nteresting point by one of the observers is that Blago may have good grounds for appeal on the one conviction. Lying to the FBI only matters if it is material to other crimes charged. The interview in which Blago's statements were used for that charge was at least two years before all the other charges alleged. There was apperently no evidence presented that indicated that Blago's statements were, in fact, not true when he said them, only that three years later, he was behaving differently.
The frightening thing I learn from the Blago trial, the other trials (Libby, Black, etc etc), is that the Feds can ruin your life, threaten to ruin your loved ones' lives, get an easy conviction on one of their "trump" charges and you are powerless to do a damned thing about it - especially if you are innocent of the charges they WANT you to be guilty of.
Justice. Bah Humbug. The higher up it is, the more it reeks.
Also, an interesting point, Blago requested a court stenographer be present at the FBI interview. The FBI refused. Based on the Libby trial, we know how those reports of interviews can be different from the actual interview. (which, by the way, why is it a federal crime for an individual to lie to the FBI, but not a federal crime for an FBI agent to inaccuratly record an interview after the fact?)
Posted by: Ranger | August 17, 2010 at 08:23 PM