Did President-elect Obama schedule his resignation from the Senate in order to shut down an embarrassing investigation of his personal finances by the Senate Ethics Committee?
This is a question the new President has at least temporarily suppressed as he embarks on what he himself has pledged will be the most transparent administration in history. Yet the matter is not squelched so easily. As one source told FrumForum.com: “Barack Obama is a very calm man. But if there is anything keeping him up at night – this is it.”
Many senators have moved from Congress to the executive branch before Barack Obama. But none has ever quit the Senate so quickly.
Vice President-elect Joe Biden, for example, resigned from the Senate five days before he took the Oath of Office. Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton will resign only after she is confirmed. In 1993, Al Gore resigned from the Senate 18 days before Inauguration Day. Dan Quayle quit 17 days before in 1989. Walter Mondale and Hubert Humphrey each resigned 21 days in advance; John F. Kennedy, 31.
The reasons for postponement of resignation are manifold. They range from the party’s need for a vote to the senator’s personal need for a paycheck
Yet Barack Obama, not a wealthy man, resigned from a closely divided Senate 66 days before his swearing in as president – a modern record.
At the time of his resignation, Obama aides explained their boss’ urgency on background to The New York Times: “[A]dvisers said he wanted to avoid the awkward position of returning to the Senate to cast a ballot should his vote be needed” to pass economic legislation.
That explanation was never very convincing: The Bush administration’s requests for TARP funds have passed the Senate with strong bipartisan support, with no need for Obama’s vote.
Knowledgeable sources familiar with Obama’s background suggest another explanation for his hasty resignation:
They ask whether the President-elect acted to dodge a possible investigation of his personal finances by the Senate Ethics Committee.
In 2005, Obama accepted ethically dubious financial assistance from Antoin “Tony” Rezko, a Chicago land developer now convicted on wire and mail fraud, money laundering, and aiding and abetting bribery. The exact value of Rezko’s assistance is disputed. It is uncertain whether the benefit violated any federal law. What does seem clear, however, is that the benefit likely violated Senate ethics rules, which forbid Senators from receiving gifts with a monetary value of more than $50. There are exceptions to this rule, but real estate transactions are not among them.
The Rezko case got relatively little attention during the 2008 campaign, but while Rezko awaits sentencing and continues to cooperate with the feds, the case may return to the news. U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald is reportedly pressuring Rezko to provide more details about his apparently corrupt dealings with Chicago-area politicians.
With the Senate in special session in November and December – and Rezko talking – Obama was at risk of having his own personal case brought before the Ethics Committee.
The Ethics Committee, however, only has jurisdiction over sitting Senators. By resigning so early, Obama removed himself from the committee’s power – and, if our sources are correct, – squelched an ethics case before it could begin.
If so, call it a first taste of the Chicago way on the national stage.
Image courtesy of realjameso16. http://www.flickr.com/photos/
17 responses so far
1 gospelance // Jan 21, 2009 at 6:50 am
hi folks, It would be nice if this issue was re-visited, along with all the “questionable” contributions to the campaign. Of course, if the Golden One is brought under such scrutiny- it could start a riot or something, and the race-baiters will get out their bullhorns again.
Lance in Seattle area (help!)
2 thorsbear // Jan 21, 2009 at 7:23 am
just a bit of humor — it seems as if this story is keeping you up at night…
3 Bob Miller // Jan 21, 2009 at 8:11 am
For the sake of the nation, we naturally hope that its new leadership will do its constitutional job properly and successfully. But it’s wishful thinking to write off and ignore the personal history of Obama and his associates, as if it was irrelevant today. We have to be vigilant to prevent any re-emergence of their bad tendencies.
4 Proright169 // Jan 21, 2009 at 8:46 am
The whole Chicago poitics and thugery thing was tramped down by the their propaganda machine, the main stream media. Only those that have drank the Kool Aid of this whole Messaih, “Progressive” movement will continue to assasinate the character all those that try to expose the hypocrisy of the Left.
This whole “progressive” administration can be seen so clearly in Animal Farm and its campanion book ‘1984′.
p.s. David, I came here this a.m. after hearing you on Laura Ingraham.
5 OregonPerspective // Jan 21, 2009 at 10:55 am
Moira, I hope you intended this as a humor column, and that you’ve been featured on New Majority’s second day as an example of the subtle wit to follow.
The premises of your essay are laughable.
That Obama was concerned that a Democratic ethics committee would investigate their own president in the month before he took office is funny. That Obama, who’s book sales skyrocketed following the nomination and election, might be depending on his small Senate salary for income is risible. That the involvement of Rezko in Obama’s home purchase represented financial or political corruption on a significant scale, after the Republican corruption of the last decade is hilarious.
But, please, give us poor readers some indication when your intent is this kind of comic hyperbole. Or we might think your serious.
Thanks.
6 sewells1951 // Jan 21, 2009 at 11:29 am
I’m unaware of any information that indicates Obama accepted “ethically dubious” financial assistance from Rezko. It would have been a nice touch to provide links to independent sources to backup the assertion. Of course, if he did illegal stuff he ought to be brought up on charges.
Still, phrasing something as a given without providing corroboration treats your readers with disrespect. Unless you can provide information that shows something unethical happened, I probably won’t believe there’s much substance to the allegation.
7 gospelance // Jan 21, 2009 at 12:41 pm
what’s with all the GROUP-THINKERS (liberals) on here?
don’t they have blogs over at Moveon or makelovenotwar or wherever?
8 OregonPerspective // Jan 21, 2009 at 12:46 pm
I’m here b
9 johnroach22 // Jan 21, 2009 at 2:10 pm
I’m with oregon and others. Let’s keep this about issues we can embrace to restore conservative confidence and less about whacking political enemies. If we want to talk about corruption let’s stick to those that are proven and we can do something about like certain former Alaskian senators. We have enough in our own party to fix without trying to fix others.
10 GeneK // Jan 21, 2009 at 2:22 pm
There are real isues out there–this isn’t one of them.
11 NYCRepublican // Jan 21, 2009 at 3:11 pm
hey oregon – “Republican corruption of the last decade is hilarious”
Are you serious? If I am not mistaken there have been an avalanche of unethical and corrupt activities emanating from the Democratic side of the aisle. Perhaps you forgot about Sen Dodd’s sweetheart mortgage policy from Countrywide, the $90K in William jefferson’s freezer, BLAGOJEVICH, etc etc etc. Typical liberal with a selective memory.
12 mrrightwing // Jan 21, 2009 at 4:34 pm
Anybody who thinks Obama wasn’t itching to get out of the Senate and become the full time President-Elect isn’t thinking it through. Has anyone ever festooned a podium with “Office of the President Elect before? This is a guy who had his own seal created before he even won the election.
You think this guy gives a damn about the business of the Senate? What did he ever do while he was there?
I saw a funny piece in the PBS hagiography that aired last night about The One’s path to power. Obama is in a hearing, with Biden prattling on. Obama turns to an aide and passes a note. Breathless aide feels flushed with excitement; what issue of great import will he be tasked with by his new patron?
The note reads: “Shoot me now. Shoot. Me. Now.”
13 Steve Lee // Jan 21, 2009 at 5:33 pm
We would think that, like so many Americans, the condition of the U.S. economy is keeping President Obama awake at night.
The next problem for the U.S. economy won’t be happening on Wall Street, Click Link:
http://rebuild the party.ning.com/forum/topics/american-economys
14 gopwriterguy // Jan 21, 2009 at 6:51 pm
you all need a facebook GROUP/PAGE!
15 Orwell1st // Jan 21, 2009 at 8:03 pm
“He who fears corruption fears life.” Alinsky, Rules for Radicals. For Obama, who trained in the most corrupt environment there is (Chicago) it must seem an incredible accomplishment that most of his supporters see him as a champion of reform, as indeed it is. He sold it.
16 Orwell1st // Jan 21, 2009 at 8:18 pm
I’ll add that we have just elected, to protect our democratic institutions, a man who was trained in subverting them. Manchurrriaaa!
17 A Ready Repub // Jan 22, 2009 at 12:26 am
Why doesn’t anything stick to this bum? He is so crooked that he probably doesn’t pee straight. I did not watch him during the campaign, I didn’t view his coronation, I won’t let him in my home, and I hope he fails. Darn the Repubs who have no backbone and wish him well including my beloved W. Get some cojones!
You must log in to post a comment.