This week we have been promised the Obama transition team’s accounting of its contacts with Blagojevich. It is likely that Rahm Emanuel will be a prominent player. The latest press report explains:
Emanuel did contact the governor’s office about the appointment, and left Blagojevich with the impression that he was pushing Valerie Jarrett, a close Obama friend, so he wouldn’t have to compete with her in the White House for Obama’s attention, said a person close to Blagojevich. The person was not authorized to talk about the governor’s discussions regarding the vacancy and requested anonymity.
It was not clear whether Blagojevich inferred Emanuel’s motive for advocating Jarrett, or whether Emanuel discussed the appointment with Blagojevich directly or with John Harris, the governor’s then-chief of staff who also is charged in the case, according to the source.
The MSM’s Obama-defenders repeat ad nauseam, there is no evidence yet that Emanuel received or solicited what amounts to a bribe (e.g. a cabinet seat for Valerie Jarrett’s appointment to the Senate). But is that really the standard politically for a chief of staff? Let’s look at it differently. Suppose that the Blago criminal complaint and reports of twenty conversations with Emanuel had come out before the latter was formally selected as chief of staff. Under those circumstances would President-elect Obama have picked him? It seems unlikely he would have willingly taken on a distraction that may go on for weeks and months, if not longer, as Blago slowly sucks up every political bystander in his path. After all, President-elect Obama was not known during the campaign for sticking by allies when they got into hot water. (“X is not the X I knew” became the go-to refrain as he tossed each offender under the proverbial bus.)
For the chief of staff, like Caesar’s wife, the standard is to be above suspicion. But suspicion abounds in the Blago case. (Why was Emanuel dickering with Blago, who was known to be under investigation? Did Emanuel smell a rat and turn him in? And if not, isn’t that problematic?) U.S. Attorney Patrick Fiztgerald seems to think the standard for public officials is not simply to do no wrong, but to tolerate no wrong:
Obama already has insisted that his aides did no bartering with Blagojevich to advance candidates for the appointment. But refusing the deal is only the first step to fighting corruption in a political culture that promotes it when others look the other way, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald said earlier when announcing the charges against Blagojevich.
“We’re not going to end corruption in Illinois by arrests and indictments alone,” the prosecutor said. “What’s going to make the difference is when people who are approached to ‘pay to play’ first say no, and, second, report it.”
The full accounting of the transition team’s contacts and the Blago tapes themselves will reveal whether Emanuel is in any legal peril. But really, lack of criminal liability is an awfully low bar to hop over — especially in the age of New Politics. Throughout the campaign, Obama argued that we should expect much more of those in government. We’ll see how serious he was about that standard — and how much tolerance he has for distraction as he begins his presidency.
