Suppose you are a conscientious and dedicated U.S. attorney investigating corruption in Illinois and have audio recordings of numerous conversations in which the governor sought payment or other benefits in exchange for an appointment to the U.S. Senate seat that Barack Obama will vacate when he becomes president.
We now are being told, in an Obama organization report on an investigation of itself, that the President Elect is above all this, that he does not have and has not had any preference for any candidate for the position, and that in a half dozen or more conversations that members of his organization had with the governor or the governor's staff, nothing untoward was mentioned.
Now suppose that the recordings that you, as the above described prosecutor, have in your possession include one or more that contradict what the Obama organization is saying. As a patriotic American do you make public information indicating that the President Elect has been less than forthright about his interactions with other members of the political machine in which he participated with all of the other players in the sordid tale of how Illinois is governed? I suggest not . . . and that any such recording will forever be kept from the public -- in, of course, the public interest.
Nonetheless, there are a couple of problems with the Obama organization's report on its internal investigation. The first one is that its release was calculated to occur, as it did, when neither Mr. Obama nor his chief of staff were available to respond to questions about the matter. Furthermore, there is the problem of the previous release of a recording in which the governor of Illinois is heard cursing the Obama organization for refusing to pay or confer any benefit on the governor in exchange for appointing an Obama preferred candidate to the soon to be vacant position.
If the Obama organization's report clearing everybody within it of any "pay for play" discussion with the Illinois statehouse gang is correct, what could the governor have been cursing about? It appears likely that someone within the Obama organization received, and at best rejected, a "pay for play" request from someone in the Illinois statehouse gang. And, if that occurred, the involved Obama staff member at best failed to report a demand for a bribe.
No comments:
Post a Comment