TrumanB Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Ok, so what are we to believe now? Was David Axelrod, Obama's top senior advisor, lying then or is he lying now? Was Obama lying today when he stated that he did not have discussions with Blagojevich about the vacancy? It really begs the question: what did Obama know and when did he know it. Developing story and video here ... http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/12/09/axelrod-denies-barack-obama-met-with-blagojevich/ The Obama press office just sent out the following statement, via email: STATEMENT FROM SENIOR ADVISOR DAVID AXELROD I was mistaken when I told an interviewer last month that the President-elect has spoken directly to Governor Blagojevich about the Senate vacancy. They did not then or at any time discuss the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Hate to break it to you, but the election was last month... trying to invent a controversy now won't do anything to stop Obama from being sworn in next month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUSkinsFan Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 I would be surprised if Obama did not at least speak to Blagojevich about who would replace him. Just like Biden probably spoke with Minner and Clinton probably spoke to Paterson about their replacements. Although I highly doubt that he had anything to do with Blagojevich's scheme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrumanB Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 Hate to break it to you, but the election was last month... trying to invent a controversy now won't do anything to stop Obama from being sworn in next month. Who's "inventing" a controversy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONAWARPATH Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 I would be surprised if Obama did not at least speak to Blagojevich about who would replace him. Just like Biden probably spoke with Minner and Clinton probably spoke to Paterson about their replacements.Although I highly doubt that he had anything to do with Blagojevich's scheme. That's what I suspect as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrumanB Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 That's what I suspect as well. So, are you saying that Obama lied today when he said: "I had no contact with the governor or his office, and so I was not aware of what was happening." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHOPSkins Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 If the Press would label Blagojevich a Democrat as many times as they say "Obama had nothing to do with it"....maybe my disgust at the liberal media would lessen Maybe not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Judges Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Is it just me or does the article answer the op's question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONAWARPATH Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/12/09/press-conference-of-fitz-liveblog/ Local Chicago press is reporting that Rahm Emanuel reported Blago after someone approached the Obama folks about who he wanted for the Senate seat. In other words, yes, Rahm may well be the good guy here, and Obama couldn't be cleaner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Who's "inventing" a controversy? You are trying really hard... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Lol, I love how dude calls Obama a "mother****er" and says "**** him" multiple times yet this is supposed to be bad for Obama. And the grasping continues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrumanB Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 You are trying really hard... No, I posted a link that shows a TV interview where Axelrod states that Obama met with Blagojevich about the Senate vacancy. Then today, after Obama denies meeting with Blagojevich, Axelrod was "mistaken" about his earlier statement. Doesn't pass the smell test. It actually stinks to high heaven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Who's "inventing" a controversy? You are. "lying then or is he lying now" are your words are they not? Obama obviously got word to this idiot as to who he wanted to replace him, one can do this without directly speaking to him. I get word to people all the time through people I work with. Also it's pretty clear that Gov Retardinski was upset that he wasn't getting paid for the appointment. There is no controversy here TrumanB, if you want to talk about the story your target should be the governor... the one that's actually done something wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heisenberg Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 No, I posted a link that shows a TV interview where Axelrod states that Obama met with Blagojevich about the Senate vacancy. Then today, after Obama denies meeting with Blagojevich, Axelrod was "mistaken" about his earlier statement.Doesn't pass the smell test. It actually stinks to high heaven. Pretty much every post you make - at least regarding politics - stinks to high heaven. Not even the other conservative posters on this forum take you seriously. If you took the time to read the link you posted to the blogger even states that it seems like Axelrod was dodging the question because he wasn't really sure the answer. That - combined with the post made by BRAVE have made your "question" completely bunk yet I'm sure you will continue to try to push this agenda long after it has been proven to be complete horse****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrumanB Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 If you took the time to read the link you posted to the blogger even states that it seems like Axelrod was dodging the question because he wasn't really sure the answer. I don't care what the blogger thinks, Axelrod says "I KNOW that he has spoken to the governor". How is that dodging the question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slogriff Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Obama has had more important fish to fry than helping the Gov get "paid" by filling the senate position. However, I'm curious to see what else comes out of this story. Blago seems like the type who would spill his guts to save his own backside. Reznick is also involved with this investigation. One can only wonder what they could pull out of the closet on others in the Chicago/ILL political cesspool? This speculation could be a driving force behind Obama being mentioned/dragged into discussions of this investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Did Obama have contact with Blago? Well seeing as how he was wiretapped the feds can answer that. You really think he's going to make up such a big lie knowing that all of Blago's convos were recorded? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Obama knew the guy was under investigation... he would not and has not been in contact with him for months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 this should be an explorable topic given the criminal actions of the illinois gov, the nature of the chicago political machine and obamas connections to it. The brown shirt practice of beating down anyone who dissents is disturbing. Just cause Obama is president doesnt mean we shouldnt talk about this, hell if he was knee deep in it he has a chance to do the right thing now and smoke them all out. If you guys excersizing your political loyalty to defend obama would take a break maybe obama would feel like he needs to smoke these crooks out to save himself. You guys elected a guy from the most corrupt political machine the world has known, and you are defending him allowing that corruption to fester. Force him to come out and condem it for what it is. Hes prez now, they shouldnt be able to touch him. Why defend that corruption, defending it will only let it spread up. You guys put chicago in the white house, its your responsibility to not let it controll it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Lol, who is defending this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Lol, who is defending this? case in point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 case in point Ooook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Ooook. Then I suppose you are in favor of investigating obama, and having an open dialogue about this case and not just using humilation tactics to back off dissenters. I want obama to use his new office to blow these guys out of the water, I hope you want the same thing if you are willing to. I will understand if you dont feel this way, the left gets the nod for party loyality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUSkinsFan Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Then I suppose you are in favor of investigating Obama, and having an open dialogue about this case and not just using humiliation tactics to back off dissenters.I want Obama to use his new office to blow these guys out of the water, I hope you want the same thing if you are willing to. I will understand if you don't feel this way, the left gets the nod for party loyalty. What rationale is there to investigate Obama? Is there any evidence that he has been involved in any wrong doing? So far, the only link between Obama and Blagojevich is that Blagojevich is the Governor of the state that Obama used to be a Senator from.As I stated earlier, I would be willing to bet that the only contact Obama has had with Blagojevich (in regards to this seat) was giving his office the names of people that he would recommend get his seat. Just because you want Obama involved in this doesn't make it so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Then I suppose you are in favor of investigating obama, and having an open dialogue about this case and not just using humilation tactics to back off dissenters.I want obama to use his new office to blow these guys out of the water, I hope you want the same thing if you are willing to. I will understand if you dont feel this way, the left gets the nod for party loyality. There is a difference between investigating Obama (and all others tied to this case) and a full blown assertion that he is already guilty based on the David Axelrod quotes from a not so credible person The first is already happening now, and is open to discussion and ought to be commended. The second ought to be criticized and require a higher standard of proof. Your characterization of this thread as a whole is exaggerated and does not take into account the contextual basis of the thread, and specifically previous experiences with the posters involved. The unwarranted comparison to Nazis is good evidence of the exaggeration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.