This is why we need human beings in Washington, not politicians. Obama is a politician. He knew about this when he made his first statement. As usual he is trying to see how much he needs to say, instead of just telling the truth. I did not vote this year for the first time in 18yrs, because we need to get regular people in Washington. I am tired of multimillionaires, with time on their hands, telling us all what is best for us. You have to be rich to even run for office. All politicians lie and cut deals at the peoples' exspense. Why are there no term limits in congress?

Since Emanuel boasted about being responsible for
Blago's re-election( and later recanted when called out by a colleague) and had ties to Obama, Jackson, Duckworth, etc. it is hard to imagine how he could not have had converstions with Drago and Co.

Isn't this the same station that said it was Rahm who told the FBI what Blago was doing, only to find that it wasn't true?

I am a politician, therefore I obfuscate.

It is that simple.

If Rahm was actually cutting a deal with Blago, then Blago wouldn't be going nuts on tape about how uncooperative Obama was. Seems more likely that bad-cop Rahm spent his phone time telling Blago to go **** himself, no deals. But Rahm had better step up and say this quick.

I think Fox has the most plausible guess about this.

Rahm was on the call, let's say. He wasn't playing ball. But perhaps he also didn't "out" Blago for talking so crazily. In other words, Rahm clearly saw Blago's corruption and didn't call the feds.

If this is true, I think it is still a problem. Your ethical standards must be high enough that you alert the Feds if you see completely blatant corruption.

However, it is possible that Rahm did out Blago to the Feds, and for some reason he doesn't want his fingerprints on it. Maybe Blago has dirt on Rahm, and since he's still governor, he could pull some strings and sink Rahm.

Are they waiting for Blago to step down (and lose his remaining power) before revealing they outed him? Or did they stand passively in the face of corruption?

I think the answer to that question may determine Rahm's future.

I think this explains why Obama has been so circumspect so far. He undoubtedly knew that Emanual had talked to Blago and needed to find out what was said and what Fitzgerald knew about those conversations. However, it is now important that Obama promptly explain everything to get this behind him; otherwise it will build and build and only get worse. There is certainly nothing in the criminal complaint indicating that Blago had any idea he could get any quid pro quo from Obama, so why not get all the facts out now? Unless Emanual is afraid he said something he should not have.

If I had to guess, I'd say that Obama and company are preparing to announce the following:

1) That Rahm passively observed corruption, but did not tell Obama.
2) That Rahm is staying on as CoS.
3) That passively observing corruption is unacceptable,
4) But Rahm is still staying in part because "the buck stops with Obama" who did not fulfill his own responsibility to set sufficiently clear policies and ethical guidelines for his staff.
5) That the policies and guidelines as revised are strong enough to be satisfactory (or that revisions are ongoing; perhaps with outside or popular input).
6) That we must address corruption proactively in all its guises, and perhaps make a set of proposals to that effect.

Of course, just speculation!

Because of a family emergency, I was in Chicago last week, and got a bit of first hand experience of the Blago arrest. My cousin got five calls at 6 am, when Blagojevich was arrested. I swear, if it had been later in the day, and if it wasn't rain, turning into snow, there would have been dancing in the streets. I have to add, no one in my extended family is political junkie like me.

General consensus is that Blagojevich is wacko-nuts, and generally hated.

Listening to interviews on Rachel Maddow's show, it seems that the Lt. Governor hasn't spoken to Blagojevich in over a year! And the head of the Illinois Judiciary Committee has spent the last year and a half researching impeachment procedures.

All sorts of news people have pointed out that, of course, Obama would, in the normal course of events, have been speaking to Rod Blagojevich. Well, in the normal course of events, the Lt. Governor would be speaking to him, too. This simply isn't the normal course of events.

Everyone knew that Blago was nuts, and going off the deep end, and backed way, way away. The problem with the "What did they know, and when did they know it?" question, is that people may know that someone is going off the deep end, in general, but lack any specific knowledge.

Crazy guy with power, back away, quickly!

This is gonna be great!!! I can hear Rahm telling this crook to shove it up his....I knew this happened. I hope it turns out the way I thought it would.

It's okay that he talked to him. There is no crime in talking! It would be odd if they didn't. The key, obviously, is what was said.
That said Rahm must understand that if he can't take the heat he needs to get out of the kitchen. The media is probabaly more blood thirsty than ever and certainly more than they were in the nineties simply because they are bigger and more adept at staking out their target.