Obama WTF

AO 91 (REV.5/85) Criminal Complaint AUSAs: REID SCHAR (353-8897), CARRIE HAMILTON (353-4558), and CHRIS NIEWOEHNER (353-6117)
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
UNDER SEAL

V. CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, and
JOHN HARRIS
I, the undersigned complainant being duly sworn state the following is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Count One

From in or about 2002 to the present, in Cook County, in the Northern District of Illinois, defendants did,
conspire with each other and with others to devise and participate in a scheme to defraud the State of Illinois and
the people of the State of Illinois of the honest services of ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS, in
furtherance of which the mails and interstate wire communications would be used, in violation of Title 18, United
States Code, Sections 1341,1343, and 1346; all in violation of Title 18 United States Code, Section 1349.

Count Two

Beginning no later than November 2008 to the present, in Cook County, in the Northern District of Illinois,
defendants ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS, being agents of the State of Illinois, a State government
which during a one-year period, beginning January 1, 2008 and continuing to the present, received federal benefits
in excess of $10,000, corruptly solicited and demanded a thing of value, namely, the firing of certain Chicago
Tribune editorial members responsible for widely-circulated editorials critical of ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH,
intending to be influenced and rewarded in connection with business and transactions of the State of Illinois
involving a thing of value of $5,000 or more, namely, the provision of millions of dollars in financial assistance by
the State of Illinois, including through the Illinois Finance Authority, an agency of the State of Illinois, to the
Tribune Company involving the Wrigley Field baseball stadium; in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
Sections 666(a)(1)(B) and 2.

I further state that I am a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and that this complaint is based on the following facts:

SEE ATTACHED AFFIDAVIT

Continued on the attached sheet and made a part hereof: X Yes No

Daniel W. Cain, Special Agent
Federal Bureau of Investigation

Sworn to before me and subscribed in my presence,

December 7, 2008 at Chicago, Illinois
Date City and State

MICHAEL T. MASON, United States Magistrate Judge
Name & Title of Judicial Officer Signature of Judicial Officer

Northern District of Illinois )
) UNDER SEAL
County of Cook, City of Chicago )

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION

I, Daniel W . Cain, hereinafter referred to as “Affiant,” being duly sworn, state as

follows:

I. INTRODUCTION

1. I am a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) assigned
to the Chicago, Illinois Field Division . I have been a Special Agent with the FBI for over twenty-two years. I am presently assigned to the West Resident Agency of the FBI's Chicago Field office. My duties include investigating corruption of public officials, mail fraud, wire fraud, and other white collar crimes. I have been involved in white collar crime investigations for a majority of my career as a Special Agent with the FBI.
2. I have participated in and am familiar with this investigation through interviews
and analysis of reports submitted by other Special Agents of the FBI, the Internal Revenue
Service (IRS), the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS), and the U.S. Department of
Labor's Office of Inspector General (DOLIG); personal interviews conducted with witnesses;
my review of consensually-recorded conversations; a review of pen register information, trap
and trace information, and telephone toll record information; and a review of information
derived from the interception of wire communications occurring to and from certain
telephones. I also am familiar with information derived from the interception of oral
communications occurring in the offices of Friends of Blagojevich, 4147 North Ravenswood

Avenue, Suite 300, Chicago, Illinois. In addition, I am familiar with testimony given during the trial of Antoin Rezko from March to May 2008.

3. This affidavit is submitted in support of an application for a criminal complaint

and corresponding arrest warrants charging ROD R . BLAGOJEVICH (“ROD

BLAGOJEVICH ”) and JOHN HARRIS with:

a. conspiring with each other and with others to devise and participate in
a scheme to defraud the State of Illinois and the people of the State of Illinois of the honest
services of ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS, in furtherance of which the mails
and interstate wire communications would be used, in violation of Title 18, United States
Code, Sections 1341, 1343 and 1346; all in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section
1349; and

b. being agents of the State of Illinois, a State government which during
a one-year period, beginning January 1, 2008 and continuing to the present, received federal
benefits in excess of $10,000, corruptly soliciting and demanding a thing of value, namely,
the firing of certain Chicago Tribune editorial members responsible for widely-circulated
editorials critical of ROD BLAGOJEVICH , intending to be influenced and rewarded in
connection with business and transactions of the State of Illinois involving a thing of value
of $5,000 or more, namely, the provision of millions of dollars in financial assistance by the
State of Illinois, including through the Illinois Finance Authority, an agency of the State of

2

Illinois, to the Tribune Company involving the Wrigley Field baseball stadium ; in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 666(a)(1)(B ) and 2.

4. Defendant ROD BLAGOJEVICH is the Governor of the State of Illinois. He

was elected Governor in 2002 and was reelected Governor in 2006.

5. Defendant JOHN HARRIS is employed by the State of Illinois as the chief of

staff to the Governor, ROD BLAGOJEVICH .
6. As officials of the State of Illinois, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS
each owe a duty of honest services to the State of Illinois and the people of the State of
Illinois in the performance of their public duties.
7. Pursuant to Article VIII, Section 1(a) of the Constitution of the State of Illinois,
public funds, property and credit shall be used only for public purposes.
8. Pursuant to the criminal laws of the State of Illinois (720 ILCS 5/33-3(c) and
(d)), ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS each are prohibited from committing the
following acts in his official capacity: (1) performing an act in excess of his lawful authority,
with intent to obtain a personal advantage for himself or others; and (2) soliciting or
knowingly accepting, for the performance of any act, a fee or reward which he knows is not
authorized by law .
9. Pursuant to the criminal laws of the State of Illinois (720 ILCS 5/33-1(d)),
ROD BLAGOJEVICH is prohibited from receiving, retaining, or agreeing to accept any
property or personal advantage which he is not authorized by law to accept, knowing that

3

such property or personal advantage was promised or tendered with intent to cause him to
influence the performance of any act related to the employment or function of his public
office.
10. Friends of Blagojevich is a private entity organized and existing under the laws
of the State of Illinois as a state-wide political campaign committee established on behalf of
ROD BLAGOJEVICH to support his campaign efforts.
11. The Illinois Finance Authority (“IFA ”) is a body politic and corporate created
by Illinois law (20 ILCS 3501 et seq.), one of the statutory purposes of which is to “to
accomplish and to carry out these policies of the State which are in the public interest of the
State and of its taxpayers and residents.” Pursuant to Illinois law , the members of the IFA
are appointed by the Governor of the State of Illinois and may be removed by the Governor
for cause. The IFA is authorized by statute to accept state and federal funds for use in
connection with the IFA ’s purposes, and its operations are subject to audit by the Illinois
Auditor General. Pursuant to Title 74 of the Illinois Administrative Code, Part 1100.250,
“[t]he Governor of the State serves as the applicable elected representative [of the IFA ] for purposes of the public approval requirement of the Tax Code.” According to a web site maintained by the Illinois State Comptroller, the IFA received at least $493,750 in 2008 in earmarked loan funds from the State of Illinois. In 2008, the State of Illinois received over $10,000 in federal benefits.

4

12. Because this affidavit is submitted for the limited purpose of securing a

criminal complaint and corresponding arrest warrants, I have not included each and every

fact known to me concerning this investigation.

II. SUMMARY OF PROBABLE CAUSE

13. Since approximately 2003, the government has been investigating allegations
of illegal activity occurring in State of Illinois government as part of the administration of
Governor ROD BLAGOJEVICH . As further detailed below , the investigation has developed
evidence that: (a) beginning not later than in or about 2002, ROD BLAGOJEVICH has
conspired with multiple individuals, including, beginning not later than in or about October
2008, JOHN HARRIS, to devise and participate in a scheme, which used and contemplated
the use of the mails and interstate wire communications, to defraud the State of Illinois and
its residents of the honest services of ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS by
corruptly using the office of Governor of the State of Illinois to obtain and attempt to obtain
personal gain, including financial gain, for ROD BLAGOJEVICH and third parties with
whom he is associated; and (b) beginning no later than November 2008, ROD
BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS have corruptly solicited and demanded the firing of
Chicago Tribune editorial board members responsible for editorials critical of ROD
BLAGOJEVICH , intending to be influenced and rewarded in connection with State of
Illinois financial assistance in connection with the sale of Wrigley Field. The evidence

5

demonstrates that the corrupt conduct undertaken included but was not limited to the following:

a. Defendant ROD BLAGOJEVICH and at times defendant JOHN
HARRIS, together with others, obtained and attempted to obtain financial benefits for ROD BLAGOJEVICH , members of the Blagojevich family, and third parties including Friends of Blagojevich, in exchange for appointments to state boards and commissions, state employment, state contracts, and access to state funds;

b. Defendants ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS, together with
others, offered to, and threatened to withhold from, the Tribune Company substantial state
financial assistance in connection with Wrigley Field, which assistance ROD
BLAGOJEVICH believed to be worth at least $100 million to the Tribune Company, for the
private purpose of inducing the controlling shareholder of the Tribune Company to fire
members of the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune, a newspaper owned by the Tribune
Company, who were responsible for editorials critical of ROD BLAGOJEVICH ;

c. Defendants ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS, together with
others, attempted to use ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s authority to appoint a United States Senator
for the purpose of obtaining personal benefits for ROD BLAGOJEVICH , including, among
other things, appointment as Secretary of Health & Human Services in the President-elect’s
administration, and alternatively, a lucrative job which they schemed to induce a union to
provide to ROD BLAGOJEVICH in exchange for appointing as senator an individual whom

6

ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS believed to be favored by union officials and their associates.
14. As detailed below , in early October 2008, the government obtained information
that ROD BLAGOJEVICH was accelerating his corrupt fund raising activities to accumulate
as much money as possible before the implementation of ethics legislation on January 1,
2009, that would severely curtail ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s ability to raise money from
individuals and entities conducting business with the State of Illinois. Based in part on the
recently obtained information, and as part of the investigation into ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s
corrupt fund raising efforts, in October 2008 the government obtained court approval to
intercept oral communications in certain locations in the offices of Friends of Blagojevich.
In addition, as part of its investigation, the government obtained court approval to intercept
wire communications on the home phone of ROD BLAGOJEVICH .1 Specifically:
a. On October 21, 2008, Chief Judge James F. Holderman signed an order
authorizing the interception of oral communications for a 30-day period in two rooms at the
Friends of Blagojevich office: the personal office of ROD BLAGOJEVICH and the
conference room . On the morning of October 22, 2008, the FBI began intercepting oral
communications in those rooms. On November 19, 2008, Chief Judge James F. Holderman

1 Minimization procedures were implemented during the interception of conversations at the Friends of Blagojevich offices and over phones. At times, these minimization procedures were stricter than required under law so as to avoid intercepting certain potentially privileged conversations.
7

signed an order authorizing the continued interception of oral communications in the two rooms at the Friends of Blagojevich office for a second 30-day period.

b. On October 29, 2008, Chief Judge James Holderman entered an Order
authorizing the interception of wire communications to and from a landline telephone
subscribed to ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s home address and used by ROD BLAGOJEVICH and
others. The interception of wire communications to and from ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s home
phone began on the evening of October 29, 2008. On November 26, 2008, Acting Chief
Judge Matthew F. Kennelly signed an order authorizing the continued interception of wire
communications on ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s home phone for a second 30-day period.
15. The remainder of this affidavit first sets out certain information obtained prior
to the initiation of the court-authorized interceptions, relating to allegations that ROD
BLAGOJEVICH solicited and obtained campaign contributions in exchange for official
actions as Governor. Next, this affidavit details certain information obtained during the
course of the court-authorized interceptions and relating to the crimes alleged in the attached
criminal complaint. This information, in turn, is divided into sections relating to three topics:
(a) efforts to obtain campaign contributions in exchange for official actions by ROD
BLAGOJEVICH ; (b) efforts to use state funds for the private purpose of inducing the
Tribune Company to fire Chicago Tribune editorial board members critical of ROD
BLAGOJEVICH by making their firing a condition of state assistance to the Tribune

8

Company in connection with Wrigley Field; and (c) efforts to obtain personal financial
benefits for ROD BLAGOJEVICH in return for his appointment of a United States Senator.

III. FACTS ESTABLISHING PROBABLE CAUSE

A . Evidence Concerning the Solicitation and Receipt of Campaign
Contributions in Return for Official Acts by ROD BLAGOJEVICH Prior
to October 2008

1. Information Provided by Ali Ata

16. As described in more detail in the following paragraphs, Ali Ata testified under
oath in the spring of 2008 that Ata discussed with ROD BLAGOJEVICH a potential appointment to a high-level position with the State of Illinois while a $25,000 donation check to Friends of Blagojevich from Ata was sitting on a table in front of ROD BLAGOJEVICH . Ata further testified that later, after Ata made another substantial contribution to Friends of Blagojevich, ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Ata that he was aware of the donation, that he understood that Ata would be joining his administration, and that Ata better get a job “where [Ata] can make some money.”
17. Ata is a businessman who, in May 2008, as part of a cooperation agreement
with the government, pled guilty to making false statements to the FBI and to tax fraud.2
Pursuant to his cooperation agreement, the government has interviewed Ata extensively

2 Under the terms of the plea agreement, if Ata continues to completely and truthfully cooperate, the government will make a motion pursuant to 5K 1.1 for a reduction from his 12 18 month applicable guideline range. The plea agreement allows his counsel to ask for any sentence, including probation. Other than his felony convictions in May 2008, Ata has no criminal history.
9

regarding a number of topics, including his knowledge of and involvement in fundraising for ROD BLAGOJEVICH . In addition, Ata testified under oath at the criminal trial of Antoin Rezko (the “Rezko Trial”) in May 2008.3 Portions of Ata’s testimony are directly relevant to the current investigation. In summary, and in relevant part, Ata testified as follows during the Rezko Trial:
18. In or about 2000 or 2001, at a meeting with Ata, ROD BLAGOJEVICH who
at the time was a member of the United States House of Representatives, told Ata that he was
contemplating a run for higher office and asked for Ata’s support. Ata agreed to support him. Thereafter, Ata observed that Rezko was close to ROD BLAGOJEVICH and was very involved in fund raising for ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s campaign, including overseeing Ata’s own fund raising efforts on behalf of ROD BLAGOJEVICH .
19. In or about 2002, Ata had several conversations with Rezko regarding the
possibility of a high level appointment for Ata in state government should ROD
BLAGOJEVICH be elected. At Rezko’s direction, Ata put together a list of three state agencies to which he would be interested in being appointed, including the Capital Development Board.

3 Rezko was a principal fundraiser for ROD BLAGOJEVICH . His criminal trial focused on allegations that Rezko and Stuart Levine, a member of the board of trustees of the Teachers Retirement System and the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board, engaged in a scheme to defraud the State of Illinois of Levine’s honest services by demanding kickbacks, as well as political contributions to the campaign of ROD BLAGOJEVICH , in return for the exercise of Levine’s official influence. Relevant evidence presented at the Rezko trial is summarized below .
10

20. In or about August 2002, Ata held a small fund raising event for ROD
BLAGOJEVICH that ROD BLAGOJEVICH attended. In advance of that fund raising event, Ata committed to Rezko that Ata would raise $25,000 at that event, which he eventually did, personally contributing at least approximately $5,000.
21. Later that year, Rezko approached Ata for additional monetary support for
ROD BLAGOJEVICH . Ata agreed to contribute $ 25,000 in additional monies to the
campaign of ROD BLAGOJEVICH . Ata, subsequently and by prior arrangement with Rezko, brought a check in this amount to Rezko’s offices on Elston Avenue in Chicago. After he arrived at Rezko’s offices, Ata was greeted by Rezko to whom he handed the check in an envelope. Rezko, carrying the check, ushered Ata into a conference room where he met with Rezko and ROD BLAGOJEVICH . Rezko placed the envelope containing Ata’s $25,000 check to ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s campaign on the conference room table between himself and ROD BLAGOJEVICH and stated to ROD BLAGOJEVICH that Ata had been a good supporter and a team player and that Ata would be willing to join ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s administration. ROD BLAGOJEVICH expressed his pleasure and acknowledged that Ata had been a good supporter and good friend. ROD BLAGOJEVICH , in Ata’s presence, asked Rezko if he (Rezko) had talked to Ata about positions in the administration, and Rezko responded that he had.4

4 Rezko, whose reliability has yet to be fully determined, has confirmed to the
government in proffer sessions the essence of Ata’s testimony regarding Ata’s meeting with
ROD BLAGOJEVICH , but has a different recollection regarding the timing and chronology
(continued...)
11

22. After this meeting, Ata completed an application for a state appointment. In
or about early 2003, Rezko informed Ata that he was going to be appointed to head the state
Capital Development Board. Rezko subsequently informed Ata that this position was going
to someone else and that another position would have to be found for Ata. Later, Rezko
discussed an opportunity for Ata with the newly formed Illinois Finance Authority (“IFA ”).
23. In or about July 2003, Rezko asked Ata to make an additional $50,000
contribution to the campaign of ROD BLAGOJEVICH . Ata agreed to contribute the same
amount as he had previously, namely $25,000. Ata made this contribution on or about July
25, 2003, by check payable to ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s campaign. Ata gave this check to
Rezko. Thereafter, Ata had a conversation with ROD BLAGOJEVICH at a large fund
raising event at Navy Pier. During this conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Ata that
Ata had been a good supporter, indicated that ROD BLAGOJEVICH was aware that Ata had

4 (...continued)
of certain events and only recalls asking Ata for one $25,000 check for ROD
BLAGOJEVICH . Rezko’s proffers have been substantial but are not complete and the
government’s efforts to fact check and corroborate Rezko’s proffered information are not yet
complete. Rezko has proffered with the government in hopes of receiving a recommendation
from the government for a reduced sentence. During the proffer sessions, Rezko at times has
provided accounts that differ from those of other witnesses, including Ata, but in broad terms
Rezko’s account incriminates ROD BLAGOJEVICH in a “pay to play” criminal scheme.
Because the government is not yet satisfied that Rezko’s accounts are full and complete, the
government is not relying on Rezko’s account for probable cause. The government simply
notes that while Rezko’s account varies at times from those of other witnesses, Rezko’s
account of ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s activity, on balance, would add to the probable cause
set forth herein, not subtract. Where Rezko’s proffered recollection differs significantly from
those of witnesses upon whose testimony the government is relying, this affidavit notes those
differences.
12

made another substantial donation to ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s campaign, and told Ata that he understood that Ata would be joining his administration. Ata responded that he was considering taking a position, and ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that it had better be a job where Ata could make some money.
24. Ata was surprised by this comment by ROD BLAGOJEVICH and said
something to Rezko about it the next time Ata saw Rezko. When Ata told Rezko that ROD
BLAGOJEVICH had said words to the effect of, “it had better be a job where you can make some money,” Rezko responded that he was not surprised and had heard ROD BLAGOJEVICH say things like that before.

2. Information Provided by Joseph Cari

25. As described in further detail in the following paragraphs, Joseph Cari testified
under oath at the Rezko Trial on April 15 and 16, 2008.5 Among other things, Cari testified
that he had a conversation with ROD BLAGOJEVICH in which ROD BLAGOJEVICH
informed Cari that ROD BLAGOJEVICH could use his power to award State of Illinois
contracts in order to generate campaign contributions. Cari further testified that he had

5 Cari testified pursuant to his obligations under a written plea agreement entered into with the government. In the plea agreement, Cari pled guilty to the attempted extortion of JER , an investment company attempting to obtain a State of Illinois investment. In exchange for his truthful cooperation, the government agreed to recommend at the time of Cari’s sentencing that Cari receive a sentence of two and a half years in prison. The plea agreement allows his counsel to ask for any sentence, including probation. Prior to pleading guilty to attempted extortion, Cari had no criminal history.
13

6
similar conversations with Rezko and Chris Kelly , who specifically offered him State of
Illinois work in exchange for Cari’s assistance with various fundraising matters. In

summary, and in relevant part, Cari testified as follows during the Rezko Trial:
26. Cari was a significant fundraiser for Democratic causes and was previously the
national finance chair for Vice President Al Gore’s 2000 presidential campaign. During his
testimony, Cari described meetings that he had with ROD BLAGOJEVICH , Chris Kelly,

7
Rezko, and Stuart Levine . In particular, on approximately October 29, 2003, Cari, ROD
BLAGOJEVICH , Kelly, Levine and others rode on an airplane arranged by Levine to a
fundraiser in New York being hosted by Cari on behalf of ROD BLAGOJEVICH . During
the plane ride, Cari had a conversation with ROD BLAGOJEVICH . During the
conversation, Cari and ROD BLAGOJEVICH discussed Cari’s fundraising background and
work as a national fundraiser. ROD BLAGOJEVICH discussed his interest in running for
President of the United States. During the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH informed
Cari that it was easier for governors to solicit campaign contributions because governors had
the ability to “award contracts” and give legal work, consulting work, and investment
banking work to campaign contributors. ROD BLAGOJEVICH informed Cari that Rezko
and Kelly were his point people in raising campaign contributions. Later in the conversation,

6

Like Rezko, Kelly was a principal campaign fundraiser for ROD BLAGOJEVICH .

Stuart Levine was a Chicago-area businessman and an associate of Rezko and Kelly who served on the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board and the board of trustees of the Teachers Retirement System of Illinois. Further information about Levine is provided below at paragraph 31 et seq.
14

ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Cari that there were State of Illinois contracts and other State of Illinois work that could be given to contributors who helped ROD BLAGOJEVICH , Rezko, and Kelly. Cari testified that ROD BLAGOJEVICH ended the conversation with Cari by informing Cari that Rezko and Kelly would follow up with Cari in relation to the discussion that had just occurred.
27. At one point during the October 29, 2003 New York fundraiser, Cari and
Levine had a conversation. Cari testified that during the conversation, Levine informed Cari
that there was a plan in place in the Blagojevich administration pursuant to which Rezko and Kelly would pick consultants to do business with State of Illinois boards, and thereafter, the consultants would be asked to make campaign contributions.
28. Cari also testified about a conversation he had with Rezko at Rezko’s office.
Levine was also present for the conversation. According to Cari, Rezko informed Cari that
Rezko had a close relationship with the Blagojevich administration and Rezko had a role in
picking consultants and law firms and other entities to get State of Illinois business. Rezko
informed Cari that Rezko called ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s chief of staff, Lon Monk, and
Monk would help implement Rezko’s choices for certain State of Illinois work. Rezko
informed Cari that, in exchange for raising money for ROD BLAGOJEVICH , the
Blagojevich administration would be financially helpful to Cari’s business interests.
29. On approximately March 5, 2004, Cari met with Kelly at a restaurant. Cari
testified that Kelly stated that Kelly was following up on Cari’s conversations with ROD

15

BLAGOJEVICH , Rezko, and Levine. Kelly then requested Cari’s help in raising money on a national level for ROD BLAGOJEVICH . Cari, as he had in the past, indicated he was not inclined to assist ROD BLAGOJEVICH . In response, Kelly pushed Cari to assist ROD BLAGOJEVICH and informed Cari that helping ROD BLAGOJEVICH would be good for Cari’s business interests and that Cari “could have whatever [Cari] wanted,” which Cari understood to be a reference to getting Cari’s business interests whatever State of Illinois work Cari wanted if Cari helped raise money on a national level for ROD BLAGOJEVICH . The conversation ended shortly thereafter.
30. Cari testified that he eventually became involved in the attempted extortion of
JER , a real estate investment firm that was seeking an investment from the Teachers
Retirement System (“TRS”). Details regarding corruption at TRS involving one of its board
members, Stuart Levine, are set forth below . Based on his conversations with ROD
BLAGOJEVICH , Rezko, Kelly, and Levine, in which he was informed that consultants
would be inserted into State of Illinois transactions and then solicited for campaign
contributions, Cari believed that JER needed to hire a consultant. Cari testified that he
informed employees of JER that they needed to hire a consultant and that in Illinois the
“Governor and the people around the Governor” pick the consultants to be used on particular
deals. Cari informed JER employees that if they did not hire the consultant then JER would
not receive the money it was seeking from the State of Illinois. Ultimately, JER exposed the
attempted extortion and received money from the State of Illinois.

16

3. Information Provided by Stuart Levine

31. In approximately December 2003, the FBI began an investigation of allegations
that at least one member of the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board (the “Planning Board”), Stuart Levine, was soliciting bribes in exchange for board action. At the time, Levine was a businessman who served on two state boards: the board of trustees of TRS, and the Planning Board. As part of the investigation, the government sought and obtained court authorization to record phone calls on multiple phones used by Levine.
32. On May 4, 2005, Levine was indicted in United States v. Levine, et al. 05 CR
408 (Grady, J.) on 28 counts of mail and wire fraud, extortion, bribery, and money
laundering. On August 3, 2005, Levine was indicted in United States v. Levine, et al., 05 CR 691 (St. Eve., J.) on 13 counts of mail and wire fraud, bribery, and attempted extortion. On October 27, 2006, Levine pleaded guilty to Counts One and Twenty-Three of a superseding indictment in Case No. 05 CR 691. As part of Levine’s plea agreement, the government moved, on November 15, 2006, to dismiss the pending superseding indictment and indictment against Levine in Case No. 05 CR 408.
33. Pursuant to his cooperation agreement, the government has interviewed Levine
extensively regarding a number of topics, including his knowledge of and involvement in the
corruption of Illinois state government and fundraising for ROD BLAGOJEVICH . In
addition, Levine testified under oath at the Rezko Trial.8 Portions of Levine’s testimony at

8 As noted above, Levine was charged in two separate indictments before pleading
(continued...)
17

the Rezko trial are directly relevant to the current investigation. The remainder of this section sets forth, in summary, and in relevant part, Levine’s testimony at the Rezko Trial, except as noted where information is specifically identified as having been obtained from other sources:

a. Levine’s Plane Ride with Blagojevich

34. According to Levine, in approximately late October 2003, after Levine was
reappointed to the Planning Board, he shared a private plane ride from New York to Chicago
with ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Kelly. Levine, ROD BLAGOJEVICH , and Kelly were the
only passengers on the flight. According to Levine, at the beginning of the flight, Levine
thanked ROD BLAGOJEVICH for reappointing him to the Planning Board. ROD

8

(...continued)

guilty in Case No. 05 CR 691. In Levine’s plea agreement, Levine acknowledged that under
the Sentencing Guidelines he was facing a guidelines range of life imprisonment. As a result
of Levine’s plea, the government will recommend, assuming Levine’s continued complete
and truthful cooperation, that Levine be sentenced to a term of 67 months’ imprisonment.
In Levine’s plea agreement, Levine admitted to violating his duty of honest services to two
separate Illinois state boards by seeking and agreeing to accept kickbacks and payments
worth millions of dollars in exchange for using Levine’s influence and position on the state
boards to benefit numerous third parties. Levine further admitted in his plea agreement to
defrauding a medical school and a charitable organization which he controlled out of
additional millions of dollars. In addition to the crimes detailed in his plea agreement,
Levine committed additional crimes over the past approximately 20 years, including
instances of paying bribes, tax fraud, election fraud, structuring, and defrauding the estate
of a business associate. Levine has further admitted to using illegal narcotic drugs for
approximately 30 years up to and including 2004, including the repeated and regular use of
cocaine, crystal methamphetamine, ecstasy, and ketamine. Levine’s credibility was
vigorously challenged by defense counsel during the trial that ultimately led to Rezko’s
conviction.

18

BLAGOJEVICH responded that Levine should only talk with “Tony” [Rezko] or [Kelly]
about the Planning Board, “but you stick with us and you will do very well for yourself.”
ROD BLAGOJEVICH said this in front of Kelly. According to Levine, Levine understood
from ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s manner of speaking and words that ROD BLAGOJEVICH
did not want Levine to talk to ROD BLAGOJEVICH directly about anything to do with the
boards, but that Levine should talk to Rezko or Kelly. Levine also understood that ROD
BLAGOJEVICH meant that Levine could make a lot of money working with ROD
BLAGOJEVICH ’s administration. According to Levine, ROD BLAGOJEVICH did not
seem to expect a response from Levine, and Kelly then shifted the conversation to something
else.

b. Corruption of the Planning Board

35. As described more fully in the following paragraphs, Mercy Hospital, which
sought permission from the Planning Board to build a hospital in Illinois, received that
permission through Rezko’s exercise of his influence at the Planning Board after Rezko was
promised that Mercy Hospital would make a substantial campaign contribution to ROD
BLAGOJEVICH . Rezko later told a member of the Planning Board that Mercy Hospital
received the permit because ROD BLAGOJEVICH wanted the organization to receive the
permit.
36. Levine’s criminal activities included his abuse of his position on the Planning
Board to enrich both himself and Friends of Blagojevich. The Planning Board was a

19

commission of the State of Illinois, established by statute, whose members were appointed
by the Governor of the State of Illinois. At the relevant time period, the Planning Board
consisted of nine individuals. State law required an entity seeking to build a hospital,
medical office building, or other medical facility in Illinois to obtain a permit, known as a
“Certificate of Need” (“CON ”), from the Planning Board prior to beginning construction.
37. Levine, as well as Planning Board members Thomas Beck and Imad
Almanaseer, testified under oath at the Rezko Trial.9 Beck testified that he asked Rezko to
reappoint him to the Planning Board and that Beck thereafter followed Rezko’s directions
regarding which CON applications Rezko wanted approved. Beck testified that it was his
job to communicate Rezko’s interest in particular CONs to other members of the Planning
Board, including Almanaseer, who were loyal to Rezko. Beck testified that he understood
that Rezko spoke for the Blagojevich administration when Rezko spoke to Beck about
particular CONs. Almanaseer testified that Beck instructed him that Rezko wanted
Almanaseer to vote a particular way and that Almanaseer should follow Levine’s lead in
voting on CONs. Almanaseer testified that before certain Planning Board meetings, he
received notecards from Beck indicating how to vote on certain CON applications. Beck
testified he provided these notecards to Almanaseer and certain other members of the
Planning Board to communicate Rezko’s directions about certain CON applications.

9 Beck and Almanaseer testified pursuant to immunity orders.
20

38. During his testimony, Levine described a plan to manipulate the Planning
Board to enrich himself and Friends of Blagojevich. The plan centered on an entity
commonly known as Mercy Hospital (“Mercy”) that was attempting to obtain a CON to build
a new hospital in Illinois. Levine knew the contractor hired to help build the hospital. In
approximately November 2003, on behalf of the contractor, Levine checked with Rezko to
determine whether Rezko wanted Mercy to obtain its CON . Rezko informed Levine that
Mercy was not going to receive its CON . According to Levine, he asked Rezko whether it
would matter to Rezko if Mercy’s construction contractor paid a bribe to Rezko and Levine
and, in addition, made a contribution to ROD BLAGOJEVICH . Levine testified that Rezko
indicated that such an arrangement would change his view on the Mercy CON .1 0
39. Levine’s testimony regarding Rezko’s actions to change the Planning Board
decision concerning Mercy’s application for a CON based on contributions for ROD
BLAGOJEVICH is confirmed by attorney Steven Loren. Loren testified at Rezko’s criminal
trial and, before that, in the grand jury.1 1 According to Loren, in approximately December
2003, Levine informed Loren that Rezko was against the Mercy CON . According to Loren,

10 Rezko has admitted that he manipulated the Mercy vote based on Mercy’s
agreement to make a contribution to ROD BLAGOJEVICH , which agreement he states was
communicated to ROD BLAGOJEVICH , but denies that Levine offered a personal bribe to Rezko as well.

11

In connection with this investigation, Steven Loren pled guilty to interfering with

the due administration of the Internal Revenue Service. In exchange for his continued and
truthful cooperation, the government has agreed to move the Court for a 5K 1.1 departure and
his counsel is free to seek any sentence, including probation. Loren has no other criminal
history. Pursuant to his cooperation agreement, Loren testified at the Rezko Trial.
21

Levine relayed to Loren a conversation between Rezko and Levine during which Levine asked Rezko whether a political contribution to ROD BLAGOJEVICH would make a difference for Mercy’s CON , and Rezko responded to Levine that such a contribution might make a difference.
40. Thereafter, and confirmed by the testimony of Levine, Beck, and Almanaseer,
as well as recorded conversations, Rezko switched his directions to Beck and informed Beck
that Mercy was to receive its CON . According to Almanaseer, although he previously had
been told by Beck that Rezko did not want Mercy to receive its CON , he was later told that
there had been a change and that Rezko now wanted Mercy to receive its CON .
41. Mercy received its CON as a result of a controversial and irregular vote at a
public Planning Board meeting.1 2 The vote brought significant publicity to the Planning
Board and ultimately led to the disbanding of the Planning Board. Almanaseer testified
under oath in the grand jury that not long after the Planning Board vote on Mercy’s CON he
saw Rezko at a fundraiser. According to Almanaseer, he was still embarrassed about what
had occurred at the Planning Board vote on Mercy’s CON and Rezko’s role in the vote.
Almanaseer testified that he asked Rezko why Rezko had switched the vote on the Mercy
CON . According to Almanaseer, Rezko stated: “The Governor wanted it to pass.”

12 There was extensive testimony regarding the irregularity of the vote at the Planning Board meeting. In summary, during the vote, Levine got up from his seat and went to speak to Beck and to Almanaseer. After these discussions, Almanaseer then changed his vote to be in favor of Mercy receiving its CON . Beck then voted in favor as well and by a vote of 5 to 4, Mercy’s application for a CON passed.
22

Almanaseer understood the reference to “Governor” to be a reference to ROD

BLAGOJEVICH .

c. History of Control at TRS

42. In addition to serving on the Planning Board, Levine was a member of the TRS
board of trustees. TRS is a public pension plan created by Illinois law for the purpose of providing pension, survivor, and disability benefits for teachers and administrators employed in Illinois public schools except in the City of Chicago. TRS manages over $30 billion in assets on behalf of those individuals and the State of Illinois. The TRS Board of Trustees, with assistance from TRS staff, votes on how to invest these assets.
43. Levine originally was appointed to the TRS Board in 2000. By the summer of
2001, Levine, working in concert with William Cellini, who had a significant interest in a
real estate asset management firm that had a long-standing business relationship with TRS,
had established effective control over the TRS board by forming and maintaining a group of
TRS trustees who consistently voted together on matters important to Cellini and Levine. Levine testified at the Rezko Trial that he and Cellini were both powerful, long-standing
Republican operatives in the state of Illinois. ROD BLAGOJEVICH was the first
Democratic governor in the State of Illinois in over 20 years. Because of this, according to
Levine, Cellini and Levine had to take certain steps to ingratiate themselves with the new
Democratic administration.

44. Levine testified that among the steps Cellini took to ingratiate himself with

23

ROD BLAGOJEVICH was raising considerable money for ROD BLAGOJEVICH . Kelly
Glynn worked for Friends of Blagojevich from approximately May 2002 to August 2004 as
the organization’s Finance Director. Glynn testified under oath at the Rezko Trial and has
been interviewed by the government. Among other things, Glynn testified that she was
familiar with how Friends of Blagojevich tracked fundraising events and credited money
brought into Friends of Blagojevich. Glynn testified that a computer database was set up to
track donations to Friends of Blagojevich and the individuals responsible for obtaining those
donations. In particular, Glynn testified about a fundraising event that occurred in
approximately October 2002. Glynn testified that the event was organized and held by
Cellini with the attendees being primarily members of the Illinois Road and Transportation
Builders Association. Based on instructions from Chris Kelly, however, the Cellini event
was not tracked as a Cellini event in the Friends of Blagojevich database but, rather, was
listed as a Roadbuilders event in combination with, among others, Rezko.

d. The Accommodation with Rezko and Kelly

45. As set forth more fully in the following paragraphs, Levine and Cellini, in order
to keep their control over TRS, agreed to an accommodation with Rezko and Kelly that
Rezko and Kelly would use their influence with ROD BLAGOJEVICH to stop the
consolidation of TRS with other pension boards and, in exchange, Levine and Cellini would
assist investment firms named by Rezko and Kelly to receive TRS money because those
investment firms had made or would make political contributions to ROD BLAGOJEVICH .

24

46. In approximately the spring of 2003, a threat arose towards Levine’s and
Cellini’s control over the TRS Board. At that time, there were indications that the Blagojevich administration would seek legislation consolidating TRS with two other Illinois state pension boards.
47. Levine and Cellini were opposed to the proposal to consolidate the pension
boards because it might cause them to lose their control at TRS. According to Levine, in the
spring of 2003, Cellini told Levine that Cellini would talk to Rezko and Kelly about trying
to stop the pension consolidation plan. Cellini later told Levine that he had spoken with
Rezko and Kelly, and offered an accommodation to them. According to Levine, in exchange
for Rezko’s and Kelly’s help in stopping the consolidation proposal, Cellini said that Cellini
and Levine would use their influence on the TRS Board to help investment firms that Rezko
or Kelly recommended receive investments from TRS . Cellini said that Rezko and Kelly
agreed to the arrangement. Levine understood from Cellini’s description that Rezko and
Kelly would ask Levine and Cellini to help investment firms receive TRS money because
those investment firms had made or would make political contributions to ROD
BLAGOJEVICH .1 3

13 Rezko has informed the government that Cellini raised the issue of pension board
consolidation with Rezko and Chris Kelly and that Cellini was against the pension board
consolidation. Rezko has stated he is unaware if Kelly took any action regarding the pension
consolidation and that he did not personally take any action in relation to the pension board
consolidation. Rezko has stated he did not consider using TRS to solicit campaign
contributions.
25

48. Levine’s testimony regarding the accommodation was corroborated by a
recorded call on April 12, 2004, in which Levine informed another individual: “You know
I sat down talked [to Cellini] a long time ago I said if you can convince those guys [Rezko
and Kelly] to let us stay in place. . . We got a great machinery and if there’s an
accommodation you know we’ll certainly try to accommodate but if they just wanna stick things in you know I’m gonna leave that’s no way to do that.”
49. According to Levine, Cellini told Levine that Rezko had informed Cellini that
Rezko and Kelly had met with ROD BLAGOJEVICH and other senior Illinois state officials
regarding the proposal to consolidate TRS and two other pension boards. According to Levine, Cellini said that Rezko related that ROD BLAGOJEVICH was skeptical as to why he should take the advice of Kelly over a senior state official on this topic. According to Levine, Rezko asked Cellini, who asked Levine, to get some talking points as to why the consolidation idea was a bad one. Levine ultimately obtained talking points from Steve Loren, TRS’s outside counsel.
50. Ultimately, the proposal to consolidate the state pension boards was not
advanced in the Spring 2003 legislative session. According to Levine, Levine told Loren that
Kelly and Rezko had assured him that the administration was going to leave TRS alone.
According to Levine, around that time, Levine and Rezko agreed that there would be times
that Rezko or ROD BLAGOJEVICH needed to repay political contributors by helping those
people get investments from TRS. According to Loren, Levine told Loren that in exchange

26

for Rezko and Kelly’s support on the pension issue, Levine had agreed with Rezko and Kelly that from time to time Rezko and Kelly would be allowed to direct the payment of placement fees in TRS transactions. Loren understood this to mean that Rezko and Kelly would use these placement fees as an incentive or reward to those who contributed to ROD BLAGOJEVICH . Loren further understood that Rezko and Kelly would be able to steer free money to the people whom they selected, and those people would get money without providing any services in relation to TRS transactions.
51. According to Levine, there were occasions when Rezko or Kelly provided
names of funds or individuals to Levine. According to Levine, Levine brought those funds
or individuals to the attention of TRS staff and otherwise tried to help those funds or
individuals obtain TRS business. There were times, however, where Levine was unable to
arrange for TRS to invest in an entity suggested by Rezko or Kelly because the
recommendations did not meet the basic TRS investment criteria (e.g., TRS did not invest
in hedge funds at that time, so if Rezko or Kelly recommended a hedge fund, Levine could
not help that entity).

4. BLAGOJEVICH ’s knowledge of the Attempted Extortion of Capri
Capital
52. As described in more detail in the following paragraphs, when an attempt by
Rezko, Levine, and others to extort a company doing business with the State of Illinois by
withholding $220 million in State of Illinois funds until the company made a substantial
campaign contribution to ROD BLAGOJEVICH failed, Rezko checked with ROD

27

BLAGOJEVICH before Rezko and others agreed that the company would not again receive State of Illinois funds after it received the $220 million.
53. Capri Capital (“Capri”) was a real estate investment management firm that had
a long-standing relationship with TRS. In February 2004, Capri was expected to receive
$220 million from TRS to manage. Levine originally acted to stall the allocation in February
2004. Eventually, however, the $220 million allocation was going to proceed until Levine,
Rezko, Kelly, and Cellini conspired to extort Capri and Thomas Rosenberg, one of Capri’s
owners. In short, according to Levine, Levine and Rezko agreed that if Rosenberg wanted
to get the $220 million for Capri, Rosenberg was either going to have to make a $1.5 million
donation to ROD BLAGOJEVICH or pay Levine and Rezko a 1% fee.1 4 According to
Levine, and as confirmed on recorded conversations, both Kelly and Cellini joined the
attempted extortion and played roles in the attempted extortion. As part of the extortion,
Cellini informed Rosenberg that, in essence, Capri had not gotten its $220 million allocation
because Rosenberg and Capri had not donated to ROD BLAGOJEVICH . Rosenberg,
realizing he was being extorted, threatened to expose the extortion to law enforcement.
Thereafter, Levine, Rezko, Kelly, and Cellini backed off the extortionate threats, but agreed
that after the $220 million allocation, neither Capri nor Rosenberg would get any further
State of Illinois business.

14 According to Rezko, he recalls agreeing that Rosenberg would have to make a campaign contribution to ROD BLAGOJEVICH , but is not sure whether a finder’s fee was discussed.
28

54. Numerous conversations related to the extortion were captured on the court-

authorized wiretaps on Levine’s phones. In particular, on a recorded May 1, 2004
conversation, Levine spoke with Dr. Robert Weinstein, a co-schemer in Levine’s criminal
activities. During the call, Levine told Weinstein about his more recent meeting with Rezko
and Kelly. Levine described how Rezko said that Rosenberg would “have a choice. . . . you
can raise a million and a half dollars for the fund raiser in June [for ROD BLAGOJEVICH ]
. . . or you can work out somethin’ with [a consultant to pay a finder’s fee].” During other
conversations, Levine and Cellini discussed Rosenberg’s reaction to learning that Rezko and Kelly were stalling Capri’s $220 million allocation and that if Rosenberg did not want to deal with Rezko in terms of paying money, then Rosenberg could walk away from the $220 million allocation.
55. On May 8, 2004, Cellini and Levine had a recorded phone conversation after
Rosenberg threatened to inform law enforcement about the attempted extortion of Capri for
a campaign contribution for ROD BLAGOJEVICH . During the conversation, Cellini told Levine about how Rezko and Kelly had been “essentially hammerin’ people for contracts uh, with with contracts for fundraising [Rezko and Kelly had been forcing individuals to make political contributions in order to win State of Illinois contracts],” how Cellini was a “nervous wreck” about it, and how Cellini and Levine needed to talk with Rezko and Kelly about Rosenberg’s threats.
56. According to Levine, and as confirmed on the recorded conversations, several

29

days later, Levine, Kelly, Rezko, and Cellini met (Cellini participated by phone). After discussing Rosenberg’s threats, Rezko suggested that Rosenberg be given his $220 million allocation but never get further business from the State of Illinois. Kelly, however, still wanted to withhold the $220 million allocation.
57. On May 12, 2004, in a recorded conversation, Levine and Cellini discussed
their meeting with Rezko and Kelly. In addition, Levine told Cellini about another
conversation he had with Rezko. During Levine’s conversation with Rezko, Rezko again
advised Levine to solve the Rosenberg problem “with your head, not your heart.” Levine
noted to Cellini that “[t]he other guy says smack’em over the head,” which Levine testified
was a reference to Kelly’s view that Rosenberg should be given a hard time in relation to the
$220 million allocation. Cellini responded by saying , “I think what their position is, or at
least Tony’s is, okay so he may have to get something here, but he ain’t gonna get anything
more [Rosenberg would not get any more business from the State of Illinois or TRS].”
58. Later in the May 12, 2004 recorded call, Cellini asked Levine “did he tell you,
too, that the big guy said Rosenberg means nothing to him .” Levine testified that he
understood Cellini to be stating that Cellini had been told by Rezko that ROD
BLAGOJEVICH (the “big guy”) was aware of the extortion, that Rosenberg meant nothing
to ROD BLAGOJEVICH , and that Cellini was asking if Levine was told something similar
about ROD BLAGOJEVICH . Levine responded to Cellini in the affirmative. Levine further
testified that he, too, had a conversation with Rezko and Kelly regarding ROD

30

BLAGOJEVICH ’s knowledge of the extortion. Levine testified that Rezko stated that Rezko had informed ROD BLAGOJEVICH of the extortion situation and that ROD BLAGOJEVICH agreed that the $220 million allocation was the last business Rosenberg would get from the State of Illinois.1 5

B. Evidence Concerning Corrupt Conduct by ROD BLAGOJEVICH and
JOHN HARRIS in and After October 2008

1. Evidence Concerning Efforts to Obtain Campaign Contributions
In Exchange for Official Acts

a. Information Obtained From Individual A

59. Since October 2008, the FBI has conducted multiple interviews with Individual
A , who is an associate of ROD BLAGOJEVICH and has assisted in campaign fundraising
for ROD BLAGOJEVICH .1 6 Individual A has advised agents that he/she has been present
for and participated in multiple conversations with ROD BLAGOJEVICH in recent months
regarding campaign fundraising. According to Individual A , ROD BLAGOJEVICH and

15 Rezko has proffered that it was Kelly who informed ROD BLAGOJEVICH about
the circumstances of Rosenberg’s Capri allocation. As described below , numerous phone
conversations have been intercepted in which ROD BLAGOJEVICH engages in ongoing
criminal conduct. During certain of these conversations, including those of a clear criminal
nature, ROD BLAGOJEVICH denies his involvement in illegal activity, including
involvement in illegal activity with Rezko or in relation to the Capri transaction.
16 Individual A is a subject, but not a target, of the criminal investigation concerning
activities at the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board. Individual A has no criminal
history and is not currently providing information to the government as part of any type of
cooperation agreement. Individual A ’s attorney has indicated that Individual A hopes that
the government will provide Individual A with immunity in exchange for Individual A ’s
truthful information. Individual A has declined the government’s requests to record in-
person meetings or telephone conversations with the subjects of the investigation.
31

Fundrasier A , who is the chairman of Friends of Blagojevich, are making a strong push to raise campaign funds before a new state ethics law goes into effect on January 1, 2009, that will prohibit any individual or entity with existing state contracts of more than $50,000 from contributing to entities like Friends of Blagojevich.
60. In response to questions posed by agents, Individual A has described efforts
by ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Fundrasier A to obtain campaign contributions from state
contractors by the end of the year. Specifically, Individual A advised that ROD
BLAGOJEVICH is seeking a total of approximately $2.5 million in campaign contributions
by the end of the year, principally from or through individuals identified on a list maintained
by Friends of Blagojevich. The FBI has obtained a copy of that list, which identifies
individuals and entities targeted for campaign contributions, as well as amounts sought from
those individuals and entities. A comparison of the names and entities on that list with
information available from public sources and FBI investigative files reflects that numerous
of the individuals and entities on that list have state contracts or have received public benefits
conferred by ROD BLAGOJEVICH , such as appointments to positions in state government.
61. In response to questions, Individual A has advised agents of incidents involving
efforts by ROD BLAGOJEVICH to obtain campaign contributions in connection with his
official actions as Governor. Three such incidents are related below .
62. On October 6, 2008, Individual A and Individual B attended a meeting with
ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS . Individual B sought the meeting with ROD

32

BLAGOJEVICH to discuss help ROD BLAGOJEVICH could provide to Individual B ’s business venture. After Individual B left the meeting, ROD BLAGOJEVICH informed Individual A that ROD BLAGOJEVICH liked Individual B and/or Individual B ’s project and wanted Individual A to approach Individual B about raising $100,000 for Friends of Blagojevich by the end of the year. According to Individual A , he later learned that ROD BLAGOJEVICH reached out directly to Individual B to ask Individual B to hold a fund raiser for ROD BLAGOJEVICH before the end of the year.
63. According to Individual A , after Individual B left the meeting on October 6,
2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Individual A that he was going to make an upcoming
announcement concerning a $1.8 billion project involving the Tollway Authority. ROD
BLAGOJEVICH told Individual A that Lobbyist 1 was going to approach Highway Contractor 1 to ask for $500,000 for Friends of Blagojevich. ROD BLAGOJEVICH told
Individual A that, “I could have made a larger announcement but wanted to see how they perform by the end of the year. If they don’t perform , fuck ‘em.” According to Individual A , he/she believed that ROD BLAGOJEVICH was telling Individual A that ROD
BLAGOJEVICH expected Highway Contractor 1 to raise $500,000 in contributions to
Friends of Blagojevich and that ROD BLAGOJEVICH is willing to commit additional state money to the Tollway project but is waiting to see how much money Highway Contractor 1
raises for Friends of Blagojevich.

33

64. A search of public information available on the internet reflects that Highway
Contractor 1 is an officer of a company that is a large supplier of concrete in the state of Illinois. The search also reflected that Highway Contractor 1 is active in one of the largest trade associations, ACPA (American Concrete Pavement Association), in the road building industry in the state of Illinois. In addition, I am aware from public sources that on October 15, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH announced a plan to have new express lanes built on the Illinois Tollway in the next few years at a cost of $1.8 billion.
65. According to Individual A, on October 8, 2008, during a discussion of
fundraising from various individuals and entities, the discussion turned to Children ’s
Memorial Hospital, and ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Individual A words to the effect of “I’m
going to do $8 million for them . I want to get [Hospital Executive 1] for 50.” Individual A
understood this to be a reference to a desire to obtain a $50,000 campaign contribution from
Hospital Executive 1, the Chief Executive Officer of Children’s Memorial Hospital.
Individual A said that he/she understood ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s reference to $8 million to relate to his recent commitment to obtain for Children’s Memorial Hospital $8 million in state funds through some type of pediatric care reimbursement. As described in further detail below , intercepted phone conversations between ROD BLAGOJEVICH and others indicate that ROD BLAGOJEVICH is contemplating rescinding his commitment of state funds to benefit Children’s Memorial Hospital because Hospital Executive 1 has not made a recent campaign contribution to ROD BLAGOJEVICH .

34

66. According to Individual A , during this same meeting, ROD BLAGOJEVICH
began discussing recent media reports about the possibility that Antoin “Tony” Rezko was cooperating with the government. According to Individual A , at one point in the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH said words to the effect that he was not concerned about Rezko’s cooperation because he was not involved in illegal activity with Rezko. According to the Individual A , Fundraiser A then said words to the effect of, “unless prospectively somebody gets you on a wire.”
67. On October 22, 2008, the FBI intercepted pursuant to a court order portions of
a meeting held in a conference room at the Friends of Blagojevich office. The meeting was
attended by ROD BLAGOJEVICH , Fundraiser A , and two lobbyists actively involved in
fundraising for Friends of Blagojevich. FBI Special Agents have listened to a recording of
the meeting. The voices on the recording are very low and at times are difficult to hear.
However, based on a review of the recording, FBI Special Agents were able to determine the
following:1 7

(a) At approximately 10:15 a.m ., and consistent with phone records, ROD

17 Voice identifications of the individuals on the oral intercepts or, as described in detail below , on the phones, are preliminary. In most cases, voice identifications are based on names used during the intercepted conversations, as well as voice recognition that has been accomplished to date by FBI monitoring personnel and/or telephone subscriber information . In addition, quoted sections of intercepts or phone calls are based on preliminary analysis of the intercepts or calls and are not final transcripts. For purposes of clarification, I have added interpretations of certain sections of the phone calls within the quoted language by inserting the clarification in parentheses.
35

BLAGOJEVICH called Highway Contractor 1. Only ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s portion of
the phone call can be heard. The call started with ROD BLAGOJEVICH saying hello to
“Mr. [Highway Contractor 1]” and noting that ROD BLAGOJEVICH was “excited” about
the “Tollway” (believed to be a reference to ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s recent announcement
of $1.8 billion in Illinois Tollway funding that will benefit Highway Contractor 1 and the
trade association with which he is affiliated). ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked about speaking
with “[Individual C ],” (Individual C is a former member of the U .S. House of
Representatives who is believed to be attempting to assist ROD BLAGOJEVICH in passing a capital bill worth billions of dollars that would benefit Highway Contractor 1 and the trade association with which he is affiliated) and began, in the context of asking Highway Contractor 1 to do fund raising, to discuss fund raising rule changes that will take effect on January 1, 2009. The conversation ended with ROD BLAGOJEVICH stating to Highway Contractor 1: “Call me if you need anything.”

2. Information Obtained from Intercepted Phone Conversations
Concerning Efforts to Obtain Campaign Contributions In Exchange for Official Acts
68. Certain of the intercepted telephone communications relate to ROD
BLAGOJEVICH ’s efforts to illegally obtain campaign contributions in exchange for official
action, in violation of his duty of honest services to the State and people of Illinois. The
interceptions to date have corroborated the testimony of witnesses in the Rezko Trial who
testified that ROD BLAGOJEVICH was involved in obtaining campaign contributions in

36

exchange for official action and directly corroborate the information provided by Individual A that ROD BLAGOJEVICH is engaged in an effort to obtain as many contributions as possible from persons doing business with the State of Illinois before the end of the year. Among these communications are the following:

a. On the morning of November 12, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked
to Fundraiser A . During the course of the conversation, which principally concerned the
status of campaign fundraising efforts, Fundraiser A told ROD BLAGOJEVICH that
Fundraiser A had never heard from Hospital Executive 1. Fundraiser A said, “I’ve left three
messages there so I’m gonna quit calling. I feel stupid now .” ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked
when the most recent call was, and Fundraiser A replied that it was two days ago. ROD
BLAGOJEVICH said that if “they don’t get back to you, then, then, last resort is, I’ll call.”

b. Later on November 12, 2008, at approximately 2:14 p.m ., ROD
BLAGOJEVICH spoke with Deputy Governor A , a Deputy Governor of the State of Illinois. The following exchange began the conversation:

ROD BLAGOJEVICH :

DEPUTY GOVERNOR A :

ROD BLAGOJEVICH :

DEPUTY GOVERNOR A :

ROD BLAGOJEVICH :

DEPUTY GOVERNOR A :

The pediatric doctors - the reimbursement. Has
that gone out yet, or is that still on hold?”

The rate increase?

Yeah.

It’s January 1.

And we have total discretion over it?

Yep.

37

ROD BLAGOJEVICH : We could pull it back if we needed to - budgetary
concerns - right?

DEPUTY GOVERNOR A : We sure could. Yep.

ROD BLAGOJEVICH : Ok. That’s good to know .

c. On November 12, 2008, at approximately 8:26 p.m ., Fundraiser A called
ROD BLAGOJEVICH and reported the status of fundraising efforts. During the conversation ROD BLAGOJEVICH instructed Fundraiser A to call Lobbyist 1 the following day and ask Lobbyist 1 what to do about the fact that Hospital Executive 1 is not calling Fundraiser A back and inquire whether it was possible that Individual A had instructed Hospital Executive 1 not to call back (see Paragraph 65). ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked, “what do we do with this guy, [Hospital Executive 1]?”

d. On November 13, 2008, at approximately 10:05 a.m ., ROD
BLAGOJEVICH talked with Fundraiser A . The discussion concerned the status of
fundraising efforts. During this call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked about Highway
Contractor 1. Fundraiser A stated that Lobbyist 1 is still working with Highway Contractor
1. Fundraiser A also advised ROD BLAGOJEVICH that he will be meeting Lobbyist 2 to meet with an individual at Weiss Memorial Hospital. ROD BLAGOJEVICH states: “Yeah, now be real careful there. I mean, the FBI went to see [Lobbyist 2]. You understand?” Fundraiser A also said that he had a call into Individual A and that Fundraiser A will talk to Individual A about Hospital Executive 1.

38

e. Also during this call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Fundraiser A spoke
about efforts to raise funds from two other individuals before the end of the year. Fundraiser
A advised ROD BLAGOJEVICH that with respect to one of these individuals, Contributor
1,1 8 Lobbyist 1 had informed Fundraiser A that Contributor 1 was “good for it” but that
Lobbyist 1 was “going to talk with you (ROD BLAGOJEVICH ) about some sensitivities
legislatively, tonight when he sees you, with regard to timing of all of this.” ROD
BLAGOJEVICH asked, “Right, before the end of the year though, right?” Fundraiser A
responded affirmatively. Later in the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he
knows Lobbyist 1 is “down there (Springfield, Illinois)” with Contributor 1 “pushing a bill.”
In a series of calls since that time, it became clear that the bill Lobbyist 1 is interested in is
in the Office of the Governor awaiting ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s signature. The bill, which
is believed to be a law which involves directing a percentage of casino revenue to the horse
racing industry, is expected to be signed as soon as next week. In a call on December 3,
Lobbyist 1 advised ROD BLAGOJEVICH that Lobbyist 1 had a private conversation with
Contributor 1 about the contribution (“commitment”) Contributor 1 had not yet made and
advised Contributor 1 “look, there is a concern that there is going to be some skittishness if
your bill gets signed because of the timeliness of the commitment” and made clear that the
contribution “got to be in now .” ROD BLAGOJEVICH commented to Lobbyist 1 “good”

Contributor 1 is listed on the Friends of Blagojevich spreadsheet as someone from whom Friends of Blagojevich was seeking $100,000 in contributions and Lobbyist 1 is listed as one of the contacts for Contributor 1.
39

and “good job.” In a call the next day, Lobbyist 1 asked ROD BLAGOJEVICH to call Contributor 1 “just to say hello, I’m working on the timing of this thing, but it’s gonna get done.” Lobbyist 1 suggested that it is better for ROD BLAGOJEVICH to make the call personally “from a pressure point of view .” ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he would call Contributor 1 and indicate that ROD BLAGOJEVICH wanted to do an event (fundraiser) downstate “so we can get together and start picking some dates to do a bill signing.” Lobbyist 1 assured ROD BLAGOJEVICH that Contributor 1 would be good for the donation because Lobbyist 1 “got in his face.”

f. With respect to the second individual discussed during the November
13, 2008 call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Fundraiser A discussed “60" (believed to be
$60,000) that they have “in hand” from a fundraiser held the prior evening by the president
of Engineering Firm 1. According to public records maintained by the State of Illinois,
Engineering Firm 1 received in excess of $10 million from the State of Illinois during each
of fiscal years 2004 through 2008. Shortly after completing this call, at approximately 10:15
a.m . on November 13, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke by telephone with the president
of Engineering Firm 1, and told him , “I want to thank you again for your support and
friendship and we are going to do everything we can to get that capital bill.” Public source
information indicates that ROD BLAGOJEVICH is supporting a bill that would provide
billions of dollars for infrastructure and would benefit companies like Engineering Firm 1.

40

g. On November 14, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked to Fundraiser A .
During the conversation Fundraiser A told ROD BLAGOJEVICH that he had spoken with Individual A , and that ROD BLAGOJEVICH needed to call Hospital Executive 1. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that he would call him .

3. Evidence Concerning Efforts to Use ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s
Influence Over the Expenditure of State Funds for the Private Purpose of Inducing the Firing of Chicago Tribune Editorial Board Members Critical of ROD BLAGOJEVICH
69. Intercepted phone calls reflect that ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN
HARRIS, together with others, are corruptly using and threatening to use the powers of ROD
BLAGOJEVICH ’s office as Governor of the State of Illinois to exert financial pressure on the owners of the Tribune Company, the parent corporation of the Chicago Tribune newspaper, to fire Chicago Tribune editorial board members who were responsible for editorials sharply critical of ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s actions as Governor and, among other things, calling for his impeachment.
70. Media accounts reflect that Tribune Owner, who acquired effective control of
the Tribune Company as a result of a financial transaction in 2007, has sought to sell the
Chicago Cubs, currently owned by the Tribune Company, and to use the proceeds of that sale
to pay debt associated with his acquisition of the Tribune Company. Media accounts also
reflect that final bids for the purchase of the Cubs were due by November 26, 2008; that
Tribune Owner needs the proceeds from the sale of the Cubs to pay down debt associated
with the Tribune Company acquisition; and that a loan agreement relating to his purchase of

41

the Tribune Company may require Tribune Owner to accelerate payments if he is unable to reduce the debt by specified amounts.
71. Based on a review of intercepted phone calls, it appears that the Tribune
Company, in connection with its efforts to sell the Cubs, has explored the possibility of
obtaining financial assistance from the Illinois Finance Authority (“IFA ”) relating to the
financing or sale of Wrigley Field.1 9 During the course of this investigation, agents have
intercepted a series of communications regarding the efforts of ROD BLAGOJEVICH and
JOHN HARRIS to corruptly use the power and influence of the Office of the Governor to
cause the firing of Chicago Tribune editorial board members as a condition of State of
Illinois financial assistance in connection with Wrigley Field. The phone calls reflect that
ROD BLAGOJEVICH directed JOHN HARRIS to inform Tribune Owner and an associate
of Tribune Owner, Tribune Financial Advisor (Tribune Financial Advisor is believed to be
an individual identified in media accounts as a top assistant and financial advisor to Tribune
Owner, who played a significant role in Tribune Owner’s purchase of the Tribune), that State
of Illinois financial assistance for the Tribune Company’s sale of Wrigley Field would not
be forthcoming unless members of the Chicago Tribune’s editorial board were fired. Set out

19 According to its website, the “IFA ’s role is to support the Governor of Illinois’
economic development agenda. IFA is uniquely positioned to provide such support by
providing required financing resources for businesses, municipalities and not-profit entities.”
Further, according to its website the IFA ’s mission is “to foster economic development to
public and private institutions that create and retain jobs and improve the quality of life in
Illinois by providing access to capital.” The IFA is a State of Illinois authority and the
governor of the State of Illinois appoints the members of the IFA Board of Directors.
42

below are summaries of certain of those conversations. This affidavit does not include all calls dealing with the corrupt efforts of ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS to misuse their influence over the expenditure of state funds to cause the firing of employees of the Chicago Tribune editorial board.
72. On the evening of November 3, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked to Deputy
Governor A . ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he was concerned about possibly being
impeached in the Spring and that the Chicago Tribune will be “driving” the impeachment discussion. ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked Deputy Governor A to check to see if the Tribune has recently “advocate[d]” that he be impeached. In fact, the Chicago Tribune recently had published editorials critical of ROD BLAGOJEVICH .2 0
73. In another call between ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Deputy Governor A that
occurred a short time later on November 3, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Deputy
Governor A discussed an editorial from the Chicago Tribune regarding the endorsement of
Michael Madigan and calling for a committee to consider impeaching ROD

20 On September 29, 2008, an editorial in the Chicago Tribune called for the Illinois House of Representatives to investigate whether articles of impeachment are warranted against ROD BLAGOJEVICH . In addition, on October 25, 2008, the Chicago Tribune editorial board issued certain endorsements in state political races. An editorial endorsing Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives Michael Madigan stated: “House Speaker Michael Madigan resists Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s worst impulses. Actually, he resists all of Blagojevich’s impulses. Now ’s the time for Madigan to create a House committee to study if there are valid grounds to impeach the governor.” In its separate endorsement of Illinois Representative David Miller, the Tribune wrote that he, “is a quality legislator, well-versed in education, health care and human services issues. (He’s also the only dentist in the legislature. Can he extract a governor? ).”
43

BLAGOJEVICH . During the call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s wife can be heard in the
background telling ROD BLAGOJEVICH to tell Deputy Governor A “to hold up that
fucking Cubs shit. . . fuck them.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked Deputy Governor A what
he thinks of his wife’s idea. Deputy Governor A stated that there is a part of what ROD
BLAGOJEVICH ’s wife said that he “agree[s] with.” Deputy Governor A told ROD
BLAGOJEVICH that Tribune Owner will say that he does not have anything to do with the
editorials, “but I would tell him, look, if you want to get your Cubs thing done get rid of this
Tribune.” Later, ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s wife got on the phone and, during the continuing
discussion of the critical Tribune editorials, stated that Tribune Owner can “just fire” the
writers because Tribune Owner owns the Tribune. ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s wife stated that
if Tribune Owner’s papers were hurting his business, Tribune Owner would do something
about the editorial board. ROD BLAGOJEVICH then got back on the phone. ROD
BLAGOJEVICH told Deputy Governor A to put together the articles in the Tribune that are
on the topic of removing ROD BLAGOJEVICH from office and they will then have
someone, like JOHN HARRIS, go to Tribune Owner and say, “We’ve got some decisions
to make now .” ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that “someone should say, ‘get rid of those
people.’” ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that he thinks that they should put this all together and
then have HARRIS or somebody go talk to the Tribune owners and say, “Look, we’ve got
decisions to make now . . . moving this stuff forward (believed to be a reference to the IFA
helping with the Cubs sale) . . . someone’s gotta go to [Tribune Owner], we want to see him

44

. . it’s a political fuckin’ operation in there.” Deputy Governor A agreed and said that
HARRIS needs to be “sensitive” about how he does it. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said there is
nothing sensitive about how you do it and that it’s “straight forward” and you say “we’re
doing this stuff for you, we believe this is right for Illinois [and] this is a big deal to [Tribune
Owner] financially” but what ROD BLAGOJEVICH is doing to help Tribune Owner is the
same type of action that the Tribune is saying should be the basis for ROD
BLAGOJEVICH’s impeachment. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said Tribune Owner should be told
“maybe we can’t do this now . Fire those fuckers.” Deputy Governor A suggested that ROD
BLAGOJEVICH say, “I’m not sure that we can do this anymore because we’ve been getting
a ton of these editorials that say, look, we’re going around the legislature, we gotta stop and
this is something the legislature hasn’t approved. We don’t want to go around the legislature
anymore.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH agreed and said that he wants HARRIS to go in and make
that case, “not me.” Deputy Governor A agreed and said that he likes it. ROD
BLAGOJEVICH asked Deputy Governor A to put the list of Tribune articles together.
74. During another intercepted call still later on the evening of November 3, 2008,
ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with Advisor A , a former Deputy Governor under ROD
BLAGOJEVICH who is currently a lobbyist. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he is going
to go to Tribune Owner and tell Tribune Owner that ROD BLAGOJEVICH will not help
Tribune Owner because Tribune Owner’s own paper will argue to impeach ROD
BLAGOJEVICH for his actions in helping Tribune Owner. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated

45

they are going to go to Tribune Owner “before we pull the trigger on this deal” (believed to be a reference to helping Tribune Owner at the IFA ).
75. During an intercepted call on November 4, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke
with Deputy Governor A . ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Deputy Governor A to think about the
“Tribune stuff” and that he is going to talk to HARRIS as well. Deputy Governor A confirmed that he has people doing the “research right now .” ROD BLAGOJEVICH , in discussing taking the issue to Tribune Owner, stated, “then we’ll say, look, we got a problem at IFA . Here it is.”

76. During a subsequent intercepted call on November 4, 2008, ROD
BLAGOJEVICH talked with JOHN HARRIS. ROD BLAGOJEVICH discussed the Tribune
editorials suggesting that ROD BLAGOJEVICH be impeached, and told HARRIS that they
need to have a conversation with “[Tribune Financial Advisor]”2 1 (as noted above, Tribune
Financial Advisor is believed to be a top adviser to Tribune Owner who played a significant
role in Tribune Owner’s purchase of the Tribune), Cubs Chairman, and Tribune Owner and
explain that the Tribune is writing editorials criticizing ROD BLAGOJEVICH for taking
actions like those Tribune Owner wants ROD BLAGOJEVICH to take “on this Cubs deal
at the IFA .” ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that because of the impeachment articles, “we
don’t know if we can take a chance and do this IFA deal now . I don’t want to give them a

21 Tribune Financial Advisor’s first name was used by ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS during the conversations.
46

grounds to impeach me.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that “our recommendation is fire all
those fucking people, get ‘em the fuck out of there and get us some editorial support.”
77. During an intercepted call on November 5, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked
to JOHN HARRIS, Advisor A , and Spokesman, a State of Illinois employee who is the
official spokesperson for the Governor’s office. During part of the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH instructed HARRIS to call someone at the Tribune and “lay a foundation with them .” HARRIS agreed to call Tribune Financial Advisor. ROD BLAGOJEVICH told HARRIS to tell Tribune Financial Advisor “this is a serious thing now ” and that the only “way around it” is around the legislature and that the Tribune is “trumping up impeachment discussions because I do this stuff to get things done.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH told HARRIS to tell Tribune Financial Advisor that “everything is lined up, but before we go to the next level we need to have a discussion about what you guys are going to do about that newspaper.” HARRIS stated that he “won’t be so direct.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH told HARRIS “yeah, you know what you got to say.”
78. During intercepted calls on November 6, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke
with JOHN HARRIS. ROD BLAGOJEVICH mentioned a Chicago Tribune editorial
published that day about “disservices” ROD BLAGOJEVICH had done to the State of
Illinois and suggested that HARRIS call Tribune Financial Advisor about it. ROD
Blagojevich and HARRIS then discussed a conversation HARRIS had with “[Tribune
Financial Advisor]” the prior day. HARRIS said he told Tribune Financial Advisor that

47

things “look like they could move ahead fine but, you know , there is a risk that all of this is
going to get derailed by your own editorial page .” HARRIS said that he told Tribune
Financial Advisor that they need to have a discussion on how they might tone things down
and change the focus of “that page.” HARRIS said that Tribune Financial Advisor said that
is a delicate issue, that Tribune Financial Advisor wanted to come in and talk to HARRIS
about it, and that Tribune Financial Advisor will talk to Tribune Owner preliminarily about
it. Later in the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and HARRIS talked about an upcoming
meeting HARRIS will have with an individual at the Tribune (believed to be Tribune
Financial Advisor). HARRIS stated that he will tell the individual that in HARRIS ’s
experience you cannot “tread lightly” and you need “to make wholesale changes.” HARRIS
stated that he will “throw it out there and let them figure out how to do it.” ROD
BLAGOJEVICH stated that HARRIS’s suggestion will be to “get rid of these people” and
that “the other point you want to make is in fact, we, we sure would like to get some editorial
support from your paper. Okay?” HARRIS stated, “I want to do that in person.” HARRIS
stated that they will not get editorial support “out of the current crew .” ROD
BLAGOJEVICH said, “this is a priority. Stay on it right. I mean, he, he gets the message,
doesn’t he?” HARRIS replied, “Oh yeah. He got it loud and clear.” In apparent reference
to the prospect of IFA assistance for the Wrigley Field deal, ROD BLAGOJEVICH then
asked, “what does this mean to them? Like $500 million? What does it mean to [Tribune
Owner] in real terms?” HARRIS replied, “To them ? About $100 million . . .maybe 150.”

48

ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that he thought “it was worth like $500 million to ‘em .” ROD
BLAGOJEVICH and HARRIS then discussed the details of the deal the Cubs are trying to
get through the IFA . HARRIS said that it is basically a tax mitigation scheme where the IFA
will “own title to the building” (believed to be Wrigley Field), and the Tribune will not “have
to pay capital gains tax.” HARRIS explained that the total gain to the Tribune is in the
neighborhood of $100 million. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said, “$100 million is nothing to
sneeze at. That’s still worth something, isn’t it?” HARRIS said he planned on seeing
“[Tribune Financial Advisor]” the following Monday (November 10, 2008).
79. During an intercepted call on November 11, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH
talked with JOHN HARRIS. ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked HARRIS about the Tribune issue.
HARRIS said that he met with Tribune Financial Advisor the prior day (November 10,
2008), and that Tribune Financial Advisor talked to Tribune Owner and Tribune Owner “got
the message and is very sensitive to the issue.” HARRIS stated that according to Tribune
Financial Advisor, there will be “certain corporate reorganizations and budget cuts coming
and, reading between the lines, he’s going after that section.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH
responded, “oh, that’s fantastic.” According to HARRIS, Tribune Financial Advisor did not
acknowledge that “he interferes in that operation. . . but I got the clear feeling that, that he
was, uh, very sensitive to our concerns.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked HARRIS whether
Tribune Financial Advisor understood the time line in which ROD BLAGOJEVICH wanted
changes made in relation to “our ability to do this without the legislature” (believed to be a

49

reference to using the IFA to help with the Cubs financing). HARRIS stated “correct . . .
November, December.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH responded, “right.” HARRIS said that he
expects “before the end of this month [November] there’s gonna be some reorganization or
cuts” (believed to be a reference to changes in the editorial department). ROD
BLAGOJEVICH replied, “Wow . Okay, keep our fingers crossed. You’re the man. Good
job, John.”
80. During an intercepted call on November 20, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH
spoke with JOHN HARRIS. ROD BLAGOJEVICH began the conversation by asking
HARRIS whether HARRIS is “making any progress on that Tribune editorial board with
[Tribune Financial Advisor]?” HARRIS said he had not heard back from Tribune Financial
Advisor. ROD BLAGOJEVICH directed HARRIS to “be smart and stay on top of that” and
advised HARRIS that Spokesman just informed ROD BLAGOJEVICH that the Tribune
editorial board was not willing to listen to Deputy Governor A and basically hung up on
Deputy Governor A . ROD BLAGOJEVICH told HARRIS to touch base with Spokesman
and Deputy Governor A . ROD BLAGOJEVICH told HARRIS to “keep talking to [Tribune
Financial Advisor] about this.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH then suggested that HARRIS could
say the following to Tribune Financial Advisor: “What are we going to do? We’ve got this
IFA thing. We want to do all this. How ’s that going?” ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked
HARRIS if he understood what ROD BLAGOJEVICH wants, and told HARRIS to “use your
judgment.”

50

81. During an intercepted call on November 21, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH
spoke with JOHN HARRIS. ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked HARRIS whether he told Deputy
Governor A that “McCormick is going to get bounced at the Tribune.” (McCormick is
believed to be John P. McCormick, the Chicago Tribune’s Deputy Editorial Page Editor).
HARRIS said “no, I told him (Deputy Governor A ) that McCormick is in a bad mood,” and
that HARRIS was going “to check with [Tribune Financial Advisor] to see” whether “it was
part of that message about the cuts on the Ed board.” HARRIS stated, “I had singled out
McCormick as somebody who was the most biased and unfair.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH
responded, “to [Tribune Financial Advisor] you did?” HARRIS confirmed that it was to
Tribune Financial Advisor. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated “that would be great,” and
McCormick is a “bad guy.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked, “[Tribune Financial Advisor] is
on top of this, right?” HARRIS replied that Tribune Financial Advisor said they would be
“downsizing that division or changing personnel” and that Tribune Financial Advisor
understands and “[Tribune Owner]” understands. ROD BLAGOJEVICH confirmed that
HARRIS made the point with Tribune Financial Advisor that the Tribune is advocating that
ROD BLAGOJEVICH be impeached for going around the legislature and that “is precisely
what we’re doing on Wrigley Field.” HARRIS said he explained that information to Tribune
Financial Advisor. ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked whether Tribune Financial Advisor
understood that “we are not in a position where we can afford to do that if . . . the Tribune
is pushing impeachment.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked, “they got that, right?” HARRIS

51

replied, “right.” HARRIS suggested to ROD BLAGOJEVICH that HARRIS explained to Tribune Financial Advisor that the Tribune’s editorials discussing impeachment “could jeopardize our efforts to do good things for people as well as the other thing (helping the Cubs sale at the IFA ).” ROD BLAGOJEVICH responded, “there ya go. He got the message?” HARRIS replied, “yeah.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated “good.”
82. On November 21, 2008, approximately five minutes after the previous
conversation with JOHN HARRIS, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke again with HARRIS. At
the end of this call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that “the Tribune thing is important, if we can get that.” HARRIS replied, “delicate, very delicate.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH said, “I know , I know . Use your judgment, don’t push too hard. But you know what you got to do, right.” HARRIS responded, “Alright, sir.”
83. After hearing that Tribune Financial Advisor had assured HARRIS that the
Tribune would be downsizing or making personnel changes affecting the editorial board,
ROD BLAGOJEVICH had a series of conversations with representatives of the Chicago
Cubs regarding efforts to provide state financing for Wrigley Field. On November 30, 2008,
ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with Sports Consultant, the president of a Chicago-area sports
consulting firm , whose remarks during the conversation indicated that he was working with
the Cubs on matters involving Wrigley Field. In that conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH
and Sports Consultant discussed the importance of getting the IFA transaction approved at
the IFA ’s December 2008 or January 2009 meeting, because ROD BLAGOJEVICH was

52

contemplating leaving office in early January 2009 and ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s IFA
appointees would still be in place to approve the IFA deal. On December 3, 2008, ROD
BLAGOJEVICH spoke again with Sports Consultant and explained that ROD
BLAGOJEVICH had control over state funds designated for use in connection with science
and technology, and which could be used to pay for improvements at Wrigley Field. Later
that same day, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with Cubs Chairman and said that he could
make state science and technology funds available to the Cubs without having to go through
the legislature, and suggested that the Cubs come up with proposals that would allow the use
of such funds.
84. On December 4, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with Spokesman. On
December 4, 2008, the Chicago Tribune announced it was reducing the size of its workforce
by 11 members. During the phone conversation, Spokesman informed ROD
BLAGOJEVICH that the Tribune had its “cuts” but that Spokesman did not think the “person we mentioned” was cut. ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked “McCormick?” Spokesman responded “right.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH instructed Spokesman to “go tell HARRIS that.” Spokesman stated he had already informed HARRIS of the information.
85. On the morning December 5, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with JOHN
HARRIS. On the morning of December 5, 2008, the Chicago Tribune ran a front page news
story discussing an ongoing criminal investigation involving ROD BLAGOJEVICH . During
the phone conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and HARRIS discussed information

53

contained in the newspaper article. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated “what’s the deal? So, do
McCormick stays at the Tribune, huh?” HARRIS stated “we haven’t heard that he’s gone,
so.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated “I mean, those layoffs were minor (the December 4, 2008
Tribune layoffs).” HARRIS stated “well, I know they got a lot to do.” ROD
BLAGOJEVICH asked “there’s still more coming?” HARRIS responded “yeah, they got a lot of cuts to make.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated “okay, at some point we should talk to [Tribune Financial Advisor] again, right?” HARRIS confirmed they should talk to Tribune Financial Advisor again.

4. Evidence Concerning Efforts to Obtain Personal Benefits for ROD
BLAGOJEVICH in Return for his Appointment of a United States
Senator
86. Intercepted phone calls demonstrate that ROD BLAGOJEVICH , JOHN
HARRIS, and others have engaged and are engaged in efforts to obtain personal gain,
including financial gain, for the benefit of ROD BLAGOJEVICH and his family through the corrupt use of ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s authority as Governor of the State of Illinois to fill the vacant United States Senate Seat previously held by the President-elect.
87. By law , after the President-elect’s resignation of his position as a U .S. Senator,
which was effective on November 16, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH has sole authority to
appoint his replacement for the two years remaining of the President-elect’s Senate term . See
10 ILCS 5/25-8. During the course of this investigation, agents have intercepted a series of
communications regarding the efforts of ROD BLAGOJEVICH , JOHN HARRIS, and others

54

to misuse this power to obtain personal gain, including financial gain, for ROD BLAGOJEVICH and his family. In particular, ROD BLAGOJEVICH has been intercepted conspiring to trade the senate seat for particular positions that the President-elect has the power to appoint (e.g. the Secretary of Health and Human Services). ROD BLAGOJEVICH has also been intercepted conspiring to sell the Senate seat in exchange for his wife’s placement on paid corporate boards or ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s placement at a private foundation in a significant position with a substantial salary. ROD BLAGOJEVICH has also been intercepted conspiring to sell the Senate seat in exchange for millions of dollars in funding for a non-profit organization that he would start and that would employ him at a substantial salary after he left the governorship.
88. Set out below are summaries of certain of the conversations referenced above.
This affidavit does not include all calls dealing with the corrupt efforts of ROD
BLAGOJEVICH , JOHN HARRIS , and others to misuse the power of ROD
BLAGOJEVICH to appoint a United States Senator for the personal gain of ROD
BLAGOJEVICH and his family, nor does this affidavit set forth other calls where ROD
BLAGOJEVICH and others discussed a possible appointment to the Senate seat based on
considerations other than financial gain for ROD BLAGOJEVICH and his family,
discussions which took place with greater frequency after efforts to arrange for a private job
for ROD BLAGOJEVICH in exchange for appointing a particular candidate to the open
Senate seat did not meet with success. As set forth below , more recent discussions focused

55

on an effort to obtain campaign contributions up front in consideration of an appointment to the Senate.
89. On November 3, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with Deputy Governor
A . This discussion occurred the day before the United States Presidential election. ROD
BLAGOJEVICH and Deputy Governor A discussed the potential Senate seat vacancy.
During the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Deputy Governor A that if he is not
going to get anything of value for the open Senate seat, then ROD BLAGOJEVICH will take
the Senate seat himself: “if . . . they’re not going to offer anything of any value, then I might
just take it.”
90. Later on November 3, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with Advisor A .
By this time, media reports indicated that Senate Candidate 1, an advisor to the President-
elect, was interested in the Senate seat if it became vacant, and was likely to be supported by the President-elect. During the call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated, “unless I get something real good for [Senate Candidate 1], shit, I’ll just send myself, you know what I’m saying.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH later stated, “I’m going to keep this Senate option for me a real possibility, you know , and therefore I can drive a hard bargain. You hear what I’m saying. And if I don’t get what I want and I’m not satisfied with it, then I’ll just take the Senate seat myself.” Later, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that the Senate seat “is a fucking valuable thing, you just don’t give it away for nothing.”

56

91. On November 4, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with Deputy Governor
A . This was the same day as the United States Presidential election. With respect to the Senate seat, Deputy Governor A suggested putting together a list of things that ROD BLAGOJEVICH would accept in exchange for the Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH responded that the list “can’t be in writing.” Thereafter, ROD BLAGOJEVICH discussed whether he could obtain an ambassadorship in exchange for the Senate seat.
92. On November 4, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with JOHN HARRIS
regarding the potential vacant Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that the “trick . .
. is how do you conduct indirectly . . . a negotiation” for the Senate seat. Thereafter, ROD
BLAGOJEVICH analogized his situation to that of a sports agent shopping a potential free
agent to various teams, stating “how much are you offering, [President-elect]? What are you
offering, [Senate Candidate 2]? . . . Can always go to. . . [Senate Candidate 3].” Later ROD
BLAGOJEVICH stated that he will make a decision on the Senate seat “in good faith . . . but
it is not coming for free. . . .It’s got to be good stuff for the people of Illinois and good for
me.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH states “[President-elect], you want it? Fine. But, its got to be good or I could always take [the Senate seat].”
93. On November 5, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with Deputy Governor
A regarding positions that ROD BLAGOJEVICH might be able to obtain in exchange for the
soon-to-be vacated Senate seat. Among the potential positions discussed were Secretary of
Health and Human Services and various ambassadorships. Deputy Governor A noted that

57

the cabinet position of Secretary of the Energy is “the one that makes the most money.”
Deputy Governor A stated that it is hard not to give the Secretary of Energy position to a
Texan, but with ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s coal background it might be a possibility.
94. On November 5, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with JOHN HARRIS
regarding what ROD BLAGOJEVICH could obtain for the Senate seat. After discussing
various federal governmental positions that ROD BLAGOJEVICH would trade the Senate
seat for, ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked about “the private sector” and whether the President-
elect could “put something together there. . . .Something big.” Thereafter, HARRIS
suggested that the President-elect could make ROD BLAGOJEVICH the head of a private foundation. ROD BLAGOJEVICH told HARRIS that he should do “homework” on private foundations “right away.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked whether he could get a high-ranking position at the Red Cross. HARRIS stated that “it’s got to be a group that is dependent on [the President-elect],” and that a President probably could not influence the Red Cross. ROD BLAGOJEVICH told HARRIS to “look into all of those.”
95. On November 5, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with JOHN HARRIS and
Deputy Governor A . They discussed potential private foundations with which ROD
BLAGOJEVICH might be able to get a position in exchange for filling the Senate seat and, in particular, those foundations that are “heavily dependent on federal aid” and which, therefore, the White House would have the most “influence” on. ROD BLAGOJEVICH wanted to know how much the positions being discussed pay.

58

96. On November 5, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with Advisor A about
the Senate seat. During the phone call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that the President-elect can remove somebody from a foundation and give the spot to ROD BLAGOJEVICH . In regards to the Senate seat, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated “I’ve got this thing and it’s fucking golden, and, uh, uh, I’m just not giving it up for fuckin’ nothing. I’m not gonna do it. And, and I can always use it. I can parachute me there.”
97. On November 6, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with Spokesman. ROD
BLAGOJEVICH told Spokesman to leak to a particular columnist for the Chicago Sun-
Times, that Senate Candidate 2 is in the running for the vacant Senate seat. According to ROD BLAGOJEVICH , by doing this, he wanted “to send a message to the [President-elect’s] people,” but did not want it known that the message was from ROD BLAGOJEVICH . Thereafter, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Spokesman discussed specific language that should be used in the Sun Times column and arguments as to why Senate Candidate 2 made sense for the vacant Senate seat. A review of this particular Sun Times column on November 7, 2008, indicates references to the specific language and arguments regarding Senate Candidate 2 as a potential candidate for the Senate seat, as discussed by ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Spokesman.
98. On November 7, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with Advisor A about
the Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he is willing to “trade” the Senate seat to

59

Senate Candidate 1 in exchange for the position of Secretary of Health and Human Services in the President-elect’s cabinet.
99. Later on November 7, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH discussed the open Senate
seat in a three-way call with JOHN HARRIS and Advisor B, a Washington D .C .-based
consultant. ROD BLAGOJEVICH indicated in the call that if he was appointed as Secretary
of Health and Human Services by the President-elect, then ROD BLAGOJEVICH would
appoint Senate Candidate 1 to the open Senate seat. HARRIS stated “we wanted our ask to
be reasonable and rather than. . .make it look like some sort of selfish grab for a quid pro
quo.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he needs to consider his family and that he is
“financially” hurting. HARRIS said that they are considering what will help the “financial
security” of the Blagojevich family and what will keep ROD BLAGOJEVICH “politically
viable.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated, “I want to make money.” During the call, ROD
BLAGOJEVICH , HARRIS, and Advisor B discussed the prospect of working a three-way
deal for the open Senate seat. HARRIS noted that ROD BLAGOJEVICH is interested in
taking a high-paying position with an organization called “Change to Win,” which is
connected to Service Employees International Union (“SEIU ”).2 2 HARRIS suggested that
SEIU Official make ROD BLAGOJEVICH the head of Change to Win and, in exchange, the
President-elect could help Change to Win with its legislative agenda on a national level.

22 Open source information indicates that Change to Win is an organization affiliated
with seven unions, including SEIU , and appears to be focused on having the affiliated unions
work together on matters of common interest. SEIU Official is affiliated with SEIU .
60

Advisor B asked why SEIU Official cannot just give the job to ROD BLAGOJEVICH .
HARRIS responded that it would be just a big “give away” for SEIU Official and Change
to Win since there are already individuals on the Change to Win payroll doing the functions
of the position that would be created for ROD BLAGOJEVICH . HARRIS said that Change
to Win will want to trade the job for ROD BLAGOJEVICH for something from the
President-elect. HARRIS suggested a “three-way deal,” and explained that a three-way deal
like the one discussed would give the President-elect a “buffer so there is no obvious quid
pro quo for [Senate Candidate 1].” ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that for him to give up the
governorship for the Change to Win position, the Change to Win position must pay a lot
more than he is getting paid right now . Advisor B said that he liked the idea of the three-way
deal. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he is interested in making $250,000 to $300,000 and
being on some organization boards. Advisor B said they should leverage the President
elect’s desire to have Senate Candidate 1 appointed to the Senate seat in order to get a head
position with Change to Win and a salary. Advisor B agreed that the three-way deal would
be a better plan than ROD BLAGOJEVICH appointing Senate Candidate 2 to the Senate seat
and getting more done as Governor.
100. On November 8, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with JOHN HARRIS
about the Senate seat. During the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and HARRIS
discussed whether it would be possible to obtain a financial benefit for ROD
BLAGOJEVICH ’s wife in relation to the Senate seat. Specifically, ROD BLAGOJEVICH

61

referred to his wife’s Series 7 license2 3 and asked “is there a play here, with these guys, with her” to work for a firm in Washington or New York at a significantly better salary than she is making now . Also, ROD BLAGOJEVICH wanted to know whether SEIU could do something to get his wife a position at Change to Win until ROD BLAGOJEVICH could take a position at Change to Win.
101. On November 10, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH , his wife, JOHN HARRIS,
Governor General Counsel, and various Washington-D .C . based advisors, including Advisor
B , discussed the open Senate seat during a conference call. (The Washington D .C .-based
advisors to ROD BLAGOJEVICH are believed to have participated on this call from Washington D .C.). Various individuals participated at different times during the call. The call lasted for approximately two hours, and what follows are simply summaries of various portions of the two-hour call.
a. ROD BLAGOJEVICH expressed his interest in figuring out a way to
make money and build some financial security, while at the same time potentially
participating in the political arena again. ROD BLAGOJEVICH mentioned the Senate seat,
the dynamics of a new Presidential administration with the strong contacts that ROD
BLAGOJEVICH has in it, and asked what if anything he can do to make that work for him
and his wife and his responsibilities as Governor of Illinois. ROD BLAGOJEVICH

23 A Series 7 license is the most comprehensive of several securities licenses and permits an agent to communicate with retail investors.
62

suggested during the call that he could name himself to the open Senate seat to avoid impeachment by the State of Illinois legislature. ROD BLAGOJEVICH agreed it was unlikely that the President-elect would name him Secretary of Health and Human Services or give him an ambassadorship because of all of the negative publicity surrounding ROD BLAGOJEVICH .
b. ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked what he can get from the President-elect
for the Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that Governor General Counsel believes
the President-elect can get ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s wife on paid corporate boards in
exchange for naming the President-elect’s pick to the Senate. Governor General Counsel
asked, “can [the President-elect] help in the private sector. . . where it wouldn’t be tied to
him ? . . .I mean, so it wouldn’t necessarily look like one for the other.” ROD
BLAGOJEVICH ’s wife suggested during the call that she is qualified to sit on corporate
boards and has a background in real estate and appraisals. ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked
whether there is something that could be done with his wife’s “series 7" license in terms of
working out a deal for the Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he is “struggling”
financially and does “not want to be Governor for the next two years.”
c. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that the consultants (Advisor B and another
consultant are believed to be on the call at that time) are telling him that he has to “suck it
up” for two years and do nothing and give this “motherfucker [the President-elect] his
senator. Fuck him . For nothing? Fuck him .” ROD BLAGOJEVICH states that he will put

63

“[Senate Candidate 4]” in the Senate “before I just give fucking [Senate Candidate 1] a
fucking Senate seat and I don’t get anything.” (Senate Candidate 4 is a Deputy Governor of
the State of Illinois). ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that he needs to find a way to take the
“financial stress” off of his family and that his wife is as qualified or more qualified than
another specifically named individual to sit on corporate boards. According to ROD
BLAGOJEVICH , “the immediate challenge [is] how do we take some of the financial
pressure off of our family.” Later in the phone call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that absent
getting something back, ROD BLAGOJEVICH will not pick Senate Candidate 1. HARRIS
re-stated ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s thoughts that they should ask the President-elect for
something for ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s financial security as well as maintain his political
viability. HARRIS said they could work out a three-way deal with SEIU and the President-
elect where SEIU could help the President-elect with ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s appointment
of Senate Candidate 1 to the vacant Senate seat, ROD BLAGOJEVICH would obtain a
position as the National Director of the Change to Win campaign, and SEIU would get
something favorable from the President-elect in the future.

d. One of ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s advisors said he likes the idea, it
sounds like a good idea, but advised ROD BLAGOJEVICH to be leery of promises for
something two years from now . ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s wife said they would take the job
now . Thereafter, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and others on the phone call discussed various ways

64

ROD BLAGOJEVICH can “monetize” the relationships he is making as Governor to make money after ROD BLAGOJEVICH is no longer Governor.
102. Later on November 10, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Advisor A discussed
the open Senate seat. Among other things, ROD BLAGOJEVICH raised the issue of
whether the President-elect could help get ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s wife on “paid corporate
boards right now .” Advisor A responded that he “think[s] they could” and that a “President
elect . . . can do almost anything he sets his mind to.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH states that he
will appoint “[Senate Candidate 1] . . . but if they feel like they can do this and not fucking
give me anything . . . then I’ll fucking go [Senate Candidate 5].” (Senate Candidate 5 is
publicly reported to be interested in the open Senate seat). ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated
that if his wife could get on some corporate boards and “picks up another 150 grand a year
or whatever” it would help ROD BLAGOJEVICH get through the next several years as
Governor.
103. Later on November 10, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Advisor A again
discussed the open Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Advisor A discussed leaking to
the same particular Chicago Sun-Times columnist that ROD BLAGOJEVICH is seriously
considering Senate Candidate 5 for the open Senate seat, in order to send a message to the
President-elect that there are options for the Senate seat beyond Senate Candidate 1. At the
end of the conversation Advisor A agreed to call the Sun Times columnist to leak the story
(believed, based on other intercepted conversations, to be untrue), that ROD

65

BLAGOJEVICH had a “long, productive discussion” with Senate Candidate 5 regarding the open Senate seat.
104. On November 11, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with JOHN HARRIS about the Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH suggested starting a 501(c)(4) organization (a non-profit organization that may engage in political activity and lobbying) and getting “his (believed to be the President-elect’s) friend Warren Buffett or some of those guys to help us on something like that.” HARRIS asked, “what, for you?” ROD BLAGOJEVICH replied, “yeah.” Later in the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that if he appoints Senate Candidate 4 to the Senate seat and, thereafter, it appears that ROD BLAGOJEVICH might get impeached, he could “count on [Senate Candidate 4], if things got hot, to give [the Senate seat] up and let me parachute over there.” HARRIS said, “you can count on [Senate Candidate 4] to do that.” Later in the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH said he knows that the President-elect wants Senate Candidate 1 for the Senate seat but “they’re not willing to give me anything except appreciation. Fuck them .”
105. Later on November 11, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with Advisor A .
Advisor A indicated that he will stay “on top” of getting the Senate Candidate 5 information
leaked to the particular Sun Times columnist. ROD BLAGOJEVICH again raised the idea
of the 501(c)(4) organization and asked whether “they” (believed be the President-elect and
his associates) can get Warren Buffett and others to put $10, $12, or $ 15 million into the
organization. Advisor A responded that “they” should be able to find a way to fund the

66

organization. Later in the conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH returned to the issue of the
501 (c)(4) organization and noted that he is looking for “$10, $15, $20 million in an
organization like that.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that when he is “no longer Governor”
he could go over to the organization. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that “[Senate Candidate
6]” (Senate Candidate 6, based on other intercepted conversations, is believed to be a wealthy
person from Illinois) “could raise me money like that for a Senate seat.” ROD
BLAGOJEVICH asked, “if I get [Senate Candidate 6] to do something like that, is it worth
giving him the Senate seat?” Advisor A responded that it would be hard to put Senate
Candidate 6 in the Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that it would be better than
putting Senate Candidate 1 in the Senate and not getting anything back. Later in the
conversation, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Advisor A again discussed the possibility of a
501 (c)(4) organization, and ROD BLAGOJEVICH again noted that “[Senate Candidate 6]”
could “do it.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Advisor A discussed who might be close to Senate
Candidate 6 to talk with him about the issue, because ROD BLAGOJEVICH did not “want
to be the one to ask something like that.” Advisor A agreed to find out who is close to
Senate Candidate 6.
106. On November 12, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with JOHN HARRIS.
ROD BLAGOJEVICH noted that CNN is reporting that Senate Candidate 1 does not want
the open Senate seat. HARRIS said he thought that is just a tactic. ROD BLAGOJEVICH
raised the issue of the 501(c)(4) organization and that contributors and others can put “10 to

67

15 million in it so I can advocate health care and other issues I care about and help them ,
while I stay as Governor, she’s (believed to be Senate Candidate 1) a Senator.” ROD
BLAGOJEVICH noted that the President-elect can ask Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, and others
for money for the organization. ROD BLAGOJEVICH states he will ask “[Senate Candidate
6]” to help fund it as well. HARRIS said that funding the 501(c)(4) would be a lot easier for
the President-elect than appointing ROD BLAGOJEVICH to a position. ROD
BLAGOJEVICH said, “They could say ‘hey, we get [Senate Candidate 1]. Let’s help this
guy have a 501(c)(4) issue advocacy organization. Let’s fund it to the level that he’s asked
for and then we’ll get [Senate Candidate 1].’” ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that he will
control the 501(c)(4) organization through a board of directors while he is Governor, and
then a position in the 501(c)(4) would be waiting for him when he was no longer Governor.
107. On November 12, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with Advisor B . ROD
BLAGOJEVICH discussed with Advisor B his idea for a 501(c)(4) organization. Advisor
B stated that he likes the idea, but liked the Change to Win option better because, according
to Advisor B , from the President-elect’s perspective, there would be fewer “fingerprints” on
the President-elect’s involvement with Change to Win because Change to Win already has
an existing stream of revenue and, therefore, “you won’t have stories in four years that they
bought you off.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that he likes the 501(c)(4) idea because he
knows it will be there in two years when he is no longer Governor, whereas Change to Win
might not be.

68

108. On November 12, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with one of his
Washington D .C .-based advisors. ROD BLAGOJEVICH explained the 501 (c)(4)
organization idea to the advisor, and that “[the President-elect] gets these Warren Buffett types to [fund it].” The advisor asked ROD BLAGOJEVICH if the 501(c)(4) is a real effort or just a vehicle to help ROD BLAGOJEVICH . ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that it is a real effort but also a place for ROD BLAGOJEVICH to go when he is no longer Governor. The advisor said he likes the Change to Win idea better, and notes that it is more likely to happen because it is one step removed from the President-elect.
109. On November 12, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with SEIU Official, who
was in Washington, D .C. Prior intercepted phone conversations indicate that approximately
a week before this call, ROD BLAGOJEVICH met with SEIU Official to discuss the vacant
Senate seat, and ROD BLAGOJEVICH understood that SEIU Official was an emissary to
discuss Senate Candidate 1’s interest in the Senate seat. During the conversation with SEIU
Official on November 12, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH informed SEIU Official that he had
heard the President-elect wanted persons other than Senate Candidate 1 to be considered for
the Senate seat. SEIU Official stated that he would find out if Senate Candidate 1 wanted
SEIU Official to keep pushing her for Senator with ROD BLAGOJEVICH . ROD
BLAGOJEVICH said that “one thing I’d be interested in” is a 501(c)(4) organization. ROD
BLAGOJEVICH explained the 501(c)(4) idea to SEIU Official and said that the 501(c)(4)

69

could help “our new Senator [Senate Candidate 1].” SEIU Official agreed to “put that flag up and see where it goes.”
110. On November 12, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with Advisor B . ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Advisor B that he told SEIU Official, “I said go back to [Senate Candidate 1], and, and say hey, look, if you still want to be a Senator don’t rule this out and then broach the idea of this 501(c)(4) with her.”
111. Later on November 12, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with JOHN
HARRIS. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated that his decision about the open Senate seat will be
based on three criteria in the following order of importance: “our legal situation, our personal
situation, my political situation. This decision, like every other one, needs to be based upon
on that. Legal. Personal. Political.” HARRIS said, “legal is the hardest one to satisfy.”
ROD BLAGOJEVICH said that his legal problems could be solved by naming himself to the
Senate seat.
112. On November 13, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with JOHN HARRIS.
ROD BLAGOJEVICH said he wanted to be able to call “[President-elect Advisor]” and tell
President-elect Advisor that “this has nothing to do with anything else we’re working on but
the Governor wants to put together a 501(c)(4)” and “can you guys help him . . . raise 10, 15
million.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH said he wanted “[President-elect Advisor] to get the word
today,” and that when “he asks me for the Fifth CD thing I want it to be in his head.” (The
reference to the “Fifth CD thing” is believed to relate to a seat in the United States House of

70

Representatives from Illinois’ Fifth Congressional District. Prior intercepted phone conversations indicate that ROD BLAGOJEVICH and others were determining whether ROD BLAGOJEVICH has the power to appoint an interim replacement until a special election for the seat can be held.).
113. Also on November 13, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH talked with Advisor A .
ROD BLAGOJEVICH said he wants the idea of the 501(c)(4) in President-elect Advisor’s
head, but not in connection with the Senate appointment or the congressional seat. Advisor
A asked whether the conversation about the 501(c)(4) with President-elect Advisor is
connected with anything else. ROD BLAGOJEVICH replied that “it’s unsaid. It’s unsaid.”
114. Later on November 13, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke with Advisor A .
ROD BLAGOJEVICH asked Advisor A to call Individual A and have Individual A pitch the
idea of the 501(c)(4) to “[President-elect Advisor].” Advisor A said that, “while it’s not said
this is a play to put in play other things.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH responded, “correct.”
Advisor A asked if this is “because we think there’s still some life in [Senate Candidate 1]
potentially?” ROD BLAGOJEVICH said, “not so much her, but possibly her. But others.”
115. Throughout the past month, ROD BLAGOJEVICH has continued to engage
in numerous conversations relating to filling the open Senate seat. In these conversations,
he has repeatedly discussed the attributes of potential candidates, including , among other
things, the candidates’ ability to benefit the State of Illinois, and the personal and political

71

benefits for himself and his family of appointing particular candidates. These calls have included the following:

a. On December 4, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke to Advisor B and
informed Advisor B that he was giving Senate Candidate 5 greater consideration for the
Senate seat because, among other reasons, if ROD BLAGOJEVICH ran for re-election
Senate Candidate 5 would “raise[] money” for ROD BLAGOJEVICH , although ROD
BLAGOJEVICH said he might “get some (money) up front, maybe” from Senate Candidate
5 to insure Senate Candidate 5 kept his promise about raising money for ROD
BLAGOJEVICH . (In a recorded conversation on October 31, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH
described an earlier approach by an associate of Senate Candidate Five as follows: “We were
approached ‘pay to play.’ That, you know, he’d raise me 500 grand. An emissary came .
Then the other guy would raise a million, if I made him (Senate Candidate 5) a Senator.”)
b. Later on December 4, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke to Fundraiser
A . ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated he was “elevating” Senate Candidate 5 on the list of
candidates for the open Senate seat. ROD BLAGOJEVICH stated he might be able to cut
a deal with Senate Candidate 5 that provided ROD BLAGOJEVICH with something
“tangible up front.” ROD BLAGOJEVICH noted he was going to meet with Senate
Candidate 5 in the next few days. ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Fundraiser A to reach out to
Individual D , an individual who ROD BLAGOJEVICH is attempting to obtain campaign
contributions from and who, based on intercepted phone calls, ROD BLAGOJEVICH

72

believes to be close to Senate Candidate 5. ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Fundraiser A to tell
Individual D that Senate Candidate 5 was very much a realistic candidate for the open Senate
seat, but that ROD BLAGOJEVICH was getting “a lot of pressure” not to appoint Senate
Candidate 5. ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Fundraiser A to tell Individual D that ROD
BLAGOJEVICH had a problem with Senate Candidate 5 just promising to help ROD
BLAGOJEVICH because ROD BLAGOJEVICH had a prior bad experience with Senate
Candidate 5 not keeping his word. ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Fundraiser A to tell
Individual D that if Senate Candidate 5 is going to be chosen to fill the Senate seat “some of
this stuffs gotta start happening now . . .right now. . . and we gotta see it. You understand?”
ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Fundraiser A that “you gotta be careful how you express that and
assume everybody’s listening, the whole world is listening. You hear me? ” ROD
BLAGOJEVICH told Fundraiser A to tell Individual D if there is “tangible political support
(campaign contributions) like you’ve said, start showing us now .” Fundraiser A stated he
will call Individual D on the phone to communicate ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s message. ROD
BLAGOJEVICH responded that “I would do it in person. I would not do it on the phone.”
ROD BLAGOJEVICH told Fundraiser A to communicate the “urgency” of the situation to
Individual D .

c. On December 5, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH spoke to Fundraiser A .
On the morning of December 5, 2008, the Chicago Tribune ran a front page news story
stating that ROD BLAGOJEVICH had recently been surreptitiously recorded in relation to

73

an ongoing criminal investigation. During the conversation on December 5, 2008, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and Fundraiser A discuss certain information contained in the newspaper story. ROD BLAGOJEVICH instructed Fundraiser A to “undo your [Individual D ] thing.” Fundraiser A confirmed that it would be undone.

d. Also on December 5, 2008, after publication of the Tribune article
described above, ROD BLAGOJEVICH and three others discussed whether to move money out of the Friends of Blagojevich campaign fund to avoid having the money frozen and also considered the possibility of prepaying the money to ROD BLAGOJEVICH ’s criminal defense attorney with an understanding that the attorney would donate the money back at a later time if it was not needed. They also discussed opening a new fund raising account named Citizens for Blagojevich with new contributions received.
116. In addition, in the course of the conversations over the last month, ROD BLAGOJEVICH has spent significant time weighing the option of appointing himself to the open Senate seat, and has expressed a variety of reasons for doing so, including frustration at being “stuck” as governor, a belief that he will be able to obtain greater resources if he is indicted as a sitting Senator as opposed to a sitting governor, and a desire to remake his image in consideration of a possible run for President in 2016, avoid impeachment by the Illinois legislature, make corporate contacts that would be of value to him after leaving public office, facilitate his wife’s employment as a lobbyist, and assist in generating speaking fees should he decide to leave public office.

74

III. CONCLUSION
117. Based upon the facts set forth in this affidavit, I believe that there is probable
cause to believe that: (a) ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS, and others have
conspired with each other and with others to commit offenses against the United States,
namely to devise and participate in a scheme to defraud the State of Illinois and the people
of the State of Illinois of the honest services of ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN HARRIS,
in furtherance of which the mails and interstate wire communications would be used, in
violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1341, 1343, and 1346; all in violation of
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1349; and (b) ROD BLAGOJEVICH and JOHN
HARRIS, being agents of the State of Illinois, a State government which during a one-year
period, beginning January 1, 2008 and continuing to the present, received federal benefits in
excess of $10,000, corruptly solicited and demanded a thing of value, namely, the firing of
certain Chicago Tribune editorial members responsible for widely-circulated editorials
critical of ROD BLAGOJEVICH , intending to be influenced and rewarded in connection
with business and transactions of the State of Illinois involving a thing of value of $5,000 or
more, namely, the provision of millions of dollars in financial assistance by the State of

75

Illinois, including through the Illinois Finance Authority, to the Tribune Company involving
the Wrigley Field baseball stadium ; in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 666
(a)(1)(B ) and 2. Accordingly, it is requested that arrest warrants be issued as detailed in this
affidavit.

Daniel W . Cain
Special Agent
Federal Bureau of Investigation

Sworn to before me this
day of December 2008.

HONORABLE MICHAEL T. MASON
Magistrate Judge
Northern District of Illinois

76

Obama plans to reach out to Muslim world; claims his heart will remain in Governor Blagojevich's Chicago

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 10:47:59 PST

Barack Obama plans to reach out to Muslim world

In exclusive interview, he says he plans to be sworn in like every other president, using his full name: Barack Hussein Obama

By Christi Parsons, John McCormick and Peter Nicholas | Tribune staff reporters
8:48 PM CST, December 9, 2008

Barack Obama says his presidency is an opportunity for the U.S. to renovate its relations with the Muslim world, starting the day of his inauguration and continuing with a speech he plans to deliver in an Islamic capital.

And when he takes the oath of office Jan. 20, he plans to be sworn in like every other president, using his full name: Barack Hussein Obama.

"I think we've got a unique opportunity to reboot America's image around the world and also in the Muslim world in particular,'' Obama said Tuesday, promising an "unrelenting" desire to "create a relationship of mutual respect and partnership in countries and with peoples of good will who want their citizens and ours to prosper together."

The world, he said, "is ready for that message."

In a wide-ranging interview with Tribune reporters, Obama discussed his strategy for his first year in office, vigorously defended his choice for attorney general and reflected on his role as the first African American to be elected president.

He also made it clear that, even as he plans his move to Washington, his heart will remain in Chicago. His "Kennebunkport" will be the South Side, Obama said, and he pledged to return at least every couple months for some family down time.

The conversation was his first with a newspaper since his election on Nov. 4, and it came just hours after Gov. Rod Blagojevich was arrested on a federal conspiracy complaint. The complaint alleges that Blagojevich essentially tried to auction off the appointment to replace Obama in the U.S. Senate, but the president-elect declined to speak about any discussions between his representatives and those of the governor, a fellow Democrat.

Obama said he never has spoken personally to Blagojevich about his possible replacement, either before or since his victory. Shortly after the interview ended Tuesday afternoon, Obama's transition office released a statement saying top adviser David Axelrod misspoke last month when he said Obama had talked with Blagojevich about the Senate vacancy.

Citing an "ongoing investigation" into the matter, Obama said he considered it "inappropriate" to talk further about the situation.

As the Blagojevich drama unfolded across Dearborn Street in the federal courthouse, Obama lounged in an armchair in his spare black-and-gray office, a scattering of peanut shells from his afternoon snack littering the floor.

Obama said the country must take advantage of a unique chance to recalibrate relations around the globe, through a new diplomacy that emphasizes inclusiveness and tolerance as well as an unflinching stand against terrorism.

"The message I want to send is that we will be unyielding in stamping out the terrorist extremism we saw in Mumbai," Obama said, adding that he plans to give a major address in an Islamic capital as part of his global outreach.

Though world events and economic winds have made his agenda all the more challenging, Obama kept close counsel on how he plans to move forward.

He would not commit to specific plans on matters as varied as free trade, unionization and illegal immigration. Instead, he said, his nominees and advisers are studying the issues and will report back with recommendations.

Asked if he would support the extension of the fence between the U.S. and Mexican border, Obama deferred to his nominee for the Homeland Security Department, Janet Napolitano.

In similar fashion, he sidestepped questions about whether he would move quickly on promises to rework the North American Free Trade Agreement or push the so-called "card-check" law making it easier for unions to organize.

"My economic team is going to put together a package on trade and on worker issues,'' he said. "That will be presented to me. I don't want to anticipate right now what sequences will be on these issues.''

Likewise, he offered no hints about future Cabinet appointments, but voiced strong support for Eric Holder, his nominee for attorney general, by batting away concerns about his role in the controversial pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich at the end of Bill Clinton's presidency.

"Everybody who looks at his record says the guy was an outstanding attorney, an outstanding prosecutor, an outstanding judge, an outstanding number two at the Justice Department,'' Obama said. "And Eric has acknowledged the Rich pardon was a mistake on his part, not having caught that earlier.

"I agree with him," Obama said. "I think it was a mistake. But when you look at the totality of his experience, there's no doubt he's going to be an outstanding attorney general.''

Some liberal supporters have expressed disappointment over some of Obama's choices, like the one to retain Robert Gates as secretary of defense, but Obama said supporters have no cause for concern.

He is steadfast on his "agenda of change," he said.

"On all the promises that I made during the campaign there has been no sense I'm backing off,'' he said. "What I'm putting in place is a Cabinet of extraordinarily qualified, competent people who would not have accepted my offer for them to join my administration unless they believed in my vision.''

Obama is planning his administration mostly in a suite of offices in the federal building, spare in décor but replete with comforting remnants of his two years on the campaign trail. On his book shelf are two basketballs, and there's a third by the door. Just outside his personal office sits Reggie Love, the former college athlete who does double duty as personal assistant and basketball partner.

Most of the transition team is at work in Washington, so Secret Service agents outnumber staff members in Chicago.

From this Spartan suite, Obama contemplates issues both great and small.

One simple matter comes down to three little words, and on them he has made up his mind: he won't shrink from using his full name when he takes the oath of office.

During the campaign, Obama's detractors would often invoke his middle name, Hussein, in an attempt to falsely paint him as a Muslim. Obama, a Christian, doesn't care.

"I think the tradition is that they use all three names, and I will follow the tradition," he said. "I'm not trying to make a statement one way or another. I'll do what everybody else does.''

And then there are the grand issues, like the burden placed on him by history. As the first African-American president, he acknowledges, he thinks about it.

"The biggest challenges we face right now in improving race relations have to do with the universal concerns of Americans across color lines," he said. "If we are creating jobs throughout this economy, then African-Americans and Latinos, who are disproportionately unemployed, are going to be swept up in that rising tide."

"I think that more than anything is going to improve race relations," he said, "a sense of common purpose.''

Though he hasn't taken on a singular spiritual adviser, months after the controversial parting with his former pastor, Obama said he has found inspiration in a "prayer circle" of supportive clergy leaders.

Pastors on that regular prayer phone call toward the end of the campaign included T.D. Jakes, of the Dallas-based mega-church The Potter's House, Saddleback mega-church pastor Rick Warren and Joseph Lowery of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

"I'm reliant on the pastors who are friends of mine, and who I talk to for support, and my own prayer life at home," he said.

Obama said he and his wife, Michelle, haven't gone church-shopping in Washington yet, mainly because they are trying to pull off a massive move "without losing anything"--especially, he joked, either of their two children.

Even in the White House, though, he doesn't plan to sever ties to home. He made reference to former President George H.W. Bush's White House getaway--Kennebunkport, Maine.

"Let me explain to you, my Kennebunkport is on the South Side of Chicago," he said. "Our friends are here. Our family is here. We are going to try to come back here as often as possible . . . at least once every six weeks or couple months."

.

Obama not too British to be President concludes US Supreme Court

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 11:42:45 PST

Obama too British' case rejected
Barack Obama
Mr Obama's father was born in Kenya

An appeal claiming Barack Obama is too British to become president of the United States has been rejected by the US Supreme Court.

The lawsuit claimed he should be disqualified because, it claimed, he acquired the same British citizenship that his father had when he was born.

This meant he was not a "natural-born" US citizen, as the US constitution requires, it alleged.

Mr Obama's birth certificate shows he was born in Hawaii.

The issue was addressed by Mr Obama's aides during his presidential campaign, when they posted online his birth certificate - which was verified by Hawaiian officials.

This lawsuit, brought by retired New Jersey lawyer Leo Donofrio, gained a high profile because it was distributed by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to other justices for discussion.

It conceded that Mr Obama was born in Hawaii - but contended that he still held foreign citizenship at birth.

It read: "Since Barack Obama's father was a citizen of Kenya, and therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of Senator Obama's birth, then Senator Obama was a British citizen 'at birth', just like the framers of the Constitution, and therefore, even if he were to produce an original birth certificate proving he were born on US soil, he still wouldn't be eligible to be president."

Kenya was part of British East Africa until it received its independence in 1963.

A decision not to grant a writ of certiorari - the legal term for the declaration that the justices will hear the case - means that a lower court ruling that dismissed the lawsuit can stand.

Obama to lose Blackberry in the White House

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 06:40:25 PST

White House, no BlackBerry: Obama losing his tech edge
John Gushue The Telegram

The BlackBerry may be a marvelous tool, but it can be a marvelous distraction, too, and a spark for friction and the odd faux pas. If you've ever been in a meeting where one participant suddenly starts tapping their thumbs, you'll know what I mean.

There's also that awkward scene played out at restaurants and dinner tables nightly, as many diners sneak in "just one peek" to any mail that might have arrived.

So, when word leaked out last weekend that U.S. president-elect Barack Obama was being told he would have to wean himself off his BlackBerry, it made the news.

For good reason. Obama, after all, used his BlackBerry like previous politicians used a pen.

Of course, Obama was not the first candidate elected president who had been an e-mail user. U.S. President George W. Bush retired an American Online account in 2000, after being put in a similar position.

Obama, though, has reinvented how technology and politics blend together. A web-based fundraising campaign was so successful Obama opted not to take matching federal funds (and the spending restrictions that go with them). His campaign built state-of-the-art databases on voter information that brought workers into states and districts where Democrats are not supposed to thrive.

And, of course, Obama has practically lived on his BlackBerry. He eschewed traditional briefing books - you know, on paper - instead preferring to skim on his PDA. Ditto for the news. And, of course, he used it to tap directly into contacts near and far.

That's fine - and may soon be essential - for political candidates. Apparently, it's not cool for presidents.

For one thing, there's that whole security thing. If hackers take it as a point of pride that they can hack into a private company's site, imagine the incentive for getting into the e-mail of the proverbially most important smartphone on Earth.

Secondly, Obama has apparently been advised that everything he generates - every word of correspondence - will be archived. That, presumably, could include messages that consist of nothing other than "Thx" and "K."

It's the same reason, evidently, that Obama won't get his wish to have a laptop in the Oval Office. Evidently, wireless doesn't work too well in that particular part of the White House.

I would imagine that Obama would not give up his tech toys all that easily. After all, they've also given him his edge. Sure, the president would need to be in a bit of a bubble, but wouldn't it make sense he would want to hold on to the very connections that worked so well for him so far?

Rahm Emanual good news; strong ally of Israel; bad news; received most campaign funds from Wall Street in 2008: wiki

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:53:37 PST

Source and all links are to Wiki

Rahm Israel Emanuel^[1]^[2] (born November 29, 1959) is an American politician who has been a Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives since 2003, representing Illinois's 5th congressional district.

Emanuel was chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for the 2006 elections. After the Democratic Party regained control of the House, he was elected as the next chairman of the Democratic Caucus. He is the fourth-ranking Democrat in the House, behind Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Leader Steny Hoyer and Whip Jim Clyburn.^[3] On November 6, 2008, Emanuel accepted an offer from President-elect Barack Obama to become the White House Chief of Staff in Obama's administration, which begins on January 20, 2009.^[4]

Emanuel is an influential member of the New Democrat Coalition, and a prominent proponent of economic liberalization. He is noted for his combative style and his political fundraising abilities.^[5]

Early and personal life

Rahm Emanuel was born in Chicago, Illinois.^[6] His first name, Rahm (רם), means "high" or "lofty" in Hebrew,^[7] while his last name, Emanuel (עמנואל), means "God is with us." According to Emanuel's father, his son is the namesake of Rahamim, a Lehi group combatant who was killed.^[8] Rahm’s surname was adopted by his family in 1933, after Rahm’s paternal uncle, Emanuel Auerbach, was killed in a skirmish with Arabs in Jerusalem.^[9]

Emanuel's father, Benjamin M. Emanuel, is a pediatrician who was born in Jerusalem and was a member of the Irgun, a militant Zionist group which operated from 1931 to 1948 during the British Mandate of Palestine.^[8] His mother, Martha Smulevitz, worked as an X-ray technician and was the daughter of a local union organizer.^[5] She became a civil rights activist; she was also once the owner of a Chicago-area rock and roll club.^[9] The two met in Chicago in the 1950s.^[10] Emanuel's older brother, Ezekiel J. Emanuel, is an oncologist and bioethicist, and his brother Ari Emanuel is a talent agent in Los Angeles who inspired Jeremy Piven's character Ari Gold on the HBO series Entourage.^[5] Emanuel himself is the inspiration for the character Josh Lyman on The West Wing.^[11]^[5] Emanuel also has a younger adopted sister named Shoshanna, 14 years his junior.^[5]^[9]

When his family lived in Chicago, he attended Bernard Zell Anshe Emet Day School, a Jewish day school. After his family moved to Wilmette, he attended public school: Romona School, Wilmette Junior High School, and New Trier West High School.^[10]^[12] He and his brothers attended summer camp in Israel.^[9] At some point during his high school years, while working at an Arby's restaurant, Emanuel severely cut his right middle finger. He sought medical attention only after suffering severe infection as a result of the wound, resulting in the partial amputation of the finger.^[13]

He graduated from Sarah Lawrence College in 1981, and went on to receive a master's degree in Speech and Communication from Northwestern University in 1985. While still an undergraduate, he joined the congressional campaign of David Robinson of Chicago.^[14]

Emanuel's wife, Amy Rule, converted to Judaism shortly before their wedding.^[15] They are members of Anshe Sholom B'nai Israel, a Modern Orthodox congregation in Chicago.^[16] They have three children, son Zachariah and daughters Ilana and Leah.

Emanuel is a close friend of fellow Chicagoan David Axelrod, chief strategist for the 2008 Barack Obama presidential campaign. Axelrod signed the ketuba, a Jewish marriage contract, at Emanuel's wedding, an honor that goes to a family friend or distant relative.^[17]

Rabbi Asher Lopatin of Anshe Sholom B'nai Israel Congregation is quoted as saying: "It's a very involved Jewish family"; "Amy was one of the teachers for a class for children during the High Holidays two years ago."^[16] Emanuel has said of his Judaism: "I am proud of my heritage and treasure the values it has taught me."^[16] Emanuel's family lives on the North Side of Chicago, in the North Center neighborhood.^[7]

Emanuel trains for and participates in triathlons.^[12]

Career as political staffer

Clinton's most serious primary rival, Paul Tsongas (the New Hampshire Democratic primary winner in 1992), later withdrew, citing a lack of campaign funds. Richard Mintz, a Washington public relations consultant who worked with Emanuel on the campaign, spoke about the soundness of the idea: "It was that [extra] million dollars that really allowed the campaign to withstand the storm we had to ride out in New Hampshire [over Clinton's relationship with Gennifer Flowers and the controversy over his draft status during the Vietnam War ]."^[16] Emanuel's knowledge of the top donors in the country, and his rapport with potential donors within the Jewish community helped Clinton amass a then-unheard-of sum of $72 million.^[16]

Following the campaign, Emanuel became a senior advisor to Clinton at the White House from 1993 to 1998. In the White House, Emanuel was initially Assistant to the President for Political Affairs and then Senior Advisor to the President for Policy and Strategy. He was a leading strategist in the unsuccessful White House efforts to institute universal healthcare and many other Clinton initiatives.^[18]

One of his proudest moments during the Clinton administration "was an event that touched his political sensibilities and his personal ties to Israel: the 1993 Rose Garden signing ceremony after the Oslo Accords between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization ("PLO"). Emanuel directed the details of the ceremony, down to the choreography of the famous handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO leader Yasser Arafat."^[16]

Emanuel is said to have "mailed a rotten fish to a former coworker after the two parted ways."^[16] On the night after the 1996 election, "Emanuel was so angry at the president's enemies that he stood up at a celebratory dinner with colleagues from the campaign, grabbed a steak knife and began rattling off a list of betrayers, shouting 'Dead! ... Dead! ... Dead!' and plunging the knife into the table after every name."^[5] His "take-no-prisoners attitude" earned him the nickname "Rahm-bo".^[16] People who worked with Emanuel at that time "insist the once hard-charging staffer has mellowed out."^[16]

Career in finance

After serving as an advisor to Bill Clinton, in 1998 Emanuel resigned from his position in the Clinton administration. He then became an investment banker at Wasserstein Perella, (now Dresdner Kleinwort), where he worked until 2002.^[19] In 1999, he became a managing director at the firm’s Chicago office. Emanuel made $16.2 million in his two-and-a-half-year stint as a banker, according to Congressional disclosures.^[19]^[20] At Wasserstein Perella, he worked on eight deals, including the acquisition by Commonwealth Edison of Peco Energy and the purchase by GTCR Golder Rauner of the SecurityLink home security unit from SBC Communications.^[19]

Emanuel was named to the Board of Directors for the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("Freddie Mac") by then President Bill Clinton in 2000. His position paid him $31,060 in 2000 and $231,655 in 2001.^[21] During the time Emanuel spent on the board, Freddie Mac was plagued with scandals involving campaign contributions and accounting irregularities.^[22] The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) later accused the board of having "failed in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention." Emanuel resigned from the board in 2001 when he ran for congress.^[23]

Congressional career

Election in 2002

Rep. John Dingell and Rep. Emanuel sharing pączki

After working in investment banking, in 2002 Emanuel pursued the U.S. House seat in the 5th District of Illinois previously held by Rod Blagojevich, who chose not to run for re-election, but instead successfully ran for Governor of Illinois.^{[citation needed]}

His strongest opponent of the seven other candidates in the 2002 Democratic primary — the real contest in this heavily Democratic district — was former Illinois State Representative Nancy Kaszak, who had unsuccessfully opposed Blagojevich in the 1996 primary. The most controversial moment of the primary election came when Edward Moskal, president of the Polish American Congress, a political action committee endorsing Kaszak, called Emanuel a "millionaire carpetbagger who knows nothing" about "our heritage". Moskal also charged that Emanuel had dual citizenship with Israel and had served in the Israeli Army.^[24] Emanuel's father was an Israeli immigrant and Rahm had dual Israeli-U.S. citizenship, but relinquished his Israeli citizenship when he turned 18.^[25] He did not serve in the Israeli army, but was a civilian volunteer assisting the Israel Defense Forces for a short time during the 1991 Gulf War, repairing truck brakes in one of Israel's northern bases.^[26]^[27]

Emanuel brought together a coalition of Chicago clergy to denounce the incident. He recalled, "One of the proudest moments of my life was seeing people of my district from all backgrounds demonstrate our common values by coming together in response to this obvious attempt to divide them."^[16] Moskal's comments were denounced as anti-Semitic by many, including Kaszak.^[24] Emanuel won the primary and easily defeated Republican candidate Mark Augusti in the general election. Emanuel supported the October 2002 joint Congressional resolution authorizing the Iraq War, differentiating himself from all nine other Democratic members of the Illinois Congressional delegation (Sen. Richard Durbin, Reps. Bobby Rush, Jesse Jackson, Jr., Bill Lipinski, Luis Gutiérrez, Danny K. Davis, Jan Schakowsky, Jerry Costello and Lane Evans) elected in 2002.^[28] In his first term, Rahm Emanuel was a founding member and the Co-Chair of the Congressional Serbian Caucus.^[29]

In 2006 Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass reported he had a newsroom confrontation with Emanuel over Kass’s continued speculation Emanuel only won his 2002 election because convicted former Chicago water department boss Don Tomczak sent in his employees to work for Emanuel. He also speculated that Mayor Richard Daley’s “underlings” who were sentenced to federal prison for organizing “patronage armies” also helped Emanuel.^[22]

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman

The position of Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman (DCCC) was assumed by Emanuel after the death of the previous chair, Bob Matsui. Emanuel led the Democratic Party's effort to capture the majority in the House of Representatives in the 2006 elections. After Emanuel's election as chairman of the Democratic Caucus, Chris Van Hollen became committee chair for the 110th Congress, and thus for the 2008 elections.^{[citation needed]}

While he was chairman of the DCCC, Emanuel was known to have had disagreements over Democratic election strategy with Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean. Dean favored a "50 state strategy", building support for the Democratic Party over the long term, while Emanuel believed a more tactical approach, focusing attention on key districts, was necessary to ensure victory.^[30]

Ultimately the Democratic Party enjoyed considerable success in the 2006 elections, gaining 30 seats in the House. Emanuel has received considerable praise for his stewardship of the DCCC during this election cycle, even from Illinois Republican Rep. Ray LaHood who said "He legitimately can be called the golden boy of the Democratic Party today. He recruited the right candidates, found the money and funded them, and provided issues for them. Rahm did what no one else could do in seven cycles."^[31]

Emanuel still is close to Bill Clinton, and talked strategy with him at least once a month as chairman of the DCCC.^[12] He declared in April 2006 that he would support Hillary Rodham Clinton should she pursue the presidency in 2008. However, Emanuel's loyalties came into conflict when his home-state senator Barack Obama expressed interest in the race; asked in January 2007 about his stance on the Democratic presidential nomination, he said: "I'm hiding under the desk. I'm very far under the desk, and I'm bringing my paper and my phone."^[32]

2008 Contributions

Open Secrets reports that Rahm Emanuel "was the top House recipient in the 2008 election cycle of contributions from hedge funds, private equity firms and the larger securities/investment industry".^[33]

House leadership

After his role in helping the Democrats to win the 2006 elections, Emanuel was believed to be a leading candidate for the position of Majority Whip. Nancy Pelosi, who became the next Speaker of the House, persuaded him not to challenge Jim Clyburn, but instead to succeed Clyburn in the role of Democratic Caucus Chairman. In return, Pelosi agreed to assign the caucus chair more responsibilities, including "aspects of strategy and messaging, incumbent retention, policy development and rapid-response communications". Caucus vice-chair John Larson remained in this role instead of running for the chairman position.^[34]

After U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney asserted that he did not fall within the bounds of orders set for the executive branch, Emanuel called for cutting off the $4.8 million the Executive Branch provides for the Vice President's office. ^[35]

Political views

During his original 2002 campaign, Emanuel "indicated his support of President Bush's position on Iraq, but said he believed the president needed to better articulate his position to the American people".^[16] One of the major goals he spoke of during the race was "to help make health care affordable and available for all Americans".^[16]

Emanuel has maintained a 100 percent pro-choice voting record and is generally liberal on social issues^{[citation needed]}. He has aligned himself with the centrist wing of the Democratic Party, the Democratic Leadership Council.

Emanuel frustrated Chicago peace activists who lobbied his office to reverse course on the Iraq war. ^[36] In the 2006 congressional primaries, Emanuel, then head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, made national headlines for engineering a run by Tammy Duckworth - an Iraq war veteran with no political experience - against grassroots candidate Christine Cegelis in Illinois' 6th District. Expedited withdrawal from Iraq was a central point of Cegelis's campaign; Duckworth opposed a withdrawal timetable. ^[37]

According to The Nation, Emanuel is "seen as a strong Israel partisan.”^[38] In June 2007, Emanuel condemned an outbreak of Palestinian violence in the Gaza Strip and criticized Arab countries for not applying the same kind of pressure on the Palestinians as they have on Israel. At a 2003 pro-Israel rally in Chicago, Emanuel told the marchers Israel was ready for peace but would not get there until Palestinians "turn away from the path of terror".^[39]

In his book, Emanuel advocated a three-month compulsory universal service program for Americans between the ages of 18 and 25.^[40]

Emanuel is an ally of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich and Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley.^[41] He called Illinois state legislator John C. D'Amico in 2008 in support of Blagojevich's Illinois capital bill, but withdrew his encouragement when he discovered Daley opposed the bill.^[41]

Electoral history

Year	Winning candidate	Party	Pct	Opponent	Party	Pct	Opponent	Party	Pct
U.S. House, 5th District of Illinois (General Election)
2002	Rahm Emanuel	Democratic	67%	Mark Augusti	Republican	29%	Frank Gonzalez	Libertarian	4%
2004	Rahm Emanuel (inc.)	Democratic	76%	Bruce Best	Republican	24%
2006	Rahm Emanuel (inc.)	Democratic	78%	Kevin White	Republican	22%
2008	Rahm Emanuel (inc.)	Democratic	74%	Tom Hanson	Republican	22%

White House Chief of Staff

On November 6, 2008, Emanuel accepted the position of White House Chief of Staff for Barack Obama.^[4] After Emanuel submits his resignation of his congressional seat, Illinois Governor Blagojevich must set the date for a special election within five days, and the election must take place within 115 days.^[42]

Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio criticized Emanuel's fierce partisanship stating: "This is an ironic choice for a president-elect who has promised to change Washington, make politics more civil and govern from the center."^[4] Republican National Committee spokesman Alex Conant issued a statement saying "Barack Obama's first decision as president-elect undermines his promise to 'heal the divides'." However, Senator Lindsay Graham, Republican of South Carolina disagreed, saying: "This is a wise choice by President-elect Obama. He's tough but fair -- honest, direct and candid." ^[43]

Israel's oldest daily newspaper, Haaretz, headlined the news as follows: "Obama's first pick: Israeli Rahm Emanuel as chief of staff." ^[44] Ira Forman, executive director of the National Jewish Democratic Council, said "It's just another indication that despite the attempts to imply that Obama would somehow appoint the wrong person or listen to the wrong people when it comes to the U.S.-Israel relationship ... that was never true." ^[39] Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic opined that Emanuel would be good for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process because if Israeli leaders make excuses to President Obama for not dismantling settlements, "Rahm will call out such nonsense, and it will be very hard for right-wing Israelis to come back and accuse him of being a self-hating Jew." ^[45]

Palestinians and Arabs elsewhere expressed dismay at Obama’s appointment of Emanuel. In an article headlined “Our Man in the White House” in the Hebrew daily Maariv Emanuel's father, Benjamin, was quoted as saying, "Obviously, he will influence the President to be pro-Israel. Why shouldn't he do it? What is he, an Arab? He's not going to clean the floor of the White House."^[46] The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee called on Rahm Emanuel to repudiate his father's comment, saying it viewed "this characterization of an Arab as an unacceptable smear."^[47]^[48] Palestinian American Ali Abunimah of Electronic Intifada speaking on Democracy Now! said Obama’s appointment of Emanuel sent the signal he would not be taking “more balanced, more objective, more realistic advice that could change the course from the disastrous Palestine-Israel policies of the Bush and Clinton administrations.” ^[49]

The BBC was reporting within days of Obama's election that sections of Iranian opinion, earlier "thrilled by the stunning election victory, seeing it as offering hope of a radical change in US foreign policy and relations," were now pointing out that "one of Mr Obama's first actions was to appoint as his chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, whose background reportedly includes volunteer service in the Israeli army." ^[50]

What a surprise! Obama watering down his rules prohibiting lobbyist involvement in his transition

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:14:11 PST

Obama team announces new rules on lobbyists

By NEDRA PICKLER – 46 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Aides to President-elect Obama, who said lobbyists would not work in his White House, said Tuesday that lobbyists could serve in his transition so long as their activities do not involve areas of policy they have tried to influence in the past year.

John Podesta, a top transition aide, said federal lobbyists will be prohibited from any lobbying while they are at work on the transition.

The transition office said in a statement, "if someone has lobbied in the last 12 months, they are prohibited from working in the fields of policy on which they lobbied."

Podesta called the guidelines the toughest ever imposed by a presidential transition. But they seem to give lobbyists more leeway than Obama suggested they would have when he campaigned for the presidency.

"I have done more to take on lobbyists than any other candidate in this race," Obama said in speech last November in Spartanburg, S.C. "I don't take a dime of their money, and when I am president, they won't find a job in my White House."

Podesta said federal lobbyists may not contribute financially to the transition.

Obama to use Exec powers to quickly block drilling for oil in Utah; energy independence?

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 07:59:55 PST

(WSJ) President-elect Barack Obama will likely use his executive powers after taking office to block new drilling leases on environmentally sensitive land in Utah and to allow federal funding of stem-cell research, putting a quick mark on policy making.

Barack Obama

"There's a lot the president can do using his executive authority without waiting for congressional action," John Podesta, head of Mr. Obama's transition team, said on "Fox News Sunday."

Mr. Podesta said Mr. Obama is "a transformational figure" and that the support he received among voters in some Republican states and conservative counties gives him a mandate to pursue his agenda aggressively.

Rolling back executive orders issued by the Bush administration could give Mr. Obama a fast way to put his mark on policy making after he takes office, as past presidents have. Other Bush-era executive orders that Mr. Obama could reverse include a ban on federal aid to family-planning organizations that counsel women on abortion, and a decision in December that restricts California in regulating greenhouse-gas emissions from cars.

The Bush administration has been rushing to implement regulations before Mr. Obama takes office. Unlike with executive orders, some of these would take longer for Mr. Obama and the Democrats to roll back.

One Bush-era measure Mr. Obama is likely to address quickly are the new oil and gas leases approved recently by the Department of Interior that would open up for drilling land near Arches and Canyonlands national parks in southern Utah's desert. Environmentalists said drilling in the area could potentially damage the parks and surrounding land.

Mr. Obama could also lift restrictions placed by President George W. Bush on the type of stem-cell research that can be funded with federal dollars. Democratic congressional leaders have vowed to push a twice-vetoed stem-cell research bill as one of the first acts of the next Congress.

Rahm Emanuel

Mr. Podesta and other top Obama aides fanned out on the Sunday news talk shows, suggesting that after Tuesday's electoral sweep, the incoming administration would begin to try to influence policy making before January's inauguration.

Speaking on the Sunday shows, Mr. Podesta, incoming White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and transition Co-Chair Valerie Jarrett touched upon the detailed preparations the Obama team has made to pave the way for a smooth transition to the presidency. Mr. Podesta said his team has been working since early August, with transition leaders meeting frequently with officials in the Bush White House. About 100 Obama aides received security clearance before the election, so they could begin accessing national-security information immediately after Mr. Obama won.

Mr. Emanuel said the president-elect would be moving forward with his entire agenda as soon as he is sworn in. That agenda includes achieving universal health care, increasing education funding, implementing middle-class tax cuts and moving the country toward energy independence.

The first priority will be implementing an economic stimulus plan that includes tax rebates for the middle class and funding for infrastructure and school construction, Mr. Emanuel said. Then the new administration would regroup and push what he called the president-elect's four "reforms": education, health care, energy and taxes.

By putting those agenda items under the rubric of reform, Mr. Emanuel might make them more politically palatable. But any changes could also be implemented more gradually, as the Obama administration would pursue them as broader policy goals rather than specific legislation.

Mr. Emanuel, appearing on ABC's "This Week," didn't comment directly on whether Mr. Obama would back calls from senior Democratic lawmakers for Mr. Bush to allow ailing U.S. auto makers to tap a $700 billion fund set up to help the financial industry. But senior Obama economic advisers clarified that the president-elect supports the Democratic lawmakers' proposal to review the legality of making the funds available to the auto makers.

Ms. Jarrett, appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press," dismissed criticism from some Republicans that the appointment of Mr. Emanuel, a brash, Democratic street fighter who had served for years in the U.S. House, marked a break from Mr. Obama's pledge to move beyond partisan battles in Washington. Joking that Mr. Emanuel will become kinder and gentler, Ms. Jarrett said: "That's part of the change we've been talking about."

Chinese takeaway: if you think Obama will change America you will be "sorely disappointed"

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 07:40:17 PST

Chinese Sphere: Trepidation over Obama (RCP)

As with the rest of the world’s media, the Chinese-language press weighed in on what changes, if any, President-elect Obama would bring to US foreign policy. There seems to be an overall sense of appreciation for the historical significance of the election, but also some trepidation over whether an Obama administration would upset the relatively stable relationship that currently exists between the US and China, attested by the fact that the topic of these relations barely came up during the course of the campaign.

In Hong Kong’s Ming Pao, Dong Sheng writes, “In general, there is always bound to be a degree of uncertainty when the US changes presidents. Nevertheless, if the Sino-US relationship was able to emerge from the shadow of the (Yugoslavia) embassy bombing and spy plane incident and develop into what today appears, at least on the surface, to be one based primarily on cooperation, than in the near term there will be no dramatic changes in US-China relations.” The writer is still concerned, however, over how Obama will handle the financial crisis, especially with relation to his expectations of the Chinese government’s role.

Over in Singapore, leading Chinese language daily Lianhe Zaobao expresses concerns over Obama’s trade policies. “Traditionally, the US Democratic Party has a protectionist image, and in the midst of this financial and economic situation those protectionist feelings can be easily stirred up. Consequently, as the guardian of market economics, America needs to continue to speak out for free trade and attack protectionism.”

Taiwan is also nervous about the incoming Democratic administration because the party is seen to be more accommodating to China than the Republicans. The Taiwan-based China Times states, “Obama’s election win has given Taipei some cause for concern for the future development of US-Taiwan relations. This is completely understandable because Obama is a center-left liberal, and this will also be the ideology of his officials who will take over the handling of the US-China-Taiwan relationship. It is likely that in their consideration of US national interests that those of Taiwan's would be neglected.”

An op-ed column in the Chinese government’s official newspaper, People’s Daily, drips with scorn for Obama’s declaration of change. “Obama is a typical American political hack. There is no difference between his thinking and that of the members of the US Congress. If anyone thinks he will change America, he will probably be sorely disappointed.” One of the examples the writer gives is Obama’s conception of America’s role in foreign affairs. “America’s interference around the world will not change. Intervening in the Kashmir issue is part of Obama’s platform. His reasoning, unbelievably, is to enable Pakistan to focus its efforts on fighting terrorism. Americans are still making up reasons to reach their hands into all sorts of places. Sometimes there will not be any valid reason, so they will make something up to convince themselves and ignore what others think. Obama and Bush are the same. Democrats and Republicans are the same. They think America should be in charge of everything that goes on in this world.” The writer concludes, “In seeking out peaceful coexistence and prosperity for mankind, one should not place their hopes upon any country or even any particular leader. People need to work together so that a multipolar world can constrain rogue nations, and universal values can curb unilateral policies.”

Obama worships at the Gym, watches football

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 07:31:50 PST

Obama tries being regular guy for a while longer

Sun Nov 9, 2008 2:03pm EST

By Deborah Charles

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Can you really be a regular guy and lead a normal, low-key life when you're going to be the next president of the United States?

Barack Obama hopes so, and he is doing his best to prove it -- at least in the first week since winning a decisive victory against John McCain in Tuesday's presidential election.

Obama and his family know their lives will change drastically when they move into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in January, so they are enjoying the last few months of "normalcy" before entering the fishbowl of the White House.

He seemed slightly taken aback on Friday when he walked into his first news conference as president-elect and a room full of reporters stood as he entered. Accustomed to reporters balancing computers on their laps as they asked questions on the campaign trail, Obama just said "Wow" then began speaking.

Though security has been beefed up since Obama became president-elect, with a few more streets blocked off around his Chicago house and more police officers in his motorcade, the 47-year-old is trying to go about his regular business.

In the past few days he has gone out to a downtown restaurant for a three-hour dinner with his wife Michelle, enjoyed an unprecedented number of nights in a row at home in his own bed and followed a daily workout regime.

For his Saturday night dinner date with his wife, Obama's motorcade was as unobtrusive as a dozen cars snaking their way through downtown could be. Police rang their sirens only a few times and for most of the ride they did not use their flashing lights -- presumably in an effort to minimize attention.

The Obamas even went to their daughters' school this week for a parent-teacher conference, which had to be postponed because of the grueling presidential campaign which kept Obama away from home most of the time.

They looked like other parents, conferring as they exited the school. Except that Michelle Obama was carrying flowers that had apparently been given to her inside the school and the two got into separate motorcades after saying goodbye.

HITTING THE GYM

One constant that Obama has required is regular exercise. Even after staying up until nearly 2 a.m. on election night, he went to the gym early on Wednesday before a day of meetings.

On Sunday morning -- a day he says he likes to start by making breakfast together with Michelle and daughters Malia and Sasha -- Obama got up early and headed to the gym, located in a nearby apartment complex owned by a good friend.

Residents in the complex have grown used to seeing the president-elect work out beside them. One man standing in line at a local cafe said he has been on the stair-climbing machine near Obama as he worked out.

He said security inside the gym has been beefed up a bit lately and now Secret Service agents are asking gym-goers not to take photos. But other than that, Obama who enters wearing a baseball cap and track suit fits in as he exercise.

The rest of Sunday was to be a day like that of many Americans with plans to watch football with friends and family.

Except Obama might also be called on to talk about world matters, get intelligence briefings or make progress on deciding who to place in his Cabinet.

(Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

Obama's first press conference is a MSM love-fest; Fox not invited to ask a question:11/7/08 Transcript

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 16:49:17 PST

Fishbowl DC notes that almost all of the major networks got to ask Obama a question:

Nedra Pickler (AP), Lee Cowan (NBC), Jake Tapper (ABC), Chip Reid (CBS), Karen Bohan (Reuters), John McCormick (Chicago Tribune), Lynn Sweet (Chicago Sun-Times), Candy Crowley (CNN), Jeff Zeleny (New York Times).

Which network didn't get a question? Fox News. Source Weekly Standard

Transcript

HILTON CHICAGO, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
2:53 P.M. EST, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2008
PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: Thank you. Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you very much.

This morning we woke up to more sobering news about the state of our economy. The 240,000 jobs lost in October marks the 10th consecutive month that our economy has shed jobs. In total, we've lost nearly 1.2 million jobs this year, and more than 10 million Americans are now unemployed. Tens of millions of families are struggling to figure out how to pay the bills and stay in their homes. Their stories are an urgent reminder that we are facing the greatest economic challenge of our lifetime, and we're going to have to act swiftly to resolve it.

Now, the United States has only one government and one president at a time, and until January 20th of next year, that government is the current administration. I have spoken to President Bush. I appreciate his commitment to ensuring that his economic policy team keeps us fully informed as developments unfold. And I'm also thankful for his invitation to the White House.

Immediately after I become president, I'm going to confront this economic crisis head-on by taking all necessary steps to ease the credit crisis, help hardworking families, and restore growth and prosperity.

This morning I met with members of my Transition Economic Advisory Board, who are standing behind me, alongside my vice president-elect, Joe Biden. They will help to guide the work of my transition team, working with Rahm Emanuel, my chief of staff, in developing a strong set of policies to respond to this crisis. We discussed in the earlier meeting several of the most immediate challenges facing our economy and key priorities on which to focus on in the days and weeks ahead.

First of all, we need a rescue plan for the middle class that invests in immediate efforts to create jobs and provide relief to families that are watching their paychecks shrink and their life savings disappear. A particularly urgent priority is a further extension of unemployment insurance benefits for workers who cannot find work in the increasingly weak economy. A fiscal stimulus plan that will jump-start economic growth is long overdue. I've talked about it throughout this -- the last few months of the campaign. We should get it done.

Second, we have to address the spreading impact of the financial crisis on the other sectors of our economy -- small businesses that are struggling to meet their payrolls and finance their holiday inventories, and state and municipal governments facing devastating budget cuts and tax increases. We must also remember that the financial crisis is increasingly global and requires a global response.

The news coming out of the auto industry this week reminds us of the hardship it faces -- hardship that goes far beyond individual auto companies to the countless suppliers, small businesses and communities throughout our nation who depend on a vibrant American auto industry. The auto industry is the backbone of American manufacturing and a critical part of our attempt to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

I would like to see the administration do everything it can to accelerate the retooling assistance that Congress has already enacted. In addition, I have made it a high priority for my transition team to work on additional policy options to help the auto industry adjust, weather the financial crisis, and succeed in producing fuel-efficient cars here in the United States of America. And I was glad to be joined today by Governor Jennifer Granholm, who obviously has great knowledge and great interest on this issue. I've asked my team to explore what we can do under current law and whether additional legislation will be needed for this purpose.

Third, we will review the implementation of this administration's financial program to ensure that the government's efforts are achieving their central goal of stabilizing financial markets while protecting taxpayers, helping homeowners and not unduly rewarding the management of financial firms that are receiving government assistance.

It is absolutely critical that the Treasury work closely with the FDIC, HUD and other government agencies to use the substantial authority that they already have to help families avoid foreclosure and stay in their homes.

Finally, as we monitor and address these immediate economic challenges, we will be moving forward in laying out a set of policies that will grow our middle class and strengthen our economy in the long term. We cannot afford to wait on moving forward on the key priorities that I identified during the campaign, including clean energy, health care, education and tax relief for middle-class families.

My transition team will be working on each of these priorities in the weeks ahead, and I intend to reconvene this advisory board to discuss the best ideas for responding to these immediate problems.

Let me close by saying this: I do not underestimate the enormity of the task that lies ahead. We have taken some major action to date, and we will need further action during this transition and subsequent months. Some of the choices that we make are going to be difficult. And I have said before and I will repeat again: It is not going to be quick and it is not going to be easy for us to dig ourselves out of the hole that we are in, but America is a strong and resilient country. And I know we will succeed if we put aside partisanship and politics and work together as one nation. That's what I intend to do.

With that, let me open it up for some questions. And I'm going to start right here with you, Nedra.

Q Thanks, Mr. President-elect. I wonder what you think any president can accomplish during their first hundred days in office to turn the economy around. How far can you go? And what will be your priorities on day one?

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: Well, I think that a new president can do an enormous amount to restore confidence, to move an agenda forward that speaks to the needs of the economy and the needs of middle-class families all across the country. I've outlined during the course of the campaign some critical issues that I intend to work on.

We have a current financial crisis that is spilling out into the rest of the economy. And we have taken some action so far. More action is undoubtedly going to be needed. My transition team is going to be monitoring very closely what happens over the course of the next several months.

The one thing I can say with certainty is that we are going to need to see a stimulus package passed either before or after inauguration. We are going to have to focus on jobs, because the hemorrhaging of jobs has an impact obviously on consumer confidence and the ability of people to -- to buy goods and services and can have enormous spill-over effects.

And I think it's going to be very important for us to provide the kinds of assistance, to state and local governments, to make sure that they don't compound some of the problems that are already out there, by having to initiate major layoffs or initiate tax increases.

So there are some things that we know we're going to have to do. But I'm confident that a new president can have an enormous impact. That's why I ran for president.

All right.

Lee.

Q Sir, there's been some suggestion from House Democrats that the stimulus package may be in trouble, that it's going to be a hard time getting it out of a lame-duck session.

Are you still confident that you would be able to get something done before you actually take office?

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: I want to see a stimulus package sooner rather than later. If it does not get done in the lame-duck session, it will be the first thing I get done as president of the United States.

Jake.

Q Senator, for the first time since the Iranian Revolution, a president of Iran sent a congratulations note to a new U.S. president.

I'm wondering, first of all, if you responded to President Ahmadinejad's note of congratulations. And second of all and more importantly, how soon do you plan on sending low-level envoys to countries such as Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, to see if a presidential-level talk would be productive?

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: I am aware that the letter was sent. Let me state -- repeat what I stated during the course of the campaign.

Iran's development of a nuclear weapon, I believe, is unacceptable. And we have to mount a international effort to prevent that from happening. Iran's support of terrorist organizations, I think, is something that has to cease.

I will be reviewing the letter from President Ahmadinejad. And we will respond appropriately. It's only been three days since the election. Obviously how we approach and deal with a country like Iran is not something that we should, you know, simply do in a kneejerk fashion.

I think we've got to think it through. But I have to reiterate once again that we only have one president at a time. And I want to be very careful that we are sending the right signals, to the world as a whole, that I am not the president and I won't be until January 20th.

Let's see.

Chip.

Q Picking up what you were just talking about, your meeting with President Bush on Monday, when he is still the decider obviously, stating the obvious, when you disagree with decisions he makes, will you defer? Will you challenge? Will you confront? And if it becomes confrontational, could that rattle the markets even more?

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: Well, President Bush graciously invited Michelle and I to meet with him and First Lady Laura Bush. We are gratified by the invitation.

I'm sure that in addition to taking a tour of the White House, there is going to be a substantive conversation between myself and the president.

I'm not going to anticipate problems. I'm going to go in there with a spirit of bipartisanship and a sense that both the president and various leaders of Congress all recognize the severity of the situation right now and want to get stuff done. And you know, undoubtedly there may end up being differences between not just members of different parties, but between people within the same party.

The -- the critical point and the -- I think the critical tone that has to be struck by all of us involved right now is the American people need help. This economy is in bad shape, and we have just completed one of the longest election cycles in recorded history. Now is a good time for us to set politics aside for a while and think practically about what will actually work to move the economy forward. And it's in that spirit that I'll have the conversation with the president.

Let's see. How about Karen.

Q Mr. President-elect, with the country facing two wars and a financial crisis, do you think it's important for you to move especially quickly to fill key Cabinet posts, such as Treasury secretary and secretary of State?

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: When we have an announcement about Cabinet appointments, we will make it. There is no doubt that I think people want to know who's going to make up our team, and I want to move with all deliberate haste, but I want to emphasize deliberate as well as haste. I'm proud of the choice I made of vice president, partly because we did it right. I'm proud of the choice of chief of staff because we thought it through. And I think it's very important in all these key positions, both in the economic team and the national security team, to -- to get it right and -- and not to be so rushed that you end up making mistakes. I'm confident that we're going to have an outstanding team, and we will be rolling that out in subsequent weeks.

Let's see. Where's John McCormick? Give -- give a local, hometown guy a little bit of -- a little bit of time.

Q Thank you, sir.

To what extent -- (comes on mike) -- to what extent are you planning to use your probably pretty great influence in determining the successor for your Senate seat? And what sort of criteria should the governor be looking at in filling that position?

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: This is the governor's decision. It is not my decision. And I think that the criteria that I would have for my successor would be the same criteria that I'd have if I were a voter: somebody who is capable, somebody who is passionate about helping working families in Illinois meet their -- meet their dreams. And I think there are going to be a lot of good choices out there. But it is the governor's decision to make, not mine.

Lynn Sweet. What happened to your arm, Lynn?

Q I cracked my shoulder running to your speech on Election Night. (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: Oh, no.

Q (Off mike.)

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: I think that was the only major incident during the entire Grant Park celebration.

Q Thank you for asking.

Here's my question. I'm wondering what you're doing to get ready. Have you spoke to any living ex-presidents? What books you might be reading? Everyone wants to know what kind of dog are you going to buy for your girls. Have you decided on a private or public school for your daughters?

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: Let me list those off. In terms of speaking to former presidents, I have spoken to all of them that are living. Obviously, President Clinton. I didn't want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about, you know, doing any seances. (Laughter.)

I have reread some of Lincoln's writings, who's always an extraordinary inspiration.

And by the way, President Carter, President Bush Senior, as well as the current president have all been very gracious and offered to provide any help that they can in this transition process.

With respect to the dog, this is a major issue. I think it's generated more interest on our website than just about anything. We have -- we have two criteria that have to be reconciled. One is that Malia is allergic, so it has to be hypo-allergenic. There are a number of breeds that are hypo-allergenic. On the other hand, our preference would be to get a shelter dog. But obviously, a lot of shelter dogs are mutts, like me. So the -- so, whether we're going to be able to balance those two things, I think, is a pressing issue on the Obama household.

And with respect to schools, Michelle will be scouting out some schools. We'll be making a decision about that in the future.

Okay. Candy? Down here.

Q You are now privy to a lot of intelligence that you haven't had access to before; in fact, much of what the president sees, I'm sure, all of it. First of all, do you -- what do you think about the state of U.S. intelligence, whether you think it needs beefing up, whether you think there's enough interaction between the various agencies?

And second of all, has anything that you've heard given you pause about anything you've talked about on the campaign trail?

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: Well, Candy, as you know, if there was something I'd heard, I couldn't tell you. But --

Q (?) (Off mike.)

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: (Chuckles.) The -- I have received intelligence briefings. And I will make just a general statement. Our intelligence process can always improve. I think it has gotten better. And, you know, beyond that I don't think I should comment on the nature of the intelligence briefings.

That was a two-parter? Was there another aspect to that?

Q Well, just whether, you know, absent what you've heard --

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: Okay, I get it.

I --

Q -- whether anything's given you pause.

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: I -- I'm going to -- I'm going to skip that.

Jeff.

Q Mr. President-elect, do you still intend to seek income tax increases for upper-income Americans? And if so, should these Americans expect to pay higher taxes in 2009?

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: The -- my tax plan represented a net tax cut. It provided for substantial middle-class tax cuts. Ninety-five percent of working Americans would receive them. It also provided for cuts in capital gains for small businesses, additional tax credits. All of it is designed for job growth.

My priority is going to be, how do we grow the economy? How do we create more jobs?

I think that the plan that we've put forward is the right one. But obviously over the next several weeks and months, we are going to be continuing to take a look at the data and see what's taking place in the economy as a whole. But understand the goal of my plan is to provide tax relief to families that are struggling, but also to boost the capacity of the economy to grow from the bottom up.

All right? Thank you very much, guys.

Q ("Bonjour," ?) Mr. President.

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: "Bonjour." (Laughter.)

END.

Obama disses Nancy Reagan; first gaffe as President-elect

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 17:47:48 PST

Barack Obama apologises to Nancy Reagan after first gaffe as President-Elect

Barack Obama has apologised to former First Lady Nancy Reagan after wrongly suggesting that she held séances in the White House, his first gaffe as President-Elect.

By Tim Shipman in Washington
Last Updated: 3:52PM GMT 08 Nov 2008

Nancy Reagan, now 87, notoriously used an astrologer to draw up her husband's schedule, but never held seances Photo: EPA

Mr Obama called Mrs Reagan after making an ill-judged joke during his first press conference since the election on Friday night.

Asked which presidents he had consulted about his transition to power, Mr Obama replied: "I have spoken to all of them who are living. I didn't want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about doing any séances."

While Mrs Reagan, now 87, notoriously used an astrologer to draw up her husband's schedule after the assassination attempt against him in 1981, she never held séances.

By contrast Abraham Lincoln's wife Mary and Hillary Clinton, are said to have sought to converse with the dead through spiritual advisers.

Realising his mistake, Mr Obama called Mrs Reagan, who was recently released from hospital after fracturing her pelvis in a fall, to apologise for his "careless and off handed remark".

His spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said: "The President-elect expressed his admiration and affection for Mrs Reagan that so many Americans share and they had a warm conversation."

The incident was another reminder for Mr Obama of the pitfalls he faces as he switches from campaign to presidential mode, where everything he says will be closely scrutinised by people around the world, given the power of his words to move the economic markets.

Mrs Reagan has written that "astrology was simply one of the ways I coped with the fear I felt after my husband almost died". She mused over whether astrology was "one of the reasons" there was only one major assassination attempt. "I don't really believe it was, but I don't really believe it wasn't," she wrote.

Another first lady, Mary Todd Lincoln, is believed to have conducted séances to communicate with her two dead sons during her husband's presidency, and then with Abraham Lincoln himself after his assassination.

Watergate reporter Bob Woodward claimed in a 1996 book that Mrs Clinton had séance-like sessions at the White House in which she conversed with former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt. Mrs Clinton's advisers said the spiritual sessions were not séances.

Labor Unions call Obama to deliver on his disastrous Card Check promise within first 100 days; Opposition braces

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 14:42:46 PST

Time for reality to sink in already according to the National Journal labor unions are calling on Obama to deliver on his promise to pass the so-called Card Check law in his first 100 days. As I've previously written this is the most dangerous piece of legislation and could well have an extremely negative impact on the US economy. stifle business innovation. cost new jobs and rapidly hasten the march towards Euro-style socialism. Its well worth staying abreast of developments on this prospective and highly insidious piece of proposed legislation.

Card check: Democrats can expect fight
By Lisa Mascaro Las Vegas Sun

Fri, Nov 7, 2008 (2 a.m.)

WASHINGTON — A national association of concrete company executives gathered two months before Tuesday’s election in an ornate room off the Senate floor to meet with Republican Sen. John Ensign.

The Nevada lawmaker laid out a grim picture of what would happen if Congress approved and the president signed a labor-backed bill making it easier for unions to organize in the workplace. The legislation had not enjoyed enough support to pass the current Senate, but would surely return in future sessions of Congress.

Ensign, who headed Republican election efforts in the Senate, regarded the Employee Free Choice Act his No. 1 tool in raising money important to candidates in a handful of close races across the country.

The act was becoming part of those campaigns. Unions were spending tens of millions of dollars to promote the legislation, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and others were just as furiously spending money against.

Ensign made no direct appeal for financial help that morning two months ago, but the message was clear. The bill was bad for business and as union membership swelled, the law would be bad for the Republican Party in Washington.

“Unions don’t spend money to elect Republicans,” Ensign told the concrete execs. “They spend money to elect Democrats. From our perspective, this would have devastating consequences.”

Tuesday, six Democratic Senate candidates who support the bill won their elections. (Other key races remained undecided.)

A poll of 942 voters in Senate battleground states taken Nov. 2-4 and released Thursday by American Rights at Work, an advocacy group, showed just three Republican voters said they were voting against the Democratic candidate because of the union issue.

Now, with Democrats enjoying greater numbers in the Senate, unions and their allies see passage of the bill as a top priority. President-elect Barack Obama has said he supports the bill. President Bush does not.

The bill would allow unions to form if a majority of the employees agree by signing their names to a card. Current law says company owners can require an election. Unions say elections can take months to organize, enabling managers to intimidate workers before voting begins.

But businesses argue that doing away with the secret ballot, and simply allowing workers to sign their names to a card, will allow union bosses to twist arms outside the privacy of the voting booth. Ensign calls it “un-American.”

Unions, including those on the Strip, think the bill will enable workers to organize with less interference from company executives. The Las Vegas experience suggests they are correct.

The Mirage was the first Las Vegas casino that struck an agreement with the Culinary Union that represents Strip workers for this kind of organizing, and most other Strip operators have followed suit.

Even with greater numbers of Democrats in the Senate, a few Republicans would still be needed to cross over to pass the bill. Last year only one Republican did so.

“We must pass the Employee Free Choice Act,” Tom Woodruff of Change to Win, a coalition of major unions, said in a statement Thursday. “Corporations and CEOs have used their tremendous power to threaten, coerce, intimidate and fire workers for trying to form a union.”

Steve Smith, a spokesman for the AFL-CIO, said the union is retaining its teams of election workers in such states as Minnesota, where Senate races remains undecided, to push for the bill’s passage.

“We’re obviously going to be mounting a strong campaign,” Smith said.

Chamber President Thomas Donohue foreshadowed the brutal battle ahead.

“We do not want that to become law,” Donohue said Thursday.

The chamber thinks its campaign in the battleground states elevated the issue among voters, and it too has resources to continue the fight. Its own statistics show 7 percent of Americans are aware of the union issue, compared with as many as 30 percent in battleground Senate states where ads were shown.

“We are well prepared,” Donohue warned. “It’s not going to be a walk in the park.”

Bill Ayers sympathizes with Pastor Wright, Rashid Khaladi; claims MLK makes Wright seem like a wimp

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 14:47:23 PST

An election day interview with Bill Ayers published on the New Yorker website

...As the polling day drew into the late afternoon, the level of security in Hyde Park matched the level of anticipation. Obama’s house, four blocks away, was surrounded.

Ayers said he felt “a lot of sympathy” for the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, “who was treated grotesquely and unfairly” by the media. He said that Martin Luther King Jr. was, in his time, far more radical than Wright: “Wright’s a wimp compared to Martin Luther King—he had a fiercer tone.” Ayers was referring to the speeches King gave late in his life in opposition to the Vietnam War and on the subject of economic equality. “Martin Luther King was not a saint,” Ayers said. “He was an angry pilgrim.” Ayers said that he had commiserated recently with yet another former Hyde Park neighbor (and fellow Little League coach), the Palestinian-American scholar Rashid Khalidi, now at Columbia University, who has also been a punching bag of the right wing in recent weeks.

Across the street, neighborhood kids chanted “O-ba-ma! O-ba-ma!” and “Yes we can!” for the cameras. Ayers smiled, looking a little like a more boomer Fred MacMurray in an episode of “My Three Sons.”

Ayers said that he had never meant to imply, in an interview with the Times, published coincidentally on 9/11, that he somehow wished he and the Weathermen had committed further acts of violence in the old days. Instead, he said, “I wish I had done more, but it doesn’t mean I wish we’d bombed more shit.” Ayers said that he had never been responsible for violence against other people and was acting to end a war in Vietnam in which “thousands of people were being killed every week.”

“While we did claim several extreme acts, they were acts of extreme radicalism against property,” he said. “We killed no one and hurt no one. Three of our people killed themselves.” And yet he was not without regrets. He mocked one of his earlier books, co-written with Dohrn, saying that, while it still is reflective of his radical and activist politics today, he was guilty of “rhetoric that’s juvenile and inflated—it is what it is.”

“I wish I had been wiser,” Ayers said. “I wish I had been more effective, I wish I’d been more unifying, I wish I’d been more principled.”

Ayers said that his life hasn’t been much altered by recent months, though he decided to postpone the re-release of his memoir, “Fugitive Days”—“I didn’t want it to be put in the meat grinder of this moment.” Two books he co-edited will also be republished soon: “City Kids, City Schools” and “City Kids, City Teachers.”

It was late afternoon, and Ayers was talking about his plans for the evening: he was heading to Grant Park with some friends for what they assumed would be a mass victory party. “This is an achingly exciting moment,” he said.

As we were getting ready to go, after an hour of front-stoop conversation, a neighbor came by and ironically reminded Ayers of the event that he and his wife held for Obama in 1995 when Obama was making his run for the Illinois state senate. "Everyone, including you, wants to have a coffee here," he joked to the neighbor. “I don’t know what the fuck I’m going to do!”

Russian President doesn't acknowledge Obama; Canadians. Brits, Aussies, Israelis pour cold water on Obama's parade

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 01:09:57 PST

Now that the buzz of an internationally exultant Election Night has begun to wear, the world's view of Barack Obama's pending presidency has taken a more sober turn.

Newspapers around the globe, most of which heralded the historical significance of America's first black president, have begun to splash cold water on anyone stuck in celebration mode.

The Times of London noted succinctly on Thursday that anyone believing Obama will meet the world's lofty expectations "will be disappointed." The Toronto Star told Canadians not to expect too much attention from a new U.S. president distracted by an "economic crisis, a debt mountain, two wars and making good on health and education reforms." And The Moscow Times noted that Russian President Dmitry Medvedev failed to even acknowledge Obama's victory in his state-of-the-nation address, a reflection of the icy relations between the two countries.

It seems the global honeymoon has ended.

\ --> The Jerusalem Post shone menacing light on the president-elect's days and months ahead: "Obama's electoral success was built on insistent light and optimism -- on that empowering, 'Yes, we can!' mantra. Obama's presidential success will depend on outmaneuvering, deterring and ultimately defeating those malicious global forces that peddle darkness and misery, and are sneering to themselves right now: 'No, you can't.'"

Even scarier, at least for Obama himself, was "the uncomfortable question of his immediate protection," discussed today in the Sydney Morning Herald in Australia: "No one needs to be reminded what happened to Abraham Lincoln, the last brilliant young newcomer from Illinois who made it all the way to the White House amid times of great national tribulation."

In Thursday's edition of The Daily Telegraph in England, a columnist described the inevitable letdown of an Obama administration thusly: "(O)ne cannot help but have one overwhelming feeling: that the expectations are so insanely high, and the reality both at home and abroad so intractable in the short or even the medium term, that this is an administration that cannot but disappoint."

Source Chicago Tribune

Russian President doesn

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 01:02:41 PST

Is Obama eligible to be POTUS? Open letter demanding BHO release birth certificate may appear in national newspaper

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 00:40:08 PST

The We the People foundation plans to publish this open letter to Obama in USA Today.

I see two obstacles to having this letter published: 1) can the group raise the money to pay USA Today? 2) Will the pro-Obama USA Today publish it?

Source

An Open Letter to Barack Obama:

Are you a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S.?

Are you legally qualified to hold the Office of President?

Dear Mr. Obama:

On October 24, 2008, a federal judge granted your request to dismiss a lawsuit by Citizen Philip Berg, who challenged your qualifications under the “Natural Born Citizen” clause of the U.S. Constitution to legally hold the office of President of the United States of America.

Mr. Berg presented factual evidence to the Court in support of his claim that you are either a citizen of your father’s native Kenya by birth, or that you became a citizen of Indonesia, relinquishing your prior citizenship when you moved there with your mother in 1967.

In your response to the lawsuit, you neither denied Mr. Berg’s claims nor submitted any evidence which would refute his assertions. Instead, you argued that the Court lacked the jurisdiction to determine the question of your legal eligibility because Mr. Berg lacked “standing.”

Astonishingly, the judge agreed, simply saying, “[Mr. Berg] would have us derail the democratic process by invalidating a candidate for whom millions of people voted and underwent excessive vetting during what was one of the most hotly contested presidential primary [sic] in living memory.”

Unfortunately, your response to the legal claim was clearly evasive and strikingly out of character, suggesting you may, in fact, lack a critical Constitutional qualification necessary to assume the Office of President: i.e., that you are not a “natural born” citizen of the United States or one who has relinquished his American citizenship.

Before you can exercise any of the powers of the United States, you must prove that you have fully satisfied each and every eligibility requirement that the Constitution mandates for any individual’s exercise of those powers.

Regardless of the tactics chosen in defending yourself against the Berg lawsuit, significant questions regarding your legal capacity to hold this nation’s highest office have been put forth publicly, and you have failed to directly refute them with documentary evidence that is routinely available to any bona fide, natural born U.S. Citizen.

As one who has ventured into the fray of public service of his own volition, seeking to possess the vast powers of the Office of President, it is not unreasonable to demand that you produce evidence of your citizenship to answer the questions and allay the concerns of the People. Indeed, as the one seeking the office, you are under a moral, legal, and fiduciary duty to proffer such evidence to establish your qualifications as explicitly mandated by Article II of the Constitution.

Should you proceed to assume the office of the President of the United States as anything but a bona fide natural born citizen of the United States that has not relinquished that citizenship, you would be inviting a national disaster, placing our Republic at great risk from untold consequences. For example:

· Neither the Electoral College on December 15, nor the House of Representatives on January 6 would be able to elect you, except as a poseur - a usurper;

· As a usurper, you would be unable to take the required “Oath or Affirmation” of office on January 20 without committing the crime of perjury or false swearing, for being ineligible for the Office of the President you cannot faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States;

· Your every act in the usurped Office of the President would be a criminal offense as an act under color of law that would subject the People to the deprivation of their constitutional rights, and entitling you to no obedience whatsoever from the People;

· as a usurper acting in the guise of the President you could not function as the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy and of the militia of the several states, as such forces would be under no legal obligation to remain obedient to you;

· No one in any civilian agency in the Executive Branch would be required to obey any of your proclamations, executive orders or directives, as such orders would be legally VOID;

· Your appointment of Ambassadors and Judges to the Supreme Court would be VOID ab initio (i.e., from the beginning), no matter what subsequent actions the Senate might take as well as rendering any such acts by such appointed officials void as well;

· Congress would not be able to pass any new laws because they would not be able to acquire the signature of a bona fide President, rendering all such legislation legally VOID;

· As a usurper, Congress would be unable to remove you from the Office of the President on Impeachment, inviting certain political chaos including a potential for armed conflicts within the General Government or among the States and the People to effect the removal of such a usurper.

As an attorney and sitting U.S. Senator, I’m sure you agree that our Constitution is the cornerstone of our system of governance. It is the very foundation of our system of Law and Order – indeed, it is the supreme law of the land. I’m sure you also agree that its precise language was no accident and cannot be ignored if Individual, unalienable, natural Rights, Freedoms and Liberties are to be protected and preserved.

As our next potential President, you have a high-order obligation to the Constitution (and to those who have fought and died for our Freedom) that extends far beyond that of securing a majority of the votes of the Electoral College. No matter your promises of change and prosperity, your heartfelt intent or the widespread support you have garnered in seeking the highest Office of the Land, the integrity of the Republic and Rule of Law cannot, -- must not -- be put at risk, by allowing a constitutionally unqualified person to sit, as a usurper, in the Office of the President.

No matter the level of practical difficulty, embarrassment or disruption of the nation’s business, we must -- above all -- honor and protect the Constitution and the divine, unalienable, Individual Rights it guarantees, including the Right to a President who is a natural born citizen of the United States of America that has not relinquished his American citizenship. Our nation has endured similar disruptions in the past, and will weather this crisis as well. Indeed, it is both yours and the People’s mutual respect for, and commitment to, the Constitution and Rule of Law that insures the perpetuation of Liberty.

As a long time defender of my state and federal Constitutions, and in consideration of the lack of sufficient evidence needed to establish your credentials as President, I am compelled to lodge this Petition for Redress of Grievances and public challenge to you.

Make no mistake: This issue IS a Constitutional crisis. Although it will not be easy for you, your family or our Republic, you have it within your ability to halt this escalating crisis by either producing the certified documents establishing beyond question your qualifications to hold the Office of President, or by immediately withdrawing yourself from the Electoral College process.

With due respect, I hereby request that you deliver the following documents to Mr. Berg and myself at the National Press Club in Washington, DC at noon on Monday, November 17, 2008:

(a) a certified copy of your “vault” (original long version) birth certificate;
(b) certified copies of all reissued and sealed birth certificates in the names
Barack Hussein Obama, Barry Soetoro, Barry Obama, Barack Dunham
and Barry Dunham;
(c) a certified copy of your Certification of Citizenship;
(d) a certified copy of your Oath of Allegiance taken upon age of maturity;
(e) certified copies of your admission forms for Occidental College, Columbia
University and Harvard Law School; and
(f) certified copies of any court orders or legal documents changing your name
from Barry Soetoro.

In the alternative, in defense of the Constitution, and in honor of the Republic and that for which it stands, please announce before such time your withdrawal from the 2008 Presidential election process.

“In a government of laws, the existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.”
Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 469-471.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely,

Robert L. Schulz,
Founder and Chairman, We The People Foundation for Constitutional Education, Inc.

Pastor Wright claims he's a victim of media exploitation

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 00:17:11 PST

Obama's former pastor says media exploited him

MILFORD, Conn. (AP) - Barack Obama's former pastor complained Thursday that the media used him as a "weapon of mass destruction" in an attempt to derail Obama's campaign for the presidency.

Speaking at a forum about race and religion, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright accused the media of taking out of context videotaped clips that showed him making anti-American statements from the pulpit of the Chicago church where Obama had worshipped for 20 years.

The videos, which included Wright thundering "God damn America!", dominated cable television for weeks. The public outrage that followed caused the president-elect to sever ties with his longtime spiritual leader.

Wright told an audience of about 200 people at the forum that he was trying to convey the anger and desire for vengeance that people felt after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. He said the media failed to mention that he was a proud Christian who was raised in a Christian home.

"Their intention was to use me as a weapon of mass destruction, to tear down that man's integrity," said Wright, former pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.

In a question-and-answer session with the audience, Wright said he didn't believe Obama shared his opinions publicized on the videos.

"Do you agree with everything your pastor says?" he asked. "Ninety percent of the people sitting in church don't agree with everything their pastor says. What I saw is not an index on what he did or does not believe."

Wright's comments were a stumbling block for Obama's campaign. In an impassioned speech about faith and race, the Democrat at first expressed support for Wright, saying that "I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother."

But six weeks later during a speech at the National Press Club, Wright offered eyebrow-raising opinions about the U.S. government, praised Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan and hinted that Obama was distancing himself from the pastor for political expediency.

The next day, Obama said he was outraged and denounced Wright's remarks.

Aussie journalist points out the election of Obama proves the Left has been falsely disparaging the USA

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 21:18:43 PST

Greg Sheridan, Foreign editor | November 06, 2008

SO now we know for sure. The Noam Chomsky-John Pilger-Phillip Adams view of America is wrong. In George W. Bush's America, a land allegedly rife with militarism and racism, the white military hero lost and the black memoirist won a slashing election victory.

In a nation supposedly enthralled by fundamentalist religion, the presidential ticket with two mainstream, Protestant, capital-C Christians lost to the ticket with a vice-president of Catholic background who favours abortion on demand, and a presidential candidate who drifted into religion when he drifted into politics and who has one of the most pro-abortion records of any legislator.

In a sense all of this is beside the point. These were not the issues on which this election was fought.

Nor are they the dynamics of American society.

It is indeed a wonderful thing for the US to have its first black president. No African-American child need ever fear there is any limit to what they can achieve. Whatever you think of Obama's policies and capacity to govern well -- and I have my doubts -- his election is a powerful symbol of America's inclusiveness and opportunity. Which other big, rich, predominantly white society has elected a member of a racial minority to be its head of government? Not Australia.

So as we salute Obama, let's salute America as well.

The left liberal caricature of America was always nonsense. The militarism of American society is vastly overstated, just as its profound willingness to make sacrifice for other people's freedom is under-appreciated. This is the fifth presidential election in a row in which the candidate with the stronger military record lost to the candidate who didn't serve, or served only in the National Guard.

The last war hero to be elected president was George H. W. Bush in 1988. The same Bush lost to the draft-dodging Bill Clinton in 1992, as did another genuine war hero, Bob Dole, in 1996. Al Gore was no war hero but he had served in Vietnam, and John Kerry famously won the Purple Heart. And they both lost.

Similarly on race, the dynamic has been the opposite of the left liberal caricature of America for a long time. As Shelby Steele has argued, America has been ready for years to elect a black president. Of all the exit polls CNN conducted, perhaps the most revealing was the one that found only 20 per cent of Americans believed race was an important factor in how they voted. And a clear majority of those people voted for Obama.

Obama won nearly 100 per cent of a bigger-than-usual black vote, and it is clear his race was not a significant negative for the tens of millions of whites and Hispanics and Asian-Americans who also voted for him.

While it is historic to have an African-American president, in some ways it is almost equally historic that a northern liberal won the presidency for the Democrats. That has not happened since John F. Kennedy in 1960, and calling Kennedy a liberal is a bit of a stretch.

All of the other Democratic presidents since then -- Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton -- came from the south and sold themselves as southern conservatives. The two parties have almost reversed identities: the Republicans to a southern working class party, with the Democrats becoming the home of the liberal elites.

John McCain surely did just about as well as any Republican could have. He certainly made mistakes. But at the time of writing the popular vote was about 52 per cent to 47 per cent. That means Obama got about 1per cent more than Bush did four years ago. This was no landslide comparable to Ronald Reagan's victory of 1980, Richard Nixon's in 1972 or Lyndon Johnson's in 1964.

The world had been waiting for an "October surprise", a late external event that would transform the election. It was thought this might be a security crisis that would emphasise McCain's national security gravitas and Obama's lack of experience.

Instead it was the Wall Street crisis, which forced Americans' attention back on the economy. It destroyed McCain's efforts to run as a de facto non-Republican. Before the Wall Street crisis, McCain was ahead. Given that he was outspent two to one, and the mainstream media was vigorously campaigning for Obama, McCain can hold his head high.

Nonetheless Obama showed himself to be superbly well organised and disciplined, and ran a smooth and professional campaign. Politically, he deserves his success. Now is the time for the Obama celebrations. Soon, however, reality will set in. Obama cannot govern by dint of his exotic identity or smooth talking. But these features will afford one advantage. At least temporarily, and perhaps for quite some time, the routine, stupid and dully uninformed anti-Americanism of many opinion makers around the world will be untenable. But all that will be less important than how Obama decides to govern. History here has plenty of cautionary lessons. The US political system works around checks and balances. History tells us that when one party controls the presidency, the Senate and the House of Representatives, it is often pretty ugly. There is overwhelming evidence that unified government in Washington spends and taxes more than a divided government, and that will be a temptation for Obama and congressional leaders.

After all, when Bush had a Republican Congress he got into a lot of political trouble.

The Republican commitment to small government gave way to big government conservatism. When Clinton was elected in 1992, his fellow Democrats controlled the Congress. These were disastrous years for Clinton and led to a massive backlash against Democrats in the 1994 mid-term congressional elections. Similarly, Carter had a Democrat-controlled Congress that helped make him a one-term president.

Obama has an ideological record on the left-liberal side of US politics. However, during the general election he ran hard to the centre. He presented himself as a tax cutter, a conservative on education. He supported Bush's domestic surveillance legislation and took a hard line on security issues, vowing Iran would not get a nuclear weapon, that he would increase the US troop commitment in Afghanistan, that he would bomb terrorists in Pakistan and only withdraw from Iraq over 16 months if, on the advice of his commanders, conditions permitted.

But at this stage we have no idea of how Obama will govern. The first real sign will come when he appoints his cabinet. Then perhaps we can answer the question this long campaign has so far not addressed: politically, who is Barack Obama?

Michelle's no Jackie O: what did she spill on THAT victory frock?

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 22:16:36 PST

by Rebecca Detken

Last night, Barack Obama made history when he was elected the 44th president of the United States! Obama was joined onstage in Chicago's Grant Park by his wife, Michelle, and their two daughters, Sasha and Malia, as he addressed an estimated crowd of 240,000 people.

President-elect Barack Obama and his family celebrate in Chicago's Grant Park. INFDaily.com

While Obama's eloquent victory speech moved me to tears, unfortunately so did Michelle's dress. Barack looked sharp as can be in a dark navy suit, which was custom made by Hart Schaffner Marx, but I just wasn't feeling Michelle's splotchy red and black Narciso Rodriguez frock.

It might seem a little shallow to be discussing fashion the day after such a big moment in America's history, but I'm not the only one buzzing about Mrs. Obama's election night attire. Yahoo! users are searching like crazy for info on her dress, while critics are weighing in on whether it was a hit or miss.

Like me, LA Times blogger Elizabeth Snead was not a fan of the frock, calling it "disastrous." Of course, not everyone agrees. BlackBookmag.com's Alisa Gould-Simon found the dress to be shocking, but notes that it was "unexpected, uncoventional, and right on trend." InStyle.com also applauded our First Lady-elect's bold decision to wear something modern instead of a classic Oscar de La Renta number like many of the First Ladies before her. "Michelle Obama made fashion history last night," writes InStyle's Katrina Szish. "America, get ready to see what a true modern style icon is all about."

I guess I have to give Michelle props for daring to be different!

Obama's first pick for chief of staff is like a "cross between a hemorrhoid and a toothache"; made $18 MILLION as lobbyist

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:55:35 PST

2yr old article from FORTUNE Magazine is highly revealing about the type of money grabbers Obama likes to surround himself with. Remember all that business about not putting lobbyists in the White House. I guess he never mentioned ex-lobbyists.

By Nina Easton, Fortune Washington bureau chief
September 25 2006:

(Washingion D.C) Fortune -- On a wretchedly hot August day outside the Caterpillar tractor plant in Montgomery, Ill., President Bush and the state's congressional delegation gather for the signing of the massive transportation bill. This is 2005, the calm before the Katrina storm, and a rigorous mountain-biking schedule has the President in top shape.

In off-camera chitchat with the shirt-sleeved lawmakers, Bush takes note of Democratic Congressman Rahm Emanuel's deep tan, prompting the 46-year-old Emanuel to boast about the miles of swimming and biking in his triathlon training schedule. Testosterone oozes into the humid air space between the two men. Bush invites Emanuel down to Texas to do some real biking. "So I said, 'I'll make you a deal, Mr. President. I'll bike if you swim.' Now he didn't exactly say swimming was a wussy sport, but you could tell.... So I said, 'Mr. President, Laura can put your water wings next to the lake. You can have your water wings.' "

At that point you might think this graduate of the Evanston School of Ballet-a man whose office features sunset photos and who has the mellow chords of David Gray playing on his iPod-would leave well enough alone. But Emanuel is hard-wired to go for the jugular: Politics Chicago-style are part of his DNA. So he sharpens his drill bit on the leader of the free world. "I said to him, 'You're not one of those tribathletes, are you, Mr. President? You know-steam, sauna, shower?'

"And Bush goes, 'That's g-o-o-d.' "

Eyes dancing, Emanuel spins that last word with a solid impersonation of the President's Midland drawl. He is recounting this story 11 months later, from an office overlooking a construction site and a freeway, four blocks from the leadership offices of the U.S. Capitol he hopes to occupy some day. He has just returned from the House floor, taut and unable to sit still, his kinetic brain consumed by an upcoming election that will affect the personal fate of both men.

Banter with a U.S. President is nothing new to Emanuel; he was at Bill Clinton's side as a political advisor inside the White House for six years and still talks strategy with him at least once a month. Now chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee-the operations center for House candidates (Washington nickname: "D-Triple C")-Emanuel is applying rugged business discipline to the Democratic Party's historic effort to wrest control of the U.S. House from the Republicans. Last year he recruited dozens of candidates to challenge GOP incumbents. This year he is holding feet to the fire to raise record amounts for the Democrats' effort.

Along the way Emanuel has widened his core of admirers-and made powerful enemies. Nervous about being swamped by Republican money this fall, he spent the summer locked in a bitter dispute with Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean over the allocation of election resources-the political equivalent of Microsoft executives arguing over how many Xboxes to ship where for the Christmas season.

In private Emanuel told off Dean. In public he's aimed similar messages at liberal financiers like George Soros for being stingy and at the leftist activists in MoveOn.org for being ineffective. "Is there anyone Rahm Emanuel isn't fighting with?" asks a MyDD blogger. A straw poll by another leftist blog, Daily Kos, gave Emanuel a 58% disapproval rating.

All this matters, of course, only if the Democrats lose. "Holy Christ, his butt is on the line," says Democratic strategist Paul Begala, who describes Emanuel's aggressive style as a "cross between a hemorrhoid and a toothache." Begala continues, "I love Rahm, but that's a small group of us. He's not a beloved figure like Tip O'Neill or Dick Gephardt. Rahm's there because they want to win."

If Emanuel does succeed in returning House Democrats to power for the first time in 12 years, it's a safe bet that this one-time investment banker will vault up the House leadership ranks and eventually be in a position to bid for the Speaker's title that Chicagoans once hoped would be held by their legendary Dan Rostenkowski.

Hillary Clinton may or may not become the party's presidential nominee. Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi may or may not remain the GOP's favorite tetherballs. But Emanuel-now only 47 years old and in a safe district-is fast emerging as a new force in the Democratic Party.

He also symbolizes the party's painful internal divisions. He is praised by Democratic strategists who think the party needs to resist moving left (nearly twice as many American voters call themselves conservative as call themselves liberal) and distrusted by some in the party's liberal wing. He considers Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman a good friend, even though Lieberman's support of the Iraq war inflamed leftist sentiment and cost him his party's nomination.

"We have two Democrats running," Emanuel says, referring to Lieberman, now campaigning as an independent, and primary winner Ned Lamont. Emanuel himself criticizes Bush's conduct of the war but not the original decision to topple Saddam Hussein.

Still, even the most liberal activists admire Emanuel's martial instincts. Borrowing Newt Gingrich's battle cry that politics is "war without blood," Emanuel has come out swinging, determined to avoid a replay of the timid, flip-flopping mess that was the 2004 campaign.

Former President Clinton told FORTUNE he considers Emanuel "one of the top political minds in Washington," a strategist who "favors the counterattack over the attack." Clinton adds: "His politics are rooted in new ideas and old-fashioned values." Former Bush economic advisor Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who, as Congressional Budget Office director, worked with Emanuel, calls him the "real deal." (Like Rostenkowski, Emanuel has a seat on the powerful Ways and Means Committee.)

This "real deal" is not your average back-slapping, fraternity-brother brand of politician. You'll find him watching Twyla Tharp choreography, not his golf swing, even as he's calculating how to slash his opponent. "He will step into a fight and not back down easily, if at all. He doesn't mind the heat," says his equally combative little brother, Hollywood superagent Ariel Emanuel.

Emanuel has rejuvenated the hopes of House Democrats in no small part by applying the money-raising acumen he used when Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign nearly sank under the weight of Gennifer Flowers' accusations. With a penchant for networking and making deals-honed during a stint at Wasserstein Perella (which netted him more than $18 million in just over two years)-Emanuel has put the party's House campaign coffers on a par with the Republicans' for the first time in years.

Conservative Republican Tom Cole, a U.S. Representative from Oklahoma, cited Emanuel's ferocity in a recent letter to colleagues asking for their support in his own campaign to run the counterpart House GOP operation next term. "He's dangerous," says Cole, who calls Emanuel a friend. "He has a closing intensity. When he's got a political kill in sight, he's absolutely relentless." And that, says Cole, has the GOP worried this fall.

On a Tuesday afternoon in june, inside a Capitol Hill conference room, the Democratic Party's three biggest moneymen take their places around an oval table to begin a session of dialing for dollars. New York's camera-ready but frumpy senior Senator, Charles Schumer, tosses off his shoes, puts up his feet, and starts cracking jokes. Former DNC chair Terry McAuliffe walks in, all toothy grins. Emanuel, trim and 5-foot-8, by far the smallest of the trio, is by contrast hyperserious. Between donor calls he barks at staff and clicks out messages on his BlackBerry, according to people in the room.

"Hey, Tommy," Schumer deadpans into the speakerphone once superlobbyist Tommy Boggs is connected, "have I got an opportunity for you!"

"I think I'd rather have my proctologist calling," Boggs quips. The trio wants Boggs to bring in $100,000-$25,000 per donor-for an October fundraising dinner at the Clintons' Washington, D.C., home. Boggs pleads that he's already given to Schumer's senatorial committee.

"That was breakfast, Tommy," Schumer laughs. "This is dinner."

The Clinton event-to be followed by lunch with congressional leaders-is part of the Democrats' "last-minute money," a cash hoard they are building to return fire when Republicans start upping the money ante. As the fall campaign clicks into high gear, Democratic strategists say they have at least a fifty-fifty chance at taking back the House. "It's a jump shot," says Maryland Congressman Chris Van Hollen, one of Emanuel's top DCCC lieutenants.

But Democratic prospects could easily sour if the Republicans pour in last-minute millions that they can't match. That possibility is fueling tensions between DNC chair Dean and Emanuel. One month earlier, at a meeting on Capitol Hill, Emanuel and Schumer asked Dean to match the Republican National Committee's expected outlay in the fall campaign. Dean refused to budge from what he describes as a long-term financial strategy to build up the party in all 50 states. As Dean balked at Emanuel's money demands, tempers flared, and the Chicago Congressman couldn't contain his. He stormed out, lobbing one of his famed "f-bombs" at Dean.

Within weeks, according to sources close to the fracas, Schumer was trying to reopen communication with Dean-sans the hot-tempered Emanuel-while Emanuel was firing off a letter to Dean demanding $100,000 for each of some 40 targeted races and pointing out that Gingrich's famed 1994 GOP takeover of the House was backed by $20 million in RNC funds. When news of the letter leaked to the press, anonymous Dean supporters accused Emanuel of laying the groundwork to shift the blame if the Democrats lose in November.

Emanuel's fears about being slaughtered by RNC money are legitimate. A deal he brokered with Dean in early September committed the DNC to spend $2.4 million on 40 competitive House races, while the RNC will be drawing on a war chest that will probably clock in at 25 times that size. But ego is also part of this intraparty fracas: Schumer and Emanuel are both seasoned victors-Schumer beat powerful Republican Senator Al D'Amato; Emanuel advised a winning presidential candidate before beating a Polish Catholic in a majority Polish Catholic district in his own race for Congress.

Emanuel-Schumer allies view Dean as a hand-me-down governor (he took over in Vermont when his predecessor died) of a tiny cheese state who blew up his quixotic 2004 presidential campaign by blowing through his money.

Emanuel and Schumer schmooze easily with the silk-thread Wall Street crowd. Dean is a practiced outsider. Emanuel and Schumer pride themselves not only on breaking fundraising records but on running lean operations and saying no to incumbent candidates who don't need their help.

"Chuck is tighter than a tick, and so is Rahm," says Hassan Nemazee, a New York investor who chairs national fundraising for Senate candidates. Dean behaves more like a governor, broadly doling out money to build staff and operations.

As I arrive for a July interview with Emanuel at DCCC headquarters, former Gore campaign chief Donna Brazile is standing on the sidewalk, buttonholing him. A party veteran, Brazile has seen more than her share of internal Democratic Party squabbles, and she's worried about this one.

Some party activists view Emanuel as the instigator of a feud that is dividing the party. Dean may be the object of sighs and eye-rolling by pragmatic, big-donor Democrats-the crowd that has generally signed on with Emanuel-but as a populist hero to party activists and the "netroots" he helped spawn, the former presidential candidate has his own powerful base. So Brazile tells me she is here to deliver a compromise plan she hopes will cool the fires between the two men.

Minutes later, upstairs in his office, Emanuel obliquely suggests that Dean is nearly as big an obstacle as Karl Rove to a Democratic win. "Everyone is pulling their weight," he says, with the implication that Dean-whose DNC has $11 million in cash, compared with the RNC at $43 million-is the exception.

"Eleven of our challengers have nearly, or more than, a million dollars cash on hand. In 2004 it was zero. Zero." He shoots the last word out like a golden fireworks spray, letting it settle for effect before continuing. "I have no problem with building for the long term. But I don't know another way to win when the other side has $40 million. They got a cavalry. We need a cavalry."

Yet Dean is hardly the only one on Capitol Hill annoyed with Emanuel-so are some of the House members he is horse-whipping when they fail to pay their DCCC dues. "Nothing replaces perspiration," he says of fundraising. "You set a goal and you drive toward that goal and you put everything toward it."

Every day, including weekends, he makes calls to donors, calls to candidates to remind them to call donors, callbacks if he doesn't get an answer-or if he gets the wrong one. Says Boggs: "There's no hesitancy about asking for money and then arguing with you if he thinks you're not giving enough. If you won't take his call at 4, he'll call at 4:15; if you don't take it then, he'll call at 4:30."

Emanuel wasn't the brains of his family-that was his older brother, Ezekiel, who would grow up to become an oncologist and one of the nation's leading bioethicists. Nor was he the brawn-that was younger brother Ariel, whose raw combative style is so legendary in gladiatorial Hollywood that he was the inspiration for the hyper-ruthless, Viagra-popping agent Ari Gold in the HBO series Entourage.

Rahm was the one dancing through the living room to his mother's jazz and classical music, spinning pirouettes and leaping down the stairs of his family's suburban Chicago split-level. A popular kid but not especially focused, he had none of that out-of-the-womb political ambition so evident in the lives of leaders like Bill Clinton.

And then he almost died. With high school graduation days away, Emanuel sliced his finger while working in a fast-food joint. Infection took hold after a prom-night swim in Lake Michigan. By the time this son of a pediatrician finally sought medical care, he was suffering from a severe blood and bone infection. He lay in the hospital, his temperature reaching 106. Marsha Emanuel, his mother, is a force of will-a woman who can compare the insides of the Evanston and Chicago prisons based on her three arrests at civil rights protests. But on this subject tears still well up in her hazel eyes. "We almost lost him," she says.

After a six-week battle, he recovered, losing half his finger to the infection but gaining a new sense of seriousness and purpose. "He has one of the strongest survival instincts I've ever seen," says longtime friend Mary Leslie, who attributes that inner reserve to his Israeli roots. His father, Benjamin, was born in Jerusalem, the son of pharmacists who had escaped the Russian pogroms. In the 1940s Benjamin Emanuel interrupted his medical school training in Switzerland to take part in an unsuccessful scheme to smuggle guns from Czechoslovakia to the Israeli underground. He later served as a medic in the 1948 Israeli war of independence. (Rahm would echo his father's dedication during the Gulf war: With Iraqi Scuds falling on his father's home country, he volunteered for military-vehicle-maintenance duty near the Lebanese border.)

In 1953, Dr. Emanuel's medical training brought him to the States, where he met Marsha, then an X-ray technician at Chicago's Mount Sinai hospital. They married and, after a brief return to Israel, settled down in Chicago. Dr. Emanuel's pediatrics practice on the North Side's Lincoln Avenue drew a passel of immigrants, and eventually became-with his partners-one of the largest in the city. (Decades later the "Doc's" families would turn out to vote for his son in a congressional election.)

Money was tight in the early years. The family left their first Chicago apartment because it was rat-infested. They were kicked out of their second apartment because tenants complained that the three rambunctious boys were too loud. Yet Chicago also meant a lively street life of playing hoops in the park and building go-carts in the alley with the artist who lived upstairs.

That came to an end when Rahm was 9 and their immigrant father achieved the American dream of buying a house in the suburbs, the lakeside Republican enclave of Wilmette. The boys, recalls brother Zeke, missed the city. "The suburbs never grafted on to us," he says.

The boys also joined their mother on most civil rights demonstrations within a 50-mile radius of Chicago. "I only brought the kids if I thought it was going to be peaceful, with no arrests," Marsha Emanuel insists. (Though it wasn't always predictable; she wore a dress and had a dinner party planned when she was carted off by cops for her first overnight jail term.)

Marsha's father was a burly Moldavian immigrant who arrived alone on a ship at age 10. He went on to become a union organizer. Politics-loud and argumentative-infused Marsha's childhood; her three boys got their own dose from trips in their grandfather's delivery truck.

Rahm jumped into politics right after his graduation from Sarah Lawrence College, where he promised his mother he would take advantage of the campus's stellar dance program but never did. He quickly discovered a penchant for fundraising, which he applied to campaigns for Senator Paul Simon, the DCCC, and Chicago's Mayor Richard Daley. In 1991 he joined Clinton's presidential campaign. Emanuel wowed the team from the start, opening a spigot on needed campaign funds, and after Clinton's election helped program a picture-perfect inaugural. He nabbed the plum White House position of political director.

Then he started shooting off his mouth. There was the time he rapped on a conference table to get "Lloyd's" attention. ("We were all aghast," recalls one Clinton aide, noting that even Lloyd Bentsen's wife still called the Treasury Secretary "Senator." ) He had a very public run-in with the late Senator Patrick Moynihan, who accused him of being the source of an anonymous quote that "we'll roll all over [Moynihan] if we have to" on welfare reform. (Emanuel denied saying it.) Most damaging were Emanuel's battles with Hillary Clinton loyalists, who accused him of leaks about the travel office episode.

A year after Clinton took office, Emanuel was demoted. "He was very upset," recalls Zeke. "He thought he was going to get kicked out of the White House." He didn't, and neither did he quit. Instead, Emanuel regrouped, helping lead the charge on key Clinton initiatives, including the crime bill, the assault weapons ban, and NAFTA. "He was constantly on the offense," says Begala. Emanuel planned to leave after the 1996 election, but Clinton promoted him to take George Stephanopoulos's spot as senior advisor for policy and strategy.

Still, Emanuel had political aspirations of his own, which necessitated some financial security. So in late 1998 he traded in Clinton as his boss for Bruce Wasserstein, a major Democratic donor and Wall Street financier. "Money is not the be-all and end-all for him," says brother Zeke. "But he knew he needed money so that wouldn't be a problem while he was doing public service." Over a 2 1/2-year period he helped broker deals-often using political connections-for Wasserstein Perella.

According to congressional financial disclosures, he earned more than $18 million during that period. His deals included Unicom's merger with Peco Energy and venture fund GTCR Golder Rauner's purchase of SBC subsidiary SecurityLink. But friends say his compensation also benefited from two sales of the Wasserstein firm itself, first to Dresdner Bank and then to Allianz AG.

By 2002, Emanuel emerged as a wealthy man with a reputation as a battle-hardened national strategist. That year he won a tough primary race for a seat in Congress that paid $138,000. His 1994 White House demotion was ancient history.

"There are people who never lose, who never fail, and their first failure is usually a disaster," says Zeke. "That is not characteristic of Rahm or anyone else in our family. What we're very good at-and what Rahm is very good at-is coming back. Persistence and picking yourself up off the floor and working harder and learning lessons from getting kicked in the teeth." In 2005 that's exactly what the long out-of-power Democrats decided they could use, and so they turned to Emanuel to run the DCCC.

Emanuel's in-your-face money demands make him stand out in a party that has sometimes been a little prissy about big-donor fundraising. "Republicans understand power and that you need money to get power. Our guys don't," complains one of the party's leading funders. Colleagues say Emanuel has become adept at the care and feeding of big donors-knowing their interests, asking about their families, sending them cheesecakes from Chicago's Eli's Bakery. He's expanded the DCCC's donor base, appealing both to like-minded young financiers and big-business donors with GOP ties who are hedging their bets this fall.

Emanuel shuttles between a turn-of-the-century house in Chicago (home to his wife, Amy Rule, who works with disadvantaged youth through art programs, and their three children) and a basement apartment on Capitol Hill, where he jokingly calls himself "the hobbit." In between, he's co-authored a Democratic agenda called The Plan with former Clinton policy advisor Bruce Reed-who calls himself "one of the few people in America that Rahm doesn't yell at." The Plan reflects much of the same centrist sensibility both men displayed at the Clinton White House.

Emanuel is drawn to issues that resonate with average voters, like stem-cell research, raising the minimum wage, and a "fair, flat" income tax. While Bush was pushing his Medicare drug plan, Emanuel was pounding the administration to permit drug imports from Canada-a popular cause for families facing high prescription bills.

On Iraq, Emanuel has steered clear of the withdraw-now crowd, preferring to criticize Bush for military failures since the 2003 invasion. "The war never had to turn out this way," he told me at one of his campaign stops. In January 2005, when asked by Meet the Press's Tim Russert whether he would have voted to authorize the war-"knowing that there are no weapons of mass destruction"-Emanuel answered yes. (He didn't take office until after the vote.) "I still believe that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was the right thing to do, okay?" he added.

When it comes to slicing and dicing his Republican foes, Emanuel applies a Chicago pol's sensibility that recalls that famous Untouchables line: "He pulls a knife, you pull a gun; he sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue." Connecticut Representative Rosa DeLauro describes Emanuel as a "reflection of Chicago politics, ward politics. It's local, ethnic. You're not in a tea party." Colleague Ed Markey, a veteran House member from Massachusetts, says simply, "He's not a political romantic."

Mostly out of power for the past six years, the Democrats could use Emanuel's comeback instincts. So the match is a timely one. But what's driving Emanuel crazy right now is how little control he has over the party's future-or his own. "Can we get the right candidates?" he asks. "Yes, and we busted our balls recruiting and expanding the field. Can we raise the resources? Yes. Can we help on issues? Yes." But at the end of the day, he asks, "which way will the wind blow on Iraq? On energy prices? On the Middle East?"

"For a type-A personality like me, I hate that. I hate that," he says, his voice trailing off as he spins through a Capitol building hallway. "Your fate is out of your hands."

America will soon get to meet the Congressional looneys it just put in charge of Obama's Socialist madhouse

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 11:02:16 PST

Source WSJ

Now that Barack Obama has vanquished John McCain, he faces a much greater foe: Democrats on Capitol Hill. They've humbled the last two Democratic Presidents -- and with their enhanced majorities next year, they'll be out to do it again.

Mr. Obama may appreciate the threat, because yesterday he offered Clinton White House veteran Rahm Emanuel a job as his chief of staff. But even that savvy, relatively sane liberal will have difficulties grappling with the fearsome committee chairmen and liberal interest groups that did so much to sabotage Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter. Meet the President-elect's real opposition:

David Obey. The Appropriations Chairman wants to slash defense spending as a money grab for more social programs and entitlements. Fellow spender Barney Frank recently added that a military budget cut of 25% was about right. A military crash diet wouldn't leave the funds for the surge in Afghanistan that Mr. Obama advocates, and it's a sure way to hand the national security issue back to the GOP.

Chuck Schumer. The Senate Democrat and his friends are already threatening banks if they don't lend more money instantly under the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Other political masters want to use Tarp to nationalize large swaths of U.S. industry such as the Detroit auto makers or to bail out states like New York that are in debt. If Mr. Obama doesn't want to have to pass a Tarp II, he'll have to say no.

George Miller. Some Democrats are starting to target the tax subsidies for 401(k)s and other private retirement options. Mr. Miller, who heads the House Education and Labor Committee, calls them "a big failure" and recently held a hearing to ponder alternatives, including nationalizing pensions and replacing them with special bonds administered by Social Security. The proposal has also caught the eye of Jim McDermott, who chairs the relevant Ways and Means subcommittee. Mr. Obama won big with his promise of tax cuts for the middle class, which doesn't square with attacks on middle-class nest eggs.

John Conyers. The man running House Judiciary is cheerleading the Europeans who want to indict Bush officials for war crimes. Other Democrats are thinking about hearings and other show trials. This is far from the postpartisan reconciliation that Mr. Obama preaches.

Henry Waxman. With President Bush soon to be out of office, the Californian's team of Inspector Clouseaus at House Oversight won't have any "scandals" left to pursue. The word in Washington is that Mr. Waxman is looking to unseat John Dingell as Chairman of Energy and Commerce, in order to shove aside a global warming moderate. That could pave the way for huge new energy taxes. Voters will punish Mr. Obama if they get hammered every time they fill up the gas tank or buy groceries.

Pete Stark. The Chairman of a crucial House subcommittee dealing with health care doesn't think Mr. Obama's proposal to significantly federalize the insurance market goes far enough. He wants a single-payer system like Canada's. Mr. Obama may want to strike a deal with Senate Republicans on health care, but Mr. Stark will be pulling him left at every turn.

All of these feudal lords -- and many others -- also come with their own private armies: the interest groups that compose the money and manpower of today's Democratic Party. The American Civil Liberties Union, Human Rights Watch and others on the anti-antiterror left want Mr. Obama to limit the surveillance and other tools that have prevented another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. The Natural Resources Defense Council and Environmental Defense will insist on onerous caps -- that is, taxes -- on coal and other carbon energy. Those won't help Mr. Obama carry Ohio and Indiana again in four years.

The trial bar wants an end to arbitration in disputes in return on its Senate investment, while the National Education Association will try to gut No Child Left Behind accountability standards. And organized labor will insist on a major push to pass "card check," which would end secret-ballot elections for unions. If Mr. Obama wants to mobilize the business community against him while squeezing moderate Democrats, he'll go along with that right from the start.

While many voters may think they've voted for "change" in Mr. Obama, they also handed power to the oldest forces in the Old Democratic Party. Jimmy Carter campaigned as a moderate and outsider, but Congressional liberals quickly ran his budget director, the economic centrist Bert Lance, out of town. Then they overrode Mr. Carter's veto of a pork-barrel water bill. Mr. Carter referred to the tax committees as "ravenous wolves" after they transformed his tax reform into a special-interest bouquet. Next came Reagan.

Bill Clinton also campaigned as a moderate, but in his first two years he was unable to govern as Congress pursued liberal priorities, including a big boost in taxes and spending. Recall Roberta Achtenberg as the scourge of the Boy Scouts and Joycelyn Elders calling for the legalization of drugs? Mr. Clinton chose -- or was forced -- to take up gun control and HillaryCare before welfare reform. Next came Newt Gingrich.

Maybe Mr. Obama has absorbed these lessons, but even if he has he'll have to be tough. The Great Society liberals who dominate Congress are old men in a hurry, and they'll run over the 47-year-old neophyte if he lets them

Whoops! Italian PM compliments Obama on his suntan; vilified as racist

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:52:59 PST

Source Times UK

Silvio Berlusconi in racism row over 'suntanned' Barack Obama aside

"I don't see problems for Medvedev in establishing good relations with Obama, who is also handsome, young and suntanned."

by Richard Owen in Rome

Congratulations to President-Elect Obama: Victory speech transcript November 4 2008 Chicago

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 22:30:16 PST

Congratulations to Senator Barack Obama for a battle well fought. Here's his victory speech from Chicago tonight which he delivered after he received a concession call is from Senator McCain.

Hello, Chicago.

If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer.

It's the answer told by lines that stretched around schools and churches in numbers this nation has never seen, by people who waited three hours and four hours, many for the first time in their lives, because they believed that this time must be different, that their voices could be that difference.

It's the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled. Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of red states and blue states.

We are, and always will be, the United States of America.

It's the answer that led those who've been told for so long by so many to be cynical and fearful and doubtful about what we can achieve to put their hands on the arc of history and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day.

It's been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we did on this date in this election at this defining moment change has come to America.

A little bit earlier this evening, I received an extraordinarily gracious call from Sen. McCain.

Sen. McCain fought long and hard in this campaign. And he's fought even longer and harder for the country that he loves. He has endured sacrifices for America that most of us cannot begin to imagine. We are better off for the service rendered by this brave and selfless leader.

I congratulate him; I congratulate Gov. Palin for all that they've achieved. And I look forward to working with them to renew this nation's promise in the months ahead.

I want to thank my partner in this journey, a man who campaigned from his heart, and spoke for the men and women he grew up with on the streets of Scranton and rode with on the train home to Delaware, the vice president-elect of the United States, Joe Biden.

And I would not be standing here tonight without the unyielding support of my best friend for the last 16 years the rock of our family, the love of my life, the nation's next first lady Michelle Obama.

Sasha and Malia I love you both more than you can imagine. And you have earned the new puppy that's coming with us to the new White House.

And while she's no longer with us, I know my grandmother's watching, along with the family that made me who I am. I miss them tonight. I know that my debt to them is beyond measure.

To my sister Maya, my sister Alma, all my other brothers and sisters, thank you so much for all the support that you've given me. I am grateful to them.

And to my campaign manager, David Plouffe, the unsung hero of this campaign, who built the best -- the best political campaign, I think, in the history of the United States of America.

To my chief strategist David Axelrod who's been a partner with me every step of the way.

To the best campaign team ever assembled in the history of politics you made this happen, and I am forever grateful for what you've sacrificed to get it done.

But above all, I will never forget who this victory truly belongs to. It belongs to you. It belongs to you.

I was never the likeliest candidate for this office. We didn't start with much money or many endorsements. Our campaign was not hatched in the halls of Washington. It began in the backyards of Des Moines and the living rooms of Concord and the front porches of Charleston. It was built by working men and women who dug into what little savings they had to give $5 and $10 and $20 to the cause.

It grew strength from the young people who rejected the myth of their generation's apathy who left their homes and their families for jobs that offered little pay and less sleep.

It drew strength from the not-so-young people who braved the bitter cold and scorching heat to knock on doors of perfect strangers, and from the millions of Americans who volunteered and organized and proved that more than two centuries later a government of the people, by the people, and for the people has not perished from the Earth.

This is your victory.

And I know you didn't do this just to win an election. And I know you didn't do it for me.

You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime -- two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century.

Even as we stand here tonight, we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan to risk their lives for us.

There are mothers and fathers who will lie awake after the children fall asleep and wonder how they'll make the mortgage or pay their doctors' bills or save enough for their child's college education.

There's new energy to harness, new jobs to be created, new schools to build, and threats to meet, alliances to repair.

The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even in one term. But, America, I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there.

I promise you, we as a people will get there.

There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as president. And we know the government can't solve every problem.

But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And, above all, I will ask you to join in the work of remaking this nation, the only way it's been done in America for 221 years -- block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand.

What began 21 months ago in the depths of winter cannot end on this autumn night.

This victory alone is not the change we seek. It is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were.

It can't happen without you, without a new spirit of service, a new spirit of sacrifice.

So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism, of responsibility, where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves but each other.

Let us remember that, if this financial crisis taught us anything, it's that we cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffers.

In this country, we rise or fall as one nation, as one people. Let's resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long.

Let's remember that it was a man from this state who first carried the banner of the Republican Party to the White House, a party founded on the values of self-reliance and individual liberty and national unity.

Those are values that we all share. And while the Democratic Party has won a great victory tonight, we do so with a measure of humility and determination to heal the divides that have held back our progress.

As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours, we are not enemies but friends. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.

And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn, I may not have won your vote tonight, but I hear your voices. I need your help. And I will be your president, too.

And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces, to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of the world, our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand.

To those -- to those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security: We support you. And to all those who have wondered if America's beacon still burns as bright: Tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope.

That's the true genius of America: that America can change. Our union can be perfected. What we've already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

This election had many firsts and many stories that will be told for generations. But one that's on my mind tonight's about a woman who cast her ballot in Atlanta. She's a lot like the millions of others who stood in line to make their voice heard in this election except for one thing: Ann Nixon Cooper is 106 years old.

She was born just a generation past slavery; a time when there were no cars on the road or planes in the sky; when someone like her couldn't vote for two reasons -- because she was a woman and because of the color of her skin.

And tonight, I think about all that she's seen throughout her century in America -- the heartache and the hope; the struggle and the progress; the times we were told that we can't, and the people who pressed on with that American creed: Yes we can.

At a time when women's voices were silenced and their hopes dismissed, she lived to see them stand up and speak out and reach for the ballot. Yes we can.

When there was despair in the dust bowl and depression across the land, she saw a nation conquer fear itself with a New Deal, new jobs, a new sense of common purpose. Yes we can.

When the bombs fell on our harbor and tyranny threatened the world, she was there to witness a generation rise to greatness and a democracy was saved. Yes we can.

She was there for the buses in Montgomery, the hoses in Birmingham, a bridge in Selma, and a preacher from Atlanta who told a people that "We Shall Overcome." Yes we can.

A man touched down on the moon, a wall came down in Berlin, a world was connected by our own science and imagination.

And this year, in this election, she touched her finger to a screen, and cast her vote, because after 106 years in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how America can change.

Yes we can.

America, we have come so far. We have seen so much. But there is so much more to do. So tonight, let us ask ourselves -- if our children should live to see the next century; if my daughters should be so lucky to live as long as Ann Nixon Cooper, what change will they see? What progress will we have made?

This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment.
advertisement

This is our time, to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American dream and reaffirm that fundamental truth, that, out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope. And where we are met with cynicism and doubts and those who tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people: Yes, we can.

Thank you. God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.

Early exit polls are more skewed to Dems than 2004; Ten Reasons Why You Should Ignore Exit Polls

noreply@blogger.com (abc) — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:03:09 PST

Just saw some early exit polls on Fox, and I guarantee they are more skewed than 2004, which gave us a President Kerry. One number that stood out in this year's skewed polls related to the question of "Who can bring change to DC?" In the polls over the past three months the answer usually went towards Obama 65 -35. Tonight the number came out as 92 to 7 for Obama in VA. No way. No wonder Fox went out of its way to tell us that the exit polls is likely skewed towards Obama.

Also this article from a left leaning blogger is well worth reading
Source: fivethirtyeight.com

Oh, let me count the ways. Almost all of this, by the way, is lifted from Mark Bluemthnal's outstanding Exit Poll FAQ. For the long version, see over there.

1. Exit polls have a much larger intrinsic margin for error than regular polls. This is because of what are known as cluster sampling techniques. Exit polls are not conducted at all precincts, but only at some fraction thereof. Although these precincts are selected at random and are supposed to be reflective of their states as a whole, this introduces another opportunity for error to occur (say, for instance, that a particular precinct has been canvassed especially heavily by one of the campaigns). This makes the margins for error somewhere between 50-90% higher than they would be for comparable telephone surveys.

2. Exit polls have consistently overstated the Democratic share of the vote. Many of you will recall this happening in 2004, when leaked exit polls suggested that John Kerry would have a much better day than he actually had. But this phenomenon was hardly unique to 2004. In 2000, for instance, exit polls had Al Gore winning states like Alabama and Georgia (!). If you go back and watch The War Room, you'll find George Stephanopolous and James Carville gloating over exit polls showing Bill Clinton winning states like Indiana and Texas, which of course he did not win.

3. Exit polls were particularly bad in this year's primaries. They overstated Barack Obama's performance by an average of about 7 points.

4. Exit polls challenge the definition of a random sample. Although the exit polls have theoretically established procedures to collect a random sample -- essentially, having the interviewer approach every nth person who leaves the polling place -- in practice this is hard to execute at a busy polling place, particularly when the pollster may be standing many yards away from the polling place itself because of electioneering laws.

5. Democrats may be more likely to participate in exit polls. Related to items #1 and #4 above, Scott Rasmussen has found that Democrats supporters are more likely to agree to participate in exit polls, probably because they are more enthusiastic about this election.

6. Exit polls may have problems calibrating results from early voting. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, exit polls will attempt account for people who voted before election day in most (although not all) states by means of a random telephone sample of such voters. However, this requires the polling firms to guess at the ratio of early voters to regular ones, and sometimes they do not guess correctly. In Florida in 2000, for instance, there was a significant underestimation of the absentee vote, which that year was a substantially Republican vote, leading to an overestimation of Al Gore's share of the vote, and contributing to the infamous miscall of the state.

7. Exit polls may also miss late voters. By "late" voters I mean persons who come to their polling place in the last couple of hours of the day, after the exit polls are out of the field. Although there is no clear consensus about which types of voters tend to vote later rather than earlier, this adds another way in which the sample may be nonrandom, particularly in precincts with long lines or extended voting hours.

8. "Leaked" exit poll results may not be the genuine article. Sometimes, sources like Matt Drudge and Jim Geraghty have gotten their hands on the actual exit polls collected by the network pools. At other times, they may be reporting data from "first-wave" exit polls, which contain extremely small sample sizes and are not calibrated for their demographics. And at other places on the Internet (though likely not from Gergahty and Drudge, who actually have reasonably good track records), you may see numbers that are completely fabricated.

9. A high-turnout election may make demographic weighting difficult. Just as regular, telephone polls are having difficulty this cycle estimating turnout demographics -- will younger voters and minorities show up in greater numbers? -- the same challenges await exit pollsters. Remember, an exit poll is not a definitive record of what happened at the polling place; it is at best a random sampling.

10. You'll know the actual results soon enough anyway. Have patience, my friends, and consider yourselves lucky: in France, it is illegal to conduct a poll of any kind within 48 hours of the election. But exit polls are really more trouble than they're worth, at least as a predictive tool. An independent panel created by CNN in the wake of the Florida disaster in 2000 recommended that the network completely ignore exit polls when calling particular states. I suggest that you do the same.

-- Nate Silver at 9:15 AM source 538.comm