-
Website
http://capitolfax.com/ -
Original page
http://capitolfax.com/2008/12/17/this-just-in-supreme-court-rejects-ag-madigan-motion/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
wordslinger
96 comments · 42 points
-
Rich Miller
147 comments · 56 points
-
LoopLady
16 comments · 6 points
-
theoriginallynns
16 comments · 2 points
-
dupage dan
28 comments · 2 points
-
-
Popular Threads
LMad's case was nullified as soon as the governor signed a bill.
At best it was a stretch. It also would have required some backbone from the court.
Sheesh. A rare overreach by AG. Too desperate to do something.
It was unnecessary.
You want a political maneuver, do it yourself. Impeach.
ditto
So, she's not a good lawyer after all.
2nd down: ILSC denies AG claim without comment.
3rd down: Impeachment proceedings
Is there a 4th down? Allow me to arbitrarily limit our rights to football metaphors.
It was a pathetic attempt to boost her electoral prospects.
A DEM Primary is another matter, with the Madigan Ground troops on election day.
Was that what it was all about? Skeptics think so
Yeah...Just tryin' to do something for the fed up citizen/taxpayers of the State; an attempt to dump the hump we call a 'governor'. Good for her.
Instead she gets a long drawn out Springfield battle that hurts the Democrats immensely.
If he is impeached, it could look like she jumped the gun or was grandstanding and should have let the people's reps do their thing.
I'd give her the benefit of the doubt. Like a great many Illinoisians, she thinks he can't do his job while all of this other stuff is going on.
She had the choice of doing nothing other than uttering a few calls for resignation or actually doing something. It won't kill her career.
Now that she used the available legal tools at her disposal, those same voices complain about her taking action.
The opponents of L mad are very clear; They don't like her and will stand in opposition to every act she takes just because.
Bottom Line -
The Supreme Court doesn't consider it an emergency.
Back to work.
May 28, 2008
Gov. Blagojevich, President Poshard, Sen. Pres. Jones, Minority Leaders Sen. Watson and Rep. Cross call for passage of $31 billion Illinois Works capital plan Illinois Works invests in roads, bridges schools, creates more than 500,000 jobs SPRINGFIELD – Standing with Illinois Works Coalition Co-Chair Illinois University President Glenn Poshard, Governor Rod R. Blagojevich, Senate President Emil Jones, Senate Minority Leader Frank Watson, and House Minority Leader Tom Cross today endorsed the new $31 billion comprehensive capital infrastructure plan recommended by the Illinois Works Coalition. Last week, Former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Dennis Hastert and Poshard announced their recommendations for a capital infrastructure plan and revenue streams to pay for it after a comprehensive statewide listening tour launched in March and a series of meetings with Governor Blagojevich and legislative leaders. The Governor and the three legislative leaders called for passage of the plan prior to the scheduled legislative adjournment date later this week.
Your... "Rod's tough as nails", is our...."Rod has no moral compass".
Is his plan to elect the GOP central committee too?
How about explaining the need to hike property taxes statewide to pay for this scheme.....what a bonehead play.....BTW which bonehead decided to ask the state to pay for Blagoof's criminal lawyer
?
Genson did not seem like much of a whiz...guess the media gets hyped too early.
You mean that Illinois electorate that voted for George Ryan once and Rod Blagojevich twice? C'mon -- not even a teeny tiny taint?
Given this crisis, this was fundamentally a political, not legal, decision. Lacking an explanation, the Court has not fulfilled its constitutional responsiblities to the People.
I, for one, will not vote again for a currently sitting Justice until I receive an explanation of these decisions. The Court is as accountable to the People as the Executive and Legislative Branches. Without explanation, the Court makes it clear that it considers itself accountable to nobody but God Almighty, and perhaps not even to Him/Her.
Here, it is able to perform his duties. The problem is not fitness, it is criminality. Those are different things, legally.
Under these circumstances, impeachment is the means by which we may deal with the problem. Sadly, our constitution does not allow for a recall. Our remedy is impeachment.
Until he is impeached and removed from office, he will be carrying out the duties assigned to him by our Constitution. No legislation can amend the Constitution and over-ride it. Therefore, I still don't see how anyone thinks we can simply hold a special election.
1) LM was right on with her action, I'd have done the same. No guarantee of success, but good for her for showing the guts to try it. The Rule was ripe for interpretation, and the facts were very persuasive. Whenever a Court has discretion to hear or not hear, the result is not predictable.
The only sin is to not try and correct a wrong (in this case Rod B. claiming the continued power of governor). No one can fault her for losing... the concept of 'legal disability' goes back to Blackstone. And with Abner Mikva on the brief, only a fool would claim there was no good faith basis for the Motion.
2) The GA was stupid to allow Genson to participate in their committee hearing. They should have sat is fat butt out on the Capital steps complaining to the press about the unfairness of putting felons in jail. Impeach the SOB, send him to trial before the Senate in a week or so, and ignore Genson's continued pleas for multiple continuences to 'properly prepare his case'.
A good Circuit Court judge would politely listen to these 'wave the flag' arguments, then summarily deny them and call for the next case. If the GA wants to maintain any credibility, it will do the same.
If the grounds for removal is either physical or mental incapacity. We have could have a problem, obviously his is still going for jogs so physical incapacity is not the issue. To be ruled mentally incapacitated in a court of law, doesn't one have to be analyzed by a psychiatric professional. Which the ag is not. and if the court would have ruled that he is mentally incapable of doing his job now, wouldn't that hand his high powered defense team a nice swift mental defense to the federal charges.
the AG jumped the gun, but one would think a lawyer would know better than going to the state supreme court to have someone declared mentally incapacited while being brought to charge by the US attorney office.
Who do you want to appoint the public officials in the 2010 election since the voters are too stupid?
I understand the frustration with the voters, but get a grip.
The full moon was last Friday, Bob's Yer Uncle...
It might be painful, but maybe the next time we'll insist on better candidates.