Pre-Inaugaration FBI Investigation

What is the record for the shortest amount of a time from a presidential election to the first time that the victor finds himself tied up in a Federal investigation? I admit that I don't actually know the answer to that question, but I would guess that a month before inauguration would probably be pretty close to the number one spot.



Let's start with the Gov. Blagojevich scandal. By this time I hope that everyone has at least a little understanding concerning the Gov. Blagojevich. The Gov. attempted to trade the Senate seat vacated by Barack Obama either for favors or cold hard cash. The FBI obtained a wire tap warrant from a Federal judge and recorded multiple conversations. So, other than the fact that Barack Obama used to fill this particular senate seat how is he connected to the whole investigation?



Well it is common for a politician who has vacated a seat due to a new election to speak with those who are in charge of filling his vacant seat. That much is normal. However a look into the Chicago politics has revealed a world where vacancies and cabinet positions can be bought. It is truly a sad day. Now the real question in the all talk is did Barack Obama know about any conversations between his cabinet and Blagojevich? If so did they know that Bagojevich was attempting to sell the seat?

Mr. Obama's initial response was that he had never had any conversations with the governor about his Senate seat. This comment from the beginning is suspicious since, as previously mentioned, it is common for the this type of conversation to occur. Shortly after the elections an Obama aid was on the evening news discussing how he knew for certain that Obama had talked with the Governor. Finally, weeks after the this story first broke, we know for certain that Rahm Emmanuel discussed the issue with some in the governor's office or staff. So what does this really mean? There are actually a few possibilities.

1) After spending months preaching about "Change" that everyone could believe in, Pres. Elect Obama filled his staff with a bunch of DC insiders who far from being different are actually old Clinton administration members. So this would be business as usual for Rahm Emmanuel, the man who once sent a pollster a dead fish because he did not like the results of a poll that he published.

2)Guilt by participation. Now we see that the people that the media refused to investigate last year in connection with Obama's presidential campaign are coming back to produce scandals before the inauguration even occurs. People like Rezko and Blagojevich. Now let's not put too much stock in everybody that Obama hangs out with, forms political coalitions with in the state Senate or has help with his fund raising. Just because Rezko has been convicted of selling positions and contracts in order to get campaign funds for other people doesn't mean that he did it for Obama right.

3) A terrible pattern of lies. Perhaps Obama just forgot that he had given Rahm Emmanuel a list of potential people to fill his vacancies, or maybe Rahm just made it up, but what I really see here is a pattern. It appears that Obama's typical reaction when confronted about a relationship or friend that may cause his political backlash is to lie and feign ignorance. I will set up the examples that illustrate this pattern for you.

A) During his campaign Obama is confronted concerning comments made by his pastor Jeremiah Wright. Obama's initial reaction was to say that he had never heard Reverend Wright say those kind of things. Eventually Obama "left" the church because of the degrading comments that he had just become aware his pastor had been making for the entire 20 years that he sat in the congregation.

B) William Ayers. Interestingly enough when reporters began talking about Obama's relationship with the unrepentant terrorist William Ayers, once again Obama's initial response was, well that happened when I was 8, how was I supposed to know that he was a terrorist?

C) Blagojevich. Here we are now. Really, Gov. Blagojevich has been selling contracts since you were with him in the State Congress, he has the same fund raiser you had, and he states in FBI conversations that someone from your campaign would not give him what he wanted for your senate seat and yet somehow you are supposedly innocently ignorant of the fact that the man is using his position to get money in illegal ways? Get real. Even better do you really expect me to believe that you did not know that your staff was speaking with his office?

Now feeling that the pattern is properly established, let me ask this question. Does this situation seem familiar? Where have we seen this pattern of lies before? Of wait I know, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." Lies, the familiar sound from the Democratic White house.