Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search


Blagojevich readying for an uphill fight

In the Illinois governor’s corruption case, the law gives prosecutor the edge, analysts say.

(Page 2 of 2)



The thousands of hours of tape recordings in the prosecution’s possession, Monico says, may well include things helpful to the governor. Still, he acknowledges, “theft of honest services” can be a difficult charge to defend against because it is so amorphous.

Skip to next paragraph

Mr. Fitzgerald has not taken his case to a grand jury, and when he does, he is likely to present more evidence and obtain more testimony from witnesses.

Genson is for now focusing on the impeachment proceedings. When he spoke before the Illinois House impeachment panel Wednesday, he lambasted lawmakers for not having standards of what constitute an impeachable offense, and he criticized the makeup of a panel in which some members, he said, had already declared their opposition to the governor.

“Everyone’s in a rush to judgment,” Mr. Genson said in a news conference after testifying. “This is a real witch hunt.”

The panel’s chairman noted that an impeachment hearing is not bound by usual courtroom rules.

That is true, say Illinois constitutional experts. No standards for impeachment are laid out in the state’s constitution, though the panel is expected to look to federal guidelines and other states’ standards in adopting its own.

“They’ll have to indicate at some point very early on what they consider grounds for impeachment,” says Ann Lousin, a professor at John Marshall Law School, who served two years in the 1970s as parliamentarian of the Illinois House. As to whether it’s inappropriate for certain members to be on the committee, Professor Lousin says, “Generally, people who have already indicated they have prejudged an issue should not sit. But we really are in kind of uncharted waters.”

Genson has also questioned the ability of Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan to defend the governor as part of her office, because she petitioned the state Supreme Court to remove him last week – a case the court on Wednesday declined to take.

Blagojevich has made no public statements since he was charged last week, though on Wednesday he hinted to reporters as he headed out for a jog that he would speak soon, telling them, “I can’t wait to begin to tell my side of the story.”

Still, lawyers and legal analysts say the evidence released so far indicates he will have an uphill battle, both in the courtroom and in the court of public opinion, which has largely already condemned him.

Wishing and speculating aloud about desiring cabinet positions in a new Obama administration, high-paying jobs, or campaign funds may not be a crime, they say. But certain statements – such as Blagojevich’s now-familiar comment to an adviser that “I’ve got this thing and it’s [expletive] golden and I’m not giving it away for [expletive] nothing,” about his ability to appoint Obama’s successor to the Senate – show an intent to serve his interests rather than the public’s, they add.

A good defense lawyer may argue that this is politics as usual, says Robert Bennett, a defense lawyer in Washington who has defended many politicians. “But the tapes make it pretty clear that he was going to essentially sell that seat for his own benefit.”

He adds: “Just based on what we publicly know, I think a defense on the merits is unlikely to be successful.”

Still, many here in Illinois are not surprised by Blagojevich’s determination to fight rather than resign.

“This is his bargaining chip,” says Lousin. “It’s the tactic I would expect him to use.”

Material from Associated Press was used in this report.

Permissions