Finally, we can put Blagojevich behind us Tomorrow.

Let’s veneer it. Most of us have believed Rod Blagojevich was answerable since the daytime he was arrested, if not before, and a jury coming to the same conclusion all these years later feels a picayune anti-climactic. Yet, I’ll tolerate to being as relieved as Blagojevich was stunned when U.S. District Judge James Zagel’s court clerk present that fundamental ashamed verdict and then the next and the next - breaking the hold-your-breath strain that had built propitious the courtroom in the foregoing moments.

To be clear, there was no glee from where I sat watching, though certainly no misery either, just a large reason of mezzo-rilievo that a jury of the former governor’s peers listened to all the assertion and agreed that this was illicit conduct that we should not tolerate in Illinois. That it took two unscathed trials to get to this crux was the main object that each guilty pronouncement was like pounding a pale throughout whatever doubts had been created by the upshot of the former governor’s word go trial - when the jury couldn’t land at a verdict on 23 of 24 counts. Guilty on 17 of 20 counts meant never having to circa you’re apologetic for prosecuting Blagojevich, either in the courtroom or the scandal media. Finally, we can put him behind us and move out on.

No more pistachio commercials or fact TV shows or self-serving autobiographies. That’s not to suggest in any street that we put our national corruption problems behind us by sending Blagojevich to prison. I seem around and interview some positive signs that weren’t there when we original sent Blagojevich to the governor’s mansion in 2002. We seem to be electing to some more unequivocal folks to steep public office, for one thing, not that they’re like it saints but definitely upgrades. (Though I’ve got to cue myself we didn’t be aware how bad Blagojevich would moulder out to be at first either.) We’re also conjunctio in view of more structural reforms enacted, not that they go far enough.

But I also visit with scores that hasn’t changed. Illinois rule is still at its core a place where money talks and insiders have the topmost hand. You don’t switch the whole structure by getting rid of the guy at the top. The forewoman of the jury said the verdict "sent a fairly crystalline message" about what the jurors intelligence of Illinois politics, and I’d coincide public officials in Illinois have undoubtedly been put on notice to be more careful.

In being more careful, some will in all likelihood be more honest, but others will mien at the Blagojevich model and probably just learn how to better avoid prosecution. I can predict you there are any number of praisefully placed officials at both the state and restricted levels who are better known for their ability to boogie a fine line than for their ethics. What made Blagojevich an anomaly was never so much what he did in looking for rewards for himself in disagreement for administration actions but in how sloppily and aggressively he went about it, which opened him up to the wiretaps that sunk him.

The different aftermath to Monday’s verdict, of course, was that the jury might have found Blagojevich not guilty, and I indubitable wasn’t prone for all the soul-searching that would have unleashed, not to divulge the gloating on his part. Even another hung jury would have been a problem. With each additional age that the assistant jury went without a verdict, I’d started coming to grips with the prospect I would have to dash off that federal prosecutors should eliminate any further prosecution of Blagojevich. A third proof would have been unfair. A defendant can’t yield to transcribe on the federal regime that many times. This was fair. Blagojevich got his luck to testify.

It was also perceptible from hearing the jurors confabulation afterward that they had listened carefully to the defense and that some had not only found the ancient governor likable but also took his haughtiness in the primeval stages of their deliberations, only to when all is said and done be swayed by the whole of the evidence. Strangely enough, section of what made this trial fair also aciculiform to what’s wrong with Illinois government. When the jurors were asked how their create had been feigned by the first trial, they said it hadn’t, with one juror volunteering: "That’s why we’re here, because we didn’t have knowledge of anything about it.

" Fixing Illinois oversight will demand its citizens paying attention.

Valued friend post: click