Who will Blagojevich drag down with him?
No wrongdoing can be laid at the feet of President-elect Barack Obama in what the New York media call Blagogate and Blagobroglio. U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald made clear that Gov. Blagojevich found no bidder in Obama for Illinois' open U.S. Senate seat. Still, it will be interesting, to say the least, to learn the details of the communications between Obama's staff and Blagojevich.
A statement released Monday by Obama's transition office fell far short of providing those details. It said a review of contacts with Blagojevich had "affirmed" that Obama's staff "was not involved in inappropriate discussions" about the Senate vacancy. But the transition office is withholding the details until Dec. 22 at the request of Fitzgerald's office "in order not to impede their investigation."
So we're left with what we know at this moment, which is that Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, presented the governor with a list of candidates the president-elect thought worthy of consideration for the Senate spot. Several scenarios of what happened after that are possible.
First, maybe Blagojevich or his chief of staff, John Harris, followed up with vague inquiries, all within the bounds of normal you-scratch- my-back-I'll-scratch-your-back politics, asking how Obama might respond to the governor naming one of the candidates. With appreciation, Emanuel replied, and that was the end of that.
But the issue gets complicated if Blagojevich suggested a specific response, as in a Cabinet post, that demonstrated he had ventured beyond the bounds of normal politics into morally and legally suspect territory. If he did, we know, from Blagojevich's own tape-recorded words, he got no encouragement.
But what happened then? Did Emanuel tell Obama that Blagojevich had crossed the line by trying to sell the Senate seat? Or did Emanuel opt not to burden Obama with the Blagojevich ugliness?
Did Emanuel blow the whistle by telling Fitzgerald about Blagojevich's outrageous demand? He would deserve a medal for saying enough with corrupt money-grabbing politics. Or did he just keep what he knew to himself?
If so, Emanuel might have a problem. It wouldn't be a legal one -- he would have broken no law -- but it would be a political issue. The idea of a White House chief of staff knowing about a crime unfolding and not doing anything about it wouldn't make for a pretty picture at the start of a new presidency. It would speak of an acceptance of old-style politics at its worst, and Obama is supposed to represent change.
Only the details of the contacts will clear all this up. The confident tone of Monday's statement sounds like Obama's camp thinks they're in the clear.
Whatever you think of Emanuel -- an abrasive, take-no-prisoners political brawler -- he has always struck me as exemplifying the best in the traditional if sometimes messy politics of getting things done for people. He may be hard-charging, even mean, but he seems to be a principled man -- the polar opposite of Blagojevich.
Contemplating the possibility that Emanuel's political career might be tainted in some way by Blagojevich gets you to thinking of others dragged down in this scandal. Consider Harris, the governor's departed chief of staff. The Sun-Times' Fran Spielman reports his demeanor and outlook have so changed from his days of laboring in City Hall that former colleagues actually asked him to his face: "What happened to you?"
Consider the governor's wife. Sun-Times columnist Carol Marin sat down with Ald. Dick Mell and other members of Patti Blagojevich's family. They said the foul-mouthed and grasping woman on the tape recordings is not the Patti they know.
Consider how Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. has seen his political fortunes clouded by this scandal.
Thinking of all this reminded me of something often said about one of the key 1970s Watergate conspirators -- that everything he touched turned to, well, you know what. Sounds like our governor, doesn't it?