As you know, Hannibal, MO Quincy, IL TV station KHQA reported last Nov. 5 that President-Elect Barack Obama and Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich were meeting that day to discuss the replacement for Obama’s Senate seat. Which, if true, would directly contradict Obama’s subsequent claim that he has had absolutely no contact with Blago about it.
We also told you that KHQA has now taken down that Nov. 5 story. Here’s their explanation:
KHQA TV wishes to offer clarification regarding a story that appeared last month on our website ConnectTristates.com. The story, which discussed the appointment of a replacement for President Elect Obama in the U.S. Senate, became the subject of much discussion on talk radio and on blog sites Wednesday.
The story housed in our website archive was on the morning of November 5, 2008. It suggested that a meeting was scheduled later that day between President Elect Obama and Illinois Governor Blagojevich. KHQA has no knowledge that any meeting ever took place. Governor Blagojevich did appear at a news conference in Chicago on that date.
Which is why they deleted the original story from their site, instead of adding such a disclaimer to it. Which prompted sites like American Thinker Digest to dig up the Google cache. And Newsbusters discovered that KHQA posted a subsequent story on Nov. 8, referring to the Blagobama meeting in the past tense:
Now that Barack Obama will be moving to the White House, his seat in the U.S. Senate representing Illinois will have to be filled.
Obama met with Governor Rod Blagojevich earlier this week to discuss it. Illinois law states that the governor chooses that replacement. There’s already been speculation about his selection…from Congressman Jesse Jackson, Junior to Illinois Department of Veterans’ Affairs Director Tammy Duckworth.
Hmmmm. What do you think? Malice or incompetence?
Update: Blagojevich questions censored on Obama’s Change.gov transition site. Whoops!
Update: “No contact,” huh?
Related posts:
- Shepard Fairey Continues to Lose Hope If you thought the Associated Press was going to let...
- Past Obama Continues to Vex and Bedevil Present Obama As if Present Obama doesn’t have enough to worry about...
- David Letterman Continues to Humiliate His Family And according to the Associated Press: Letterman asked the...
- Jennifer Love Hewitt Continues to Feel Good About Herself The Insider has the breaking news. Or should I say…...
I’m thinking Orwell.
Or am I thinking Arby’s?
No, it was definitely Orwell.
Jesus H. Tap Dancing Christ. Another four years of this? There’s already questions, and problems for this guy and he hasn’t even been sworn in yet. I’m gonna guess that it’s only gonna get worse. And from what I know of Illinois politics, especially in Cook County I can almost guarantee it. Wanna Bet?
Thanks for all the hope and change Ombamabots.
Well Pasta you got to admit it is a change
Yeah, not a good sign that he is already lying. But of course they will come out and say that he meant to say was…….spin spin spin.
Every politician lies.
By saying everyone does it you are, in effect, defending the behavior. And lying as to whether you still smoke or not is quite different than lying about whether you have aided in a crime (not that I’m saying BHO did- I just find him to be not that smart of a person and just shows that affirmative action was/is alive and well at Harvard).
Remember, Obama only promised Hope and Change, no where did he ever fill the blanks as to what those two words entailed.
People Assumed it meant for the better but as the old saying goes Assume makes an ASS out of U amd ME, and the news media.
At least Clinton is an incredibly skilled liar, in all seriousness. You could really almost believe it when he was pulling one on you. But this? Did anybody hear his press conference after picking Puff Daschle for Health and Human Services? He can’t keep his pronouns or his nouns straight at all. He’s concentrating so hard on “I did not talk to the governor, I did not talk to the governor” that nothing else comes out.
And, Hurricane, that was an amazing statement.
I’m just amazed that the media has finally acknowledged that ‘Bama was knee deep in the Chicago swamps before he got to DC.
Or did he just hover over the muck?
Yep, that’s it.
Hope, Change, and Levitation.
Why thank you. I’m just so tired of people saying how smart Obama is when everything points to the opposite. It’s going to be four years of up is down, in is out, black is white (oops that is racist I guess)…..
Hear, hear, Hurricane. Obama is neither smart nor eloquent and anyone who thinks so . . . well, maybe they should get out more.
Happy the next four years. At least we’ve got Deceiver to keep us sane?
Its probably best that this happened now. Because then Obama will get a brand new start after Jan 20th. I mean it would have been a shame if Obama pulled some soon-to-be-president strings and got his friend in the seat and put Blago in his place, only to have the US Attorney bust Blago the next day.
But I’ve heard some people say that Jesse Jackson, Jr. was the front runner for the seat because he was going to be able to raise money for Blago but if the future President of the United States can’t get someone he wants appointed to a Senate seat he vacated then what’s the point of being President? I keep hearing it being called the world’s most powerful position, is that just rhetoric?
Then again, and this is pure speculation, maybe this is what happens when you call the future President a MFer and think his appreciation is not enough. Though that is also scary.
LOL @ phail neocons. They cant stand that the Democrats are more morally upright than they could ever dream of being. Try as you may, but you will NEVER be able to convince people that the Dems are the party of corruption ESPECIALLY if you try to tie it to someone as untaintable as Obama.
I was going to reply to Toproq but I know he’s kidding. Plus he’s obviously, like 13.
That old, do you think?
“Try as you may, but you will NEVER be able to convince people that the Dems are the party of corruption ESPECIALLY if you try to tie it to someone as untaintable as Obama.”
I dunno, I just got convinced the Dems are the party of corruption.
And what’s this about Obama not having a taint? Is he somne sort of alien or somethin’?
Ahem…. It is what prompted American DIGEST… DIGEST. Not that I have anything against American Thinker, which I enjoy.
Plus…. on American DIGEST… new shot which you’ve probably seen from a November 12 Governor’s Gazette newsletter.
Digest! Gah. My brain has been farting all day. Fixed.
Not sure if anyone has seen this but this is the first timeline I have come across
http://volokh.powerblogs.com/posts/1228903890.shtml
I cannot confirm how factual all this is, I will leave that up to others who are more capable than I, but it seems like a plausible timeline
Folks, I’m willing to put my money down now that we are looking at the country’s first impeached president…anyone man (or woman) enough to take me on? Or maybe I should head over to dkos for more ignorant victims, Deceiver seems to attract an intelligent crowd…
Actually, Clinton was impeached for lying to a grand jury. He just wasn’t removed from office.
CalDave’s right. Clinton was impeached. So was Andrew Johnson.
Impeachment is when the House finds against a sitting politician or judge. It then bounces to the Senate where they convict by a 2/3 vote or aquit. No conviction, no loss of office.
Impeachment and conviction are not the same thing.
Most people confuse the two processes because of the Nixon episode. Nixon resigned before he could be impeached. Not because he feared impeachment but because it was clear that the Senate would happily convict him.
No President has been impeached AND convicted to date.
Johnson came the closest. His case was more about civil war reformation rather than criminal activity. Johnson was a Southern Democrat who Lincoln (a northern Republican) chose for VP as a sign of unity with the south. Lincoln got popped and Johnson took over. Johnson ran reformation in the exact manner you’d expect from a southern sympathizing Democrat. Both houses were flooded with rabid pro-union Republicans who promptly sought to remove Johnson from office. He escaped conviction by one vote.
I highly doubt Obama will be removed from office before the end of his term. I am not so sure that his presidency will be riddled with scandals. I also don’t dislike him, I just think he is way over-hyped.
Say what you want about W., but in 8 years, he was never tied to anything shady. All the raging liberals have to go on is policy (Bush Lied Kids Died, even though the Senate voted 98-0 in favor).
Bush is supposed to be an evil mastermind who duped the U.S. government into a War, but he’s a moron who mysteriously got elected because most Americans are religious idiots? The lefties can’t get it straight.
If Bush was ever involved in anything this shady, we’d never, ever, ever, ever hear the end of it. Obama’s got scandal hounding him before he’s even officially president elect. The electoral college hasn’t voted yet. Not that they’d elect someone else, but it’s been a month and 8 days since the general election, and a month and 8 days until he takes office, and all this happens.
I did not have sexual relations with that woman…
I did not have any contact with that man on this matter…
Bush, clean for 8 years.
Obama, well, we’ll just find out. (Guilty as hell, though.)
No Clinton was not impeached. An impeached president does not serve out his full term in office which Clinton did. He was Censured but not impeached.
With closing arguments completed, the Senate began three days of closed-door deliberations on the two articles of impeachment, with each senator limited to 15 minutes of speaking time. Senate Democrats had attempted, but failed, to open this process to the public via television.
On Friday, February 12, television cameras were once again turned on inside the chamber and senators gathered in open session for the final roll call. With the whole world watching, senators stood up one by one to vote “guilty” or “not guilty.” On Article 1, the charge of perjury, 55 senators, including 10 Republicans and all 45 Democrats voted not guilty. On Article 3, obstruction of justice, the Senate split evenly, 50 for and 50 against the President.
With the necessary two-thirds majority not having been achieved, the President was thus acquitted on both charges and would serve out the remainder of his term of office lasting through January 20, 2001.
About two hours after his acquittal, President Clinton made a brief appearance in the White House Rose Garden and stated: ”Now that the Senate has fulfilled its constitutional responsibility, bringing this process to a conclusion, I want to say again to the American people how profoundly sorry I am for what I said and did to trigger these events and the great burden they have imposed on the Congress and on the American people.”
http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/impeachments/clinton.htm
Sorry Aleric, while your source is rather time line extensive, it is incomplete on defining the actual process.
Removing a president is a 2 step procedure: Impeachment and Trial.
Impeachment is done by the House. It’s similar to an indictment process where the lower legislative house acts like a grand jury. Impeachment is not a guilty verdict, it’s a demand to hold a further trail in the upper legislative house. The House hands a Bill of Impeachment over to the Senate, at that point the accused is officially impeached.
The Impeachment Trial is then held in the Senate. They either convict or aquit. The Senate does not impeach, they hold the formal trial. An aquital by the Senate does not negate the impeachment portion of the process.
Only presidents who are impeached and then convicted are removed from office.
I imagine that since we’ve never had a president go through both halves unsuccessfully, we’ve never come up with a generalized term for “skanky criminal booted out on his ass by the Senate”.
In Clinton’s case he was impeached by the House on 2 of 4 counts and Senate aquitted. Then the Senate, in a seperate piece of legislation censured him. The censure was not part of the impeachment process, nor did it negate what the House did.
http://www.abanet.org/publiced/impeach2.html
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/impeachment
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/impeach.html
and sigh, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States
Malice or incompetence?
No, worshipping self-censorship.
Heads up guys…
Rezko’s sentencing date was just postponed again. Indefinately.
Looks like Obama’s neighbor has more tales to tell.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/rezko/1333402,tony-rezko-sentencing-postponed-121608.article
You people are fickle. Look at all the sour pusses on this site bellyaching about Obama. Did someone have the nerve to say that Bush never did anything shady? ARE YOU DENSE? TAKE YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR FOURTH POINT OF CONTACT. Hurricane and isleo47 (especially you) do realize that we are in a effing recession? Do you realize that Bush/Cheney over the past 2 days have admitted that Saddam DIDN’T have WMD’s? Afghanistan and Iraq (you know, the war the BUSH LIED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY USING FEAR AND FALSE EVIDENCE OF WMD’S)People have lost loved ones, and you sorry whiners are talking about Blago as if Obama was directly involved in this scandal? IS. THAT. THE. BEST. YOU. CAN DO?
What a bunch a tossers. Get over it repigs. Obama won and you lost! Obama is by far a smarter man than Bush will ever be. Bush and the RIGHT has ruined AMERICA for the past 8 years. So get that stick out of your ass. I will not give the Bush and the G.O.P. a pass.
With a screen name like SickoflyingGOPcowards, it’s gotta be good!
Yeah, wasn’t the whole thing with George Bush insisting that Iraq had WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION when it did not extremely deceptive?
Or are you just not going to pursue that because you like to pursue Democrat deceptions only?
Oh, Simon Scowl, oh, you!
Incisive geopolitical analysis.
It’s cute how you get so bitchy and smart ass when you don’t have an answer for my incisive analysis. You Republican prick.
Well said.