriday: Sorosky is an unpaid appointee of the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority board. He’s the chairman. All board members are unpaid. Ironically, the previous chairman Peter Bensinger got $25k for the position but when blago took office, he eliminated the funding.
Comment by Lurker Thursday, Dec 18, 08 @ 9:06 am