Documents Released Through FOIA Request Indicate Obama Lied About Meeting With Blagojevich

• January 7, 2009

On December 9th, as the Blago scandal was heating up, Obama said the following: “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening.” Obama has stated on other occasions that he has had “no contacts” with Blago at all, and has disputed media reporting that has suggested otherwise.
So Obama is firmly on the record as saying he never met with Blagojevich, period. But now documents obtained by Judicial Watch indicate that Obama did meet with Blago, and that The One has apparently been lying to the public about it.

Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has obtained documents from the office of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich through the Freedom of Information Act related to Blagojevich’s contacts with President-elect Obama and his transition team. The documents include a December 3, 2008, letter from Barack Obama following his December 2, 2008, meeting with Blagojevich as well as a November 17, 2008, letter signed by Presidential Transition Team co-chairs Valerie Jarrett and John Podesta providing Blagojevich with a list of transition team contacts.
The following are excerpts from the letter signed by President-elect Obama on December 3, 2008, less than one week before authorities arrested Blagojevich for attempting to “sell” Obama’s now-vacant Senate seat, among other corruption charges. . . .
“These documents tend to undermine Obama’s claims that he had no contact with Blagojevich and suggest his transition is hiding documents about such contacts,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Why did President-elect Obama not release this letter? What else is he hiding?”

Clearly, Obama has not been entirely forthcoming with the public about his dealings with Blago. I think it can be argued, as Ed Morrissey does, that Obama’s claims of “no contact” with Blago relate only to contacts concerning the appointment and not “no contact” in general, but even so…why wouldn’t Obama make what contact he did have with Blago entirely public?
Obama said that the report his lawyers released to the media would detail all contact between Obama and his transition team and Blago, yet clearly it didn’t.
Again, Obama is being less than forthcoming, which means that Obama’s relationship with Blago bears further scrutiny.

Tags: Domestic Issues, Politics

http://Array Dino

Well sure, Bubba, that sounds plausible. The dems take over in Jan 07 after 12 years of a repub Congress, 6 of which they also have a repub prez, the recession begins in Dec 07 but it’s the dems’ fault. LOL!

That must be why dems took GREATER control of Congress AND the prez in 08!

Like shootin’ fish in a barrel.
robert108

This is no surprise to any intelligent person.
http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com/ Bike Bubba

The economy wasn’t going down until the Democrats took Congress, Dina. If you want short term cause and effect, sorry; it doesn’t look too good for the donkeys.

Of course, you won’t admit that over a decade of easy credit dating back into the Clinton administration might have something to do with it, either. Something of a selective approach to data, methinks, on your part.

And this deal? Well, shouldn’t a Senator help select his replacement if he’s doing his job? Shouldn’t a governor consult the man he’s about to replace for some thoughts? The question here is not whether Obama talked to Blago about this, it’s whether the question of quid pro quo entered the discussion.

Given Obama’s blatant lie, I’ve got a hunch.
Kurt

Nothing new here. Just a typical bureaucrat. One thing we can count on, is the lying will continue.
Dino

You people really don’t get it, do you?

Your credibility is GONE now that your side has destroyed the economy.
bill-tb

Doesn’t everyone know Obama lies and is a crook? And not very good at either.
Dino

Labeling me a troll won’t change the truth.

The truth is that conservative ideology and deregulatory policy, sprinkled liberally with TONS of greed led us to what is shaping up to be one mother of an economic debacle.

Someday soon you people here will start to come around. Not all of you, just the ones that end up damaged by your support for the ideology of ignorance, greed and selfishness.

It’s likely that will be many of you.
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 DINO

Oh great, now I see the link since I’m at a computer that can’t get viruses.

A link to this blog. How…..credible.

As for bush and Fannie & Freddie….quotes from the New York Times (the same news source your blog entry quoted):

When the the head of the agency that oversaw Freddie & Fannie warned of trouble in a report and was almost fired for it. Here’s why:

At the time, Fannie and Freddie were allies in the president’s quest to drive up homeownership rates; Franklin D. Raines, then Fannie’s chief executive, has fond memories of visiting Mr. Bush in the Oval Office and flying aboard Air Force One to a housing event. “They loved us,” he said.
So when Mr. Falcon refused to deep-six his report, Mr. Raines took his complaints to top Treasury officials and the White House. “I’m going to do what I need to do to defend my company and my position,” Mr. Raines told Mr. Falcon.
Days later, as Mr. Falcon was in New York preparing to deliver a speech about his findings, his cellphone rang. It was the White House personnel office, he said, telling him he was about to be unemployed.
His warnings were buried in the next day’s news coverage, trumped by the White House announcement that Mr. Bush would replace Mr. Falcon, a Democrat appointed by Bill Clinton, with Mark C. Brickell, a leader in the derivatives industry that Mr. Falcon’s report had flagged.

When a bill to provide more oversight to Freddie & Fannie passed the House, the White House issued a statement opposing it. Why? Mike Oxley, REPUBLICAN and chairman of the committee who produced the bill:

“The problem with those guys at the White House, they had all the answers and they didn’t think they had to listen to anyone, including the Treasury secretary,” Mr. Oxley said in a recent interview. “They were driving the ideological train. He was in the caboose, and they were in the engine room.”

So what happened? The fratboy leader screwed things up. AGAIN:

Still, some former White House and Treasury officials continue to debate whether Mr. Bush’s all-or-nothing approach scuttled a measure that, while imperfect, might have given an aggressive regulator enough power to keep the companies from failing.
sayanything-4625

A Chicago politician lying? I couldn’t be more shocked if I woke up and found my face nailed to the floor!
Dino

I’m not in a place to see your link.

The word from the people inside the admin is that those efforts were merely lip-service. Even the republican who ran the committee that tried to rein in F&F said the ideologues inside the admin stopped his efforts and killed the bill.

Here’s some more reality for you. Countrywide, Indymac, etc were neither part of F&F or subject to the CRA.

You seem smarter than to get yourself trapped in an ideological cul-de-sac of ignorance. Snap out of it.

This crisis was the direct result of conservatism run amok. That’s the only conclusion one can draw based on the evidence. It would convenient to be able to blame the dems but, unfortunately, republicans ran this country nearly unilaterally for the bubble years of 2000-2007.

BADLY.
http://sayanythingblog.com/ likwidshoe

NoJelly – The liar-elect has a completely different demographic of sycophants. These people question nothing, attack anyone who does, will defend the lowest scuzzball to the death as long as they have a “D” behind their name.

There is a preponderance of ethic in the Republican rank & file that at least tries to live up to holding their own to account. You will never see that from the Left, the “At Any Cost” party…

That explains the projecting sycophant troll in this threat to a “T”!
Dino

Democrats didn’t block SHIT, bubba.

The BUSH ADMIN blocked efforts to rein in home loans. Do some reading, you might learn something.

You prove the ignorance of conservatives with every post.
jimmypop

his own staff validated he lied the first day this came up via their previous statements.

as i said before; just like willie, its not what he did, but the fact he lied about it. youd think hed know better being surrounded by willie old crew, but oh well….. as we ll knew before, this guy is a political fool.
http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com/ Bike Bubba

Well, the GOP did go along with the Democrats far too often in the years prior to 2007, which did contribute to the problems. Keep in mind, though, that even prior to 2007, the democrats had blocked investigations and reform for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the CRA–at the behest of Barney Frank, who was literally in bed with one of their executives, yet refused to recuse himself.

So yeah, it sticks, fella.
http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

For the record I did delete a comment I made because as soon as I read it I saw that it was in error. Sorry for those that got email alerts.
http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

Regarding the topic of the post. Why shouldn’t Obama meet with the Governor about his replacement?

So why then does Obama feel that he had to lie about his meeting?
jk

No one wants him to resign, we want him humilated and proven publicly that he’s just a typical lying dem who scammed his way into office.
jimmypop

Look at all these mortgage lending outfits that failed.

this is what happens when you give poor people money.
welder4

it is like talking to a brick wall don’t waste your breath . the whole thing could be settled by just ignoring the trolls .
Dino

Look at the stems, still hoping for a Jan 19th resignation.
Dino

You could sub the word Clinton for Obama in all your posts and it would feel like we were in 93.

You stems are so unoriginal. You’re even trying to copy the dems by getting youselves an Uncle Tom to lead your floundering mess of a party.
NoJelly

Nothing new here.

Actually there’s plenty new here. The liar-elect has a completely different demographic of sycophants. These people question nothing, attack anyone who does, will defend the lowest scuzzball to the death as long as they have a “D” behind their name.

There is a preponderance of ethic in the Republican rank & file that at least tries to live up to holding their own to account. You will never see that from the Left, the “At Any Cost” party…
Rusty

What O meant to say was that he never met with the about-to-be-indicted Blago…

["That isn't the Blagojevich I knew..."]

“I misspoke…”
The new Political Legal Defense!
robert108

That’s what this article is about, fool. Duh.
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 DINO

Here’s an interesting site.

Look at all these mortgage lending outfits that failed.

None subject to the CRA and none called Freddie or Fannie.
ellinas

Again, Obama is being less than forthcoming, which means that Obama’s relationship with Blago bears further scrutiny.

By Rob on January 6, 2009 at 10:40 am

Handle your business then. Scrutinize him.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Dino, meet reality.

And that was just one of Bush’s attempts at a fix that got blocked by Dems.

SayAnythingBlog.com

Documents Released Through FOIA Request Indicate Obama Lied About Meeting With Blagojevich

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments