Rahm Emanuel is a transactional politician who comes out of a transactional political culture in Illinois. He operates on favors and horse trading and putting numbers on the board rather than principle and idealism. This has been known for a long time. Therefore, his horse trading with the Governor of Illinois while he was a Congressman should come as no surprise. The only problem with this is that said Governor was Rod Blagojevich.
President Barack Obama’s chief of staff, then a congressman in Illinois, apparently attempted to trade favors with embattled Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich while he was in office, according to newly disclosed e-mails obtained by The Associated Press.
Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, agreed to sign a letter to the Chicago Tribune supporting Blagojevich in the face of a scathing editorial by the newspaper that ridiculed the governor for self-promotion. Within hours, Emanuel’s own staff asked for a favor of its own: The release of a delayed $2 million grant to a school in his district.
The 2006 discussion with Blagojevich’s top aide, Deputy Gov. Bradley Tusk, doesn’t appear to cross legal lines, and Emanuel couldn’t speed up the distribution of the funds. But it offers a peek at ties between two high-profile Illinois politicians — one now the president’s right-hand man, the other facing years in prison if convicted of political corruption.
Yes, Congressmen and Governors, especially those of the same party, talk to each other. And yes, they ask for favors and they deliver favors. And Congressmen try to get Governors to shovel money to their districts. That’s basic politics. I don’t see the issue here.
Except that this will all come out at a trial. And as chief of staff Emanuel sits closely to the President, where the contagion of something actually untoward could spread. There’s definitely some danger in that. My problem with Emanuel is not this transactional view of politics, much of which is just a fact of life. It’s that you’d expect someone so driven in this manner to actually be good at delivering. And I basically see the opposite being true. Even in this case, Emanuel couldn’t get the money released from the Governor.




22 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
I take the opposite view. Let it come out. It is tawdry and disgusting. That’s basic politics. There’s no reason to hide from it out of some partisan desire to protect corporate democrats. You call it a “transactional political culture” and I call it a corrupt political culture.
that’s the opposite view of someone you’re pretending to be arguing with.
You’re right. I’m arguing with the person who dresses up a political patronage system in the clothes of a transactional political culture and implies that we all just have to accept it as reality.
Great read David, and I just LOVE your closing sentence.
Dude’s a fuckin loser, even as he wreaks havoc on us little people.
I have never read of any success by Rahm. His reputation exceeds him.
Are we being argumentative here? Hmmmmm.
Ironic that Rahm has been unwilling to give Don Siegelmann a fair shake.
I think that emanuel is quite proficient at what he truly sets out to do: serve corporate amerika while directing the democratic party kabuki theatre that gives them cover by “forcing” them to settle on serving their corporate sponsors.
Z
You rang? /s
Sounds like an Arkansas land deal to me. Bet Darryl Issa could do something with that. If he wasn’t just a lowly ranking member.
I’m not sure I buy that this news is necessarily fatal to Rahm’s CoS role, but the conjunction of it and the UK piece about him perhaps leaving soon is at a minimum worth noting.
A lot of us were thinking that this shoe might fall and damage Obama.
Just after Obama came into office, I was afraid that Rahm would be caught up in it and it would hurt Obama.
Now, I’m afraid that he WON’T get caught up in it.
I think Barack Obama’s presidency is hanging by a thread. Considering how willingly he’s surrendered the political power that the voters gave him, and how little political capital he’s risked to make the the changes we so badly need, that’s appropriate to me.
If Emanuel is indicted for his dealing, this may be the breaking thread.
Ordinarily, the idea of having a lame duck democratic president for half of his term in office would be appalling to me, but with Obama having done so little with so much of a mandate for change, I think he’s more valuable to progressives as an abandoned failure than as a figurehead for any second term.
I also think that this guy would NEVER voluntarily resign from this much power. He loves being a tin-horn Machaivelli too much. If he steps down it will be because Fitz has given the word to Obama and the dems that he’s going to be indicted.
BTW, the money didn’t have to be released. If there’s a quid pro on those tapes, or even if there’s something that is close, Rahm is probably gone.
When Obama was fresh as a daisy, he had the power carry Rahm, some.
Now that he’s covered with oil and two unending clusterfucks, and looking at a shellacking in the mid-terms, he doesn’t have the clout to protect him.
“Are we being argumentative here?”
Now that Obama’s waffling on both “drawdown” schedules from bush’s, now HIS, two wars, you aint seen nuthin’ yet.
With Biden (and Rahm) both saying that the July 2011 get-out-of-Dodge schedule still stands for Afghanistan, and with Obama’s SecDef saying no it doesn’t, the resolution of this little difference of opinion, is going to be…fraught:
http://news.antiwar.com/2010/06/20/us-officials-dispute-downplay-july-2011-afghan-pullout-date/
Did ya’ll read the following http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704895204575320851348474636.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines
It says that Rahm is “out” and that’s because he isn’t cozy enough with us.
Speaking as one of those left-wingers with an “overly ambitious ideological agenda”, I have doubts that Emanuel will be leaving because Obama thinks he’s too confrontational with progressives.
Again, if he goes, I think it will be because Fitz quietly told Obama that he’s in the Blago mix, big time.
Thanks. That story seems to be based on the Daily Telegraph story without any new sources.
Rahm: “Cave early, cave often!”
Here is the latest:
RAHM EMANUEL EXPECTED TO QUIT WHITE HOUSE
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/7837686/Rahm-Emanuel-expected-to-quit-White-House.html
If one questions rahm’s effectiveness, I think they misunderstand his goals. He made $16.2M on wall street in 2 1/2 years after helping to push thru nafta and other pro-corporate/pro-wall street legislation. His “failure” has been amply rewarded in the past and I’d imagine that if he wants to, he’ll walk into another high-paying job as a show of appreciation for all the pro-business legislation he has shepherded thru congress as obama’s cos.
Z
You gotta love the sub-title of that UK Telegraph article, about how Rahm is leaving because he’s:
“growing tired of the idealism of Obama’s inner circle.”
It is to laugh.
Would that be the idealism that’s led Obama to sustain some of the worst of Bush’s policies?
The Idealism that led him to grovel like a cur dog for the health insurance robber barons while refusing to insist on a Public Option?
The idealism that let him sit on his centrist ass for 16 months while doing nothing about the sweetheart oil regs for offshore drilling, and then, three weeks before the platform blew up and sank, to sign off on MORE drilling?
I mean, we all knew that Emanuel’s “bar” for idealism was so low that an arthritic cockroach could get over it, but this takes the cake. Where is the poor man going to find new work; as the Chief-of-Staff for Idi
Amin in hell?