The Super Bowl, the Pittsburgh Steelers, Republicans, Barack Obama and Dan Rooney

Andy Martin looks at the Pittsburgh Steelers and their legendary owner Dan Rooney: Republicans lost Rooney in 2008. How do they win him back? Andy Martin looks at the interrelationships between the Super Bowl, the Pittsburgh Steelers, Dan Rooney and Rooney's support for Barack Obama. How does Obama measure up against Rooney's values and verities? You be the judge after reading Andy's analysis.

How do the Republicans win Rooney Back? Maybe Republicans need to absorb a little more of the ethos of the Pittsburgh Steelers, and less of the pseudo-swagger of being "Texas tough." Texas doesn't look so tough any more. The Bush Dynasty has been sent to the showers in the bush leagues of history.


Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin on the Super Bowl, the Pittsburgh Steelers, the Republican Party and Barack Obama

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

ANDY MARTIN REFLECTS ON DAN ROONEY, THE PITTSBURGH STEELERS' LEGENDARY PRESIDENT, AND ROONEY'S SUPPORT FOR BARACK OBAMA

WHERE DID THE REPUBLICANS GO WRONG; HOW CAN THEY GET RIGHT?

ANDY MARTIN MEASURES BARACK OBAMA AGAINST "ROONEY'S VALUES;" WHAT'S YOUR OPINION?

(NEW YORK)(February 1, 2009) Regular readers know that ContrarianCommentary.com does not follow the sports pages, and we never cover sporting events. But a New York Times column on Pittsburgh Steelers owner Dan Rooney caught our eye, and we dug deeper.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/sports/football/27rooney.html

As it turns out, there have been a number of recent stories concerning Rooney's support for Obama during the presidential campaign. There have also been stories praising the guiding sprit of Dan Rooney in the Steelers organization. We went digging deeper still for the big picture.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08314/926590-176.stm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/28/AR2009012803393_pf.html

http://vault.sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1151221/index.htm

Dan Rooney is an extraordinary character in American sports, and in American business. He has built an organization out of sheer grit. The Rooney Family is wealthy today, but the Steelers franchise is not the plaything of a wealthy arriviste. The family built the team's value from scratch, and built the spirit of the team based on Dan's own personal values.

All of the stories comment on Rooney's modesty, and how he eats lunch with his players almost every day. Rooney lives in a nondescript neighborhood, in the home where he grew up, and drives an ordinary car. No limos, no entourage, no hangers-on. And, apparently, no Citicorp-style corporate jet.

Rooney, of course, exemplifies the Middle American values that made the country great. Reading the material we distilled "Rooney's values" into four general areas: (A) modesty; (B) stability and trust; (C) thrift; (D) family.

There is no executive dining room at the Steelers organization. When a server in the cafeteria line wanted to shake Rooney's hand, all she had to was walk over and shake. He's in the cafeteria most days, standing in line. How many CEO's do that today? How many at Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, Citibank, AIG or the other wounded capitals of capital in New York? Not many.

The Steelers have had three coaches in forty years. It almost seems unbelievable. But then in Pennsylvania, trust and stability are different. Football coach Joe Paterno has been at Penn State University since the dawn of creation. Stability is a big part of western Pennsylvania. Stability is something America lost in the 90's and especially in the past few years. We need it back. Desperately.

Rooney's third virtue is thrift. His "fortune" is the Steelers. He isn't wealthy apart from the team. No hedge fund, no brokerage operation, no trust fund. The Steelers are both the source of his wealth and the repository of his wealth. So he watches every dollar. He won’t overpay, won’t indulge in egomaniacs, and is a shrewd judge of character.

We never heard of Plexico Burgess until he shot himself in a New York City nightclub. Burgess was a real lowlife to be packing heat in a crowded place. (Who does he think he is? Sean Combs?) Ironically, Rooney had cut Burgess loose long before the famous gunshot. Burgess' antics may have demoralized his new teammates at the New York Giants. They were "contendas" until the shot heard round the sports world. Now the Steelers, not the Giants, are in the Super Bowl.

Finally, Rooney emphasizes family, his own family and the family of his team. He is wedded to his community, his region, his church, and, until Obama sauntered into the picture, the Republican Party. Where did Republicans go wrong? Who lost Rooney?

Rooney is a practical dollars and sense man. He built his wealth; he didn’t inert a fortune and then squander it on a sports team. Surely the economic perfidiousness of the past eight years got to him. Rooney is not one to scream from the steeple tops. But the fiascos in Iraq and Afghanistan obviously bothered him.

And then he saw Obama. Rooney took heat from the Steelers' fans for backing Barry O. But he stood by his man. And he backed a winner: Obama won.

So how does Obama measure up against Rooney's rules? In some respects Obama seems to be the exact antithesis of Rooney, which is what makes Rooney's support so surprising, and so interesting.

Modesty? Limos? Obama is intoxicated with his own importance. He has created a bubble-within-the-bubble. Obama is the most self-important public official in the entire United States. Clearly, Rooney would never hire Obama to play for the Steelers. Obama fumbles the ball on modesty.

Stability? We think Obama gets a first down here. Whether you love or hate Obama, he has pyramided a series of modest personal abilities, coupled with an outstanding speaking style, into one of the great political success stories of American history. This advance from modesty to majesty took stability. Obama gets the first down.

Thrift? Obama is thrown for a loss here. He likes to spend big on himself, especially when someone else, usually the taxpayers, is paying the tab. Obama has commandeered the entire floor of a luxury hotel for his family; he's not averse to living la vida loca while the American people by his own admission are suffering through a horrible economy. That's not Dan Rooney's style. http://michellemalkin.com/2009/01/29/obama-celebrates-spending-binge-with-cocktails-and-wagyu-steak/

And Obama is planning to bankrupt the nation. Thrift is not something we associate with Obama. By the time the American people eject him from the White House, he will have bankrupted Fort Knox. Obama, moreover, would want his own personal chef; no employee cafeteria line with a bunch of sweaty football players for the Great One.

Family? Most of our writing expresses sympathy for Obama's convoluted early family life. Indeed, we don’t even believe is an "Obama." In our opinion, his biological father was Frank Marshall Davis (who had a skill set that almost perfectly matches his undisclosed son's; like father, like son). Obama was caught in the myth of Obama, and he found out the truth too late in life to change course. We rate "family" as a neutral factor.

On the other hand. Obama sure knows how to butter up those who put him in high office; he has always been a shameless flatterer. He makes the Clintons look like rookies in that regard. Although it is almost impossible to get a straight answer out of Barry O on anything, he came out and said straight up he was rooting for the Steelers today.

Of course having the President of the United States support your sports team may reflect precisely the opposite: maybe the consummate deal-maker and orchestrator, Dan Rooney, scored a touchdown when he backed Obama. That's Rooney for you. He knows how to move the ball.

Now how does the Republican Party win Dan Rooney back as a supporter? That's the question for the Super Bowl of politics: the White House.

Maybe Republicans as a party should go back to the basics. We have a list for them to start with: modesty, stability, thrift and family. Maybe they should hold their next national convention in Pittsburgh; and ask Dan Rooney to be the keynote speaker.
--------------------------------------------
Readers of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, say the book is still the only gold standard and practical handbook on Barack Obama's unfitness for the presidency. Buy it.
Book orders: www.Amazon.com or www.OrangeStatePress.com. Immediate shipment from Amazon.com or signed copies (delayed for signing) from the publisher are available.
---------------------------------------------
URGENT APPEAL: The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama is raising money to oppose President-elect Barack Obama.
http://CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com.
Please give generously. Our ability to fight and defeat Barack Obama is directly dependent on the generosity of every American.
“The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama has no bundlers, fat cats or illegal contributions. Obama is opposed to everything America stands for," says Executive Director Andy Martin. "But while Obama has raised almost a billion dollars, and is continuing to raise money, his opponents have raised virtually nothing. Americans can either contribute now, or pay later. If we do not succeed, Obama will."
E-mail: contact@CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com
---------------------------------------------
Andy Martin is a legendary Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of broadcasting experience in radio and television. He is currently based in New York promoting his best-selling book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com.

Martin comments on regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York.

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.
MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639 or CELL (917) 664-9329
E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com [NOTE: We frequently correct typographical errors and additions/subtractions on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this release.] © Copyright by Andy Martin 2009.

Corruption fighter Andy Martin says the State of Illinois should file for bankruptcy

One day after Rod Blagojevich was removed, it’s corruption-as-usual in Illinois: Andy Martin says Governor Pat Quinn’s “reform governorship” lasted 18 hours. Quinn has begun efforts to entrench himself by seeking to manipulate the election calendar. Bankruptcy is Illinois’ only solution says, Martin.


Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin says the State of Illinois should declare bankruptcy

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

ILLINOIS CORRUPTION FIGHTER ANDY MARTIN SAYS GOVERNOR PAT QUINN IS BACK TO SUPPORTING “SMALL BORE” ISSUES AND SEEKING TO BENEFIT HIMSELF POLITICALLY

MARTIN SAYS QUINN SHOULD CONVENE THE LEGISLATURE, SEEK APPROVAL FOR FEDERAL BANKRUPTCY, AND FILE A PETITION TO ADJUST ILLINOIS’ ASSETS AND LIABILITIES


(CHICAGO)(January 30, 2009) Back in the 1970’s and 80’s, Pat Quinn focused on "small bore” issues. His biggest “victory” was a disaster for the state. Quinn eliminated cumulative voting, a system that helped create statewide parties and had produced most of the distinguished members of the legislature. Ever since Quinn “won,” the people have been losing. Mediocrity reigns supreme in Springfield.

Quinn’s “reform governorship” lasted all of 18 hours. Today he proposed moving the primary election date to September, 2010 to “shorten” the election season, as though moving dates on a calendar can control political activity. Quinn was engaging in a blatant maneuver to benefit himself personally, and nothing more, by trying to manipulate the primary election date.

So what should Quinn do? He should bite the bullet and seek legislative approval to place the State of Illinois in federal bankruptcy court.

Illinoisans are living in a daydream. Politicians promise they can somehow some day make up the deficit in their public accounts, which runs to almost $100 billion with pensions figured it. Yah, sure. It can’t happen. The State of Illinois is the functional equivalent of an automobile manufacturer, without the wheels. The government has an unsustainable model. Illinois can never tax its way out from under the mountain of debt that was created over the decades by lax management and labor unions. The debt created by Daley machine corruption and greed will not disappear. The state’s unfunded liabilities are getting bigger, not smaller, every day.

Bankruptcy would allow the court to balance assets with liabilities and provide realistic pension benefits going forward. Bankruptcy would also be the best way to avoid state tax increases. Bankruptcy would demand that a full and complete accounting be prepared.

Public employees, of course, will howl. Outrageous looting of pension funds and “double dipping” predators such as Senator Carol Ronen would be abolished. http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2008/05/the-porcine-pen.html

If Quinn does file and achieve a successful result, the City of Chicago and Cook County will soon have to follow. They are also bankrupt, which is why Richie Daley is selling off roads, parking lots and airports to pay the light bills. How long are people going to labor under 10.25% sales tax before they move out?

Rod Blagojevich was removed so the Daley Machine could raise state taxes. How is Quinn going to fight tax increases when he knows the state is bankrupt and raising taxes will create a vortex of death for the state’s finances?

The new governor should call the politicians’ bluff, and march the state into bankruptcy court. All of the game playing and evasion and prevarication would end once the state’s finances were under the supervision of a federal judge.

Federal supervision can be successful. Federal courts have supervised state prison systems, school districts and the like. Why not an entire state that has promised more than it can afford to pay?

If Quinn has the “testicular virility” (where have I heard that before) to bite the bullet and file for bankruptcy, he will leave behind his past history of small bore issues and start acting like a leader.
--------------------------------------------
Readers of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, say the book is still the only gold standard and practical handbook on Barack Obama's unfitness for the presidency. Buy it.
Book orders: www.Amazon.com or www.OrangeStatePress.com. Immediate shipment from Amazon.com or signed copies (delayed for signing) from the publisher are available.
---------------------------------------------
URGENT APPEAL: The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama is raising money to oppose President-elect Barack Obama.
http://CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com.
Please give generously. Our ability to fight and defeat Barack Obama is directly dependent on the generosity of every American.
“The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama has no bundlers, fat cats or illegal contributions. Obama is opposed to everything America stands for," says Executive Director Andy Martin. "But while Obama has raised almost a billion dollars, and is continuing to raise money, his opponents have raised virtually nothing. Americans can either contribute now, or pay later. If we do not succeed, Obama will."
E-mail: contact@CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com
---------------------------------------------
Andy Martin is a legendary Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of broadcasting experience in radio and television. He is currently based in New York promoting his best-selling book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com.

Martin comments on regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York.

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.
MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639 or CELL (917) 664-9329
E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com [NOTE: We frequently correct typographical errors and additions/subtractions on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this release.]
© Copyright by Andy Martin 2009.

Andy Martin says 2010 will be a challenging year for Illinois Republicans

Martin says the fall of Governor Rod Blagojevich challenges both parties. The hard work of reform really begins. Both Republicans and Democrats will feel the impact of the Blagojevich void. Andy extends congratulations to newly-installed Governor Pat Quinn.

Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin says Governor Pat Quinn will be a challenge for Illinois Republicans

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

ILLINOIS CORRUPTION FIGHTER ANDY MARTIN SAYS REPUBLICANS SHOULD NOT BECOME COMPLACENT NOW THAT ROD BLAGOJEVICH IS GONE

BEST WISHES, AS WELL, TO GOVERNOR PAT QUINN: HOW WILL HE DEAL WITH THE DALEY MACHINE?

(CHICAGO)(January 29, 2009) Republican senators disagreed with my views on how to deal with Governor Rod Blagojevich. I respect their decision. Blago’s history.

Best wishes as well to Governor Pat Quinn. Pat and I were both active in fighting Illinois corruption in the 1970’s. Quinn hasn’t been elected Governor yet, but he did make it to the Governor’s office. Congratulations. It’s a great accomplishment, even under sad circumstances for the state.

Now the hard work begins.

As long as Blagojevich was in control, Republicans had an easy road to 2010. With Quinn in power, the challenges have become greater and the race to replace Quinn more competitive.

Likewise for Quinn, the job suddenly gets more difficult. As long as Blago was taking the heat, Illinoisans could sit on the sidelines. With Blago gone, the Chicago Tribune has correctly editorialized that the job of reforming this state lands on everyone’s plate.

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/vox_pop/2009/01/how-will-the-rest-of-us-vote.html

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0130edit2jan30,0,4653002.story

I remember when Governor Dan Walker was elected in 1972. People said reform would sweep across the state. Walker was gone after one term. Walker was never able to dent the Daley Machine’s power in Chicago or Springfield. Today “Daley The Younger” exercises the same asphyxiating influence on Illinois politics. Who will lead the charge? Can any Democrat stand up to Daley? Certainly not Lisa Madigan.

In 1955, Chicago Alderman Paddy Bauler said “Chicago ain’t ready for reform.” Fifty years later, the Democrats still remain corrupt and entrenched.

What about the Republicans? It is my belief that as long as Andy McKenna is in control of the party machinery, Illinois Republicans are dead in the water. “Poor little rich boy” McKenna works for his father, who helps fund the Daley Machine.
If anyone sincerely believes Andy McKenna is capable of change, by all means send me an e-mail; I’d love to hear what you have to say. All I have seen from McKenna is corruption, sleaze and incompetence. McKenna likes to posture, but he can’t produce. He doesn’t know how.

Is the Republican Party ready to reform itself, and lead a reform movement in Illinois? I have serious doubts.

And so 2010 is shaping up as a really, really interesting year in Illinois politics. Both parties are going to go through upheavals. The Democrats will face a “lock” on the U. S. Senate seat, as African-Americans seek to demonize anyone who challenges Roland Burris. The Democratic gubernatorial primary will likely become a free-for-all.

Peoples’ memories being what they are, Blagojevich may be ancient history in a year. Maybe not. We’ll see. Talk is cheap; reform is costly.

As for the Republicans, the gubernatorial primary will also be a free-for-all. Likewise, the U.S. Senate primary (where I am likely to land in a few weeks) will be a pitched battle.

All of this political combat will play out on a national political scene where things could be getting worse, a lot worse, possibly even ugly. If the economy continues to slip, voters will become impatient with Mr. Obama. Very impatient, very fast. Foreign policy? It’s Scary.

No one can predict the future. Thirty years ago, Pat Quinn was a nuisance in the Democratic Party. Today he’s the governor.

Governor Blagojevich? Good by. Governor Quinn? Welcome aboard. Republicans? Roll up your sleeves and get to work. The future beckons.

ContrarianCommentary.com is here to break the stories the sleepy Chicago media ignore, to interpret the news with an independent point of view and, occasionally, to step into the arena and launch a personal challenge to the status quo in both parties. We landed on the front page of the New York Times because we tackle the big guys, fearlessly and ferociously.

I’ve been fighting corruption in Illinois for over forty years.

And I’ve just begun to fight.
--------------------------------------------
Readers of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, say the book is still the only gold standard and practical handbook on Barack Obama's unfitness for the presidency. Buy it.
Book orders: www.Amazon.com or www.OrangeStatePress.com. Immediate shipment from Amazon.com or signed copies (delayed for signing) from the publisher are available.
---------------------------------------------
URGENT APPEAL: The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama is raising money to oppose President-elect Barack Obama.
http://CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com.
Please give generously. Our ability to fight and defeat Barack Obama is directly dependent on the generosity of every American.
“The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama has no bundlers, fat cats or illegal contributions. Obama is opposed to everything America stands for," says Executive Director Andy Martin. "But while Obama has raised almost a billion dollars, and is continuing to raise money, his opponents have raised virtually nothing. Americans can either contribute now, or pay later. If we do not succeed, Obama will."
E-mail: contact@CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com
---------------------------------------------
Andy Martin is a legendary Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of broadcasting experience in radio and television. He is currently based in New York promoting his best-selling book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com.

Martin comments on regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York.

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.
MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639 or CELL (917) 664-9329
E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com [NOTE: We frequently correct typographical errors and additions/subtractions on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this release.]
© Copyright by Andy Martin 2009.

Corruption fighter Andy Martin says Republicans should keep Illinois’ governor in office

Republican state senators should not vote to remove Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. Illinois corruption fighter Andy Martin says if Blagojevich is removed, the Daley Machine will raise taxes. “We have a conflict between two corrupt wings of the Democratic Party,” says Martin. “Blago is the lesser of two evils. If you love the 10.25 sales tax in Chicago, you’ll love usurper governor Pat Quinn.”


Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin says Illinois Republicans should not vote to remove Governor Rod Blagojevich

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

ILLINOIS CORRUPTION FIGHTER ANDY MARTIN SAYS REPUBLICANS SHOULD LET DEMOCRATS DEAL WITH BLAGOJEVICH

IS BLAGO FOLLOWING ANDY MARTIN’S PLAYBOOK, AGAIN?

IS ILLINOIS REPUBLICAN LEADER ANDY MCKENNA A DALEY MACHINE “DOLL?”

(CHICAGO)(January 29, 2009) I can’t say for sure, but Governor Rod Blagojevich must be a reader of ContrarianCommentary.Com. After we announced yesterday we were filing suit for permission to present a defense on his behalf, Blago decided to appear and present a defense. Earlier, we outlined a strategy for him to appoint a replacement U. S. senator. Blago soon started following out playbook. Whether Blago listens to us, or not, today we are preaching to Illinois Republican Senators: Don’t vote to remove Blagojevich.

Illinois Republicans’ own Sasha and Malia doll, Daley machine dupe Andy McKenna, has been trying to raise his own profile by demanding the removal of Blagojevich. Maybe McKenna wants people to forget how he and other Republican leaders promised State Treasurer Judy Topinka a pot of campaign cash to run against Blagojevich if Topinka won the 2006 primary. Topinka eaked out a victory, but McKenna's millions were directed to subsidizing the Daley machine, not his own party. Topinka lost.

There are a number of obvious reasons why McKenna strategy is going to damage the Republican Party if state senators cast the deciding vote to remove Blago.

First, Democrats can’t remove Blago without Republican votes. So a Republican is going to be the one that casts the decisive vote to remove the governor. Democrats created Blago-the-monster; let them live with their own Frankenstein creation for another two years.

Second, although Blago may be a fool, he is not a complete fool. He has sought to curb the insatiable appetite of the Daley Machine for higher taxes. Republicans should remember Cook County, where we now have a 10.25% sales tax. During Blago’s years, there have not been any statewide tax increases.

If Blago goes, statewide taxes are going to skyrocket. And fast. Taxes are going up with Blago gone for a couple of reasons: Daley wants money to bail out his failed kingdom in Chicago. He can’t squeeze any more out of local taxes, so he wants more state revenue. Blago stands in the way. That is the real reason Blago is being impeached.

Democrats will also raise taxes to discredit the usurper governor Pat Quinn. State House Speaker Michael Madigan wants Quinn out of the way, and Daley will no doubt have his own McKenna-backed stooge for governor. When Daley and Madigan line up, Quinn’s toast.

What better way for low-profile legislators to discredit the interim governor than to stick Quinn with a massive tax increase? No better way. So taxes are going up to feed the Daley-McKenna demand for more revenues, and also to remove Quinn as a credible candidate for reelection. Republican party Chairman Andy McKenna is toeing the Daley Machine party line all the way. That’s why I call McKenna a Daley “doll.”

Mr. Quinn may have his Bible at hand, ready to be sworn in today or tomorrow, but his victory will be Pyrrhic one; Democrats will use him to raise statewide taxes, and then discard him like a used hanky.

So why would Republicans follow a strategy that is going to raise taxes and hurt them at the polls in 2010?

If Blago is not removed, the state will still function within approximately the current revenue stream and expenditure pattern. Not great, but probably better than anything to come after his removal. Quinn is already scheming to rouge up the Democrats as the party of “reform.” The supine Chicago media will buy Quinn’s canard the same way they swallowed-up Blago’s nonsense six years ago.

The odor of hypocrisy in the Illinois General Assembly is asphyxiating. Blago is being impeached for behavior that was the topic of debate in the 2006 election. How can the voters’ judgment on these issues be undone by impeachment, when Daley-McKenna lost at the polls? How?

Again, Blago may be a fool, but he is not a complete fool. His claim that he is being retroactively impeached for matters that were endorsed-at-the-time by state senators is 100% correct. His claim that voters reelected him after being fully apprised of the very misconduct that is now being voted on as “impeachable offenses” is also true. Daley lost control of Blagojevich, giving Daley an incentive to undo the 2006 gubernatorial election. McKenna & Co. betrayed Topinka who was the sacrificial lamb for Blago’s reelection. Now they both want to impeach the governor because the voters agreed with Blago and not with the Daley or the McKennacrats. Talk about being two-faced.

The worst thing Republican senators can do is vote to remove Blago. They will seal their doom in the 2010 election, and every Illinoisan will pay the price in higher taxes.

Andy McKenna? Republicans have lost every election since he took over. McKenna’s father and Andy, Jr./III are spouting the Daley Machine line.

And now you know why Illinois is such a crooked state. Blago may be clinically insane, but he fits in perfectly with the insanely corrupt bipartisan political culture of the state. Once Blago was crazy like a fox. Today he is the fox.

Republican senators should let that Democratic fox roam in the forest until after the 2010 election.

I’m no supporter of Rod Blagojevich. But I am practical enough to see a contest between two competing spheres of corruption, Blago and the Daley Machine. I choose Blago as the lesser evil. Keeping Blago in office will keep Daley and the Democrats off balance and ensure a fairer 2010 gubernatorial election.

Higher taxes, anyone? 10.25% sales tax isn’t high enough? You ain’t seen nuttin’ yet if Blago goes.

Impeachment feels “real good” today. It won’t feel so good when Daley starts taxing Illinoisans to death. Can’t say you weren’t warned.
--------------------------------------------
Readers of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, say the book is still the only gold standard and practical handbook on Barack Obama's unfitness for the presidency. Buy it.
Book orders: www.Amazon.com or www.OrangeStatePress.com. Immediate shipment from Amazon.com or signed copies (delayed for signing) from the publisher are available.
---------------------------------------------
URGENT APPEAL: The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama is raising money to oppose President-elect Barack Obama.
http://CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com.
Please give generously. Our ability to fight and defeat Barack Obama is directly dependent on the generosity of every American.
“The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama has no bundlers, fat cats or illegal contributions. Obama is opposed to everything America stands for," says Executive Director Andy Martin. "But while Obama has raised almost a billion dollars, and is continuing to raise money, his opponents have raised virtually nothing. Americans can either contribute now, or pay later. If we do not succeed, Obama will."
E-mail: contact@CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com
---------------------------------------------
Andy Martin is a legendary Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of broadcasting experience in radio and television. He is currently based in New York promoting his best-selling book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com.

Martin comments on regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York.

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.
MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639 or CELL (917) 664-9329
E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com [NOTE: We frequently correct typographical errors and additions/subtractions on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this release.]
© Copyright by Andy Martin 2009.

Internet Powerhouse/Law professor Andy Martin files federal civil rights lawsuit to block impeachment of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich


Law professor Andy Martin says U. S. Constitution applies to Illinois impeachment proceedings. Martin says Illinois legislators are conducting a corrupt, kangaroo court trial that is going to boomerang on the state. “America’s capital of corruption is running true to form,” Martin says. “Asking crooked Daley Machine politicians to cast an honest vote on impeachment is a travesty of justice.”


Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin files civil rights lawsuit to block Illinois impeachment proceedings
ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

ILLINOIS CORRUPTION FIGHTER ANDY MARTIN SAYS THE IMPEACHMENT PROCEDURES BEING USED AGAINST GOVERNOR ROD BLAGOJEVICH ARE A FARCE AND A REPLICA OF 1930’S SOVIET “SHOW TRIALS”

LAW PROFESSOR ANDY MARTIN SAYS “ENOUGH” AS ILLINOIS OFFICIALS IGNORE THEIR OWN CORRUPTION AND ATTACK GOVERNOR ROD BLAGOJEVICH FOR HIS CORRUPTION, ADDING A NEW TIER OF DISHONESTY TO STATE GOVERNMENT, TAINTED IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS

(CHICAGO)(January 28, 2009) Internet Powerhouse and Illinois corruption-fighter Andy Martin will file suit Thursday to block impeachment proceedings against Governor Rod Blagojevich.

“Throughout history, unpopular defendants have created a public mood for revenge. What is going on in Springfield today is a crude replica of the 1930’s Soviet show trials. Rod Blagojevich is a public official all of us would like to dismiss. His actions are unusual to say the least. But in a rush to destroy Blagojevich, corrupt Illinois politicians are also destroying the Office of Governor. The consequences of a tainted Blagojevich removal will shadow Illinois state government for decades.

“It is also true, and history reflects, that ‘bad people’ often have ‘good cases.’ Important legal principles have been forged in the crucible of events created by loathsome individuals. Blagojevich may justifiably be a bad person in the eyes of the public, and in the eyes of his adversaries in Illinois. But his opponents are destroying the Governor’s Office to get at Blagojevich. Illinoisans are entitled to impeachment proceedings that are more than a sham and show trial. Rod Blagojevich has a ‘good case’ when he says his rights are being violated.

“Finally, it often falls to unconventional defenders to stand up for what is right in constitutional adjudication. For over forty years I have been fighting Illinois corruption. I am not defending any of Blagojevich’s questionable actions. But I am fully prepared to challenge the process by which he is being accused and convicted.

“I am at stage in my life where truth matters more than power. For some reason, as a young law student I had the temerity to stand with people who sought to remove two corrupt Illinois Supreme Court justices. We won; and I paid the price for my integrity. The Supreme Court attacked me for helping expose the crooked judges. I am prepared to fight again for the interests of the People of Illinois against the onslaught of craven politicians who seek personal power at the peril of destroying our institutions. Defending the Illinois Constitution was a great honor in 1969; it is an equally unexpected honor in 2009.

“I believe the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is also being compromised. The Constitution puts a judge in control of impeachment proceedings so that a justice should be there to act as a judge, not as a potted plant. Justice Fitzgerald has been supine in the face of contemptible abuses of power by Daley Machine hacks who seek to exploit a questionable arrest to hound a governor from office. I am asking that the Chief Justice stand up for the Constitution, and stand down from appearing to endorse proceedings that are a scandalous perversion of due process.

“I am available to be in Springfield Monday, February 2nd to begin the defense of the Office of Illinois Governor. If Governor Blagojevich benefits from my efforts to undo the mess he created, so be it. I propose to represent the Constitution, not a temporary holder of what we pray will be an enduing public trust. I believe it is an overriding constitutional imperative that the current impeachment proceedings not be decided by default.

“Even if Pat Quinn attempts to seize power, his usurpation of office and the legislature’s abuses would be subject to a writ of quo warranto. Illinois’ finances could be tied up for years with legitimate questions about the legality of the impeachment proceedings. Why not just do it right the first time?” Martin states. “Only proceedings conducted in accordance with due process will enjoy public support and ultimate endorsement of the judicial process.”

Martin’s lawsuit seeks to allow him to block Blagojevich’s removal from office, and names Chief Justice Thomas Fitzgerald, Illinois Senate President John Cullerton, and Lt. Governor Patrick Quinn as defendants.

The case is being filed in Sangamon County Circuit Court. Martin’s papers are being sent by overnight delivery to Springfield.

Martin was a Republican Party candidate for Governor in the 2006 primary election.

Martin’s lawsuit and exhibits will be available shortly on the Internet.
--------------------------------------------
Readers of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, say the book is still the only gold standard and practical handbook on Barack Obama's unfitness for the presidency. Buy it.
Book orders: www.Amazon.com or www.OrangeStatePress.com. Immediate shipment from Amazon.com or signed copies (delayed for signing) from the publisher are available.
---------------------------------------------
URGENT APPEAL: The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama is raising money to oppose President-elect Barack Obama.
http://CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com.
Please give generously. Our ability to fight and defeat Barack Obama is directly dependent on the generosity of every American.
“The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama has no bundlers, fat cats or illegal contributions. Obama is opposed to everything America stands for," says Executive Director Andy Martin. "But while Obama has raised almost a billion dollars, and is continuing to raise money, his opponents have raised virtually nothing. Americans can either contribute now, or pay later. If we do not succeed, Obama will."
E-mail: contact@CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com
---------------------------------------------
Andy Martin is a legendary Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of broadcasting experience in radio and television. He is currently based in New York promoting his best-selling book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com.

Martin comments on regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York.

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.
MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639 or CELL (917) 664-9329
E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com [NOTE: We frequently correct typographical errors and additions/subtractions on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this release.]
© Copyright by Andy Martin 2009.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT
FOR THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF ILLINOIS
SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS


IN CHANCERY

CASE NO. ________________


ANDY MARTIN,

Plaintiff,

vs.

HON THOMAS FITZGERALD,
in his official capacity as
Presiding Judge of the
gubernatorial impeachment,
HON. JOHN J. CULLERTON, in
his official capacity as
President of the Senate,
HON. PATRICK QUINN,
Lieutenant Governor
of Illinois

Defendants.


COMPLAINT IN CHANCERY FOR DECLARATORY
AND INJUNCTIVE FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS RELIEF


1. Jurisdiction and venue
a. This court has federal civil rights jurisdiction of the controversy, 42 U. S.C. § 1983. State courts have a mandate to enforce federal constitutional rights, see Howlett v. Rose, 496 U.S. 356, 110 S. Ct. 2430 (1990), Van Meter v. Darien Park District, 207 Ill.2d 359, 799 N.E.2d 273, 289 (Ill. 2003). When acting pursuant to § 1983, state nisi prius courts are vested with the full enforcement powers of the United States Constitution, despite conflicting state law mandates, Howlett, supra.
b. Substantially all of the operative activity of the defendants concerning the facts of this lawsuit is centered in Sangamon County.
2. The parties
a. Plaintiff Andy Martin is a world-respected corruption-fighter, Internet publisher and columnist, see e.g. www.ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com. www.ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com, ContrarianCommentary.com.
b. Forty years ago, as a young law student at the University of Illinois, Plaintiff participated in helping expose the Klingbiel-Solfisburg bank stock scandal on the Illinois Supreme Court. Since then, Plaintiff has been a corruption fighter who specializes in judicial and political abuses, see www.AndyMartin.com.
c. Since December 2008, Plaintiff has viewed with increasing concern the lynch mob atmosphere created around the Office of Governor of Illinois.
d. The Hon. Thomas Fitzgerald is sued solely in his official capacity in his constitutional role as presiding judge at the impeachment trial of Governor Rod Blagojevich (“Blagojevich”).
e. Senator John J. Cullerton is sued solely in his official capacity as President of the Illinois S enate for any role he has at the impeachment trial of Governor Rod Blagojevich.
f. The Hon. Patrick Quinn is the Lieutenant Governor of Illinois; he would succeed to the Office of Governor if the currently unlawful impeachment proceedings were to reach fruition.
3. Factual allegations
a. Plaintiff believes that the impeachment proceedings involving Blagojevich reflect blatant corruption and conflicts of interest on the part of Governor Blagojevich’s own accusers. The orchestrator of the articles of impeachment, Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, is openly known as someone with a direct conflict of interest because of his efforts to advance the career of his daughter, Attorney General Lisa Madigan.
b. Even in the nebulous area of impeachment, the
Governor is entitled to have the charges against him procured through a process that is free of the taint of conflict of interest and corruption, and which reflects action by public officials who are acting impartially. The pending impeachment articles, orchestrated by a political opponent and promoter of alternative public officials, do not meet that threshold standard.
c. Although Governor Blagojevich was arrested in December on the basis of a vacuous claim that he tried to “sell” a U.S. Senate seat, federal prosecutors have candidly admitted in court that they lack sufficient evidence at this time to procure a grand jury indictment on that claim.
A. The term “sale” itself is misleading and
deceptive. There is little evidence that Blagojevich, in filling a U. S. Senate vacancy, did anything more than engage in the traditional forms of “logrolling” and mutual back-scratching that are ingrained in every state and the national capital.
B. The fact that federal prosecutors have been
unable to obtain an indictment for the alleged “sale” over one month after Blagojevich’s arrest attests to the opacity of the incidents in question. Blagojevich’s regrettable use of profanity and vulgarity do not transform political manipulation into criminal activity.
d. The members of the State House, and respondent State Senate (Cullerton) have rigged the impeachment trial so as to prevent the Governor from proffering a meaningful defense to the charges contained in the arrest allegations. Blagojevich has been forced into a “sentence first, verdict afterward” box. Although he has not yet been formally charged by federal indictment, the legislature has taken as true the claims contained in his arrest warrant and prevented him from defending against those accusations because such a “defense” might “prejudice” a future indictment. This is a classic example of putting the cart before the horse.
e. While legislators supervise the impeachment process, Illinois residents also have an independent right to due process, to ensure that the appearance of fairness and impartiality is maintained in the removal of any elected official. It is clear that Blagojevich would not have been impeached but for the federal “arrest.” Yet under current impeachment “Rules,” where the arrest accusations are being taken as true, he is unable to defend against the very charges contained in the arrest warrant that triggered his impeachment. That is a mockery of due process, or as a more modern critic might describe the Governor’s dilemma, a “Catch-22.”.
f. Likewise, as Senator Rickey Hendon has stated, Blagojevich is being impeached for matters in which state senators themselves participated and urged him to proceed, http://www.suntimes.com/news/brown/1398761,CST-NWS-brown27.article.
g. How can the same state senators who urged him to act in the past now be impartial in judging the Governor, by sitting in judgment on what have retroactively been recharacterized as “impeachable acts?” Merely to pose the question is to demonstrate how completely hypocritical the current proceedings are.
h. Plaintiff contacted Chief Justice Fitzgerald and stated that if Blagojevich would not tender a defense, a defense should be tendered on behalf of the Office of Governor. The corrupt and politically motivated removal of a twice-elected state official would undermine the Office of Governor itself. The Governor has a right not to appear, but he does not have a right to forfeit a defense on behalf of the Office itself.
i. Plaintiff does not claim to represent Blagojevich personally; rather, Plaintiff seeks to defend the Illinois Constitution and the Office of Governor by raising defenses in the impeachment proceedings that are obvious and potentially dispositive of the current charade. These defenses should not be forfeited merely because the Governor has chosen not to participate in his own defense.
j. As Plaintiff stated to Chief Justice Fitzgerald, there is a growing body of law concerning “defaults" by defendants, and the necessity to present defenses even in the absence of the wishes of the defendant, see e.g. attached Exhibit A, Davis v. Grant, 532 F.3rd 132 (2d Cir. 2008).
k. Plaintiff tendered a Motion for Leave to Appear, addressed to the presiding officer of the impeachment trial, Exhibit B, as well as a proposed draft order, Exhibit C.
l. Plaintiff was and remains willing, ready and able to tender a defense at the impeachment trial on behalf of the Office of Governor.
m. On January 26th, respondent Fitzgerald inquired in open court (the impeachment trial) whether there was anyone present to defend the Governor, and then concealed the fact that a motion seeking such relief had been submitted to him by Plaintiff and was pending. The legerdemain that there was no defense for the Governor was a misrepresentation to both the Senate (Cullerton) and the Citizens of Illinois. The presiding judge should have disclosed that efforts were being made to tender a defense, and that the justice himself was concealing and frustrating those efforts by refusing to rule on them, so as to prevent judicial review of any denial thereof.
o. The complete denial of due process reached a crescendo on January 27th with the playing of “tapes” that were edited by prosecutors.
A. Allowing one side to a controversy to “edit”
what the other side and the public will hear of the conflicting evidence is a travesty of due process and an assault on both the federal and state constitutions.
B. Not even the looser rules of impeachment allow
doctored and self-serving evidence to be used to convict a public official by preventing that official from tendering a full and complete response to edited tapes. One of the most ancient evidentiary doctrines is that a decision-maker should receive into evidence full and complete, and original, copies of evidence, not evidence which has been self-servingly redacted by an interested party.
C. Blagojevich’s rights are being violated twice,
both by prejudicing the impeachment court and by prejudicing any future criminal proceeding.
4. Legal claim
a. Although the members of the General Assembly have sought to portray the area of impeachment as uncharted legal territory, the United States Constitution undoubtedly applies and bars precipitous removal of state officials through impeachment procedures that violate federal constitutional due process.
b. The procedures being orchestrated by the defendants and members of the General Assembly are little more than a sham, intended to (i) benefit some politicians and injure others, and (ii) weaken the office of Governor of Illinois, all while falsely claiming to be acting in the "public" interest.
c. Illinois citizens have a right to a process which not only appears to be fair, but which is fair, In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 75 S. Ct. 623 (1955). Wheat v. U.S., 486 U.S. 153, 108 S. Ct. 1692 (1988).
d. If Blagojevich will not stand up to defend the Office of Governor, Plaintiff as a "private attorney general” is entitled to do so to defend the office of Governor and the Illinois Constitution from the predatory behavior of members of the General Assembly, Kinkel v. Cingular Wireless, 223 Ill.2d 1, 857 N.E.2d 250, 276 (Ill. 2006). The current impeachment fiasco involves questions and issues far more critical than the future of a single eccentric incumbent public official.
e. Any assumption of the Office of Governor by defendant Quinn, if accomplished through the currently contemplated procedures which violate the United States Constitution, would be null and void as a violation of due process, cf. Dynes v. Hoover, 61 U.S. 65 (1858).
5. Demand for judgment
a. Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment directing the defendants to rule on Plaintiff’s pending Motion for Leave.
b. Plaintiff seeks any and all equitable relief to which he may be entitled, including a declaratory judgment that he is entitled to appear and tender a defense on behalf of the Office of Governor in the current impeachment proceedings.
c. Plaintiff seeks a declaratory ruling that Justice Fitzgerald's statement in open court that no one was willing to appear and defend the Office of Governor was objectively false in light of Plaintiff’s pending motion.
d. Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief barring defendant Quinn from assuming the Office of Governor unless and until all federal constitutional challenges to the underlying impeachment proceedings have been finally adjudicated. A preliminary injunction may be sought to protect the status quo.

DATED: January 27, 2009

Respectfully submitted,

ANDY MARTIN
NATIONAL LITIGATION CENTER
P. O. Box 1851
New York, NY 10150-1851
Toll-free tel. (866) 706-2639
Toll-free fax (866) 707-2639
E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com (text only)

ADDITIONAL COURTESY COPY REQUESTED TO:
ANDY MARTIN
REGIONAL LITIGATION SUPPORT
30 E. Huron Street, Suite 4406
Chicago, IL 60611-4723

SERVICE OF NOTICES IS RESPECTFULLY
REQUESTED BY FAX OR E-MAIL

Additional e-mail address available
upon request

The impeachment trial of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is sham, says Internet powerhouse and former law professor Andy Martin

Andy Martin says that Governor Blagojevich’s opponents are just as corrupt and unethical as he is. Martin says the Soviet-style “show trial” in Springfield, Illinois is likely to backfire on its orchestrators, the same way that the impeachment efforts against President Bill Clinton discredited its proponents.


Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin says Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is being lynched by unethical politicians and prosecutors
ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

ILLINOIS CORRUPTION FIGHTER ANDY MARTIN SAYS THE IMPEACHMENT PROCEDURES BEING USED AGAINST GOVERNOR ROD BLAGOJEVICH ARE A JOKE

FEDERAL PROSECUTORS HAVE BECOME AS CORRUPT AS THE GOVERNOR, AND MAY INADVERTENTLY HELP BLAGO ESCAPE CRIMINAL LIABILITY

SPEAKING AS A LAW PROFESSOR, MARTIN SAYS “FOR ONCE, BLAGOJEVICH IS TELLING THE TRUTH; LIKE THE CASE OF THE BOY THAT CRIED WOLF, THE MEDIA HAVE STOPPED LISTENING.”

(CHICAGO)(January 26, 2009) I am not an admirer of Governor Rod Blagojevich (“Blago”). I am certainly not a supporter. But Blago is telling the truth when he says he is being lynched by corrupt legislators and prosecutors.

The media doesn’t want to hear about Blagojevich’s lynching, because they dislike the man. Prosecutors always love pursuing unpopular defendants because it makes their job easier. But for anyone concerned by the lack of ethical government in Illinois, I can assure you ethical violations are no more acceptable when they are committed by federal prosecutors than they are when committed by sleazy minions of the Daley Machine.

Here’s why Blago’s complaints have merit and why the legislature’s procedures are wrong:

First, if you assume that Blago will someday be lawfully and legitimately accused of some unspecified federal crime, even though there has been no indictment to date, how can prosecutors be allowed—with a judge's-permission—to pick and choose damaging snippets from hundreds of hours of tapes to smear their potential adversary and prospective criminal defendant? It violates every principle of due process.

The legislature fell into a trap set by the U. S. Attorney’s office when it agreed to rig the federal evidence against Blago. No prosecutor should try to limit and manipulate evidence so as to prevent the vigorous defense of an impeachment accusation. But that’s what legislators admit they are allowing federal officials to do. It's grossly wrong.

Second, if Blago did commit a “crime,” which I continue to doubt in so far as the “sale of the senate seat is concerned,” the prosecutors may have damaged their case if and when they get around to filing one. “If and when,” because despite all of the sound and fury convicting Blago in the media, he has not yet even been accused in the criminal justice process. Sentence first? Verdict afterward? That’s Illinois justice?

I suggested to federal Chief Judge Holderman that his authorization to release edited tapes could backfire on the federal government. I am now virtually certain that the manipulated tapes may ultimately allow Blago to escape justice, not face justice. Imagine for a moment that you are a potential defendant in a federal criminal case. Before you are even formally accused of any crime, federal prosecutors start leaking “evidence” to state officials to smear you. You are prevented from defending yourself against this self-serving “evidence” by the very people who are planning to prosecute you. That’s justice? That’s a circus.

Because the U. S. Attorney’s office was the source of prejudicial pretrial publicity could mandate the dismissal of any future indictment against Blago.

The usually reasonable Carol Marin calls Blago’s protests “poppycock." She’s completely wrong.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/blagojevich/1395210,CST-EDT-carol25.article

The way federal officials have proceeded against Blago is poppycock. They arrested him and created a media circus at a time when by their own admission they lacked sufficient evidence to file criminal charges. Now they want to destroy him politically before they even seek an indictment. Abuse of federal power? Mr. Fitzgerald, you are violating the U. S. Constitution; the halo conferred on you by the media will be irreparably tarnished in due course. What your office is doing is wrong, wrong, wrong.

If prosecutors have solid evidence on Blago, by all means charge him with a crime, hold a trial, let him present a defense and remove him from office if he is convicted of criminal activity. What would have happened if former Governor Ryan had been v“convicted” in the media and convicted by the legislature before he was even charged with a crime? People would have been saying he was being railroaded.

Blago is being railroaded, and no one cares because of his antics. The impeachment charges against Blago are strictly small bore. Without the federal arrest he would not have been impeached (to avoid confusion I will explain the difference between an “arrest” and indictment: an arrest can be made on the basis of suspicion of a crime; an indictment is a formal criminal accusation). So much for the “case” against a man who was twice elected.

Constitutional scholars, however, must deal in due process of law. Due process often slows down a “process,” and mandates that proceedings unfold in proper sequence. Patrick Fitzgerald created a firestorm of anti-Blago publicity in December and engineered the pretext for Blago’s removal from office before Fitzgerald himself even had a basis to file any charges. That is disgraceful behavior.

As odious as I find Blagojevich (and I have sued him several times for abuse of his gubernatorial power), I find his enemies have now become even more odious. Blago has never pretended to be acting in anything but his own self-interest. His opponents, legislators and prosecutors, claim to be acting in the public interest. In reality they are violating the public interest. Their behavior is just as craven and self-interested as Blago’s. For shame. Last month Attorney General Lisa Madigan jumped on the anti-Blago publicity bandwagon. She was slapped down by the Illinois Supreme Court and has not been heard from since.

Carol Marin, the Chicago Sun-Times and Chicago Tribune are defending a lynching because the defendant/victim is unpopular and obnoxious. Media mendacity makes a joke of our constitutional protections. The Constitution is not there to protect “good” people; it is there to protect “bad” people who may be intensely unpopular.

Historically, a “lynching” was a situation where someone suspected but not convicted of a crime became the victim of self-help justice by local vigilantes. That is what is happening to Blago. Here we have the father of a prospective future governor, Speaker Madigan, orchestrating the removal of the incumbent from office to create a clear path for his daughter, General Madigan. The appearance of justice and impartiality? Are Madigans any less corrupt that Blagos? Come on.

Having first “defended” Blago’s protestations, I can also say he has proffered a miserable and incompetent response to the legislature. He used criminal lawyers to defend against what is a political attack. Not surprisingly, the criminal lawyers were ineffective in the impeachment theater.

The circus/farce in the Illinois Senate is going to boomerang on its very perpetrators. The Office of Governor is going to be diminished by the lynching party (candidates are you listening?). The Illinois Senate has rules that allow “evidence” to be received as “truthful,” but for which no direct challenge may be directed at the same evidence. That is justice? Conviction first? Evidence never? The senate’s procedures are a joke.

Some people have defended the anti-Blago lynching by claiming the process is similar to that employed by Republicans against President Bill Clinton. Putting aside that the Clinton impeachment backfired, and boomeranged on its most egregious supporters, Democrats then were saying the process was rigged and crooked. How did what was wrong then become right now? Hypocrisy anyone?

In a letter to Chief Justice (not federal prosecutor) Fitzgerald I have suggested that he is also endangering his own constitutional role by participating in a mockery of justice. The “special prosecutor” of the impeachment case, and the state senators, cannot be allowed to control the introduction of evidence or to prejudice the governor’s right to vigorously challenge all of the evidence against him. The current “rules” are a joke.

Why does the Illinois Constitution specifically appoint the chief justice of the Illinois Supreme Court to preside? The reason is obvious: to interpose judicial control between the defendant official and the proponents of removal. Chief Justice Fitzgerald will be doing grave damage to his own role if he allows the corrupt rules passed by the legislative to control his powers and duties as presiding officer at the impeachment trial. He has allowed the process to act backwards.

Judges deicide what the rules are going not be, not litigants. Justice Fitzgerald should have rejected the legislature’s rules and limitations, on the basis that it is the justice’s role in this process to make the rules, not the litigants.

Allowing legislators to limit the evidence they will “hear” to prosecute and impeach, and limiting the defense, renders the Illinois Constitution and the Chief Justice’s role nothing but a smokescreen for a sickening political spectacle. Is that what the Constitution’s drafters intended? I doubt it. Justice Fitzgerald has failed to perform properly.

In Shakespeare’s plays fools often have the best lines because they speak unpleasant truths people really don’t want to hear. Blago is a thoroughly obnoxious public official; I can understand why most people consider him a fool. But even the most reviled, the worst among us is entitled to the full protection of the United States and Illinois Constitutions. Blago is being denied elementary due process. He is the victim of a lynching. He is telling the truth, for once. And that’s no poppycock.
--------------------------------------------
Readers of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, say the book is still the only gold standard and practical handbook on Barack Obama's unfitness for the presidency. Buy it.
Book orders: www.Amazon.com or www.OrangeStatePress.com. Immediate shipment from Amazon.com or signed copies (delayed for signing) from the publisher are available.
---------------------------------------------
URGENT APPEAL: The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama is raising money to oppose President-elect Barack Obama.
http://CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com.
Please give generously. Our ability to fight and defeat Barack Obama is directly dependent on the generosity of every American.
“The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama has no bundlers, fat cats or illegal contributions. Obama is opposed to everything America stands for," says Executive Director Andy Martin. "But while Obama has raised almost a billion dollars, and is continuing to raise money, his opponents have raised virtually nothing. Americans can either contribute now, or pay later. If we do not succeed, Obama will."
E-mail: contact@CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com
---------------------------------------------
Andy Martin is a legendary Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of broadcasting experience in radio and television. He is currently based in New York promoting his best-selling book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com.

Martin comments on regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York.

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.
MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639 or CELL (917) 664-9329
E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com [NOTE: We frequently correct typographical errors and additions/subtractions on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this release.]
© Copyright by Andy Martin 2009.

Chicago muckraker Andy Martin’s ContrarianCommentary.com was first to raise questions about the state of Caroline Kennedy’s marriage. Where were the mainstream media?

Update: January 22, 2009 ContrarianCommentary.com was first with questions about Caroline Kennedy’s marital problems


New York news conference: Wednesday, December 31st

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

ATTENTION NEW YORK DAYBOOK/ASSIGNMENT EDITORS

ANNOUNCEMENT OF WEDNESDAY (TODAY) NEWS CONFERENCE IN NEW YORK

NEW YEARS EVE NEWS CONFERENCE BY INTERNET POWERHOUSE ANDY MARTIN
SAYS CAROLINE KENNEDY IS “NOT READY FOR PRIME TIME”

(NEW YORK)(December 31, 2008) Time is Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg’s enemy: the longer she has to run a non-campaign for appointment to Hillary Clinton’s U. S. senate seat, the worse she looks. But first we start with some catty questions.

Regular readers of ContrarianCommentary.com know we function as a “red meat” source for investigative journalism and international commentary. We serve filet of Obama tartare on a regular basis. But in this New Year’s Eve column and news conference set in celebratory midtown Manhattan, we begin with two unpleasant inquiries for “candidate” Caroline Kennedy. No one has yet pursued these “Page Sixy” questions, but they are self-evident given Kennedy’s diffidence about discussing herself and her qualifications to represent New York in the U. S. Senate.

There is some support for our inquiries. In an interview with the New York Times, Caroline equated questions about her decision-making process at home with “women’s magazines” inquiries. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/nyregion/28kennedytranscript.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Kennedy%20+%20transcript&st=cse

And so the first question: where’s Ed? Mrs. Kennedy is, of course, a married woman. To Edward Schlossberg. But her husband appears to have taken a hike. He is nowhere to be seen. Are they living apart? Is this another “troubled” Kennedy marriage? Does he approve of her “campaign” for the senate? Did he counsel against it? Mr. Schlossberg’s absence in Mrs. Schlossberg’s campaign for office seems very peculiar.

Kennedy told the New York Times she and Schlossberg are close. But she had no recollection of the moment when the two of them discussed and decided on her campaign. How could she forget such a dramatic moment? So soon after it took place?

Does Ed’s business dominate his life 24/7? Where are the photos of the two together?

Especially for a first-time candidate, a husband/helpmate would sooth the pain and irritation of being exposed to the media. Maybe there is a good explanation for Schlossberg’s disappearance; he could be in Uganda with Rahm Emanuel on a “long-planned” vacation. Nevertheless, the mainstream media have tiptoed daintily around the question of Mrs. Schlossberg’s missing husband. We do not. Where’s Ed? People have a right to know if her family distress would distract her from senate duties.

[Redacted]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Martin is a legendary Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of broadcasting experience in radio and television. He is currently based in New York promoting his best-selling book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008.

Martin comments on regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York.

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. Andy is the author of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask.

MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639 or CELL (917) 664-9329
E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com [NOTE: We frequently correct typographical errors and additions/subtractions on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this release.]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Readers of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, say the book is still the only gold standard and practical handbook on Barack Obama's unfitness for the presidency. Buy it.
Book orders: Amazon.com or http://OrangeStatePress.com. Immediate shipment from Amazon.com or signed copies (delayed for signing) from the publisher are available.
---------------------------------------------
URGENT APPEAL: The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama is raising money to oppose President-elect Barack Obama.
http://CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com.
Please give generously. Our ability to fight and defeat Barack Obama is directly dependent on the generosity of every American.
“The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama limits itself to $100 maximum contributions for political action, and unlimited donations for persons wanting to support our legal action (court costs, fees, travel, etc.); there are no bundlers, fat cats or illegal contributions. Obama is opposed to everything America stands for," says Executive Director Andy Martin. "But while Obama has raised almost a billion dollars, his opponents have raised virtually nothing. Americans can either contribute now, or pay later. If we do not succeed, Obama will."
E-mail: contact@CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com
New York news conference: Wednesday, December 31st

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

ATTENTION NEW YORK DAYBOOK/ASSIGNMENT EDITORS

ANNOUNCEMENT OF WEDNESDAY (TODAY) NEWS CONFERENCE IN NEW YORK

NEW YEARS EVE NEWS CONFERENCE BY INTERNET POWERHOUSE ANDY MARTIN
SAYS CAROLINE KENNEDY IS “NOT READY FOR PRIME TIME”

(NEW YORK)(December 31, 2008) Time is Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg’s enemy: the longer she has to run a non-campaign for appointment to Hillary Clinton’s U. S. senate seat, the worse she looks. But first we start with some catty questions.

Regular readers of ContrarianCommentary.com know we function as a “red meat” source for investigative journalism and international commentary. We serve filet of Obama tartare on a regular basis. But in this New Year’s Eve column and news conference set in celebratory midtown Manhattan, we begin with two unpleasant inquiries for “candidate” Caroline Kennedy. No one has yet pursued these “Page Sixy” questions, but they are self-evident given Kennedy’s diffidence about discussing herself and her qualifications to represent New York in the U. S. Senate.

There is some support for our inquiries. In an interview with the New York Times, Caroline equated questions about her decision-making process at home with “women’s magazines” inquiries. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/nyregion/28kennedytranscript.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Kennedy%20+%20transcript&st=cse

And so the first question: where’s Ed? Mrs. Kennedy is, of course, a married woman. To Edward Schlossberg. But her husband appears to have taken a hike. He is nowhere to be seen. Are they living apart? Is this another “troubled” Kennedy marriage? Does he approve of her “campaign” for the senate? Did he counsel against it? Mr. Schlossberg’s absence in Mrs. Schlossberg’s campaign for office seems very peculiar.

Kennedy told the New York Times she and Schlossberg are close. But she had no recollection of the moment when the two of them discussed and decided on her campaign. How could she forget such a dramatic moment? So soon after it took place?

Does Ed’s business dominate his life 24/7? Where are the photos of the two together?

Especially for a first-time candidate, a husband/helpmate would sooth the pain and irritation of being exposed to the media. Maybe there is a good explanation for Schlossberg’s disappearance; he could be in Uganda with Rahm Emanuel on a “long-planned” vacation. Nevertheless, the mainstream media have tiptoed daintily around the question of Mrs. Schlossberg’s missing husband. We do not. Where’s Ed? People have a right to know if her family distress would distract her from senate duties.

[Redacted]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Martin is a legendary Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of broadcasting experience in radio and television. He is currently based in New York promoting his best-selling book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008.

Martin comments on regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York.

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. Andy is the author of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask.

MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639 or CELL (917) 664-9329
E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com [NOTE: We frequently correct typographical errors and additions/subtractions on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this release.]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Readers of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, say the book is still the only gold standard and practical handbook on Barack Obama's unfitness for the presidency. Buy it.
Book orders: Amazon.com or http://OrangeStatePress.com. Immediate shipment from Amazon.com or signed copies (delayed for signing) from the publisher are available.
---------------------------------------------
URGENT APPEAL: The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama is raising money to oppose President-elect Barack Obama.
http://CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com.
Please give generously. Our ability to fight and defeat Barack Obama is directly dependent on the generosity of every American.
“The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama limits itself to $100 maximum contributions for political action, and unlimited donations for persons wanting to support our legal action (court costs, fees, travel, etc.); there are no bundlers, fat cats or illegal contributions. Obama is opposed to everything America stands for," says Executive Director Andy Martin. "But while Obama has raised almost a billion dollars, his opponents have raised virtually nothing. Americans can either contribute now, or pay later. If we do not succeed, Obama will."
E-mail: contact@CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com

Internet powerhouse sues Barack Obama’s press secretary for defamation, also names Fox News, New York Times

Andy Martin appeared on the most important broadcast of the 2008 campaign. For his efforts he was smeared by the New York Times, vilified by Fox News and targeted by Barack Obama’s mud merchants. Martin fights back with a lawsuit that tells the full story of his appearance on Hannity’s America and the aftermath of the program in America’s Hard Left mainstream media.

Internet powerhouse and Obama author Andy Martin files suit against Barack Obama’s press secretary, the New York Times and Fox News for smears and distortions

ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

“Factually Correct, Not
Politically Correct”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

ATTENTION DAYBOOK/ASSIGNMENT EDITORS

ANNOUNCEMENT OF THURSDAY NEWS CONFERENCE IN CHICAGO

INTERNET POWERHOUSE ANDY MARTIN SUES NEW YORK TIMES FOR FALSE ACCUSATIONS OF ANTI-SEMITISM AND TIMES ATTEMPTS TO DESTROY THE ONLY AUTHOR BARACK OBAMA FEARS

OBAMA’S PRESS SECRETARY IS ALSO NAMED AS A DEFENDANT FOR SPEWING FALSE CLAIMS ABOUT MARTIN.

FOX NEWS EXECUTIVES SUED FOR SMEARING ANDY WITH A “DISINVITATION” TO THE MOST IMPORTANT MEDIA PRESENTATION OF THE 2008 CAMPAIGN

(CHICAGO)(January 21, 2009) Internet powerhouse Andy Martin will hold a Chicago news conference Thursday, January 22nd to announce that he has filed a defamation lawsuit against Barack Obama’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, Fox News and the New York Times for smearing him with a number of false and deliberately misleading accusations.

“Sean Hannity presented the defining media event of the 2008 campaign,” Martin will state. “His presentation on Hannity’s America October 5th was the first coherent discussion of Barack Obama’s links to anti-American radicals and miscreants.

“The validity of my claim concerning the significance of the program is confirmed by the vehemence of the response by the Hard Left media. Jim Rutenberg of the New York Times was ordered to smear me; he took facts out of context, spoke to my enemies but not friends and deliberately portrayed me in a false light. Rutenberg himself admitted I was targeted by the Hard Left.

“Instead of standing up for a crusading investigative writer, Rupert Murdoch tried to throw me under the bus as part of his effort to grovel for Obama. Murdoch and his munchkin’s behavior was despicable. The behavior of the New York Times’ smear campaign was part of a year-long smear-and-destroy effort by the Times and its law firms to discredit me.

“The Washington Post also published an extensive investigative piece on my writing. They were never sued, nor are they going to be. They focused on the 2008 campaign, not on an irrelevant 25 year-old lawsuit that had no bearing on 2008, and in which I was a tragic victim, not a perpetrator. The Washington Post was well within the bounds of political journalism; the New York Times was not. Maybe that’s why the Times required a Mexican bailout this week.

“For over forty (40) years I have been exposing corruption in Illinois, nationally, and internationally. My investigative efforts have irritated people in power and landed my name on three presidential enemies’ lists, Nixon’s, Bush II’s and Obama’s. To paraphrase FDR, I am proud of the enemies I have made.

“The Hard Left in this county is rapidly consolidating its control over the mainstream media, including now the Fox News Channel. Rupert Murdoch has capitulated to Obama. Sean Hannity is the ‘Last of the Mohicans.’

“When ContrarianCommentary.com landed an investigative task force in Honolulu last October, we were the first investigators to probe Barack Obama’s family history in depth. Based on that research we believe that ‘Obama’ is not even his real name or provenance. Rather, ‘Obama’ was a construct created by Frank Marshall Davis to conceal his fatherhood of Ann Dunham’s baby. Interestingly, Obama has never denied this claim.

“My book ‘Obama: The Man Behind The Mask,’ remains the ‘bible’ on Obama-the-unknown. No one has seen Obama’s college report cards; they may list him as a foreign student or Muslim, seeking ‘affirmative action’ relief. No one has seen Obama’s original 1961 birth certificate; he continues to obstruct access through corrupt Hawai’i officials. Obama is just as much of a man of mystery today as he was on the day he spoke to the Democratic National Convention in 2004. We continue the fight to publish the facts about Mr. Obama.

“Barry Obama-Davis may have fooled a majority of last year’s voters. He has not fooled me. Robert Gibbs’ sleazy attempt to smear me, to draw attention from Obama’s terrorist links, was despicable.

“I will not allow Obama and his crew to smear me with false accusations of anti-Semitism 25 years old, or other libels based on 35 year-old episodes that are also taken out context.

“People who are hostile to American values control the media today; these individuals will be held accountable when the truth about Obama finally comes out. In the meantime, my lawsuit will defend my honesty, independence, integrity and professionalism as an author and investigator. ContrarianCommentary.com was the #1 political blog last year, as evidenced by attacks from the Hard Left. We continue to lead in 2009,” Martin will state.

The lawsuit will be posted on Martin’s blogs beginning January 21st.

NEWS CONFERENCE DETAILS:

WHO:

Internet Powerhouse and national anti-Obama leader, Author/Editor/Internet Columnist Andy Martin

WHAT:

National anti-Obama leader Andy Martin files suit against Obama press secretary Robert Gibbs, Fox News and the New York Times for false accusations of anti-Semitism.

WHERE:

Southeast corner of Huron and Wabash Streets, Chicago

WHEN: Thursday, January 22, 2009; 1:00 P. M.

MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639; CELL (917) 664-9329

----------------------------------------------
Readers of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, say the book is still the only gold standard and practical handbook on Barack Obama's unfitness for the presidency. Buy it.
Book orders: www.Amazon.com or www.OrangeStatePress.com. Immediate shipment from Amazon.com or signed copies (delayed for signing) from the publisher are available.
---------------------------------------------
URGENT APPEAL: The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama is raising money to oppose President-elect Barack Obama.
http://CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com.
Please give generously. Our ability to fight and defeat Barack Obama is directly dependent on the generosity of every American.
“The Committee of One Million to Defeat Barack Obama has no bundlers, fat cats or illegal contributions. Obama is opposed to everything America stands for," says Executive Director Andy Martin. "But while Obama has raised almost a billion dollars, and is continuing to raise money, his opponents have raised virtually nothing. Americans can either contribute now, or pay later. If we do not succeed, Obama will."
E-mail: contact@CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com
---------------------------------------------
Andy Martin is a legendary Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of broadcasting experience in radio and television. He is currently based in New York promoting his best-selling book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com.

Martin comments on regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York.

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.
MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639 or CELL (917) 664-9329
E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com [NOTE: We frequently correct typographical errors and additions/subtractions on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this release.]
© Copyright by Andy Martin 2009.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR DUPAGE COUNTY, ILLINOIS

IN CHANCERY

No. 2009MR000111

Status Date: 5/20/09

Assigned to: 2005


ANDY MARTIN,

Plaintiff,

v.

ROBERT GIBBS,
JIM RUTENBERG,
NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY,
ARTHUR OCHS SULZBERGER, JR.,
GAIL COLLINS,
RUPERT MURDOCH,
WILLIAM SHINE,
KEITH OLBERMANN,
RANDY SCHULTZ,
JENNER & BLOCK,
DAVID P. SANDERS,
TOM SLADE,

Defendants.
____________________________/


COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Preliminary Statement
Perhaps the most dramatic media moment of the 2008 presidential campaign was an edition of Hannity’s America on Fox News Channel that laid out with some coherence the questions about Barack Obama’s secret past. The Hannity program elicited an explosive response from the hard left media in America, and prompted the New York Times (“Times”) to run two stories.
The Times’ false and malicious reporting in turn triggered an ongoing orgy of left-wing media attacks on Plaintiff, none of these reports having any factual or legal validity as to their most incendiary claims. And, in a “no good deed goes unpunished” category, Fox News then “disinvited” Plaintiff from his appearance on the program as an appeasement to Barack Obama by Rupert Murdoch.

[COUNT ONE]
[COMMON LAW DEFAMATION]
1. Jurisdiction and venue
a. This court has general common law jurisdiction to hear and determine the matters presented.
b. Venue is proper in DuPage County. Plaintiff is based in Illinois.
2. Factual allegations
a. The parties
A. The Plaintiff
1) Plaintiff has been a controversial writer for over forty (40) years.
2) In 2004, Plaintiff wrote of Barack Obama that Obama had a Muslim family background. That claim was objectively true. Despite the fact that the claim is objectively true, and that Obama’s own “family” has repeatedly admitted to Muslin adherence, the defendants have relentlessly attacked Plaintiff and claimed that Obama’s past religious heritage is a “rumor.”
3) Plaintiff first sued the New York Times in early 2008 after the Times published a magazine piece saying Plaintiff’s Muslim claims had been “debunked.” Plaintiff’s claims have never at any time been debunked. They were and remain completely true, factual and accurate. Plaintiff has amended his claims to reflect his subsequent belief that Barack Obama's real, i.e. biological, father was/is Frank Marshall Davis, but that hypothesis awaits blood tests to be fully proven. Nevertheless, anyone who believes Barack Obama, Sr. is President Barack Obama, Jr.’s. father is bound by the Muslim history of senior.
4) Defendants Jenner and Sanders appeared before a judge in secret, and proceeded to argue their defenses at a time when they were aware that Plaintiff was across the hall in the same courthouse and Plaintiff was unaware of the scheduled Times hearing being orchestrated by Jenner and Sanders. Ex parte communication is illegal; when a lawyer schemes to conduct an ex parte proceeding that is grossly illegal. Jenner and Sanders were acting illegally to further the interests of defendant Sulzberger and the New York Times.
4) Plaintiff was contacted by Fox News Channel at some point during the summer of 2008. The originally scheduled interview between Fox and Plaintiff was cancelled due to the New Orleans hurricane. Eventually Fox contacted Plaintiff and asked if he would be available during the week of September 29, 2008.
5) Since 2004, Plaintiff has conducted extensive, continuing research on Mr. Obama and his secretive past. Even today, as this lawsuit is filed and Obama sits in the White House, large areas of Obama’s life remain unknown. Obama has concealed his original birth certificate, he has concealed his college records and he has never been examined thoroughly on his links to William Ayers, America’s most notorious domestic terrorist, or Khalid Al-Mansour, a virulent opponent of White America.
6) With regard to Ayers in particular, Obama’s brief responses have been false and misleading. For example, he once referred to Ayers as a “someone in the neighborhood” when the Ayers/Obama relationship was much more extensive.
7) Liberal (hard left) media such as the Times and others were intent on smearing Plaintiff and destroying the sale of his book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask.
B. The defendants
1) Robert Gibbs is sued in his private capacity as press secretary of the Obama for President Campaign.
2) Jim Rutenberg is a reporter for the New York Times.
3) The New York Times Company is a failing media enterprise that was recently bailed out by a Mexican billionaire.
4) Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr. controls the majority of stockholder votes at the New York Times and acts as publisher.
5) Gail Collins is an employee of the New York Times.
6) Rupert Murdoch is a powerful media baron who swings with the political winds. He has been pro and anti-Clinton, and pro and anti-Obama. Plaintiff was apparently caught in one of Murdoch's swings from right to left and from being anti-Obama to genuflecting at the feet of the next president. Murdoch controls the Fox News Channel, which is generally considered a “conservative” media outlet, although Murdoch has been quoted as saying he dislikes some of the conservatives on his own channel.
7) William Shine is a Vice president at Fox News.
8) Keith Olbermann is a “hard left” host on MSNBC, a “liberal” media outlet.
9) Randy Schultz is a hard left commentator for the Palm Beach Post.
10) David P. Sanders is a partner at Jenner & Block.
11) Tom Slade is an influence peddler in Tallahassee who formerly headed the Florida Republican Party.
b. The Facts Giving Rise to This Lawsuit
A. Plaintiff was interviewed by Fox News from New York. Fox had carefully prepared a list of questions for Plaintiff, and Plaintiff supplied his answers from the Fox News studio in Chicago.
B. Plaintiff presented his own views, opinions and conclusions concerning Mr. Obama and his associates. With all due respect, the Hannity program was the only coherent mainstream media presentation during the campaign that even attempted to place all of Obama’s lacunae in some sort of order.
C. The day following the Fox program the New York Times reported that Plaintiff “came under strong attack from liberals on Monday,” see attached Exhibit A. Although Rutenberg's reporting was defamatory in some areas, Rutenberg’s report clearly indicated he had come under pressure to publish a story. Rutenberg wrote “Many noted that the Republican Party of Florida decided against backing his bid…” Rutenberg never disclosed who the “many” were who had contacted him. The claim that the Republican Party had not supported him in 1996 was objectively false and totally irrelevant to 2008. Nevertheless, because the false claims Rutenberg made were peripheral to the story, Plaintiff did not immediately threaten a libel lawsuit.
D. On October 8th defendant Gibbs attacked Sean Hannity, accusing Hannity of consorting with an “anti-Semite,” namely Plaintiff. Gibbs screamed on national television that Plaintiff was an anti-Semite.
D. On October 13, 2008 Rutenberg published a second article, which solidified Plaintiff’s belief that Hannity’s program had been the critical point of the mainstream media campaign. Rutenberg, apparently acting under pressure from someone again, sought to portray Plaintiff in a false light:
1) Rutenberg said Plaintiff “was blocked in the 1970’s after a psychiatric finding…” As Rutenberg had been told, Plaintiff has never seen a psychiatrist in his life. Plaintiff was interviewed for perhaps sixty seconds, possibly ninety seconds, by someone at U. S. Army draft station, who excused plaintiff from service after that person learned Plaintiff had filed a lawsuit challenging the draft. The "draft physical" was itself a form of Illinois Supreme Court harassment, because Plaintiff told Rutenberg that Plaintiff already held an Honorable Discharge from the U. S. Air Force Reserve and thus was not subject to being drafted. Rutenberg also withheld that fact, so as to make his false psychiatric claim appear more credible. The entire draft physical exchange took perhaps a minute, perhaps a minute and a half, and involved no psychiatric examination of any kind. The Illinois Supreme Court clearly disclosed the source of this silly claim, although the Court still misused the draft physical to retaliate against Plaintiff for being part of a team that helped remove two corrupt Illinois Supreme Court judges in 1969. Thus, Rutenberg’s “report” was not even a fair synopsis of what the Illinois Supreme Court had written.
2) Had Rutenberg told his readers the facts about the “psychiatric finding,” which was no finding at all, instead of placing Plaintiff in a false light, most people would have laughed at Rutenberg's reporting and would have seen his claims for the transparent smear they were.
3) Rutenberg quoted Tom Slade at length. Slade is one of the legendary influence peddlers of Florida politics. While Slade himself smeared Plaintiff in 1996, the Republican Party at no time voted any attack on Plaintiff. Rutenberg tried to convey the false impression, after being fully advised of the facts, that Slade’s personal attacks constituted an attack by the Party, when that claim was objectively false. Thus, in both the Florida Party and “psychiatric” matters, Rutenberg published false and misleading claims after being advised of the objective facts; as such his action was intentional and reckless. Rutenberg also created false facts of his own. He claimed that Plaintiff had been the subject of a “spitefully written by an evaluator” report, when Plaintiff has never made any such claim. Rutenberg taped his interviews with Plaintiff, so the tapes are the best evidence of what was said by each.
4) Rutenberg falsely suggested that Plaintiff had admitted to being an anti-Semite. He quoted Plaintiff, out of context, as saying “The record speaks for itself.” Plaintiff had denied any claims of anti-Semitism, and that record does speak for itself, not the contrary impression Rutenberg sought to convey.
E. Rutenberg's false reporting about Plaintiff created a media firestorm, as Gibbs and Obama tried to shift attention from Obama’s own terrorist links to an obscure lawsuit in which Plaintiff was a party over a quarter of a century ago:
1) Defendant Olbermann called Plaintiff a “transparent nut job” based on Rutenberg’s misinformation about Plaintiff’s “draft physical.”
2) Defendant Collins accused Plaintiff of “filing lawsuits laced with paranoia and anti-Semitism.”
3) Rupert Murdoch, who was seeking to appease Obama, sent his underling, defendant Shine, out to the Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz to smear Plaintiff and call interviewing Plaintiff a mistake. Murdoch’s sensitivity to Obama may be enhanced by the fact that Murdoch himself has mixed-race children. Plaintiff’s professional integrity and competence was attacked by Shine on the basis of an unrelated lawsuit a quarter-century ago. It was despicable behavior by Fox News.
4) Despite the fact that Sulzberger’s company had already been sued once for defaming Plaintiff, Sulzberger failed to exercise any care or control over the pressures placed on Rutenberg to repeatedly defame Plaintiff.
5) Gibbs’ accusations against Plaintiff were objectively false, as any jury would determine, and were intended to shift attention from Obama’s links to anti-Americans such as William Ayers and Khalid Al-Mansour.
3. Legal claim
a. Plaintiff was indeed involved in an unpleasant bankruptcy case over 25 years ago. He was an innocent man who was politically kidnapped and, while absent, had his property stolen.
b. The law protects claims made in lawsuits pursuant to the judicial privilege because claims in lawsuits are often painful, outrageous and based on partial information at the pleading stage.
c. Plaintiff’s claim that he was the victim of racial bigotry was a claim that was later found to be cognizable legal theory in a subsequent decision by the U. S. Supreme Court, Shaare Tefila v. Cobb, 481 U.S. 615 (1987).
d. The claim that plaintiff is an anti-Semite or anti-Semitic is false. Plaintiff became involuntarily embroiled in a controversy in Connecticut over which he had no control because he was the innocent victim of a political kidnapping by corrupt individuals in Illinois.
e. The defendants herein, moreover, were seeking to use a 25 year-old lawsuit to claim that Plaintiff is an anti-Semite. Obviously, placed in context, unpleasant but factual allegations from a 25 year-old lawsuit would have little or no influence on any member of the public. The claim that someone somehow is currently an anti-Semite could be a matter of concern.
f. Although Plaintiff is clearly a public figure, defendants clearly acted with reckless disregard for the truth and with actual malice to defame Plaintiff based on political pressure directed at the New York Times and its employees.
g. Defendants Jenner & Block and Sanders were similarly trying to smear Plaintiff by arranging to appear ex parte before a judge on behalf of the New York Times, so they could defame Plaintiff at a time when he was not there to defend himself. Such secret proceedings were scurrilous and unlawful.
h. By way of comparison, The Washington Post published a long article based on “research” about Plaintiff’s status as an Internet powerhouse. The Post was also the original source of Rutenberg's claims from Danielle Allen, another Obama operative. The Post never saw fit to mention the irrelevant 25 year-old claims. Plaintiff has never sued the Washington Post. When defendant Shine says that an old lawsuit was a basis to exclude Plaintiff from being interviewed, he is engaging in a transparent smear which was not recognized by the Washington Post itself.
i. Plaintiff stands by all of the claims he made in his Fox News interview. Plaintiff’s claims were based on extensive and continuing inquiry, and further based on reasonable inferences drawn from the available evidence concerning Barack Obama’s secret life which, to this date, has never seen the light of day. Obama may be president, but he is still “The Man Behind The Mask.” Plaintiff is continuing to pursue the truth about Obama, as are other writers such as David Maraniss.
4. Demand for judgment
Plaintiff sues and demands declaratory judgment and injunctive relief as follows:
a. Declaratory and injunctive relief that the reporting by the defendant Times and Rutenberg was false and defamatory, and the subsequent comments by other defendants based on that false reporting were similarly false and defamatory.
b. Ancillary money damages in an amount not to exceed $50,000 on all counts, with the total recovery in this action from all defendants limited to $50,000.

[COUNT TWO]
[FALSE LIGHT]
1-2. Plaintiff repeats and realleges Paragraphs 1-2 of Count One and further pleads:
3. Legal claim
a. The common law of Illinois recognizes the tort of “false light.”
b. Had Rutenberg told his readers the truth about Plaintiff’s “finding,” his own professional integrity would have been compromised. Rutenberg sought to falsely portray Plaintiff as someone with a psychiatric history, when Plaintiff has never received any mental health investigation or treatment. No adult who was alive in the 1960’s and 70’s would do anything but laugh if they were told Rutenberg was basing his accusations on a 60-second Army draft physical.
c. Likewise, although Rutenberg was told the Republican Party had never attacked Plaintiff, because of the Party's need for procedural sue process and the Florida Party’s own Constitution, Rutenberg sought to portray Slade’s smears as being authorized by a vote of the party, when Rutenberg was aware that claim was false.
d. Rutenberg similarly sought to portray Plaintiff as being against “Jews.” Plaintiff did indeed disparage the corrupt lawyers and judges in the bankruptcy and district courts in Connecticut, all of whom with one exception were unfortunately Jewish, but he did so based on their specific misconduct in a lawsuit. All of his accusations were factually based. Once again, Rutenberg was seeking to portray the impression that Plaintiff is anti-Semitic because of claims made in a 25 year-old lawsuit. Exposing and opposing bigotry does not become bigotry merely because the wrongdoers happen to be predominantly Jewish.
4. Demand for judgment
Plaintiff sues and demands declaratory judgment and injunctive relief as follows:
a. Declaratory and injunctive relief that the reporting by the defendant Times and Rutenberg was false and defamatory, and the subsequent comments by other defendants based on that false reporting were similarly false and defamatory.
b. Ancillary money damages in an amount not to exceed $50,000 on all counts, with the total recovery in this action from all defendants limited to $50,000.
Dated: January 21, 2009

Respectfully submitted,

ANDY MARTIN
NATIONAL LITIGATION CENTER
P. O. Box 1851
New York, NY 10150-1851
Toll-free tel. (866) 706-2639
Toll-free fax (866) 707-2639
E-mail: AndyMart20@aol.com (text only)

Additional courtesy copy requested to:
ANDY MARTIN
REGIONAL LITIGATION SUPPORT
30 E. Huron Street, Suite 4406
Chicago, IL 60611-4723

SERVICE OF NOTICES IS RESPECTFULLY
REQUESTED BY FAX OR E-MAIL

Additional e-mail address available
upon request