Obama's handling of the Blagojevich scandal? Believable or Not Believable?

[Truthiness Inspector]

I need to update my donor-status here so I can do an official poll question, but for now:

1. Obama had NO discussions PERIOD.

2. He had discussions, but the topic of dirty deals didn't come up.

3. Questionable/have some concerns that will hopefully be cleared up soon.

4. Not sure what to think.

5. Other, something overlooked in this poll question.

[Mojorabbit]

1. Something is off

He has been too good at heading these types of things off before and has not done well with this situation. I doubt it is anything bad but I hope he gets out in front it soon which will shut the press up a bit. I don't really care about the situation as it really does not affect me. This country has a boatload of pressing problems that need to be addressed without this distraction in the way.

[Writer]

3. I think the only thing keeping it in the press at the moment is Blagojevich's refusal to resign.

Other than call for his resignation - which Obama already has done, I believe - there is nothing more Obama can do with the press.

[TheWebHead]

2. It'll take some time

to get a handle on all related parties contacts with Blagojevich and I assume they'll have to clear info through the feds to some degree. Given his comments about Obama, the worst case would be they didn't drop a dime on Blagojevich when they had a clear understanding of his behavior... But it's entirely possible his words were more weasely (ie. what can you offer to make this happen?) when possibly contacting Obama people knowing they had an icy relationship and he was already skating on thin ice under investigation.

whatever the case, I can't even imagine what would have been on say a Karl Rove wiretap in 2000 as appointments were being made based on donations and industry groups were suddenly put in charge of regulating their own.

[Kahuna]

4. I don't care. This is only an "issue" because the M$M has nothing

else to do. Fitz already said that Obama was not involved. So, I have no reason to believe otherwise. Neither does the M$M.

[book_worm]

5. of course Obama and his staff have had an interest in who will be appointed to the senate

and of course they might have spoken to the governor or his staff about different names, but there is no crime in that and no indication that Obama or his staff had promised Blago any rewards beyond "appreciation" if he choose somebody to Obama's liking. The transcripts themselves support that with Blago calling Obama names because he won't pay up. But interest in who will be appointed and perhaps giving suggestions on good candidates is not unlawful or even unethical.

[jbnow]

6. Nothing is off as far as Obama himself. We don't know

what is going on with his staff and the investigation. What if somewhat significant conversations occurred that Fitzgerald did not make public that they are unsure should be made public or Fitzgerald himself wants a delay in making public? Should they step on the investigation to look better politically?
There are many reasons why waiting to give a fuller answer is the right one...including the one he suggested, he wants to have the whole picture first. Since they are there in Chicago not only did one or more speak to Blogo but there might be less direct connections that matter too.
I really think there is more to it, none of it related to a guilty act

[lonestarnot]

7. Fuck bagovicks, sick of hearing about that freak already.

[lligrd]

8. My Guess Is

Obama himself had no conversations. Rahm talked to Blagojevich to give suggestions. Blagojevich pissed Rahm off by insisting on being paid off somehow. Rahm turned Blagojevich in.