Chicagoist: Ata Takes the Stand

JohnRyskamp

Fri, 02 May 2008 13:42:37 -0600

By the way, no one has yet commented on the chances Rezko will be convicted. I just read about the defense's strategy, and it seems very lame to me. Also the cross-examinations have been very lame. I think Rezko will be convicted after a very short jury deliberation. Your predictions? And now what about the possibility of Rezko pleading? He is looking at going to jail for the rest of his life. So does he keep mum, or deliver all the big names the U.S. Attorney wants: Obama, both Daleys, Blajo, Rove? Predictions? Keep in mind that perhaps the U.S. Attorney does not need Rezko now.

JohnRyskamp

Fri, 02 May 2008 13:32:28 -0600

Watch for Evelyn Pringle's latest installment at opednews. I think this will be the bombshell on Obama, since her last pieces have been progressively focusing on Obama's specifically indictable acts: names, dates, places, amounts, scheme. By the way, Obama didn't want the house or the land: this is a front for an illegal scheme. Also, Riverside is not a development, it's a front for a scheme. Her chronologies are particularly important, because so far the evidence is circumstantial, so it must be compelling. That said, I get the feeling that those who have pleaded have already implicated Obama multiple times. Again, the chronology. He is already placed at some of these meetings and as having received money, in situations referred to in the trial. I'm surprised he's still in the race--but hey, rake in the bucks from his FOOLISH supporters while you still can. It's not surprising that Obama, and many others, have been kept out of the Rezko trial. The U.S. attorney obviously wants to present a clear case on Rezko, get him, and then move on. But it's equally clear, even now, that Obama is in this up to his eyeballs. There is a very close coordination between his acceptance of money, Rezko schemes, and his acts as a legislator and in other acts of his. Rezko's is not a RICO case, but it is very similar, so you might want to Google RICO and read up on the principles underlying it. Obama will go over on charges of accepting money and sponsoring legislation in connection with the Rezko/Auchi/General Mediterranean criminal enterprise, among many other crimes. A lot has been made of Auchi as the big cheese, since he "owns" Gen Med. My feeling is that even he is just a front. What comes out of all of this is not Rezko as mastermind, but rather, Rezko as cheap little flunkey directing the crimes of even cheaper little flunkeys. Obama is one. And Obama, this cheap punk, is a candidate for President? Well, at least he will have pulled in a lot of money before he gets Spitzered and does the perp walk. Now, how does that walk go, Martha?

kleinstadt

Fri, 02 May 2008 13:14:53 -0600

Would this collection of great legal minds (no sarcasm intended, Rounders reference) care to explain what "admission of a party opponent" means to the uninitiated?

Fri, 02 May 2008 12:32:15 -0600

Just to be clear, Blago's statements, as a co-conspirator, would also come in under the admission of a party opponent excpetion. It doesn't really matter that Blago hasn't been charged with anything yet. Blago's alleged out-of-court statements can still be used against Rezko under the excpetion to the hearsay rule.

pasta

Fri, 02 May 2008 12:28:15 -0600

Those d00ds are ballin'!

Fri, 02 May 2008 11:16:26 -0600

Rezko's out-of-court statements to Ata constitute an admission of a party opponent. One of the exemptions to the hearsay rule.

Spav1

Fri, 02 May 2008 09:54:00 -0600

Why is this not all considered HEARSAY?