« Granholm smears auto bailout opponents | Main | Blagojevich and his brush (aka "the football") »

December 14, 2008


Gosh, the injustice of it all just leaves one breathless. The media are "relentlessly" associating Obama with the scandal, despite "a complete lack of evidence," and the Republicans are not merely raising questions, they're making an "incessant drumbeat of demands for answers"--and not answers to just a limited number of questions, but a "never-ending list of questions."

Why oh why can't people take Obama at his word? If they didn't keep asking questions, Obama and his spokespeople wouldn't have to keep changing their answers. And who is this Blagojevich fellow anyway but just another guy Obama knows from the neighborhood?

Move along, folks. Show's over. Nothing to see here.

It's important to distinguish between "evidence" and "proof". There is no conclusive proof of wrongdoing on the part of Obama or his associates, but there is some evidence.

Blago's recorded statement said Obama had refused to participate in pay to play. It's to their credit that they refused, but it implies that some Obama asociate knew about the pay to play demand and may not have exposed it. Rahm Emanuel's delayed admission of contact and refusal to take questions look suspicious.

Again, this doesn't constitute proof of wrongdoing, but it's incorrect to claim that there's no evidence at all.

This is turning into an interesting test of whether Obama can break the Clinton paradigm of scandal coverage early in his administration...

I don't know. The only Clinton scandals that actually gained traction were sex scandals and Clinton actually was guilty of cheating on his wife. Every time there was an allegation of a mistress being paid off or rumors of White House indiscretions, most people considered them credible.

I don't know. The only Clinton scandals that actually gained traction were sex scandals and Clinton actually was guilty of cheating on his wife.


And Patrick Fitzgerald says this: “I’m not going to speak for what the President elect was aware of," he said. "We make no allegations that he’s aware of anything and that’s as simply as I can put it."

Does the press really think they can get more on Obama than Fitzgerald can?


Whitewater never captured the public imagination the way the Lewinski scandal did. Most people didn't even know what the scandal was. Republicans thought it was proof of Bill's corruption. Democrats thought it was a partisan witch hunt. Clinton's reputation didn't suffer from it, except among those who already referred to him as "Three Dollar Bill".

It was the expansion of the investigation into every allegation ever made against Clinton under Ken Starr that caused him trouble. Republicans dismantled the Office of the Independent Council to protect the incoming Republican president from similar tactics and it's unlikely to be rebuilt by Democrats while Obama is in office.

The comments to this entry are closed.