Jesse Jackson Jr. Reportedly Engaged In Plea Negotiations With Prosecutors

Yesterday, we discussed how voters in Chicago reelected Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. despite his appearance for months without any explanation and criminal investigation into his alleged misuse of campaign funds and alleged effort to buy a Senate seat. While Jackson thanked his voters for keeping him in office and pledged to work for them in Washington, reports now indicate that Jackson has been negotiating a plea bargain on the criminal charges with prosecutors.

Jackson has been out of contact at Mayo Clinic where he is being treated for depression and bipolar disorder.

Jackson is being investigated not only for allegedly using campaign funds to decorate his Washington home but also may have used campaign funds to buy a $40,000 Rolex watch for a female friend.

He is also under ethical investigation for allegedly discussing the payment of campaign money to former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich in return for an appointment to the Senate seat vacated by Obama.

Democratic politicians, including President Obama, have refused to call for Jackson’s departure from Congress so not to anger his powerful father. Moreover, his wife holds a seat on the City Council in Chicago as part of a political dynasty for the Jackson family. The family has many critics in Chicago for their amassed wealth and power.

While I am sympathetic with anyone suffering from mental illness and I do believe that such individuals should be allowed to seek treatment without loss of their positions, Jackson’s dismal record began long ago and his constituents have gone without a representative in Congress for many months. If it is true that he has been negotiating a plea bargain while running for reelection (without actually showing up to campaign), those concerns are only magnified.

Source: Sun Times

40 thoughts on “Jesse Jackson Jr. Reportedly Engaged In Plea Negotiations With Prosecutors

  1. Sometimes people really do get the representation they deserve. If he is who they voted for, then I can’t see them complaining about anything.

  2. That phrase “reports now indicate” and “sources indicate” are words of caution.

    The Governor of Illinois would appoint a replacement if Jackson resigned, or yikes, another election.

  3. I left the Willard Hotel in DC and went by the Capitol Building. There was some guy at the curb selling these chairs for five bucks. I asked where he got them and he said from the Senate, that they were Senate Seats. So, I bought one and took it home. Sure enough, some schmucks come to my door out in Chicago where I live and serve me papers with some criminal offense in federal court that says in the small print that I tried to buy a Senate Seat. I will be in federal court on the same docket as this Jesse guy. I hope he just tells the truth and can identify or describe the same guy that sold me the damn seat. That way there will be some support and truth to be told for what I say. If he cuts a deal then I am screwed. I told them feds who busted me that they could have the seat back and they took it. So now if I go to Washington DC to the Capital or Capitol Building (which is it JT?) then I have to stand in the Gallery and look at paintings.

  4. That’s one way to keep making more money….. I’d say raking…. But I wouldn’t want to make an inadvertent slur….. 40k for a watch…. I think that said it all….

  5. BusterCherry:

    who did you buy your seat from? 5 dollars seems like a good deal. I have been to DC many times but have not come across a deal like that.

    Now I have met some senators I wouldnt give you $5 dollars for.

  6. Swarthmore,
    Thanks for the age correction.
    If the guy is guilty of something then he will go and should go, but until we have a guilty verdict isn’t it unamerican to force him to give up his position that he won? I don’t doubt that he might be dirty, but the Feds are working on it and we will get either a plea or a trial. If he is truly mentally ill, then should we be calling for his removal without a guilty plea or a judicial determination of guilty?

  7. A lot comes out after elections doesn’t it. Sounds like he’s guilty. If he was innocent wouldn’t he defend his reputation to the hilt. Does his wife know about the rolex? How’s his dads love child doing (like father like son)? With leaders like this who needs enemies?

  8. As stated a couple days ago. Will Jr. be reelected from a Federal prison in 2014. This investigation was not a secret. The defense, “I’m bipolar and was self medicating.”

  9. We’ll see what happens. If he gets a misdemeanor he will be “cured” and return to office. If he gets a felony his condition will remain the same. If the US atty doesn’t get what he / she wants and reisists a plea bargain Jr’s condition will “worsen”.

  10. Sometime last month, I posted an opinion that a wise citizenry would – at some point in our evolution – amend the status quo, to ensure that the electorate be at least marginally qualified to cast votes.

    In my view, this could very simply be accomplished by letting the public know, that beginning in say, 2016, while “in the voting booth” or online, for that matter – passing a brief quiz on the basics would be required, in order to proceed to the ballot.

    In other words, if a voter cannot discern a general liberal viewpoint on a given issue, as opposed to that of conservative bent; if one cannot recognize the current vice president; if one has literally no concept of the difference between the Senate and the House; if the voter actually believes the Supreme Court was Diana Ross & her singers – then there is assuredly no crime in that.

    But for godsake, let’s stop fooling ourselves into thinking “progress” has any real possibility.

    The “crime” rather, is a nation stuck in the past; a nation struggling with ever more serious challenges, but steadfastly, foolishly, allowing votes of the ignorant – or the emotionally illogical – to amass valid sway over those with a cogent attention to the issues.

    By no stretch of the imagination, do I see it in the best interest of a complex society, to continue to allow millions of votes be cast, by folks with little or no logical basis, for whom they believe ought to be placed in positions of wielding real power, and spending our dollars.

    And we have no more pluperfect argument for my take, than Jesse Jackson, part deux, and his appalling reelection.

    One fellow’s opinion.

  11. In considering the number of seemingly unqualified people being reelected, most of whom are black, it may be a race thing. Blacks have been repeatedly misused by the system. White politicians get a pass, Blacks do not. This isn’t necessarily always true, but perceptions count. It could be a circling of the wagons. Like Marion Berry. His arrest was seen as a sting that wouldn’t have happened if he had been white. The relevant Black community didn’t see his take down as a favor, hence he was reelected. To the “man”, “In your face”.

    Jackson really could be playing a game, or, he could really be suffering from bi-polar disorder and is having a hard time getting the right meds. It does seem that the white establishment is going to have a hard time taking down a Black man who has achieved.

  12. IMHO Jesse Jr. was found out a while ago by the Chicago Political Machine – which of course includes all them ghosts and goblins in the White House. Realizing this guy’s alleged misdeeds (and I’m sure at least clinical depression ensued for Jr.) the Machine gave him the same “out” that Micheal Corleone gave to brother-in-law Carlo — that he will be spared but his punishment is that he’s out of the family business. After he fesses up to his sins it’s badda bing time at least politically. The plea deal fix is already in, they have the stundeens to actually let him get re-elected and leak this info out the day after the election, they already did the backroom deal of who will be appointed or anointed to replace him, and so on and so forth. And his constituents will go along with it, the press will forget about it, and the admin will sugar coat it and it’s a non-issue as it was designed to be.

    Make sense to anyone?

  13. PatricParamedic-

    I have been here long enough to know that your intentions and your character are 100% honorable.

    But, when I read your post, I instantly recalled the vile practice in the South of tests given only to Black citizens at the polls for the sole purpose of excluding them from exercising their right to vote. As much as we regret stupid or uninformed people voting, it is their Constitutional right. The solution is better teaching of what used to be known as “Civics”, although I don’t hold out much hope for that. If we start to discriminate on the basis of I.Q., where does it end- when the enforcers put on black shirts?

    Isn’t it odd that the only people who are tested by the Government on American civics are the much vilified foreigners whose greatest hope is to become an American citizen? Maybe the one test that should be mandatory in High School would be the citizenship test.

  14. Patricparamedic, Not a bad musing. On a similar scenario, I get pissed when I go to postseason baseball games and there are folks there who are CLUELESS about the game. Real fans w/o corporate connections get shut out and Betty Bimbo and Bob Bozo have great seats and don’t even watch. The great owner Bill Veeck tried to remedy this. If you wanted postseason tix you had to keep the stubs from the games you attended during the season and those w/ the most stubs would get the postseason tix. It was a nice thought but impossible to implement. And, I’m sure you know your plan would not pass constitutional muster but it’s a worthy rant. We all need to vent.

  15. Nick Spinelli – I’m familiar with the WindBag city but all you have to do is read Mike Royko’s “Boss” about Mayor RIchard J Daley. Unbelievable nasty power politics. It hasn’t changed since his demise and lives now in DC. NYC had Boss Tweed and Boston had it’s (everyone) but Chicago certainly is the best place to watch the demolition derby.
    http://tinyurl.com/bn2nu9

  16. Geeba, Nobody understood just how corrupt and dysfunctional Chicago is than Royko. I’ve read “Boss” and read his column daily. I think he would be shocked to see how much Chicago has devolved since his death. Wait a minute, Royko was the consummate cynic..no he wouldn’t be shocked @ all.

  17. BettyKath said:

    “White politicians get a pass, Blacks do not.”

    Really?

    Samuel B. Kent (R) Federal District Judge of Galveston, Texas was sentenced on May 11, 2009, to 33 months in prison for lying about sexually harassing two female employees.

    Jack Abramoff CNMI scandal involves the efforts of Abramoff to influence Congressional action concerning U.S. immigration and minimum wage laws. See Executive branch convictions. Congressmen convicted in the Abramoff scandal include:

    Tom DeLay (R-TX) House Majority Leader was convicted on two counts of money laundering & conspiracy in 2010;sentenced to three years.

    Bob Ney (R-OH) pleaded guilty to conspiracy & making false statements as a result of his receiving trips from Abramoff in exchange for legislative favors. Ney received 30 months in prison.

    Duke Cunningham (R-California) pleaded guilty on November 28, 2005 to charges of conspiracy to commit bribery, mail fraud, wire fraud and tax evasion. Sentenced to over eight years in prison.

    William J. Jefferson (D-Louisiana) in August 2005 was convicted of 11 counts of bribery and sentenced to 13 years in prison on November 13, 2009.

    Jefferson’s Chief of Staff Brett Pfeffer, was sentenced to 84 months for bribery.

    Bill Janklow (R-South Dakota) convicted of second-degree manslaughter for running a stop sign and killing a motorcyclist.

    Jim Traficant (D-Ohio) found guilty on 10 felony counts of financial corruption; was sentenced to 8 years in prison and expelled from the House.

    Vito Fossella (R-New York) US Congressman convicted of drunken driving in 2008.

    Larry Craig Senator (R-Idaho) – Guilty of disorderly conduct in a Minneapolis airport men’s room, after having been arrested on a charge of homosexual lewd conduct. Senator Craig had previously stated that “people already know that Bill Clinton is a bad boy – a naughty boy.”

    Frank Ballance (D-NC) admitted to a federal charge of money laundering and mail fraud in October; sentenced to 4 years..

    Ronald H. Blackley, Secretary of Agriculture Mike Espy’s Chief of Staff, was sentenced to 27 months for perjury.

    Mel Reynolds (D-IL) was convicted on 12 counts of sexual assault, obstruction of justice and solicitation of child pornography. Was later convicted of 12 counts of bank fraud.

    Walter R. Tucker III (D-California) was sentenced to 27 months in prison in 1996 for extortion and tax evasion.

    Barbara-Rose Collins (D-Michigan) found to have committed 11 violations of law and house rules stemming from use of campaign funds for personal use.

    Wes Cooley (R-Oregon), Cooley was convicted of having lied on the 1994 voter information pamphlet about his service in the Army. He was fined and sentenced to two years probation (1997)

    Austin Murphy (D-Pennsylvania) convicted of voter fraud for filling out absentee ballots for members of a nursing home. (1999)

    Buzz Lukens (R-Ohio) convicted of bribery and conspiracy.

    Carl D. Perkins (D-Kentucky) pleaded guilty to a check kiting scheme involving several financial institutions (including the House Bank).

    Carroll Hubbard (D-Kentucky) convicted of illegally funneling money to his wife’s 1992 campaign to succeed him in congress.

    Walter Fauntroy (D-District of Columbia) convicted of filing false disclosure forms in order to hide unauthorized income.

    Dan Rostenkowski (D-Illinois) Convicted & sentenced to 18 months in prison, in 1995

    Joe Kolter (D-Pennsylvania) Convicted of one count of conspiracy [29] and sentenced to 6 months in prison.

    Jay Kim (R-California) Convicted of accepting $250,000 in illegal 1992 campaign contributions.

    Catalina Vasquez Villalpando, (R) Treasurer of the United States. Pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice and tax evasion. (1992)

    Nicholas Mavroules (D-Massachusetts) convicted of extortion, accepting illegal gifts and failing to report them.

    Albert Bustamante (D-Texas) convicted of accepting bribes. (1993)

    David Durenberger Senator (R-Minnesota) denounced by Senate for unethical financial transactions and then disbarred (1990).

    Walter Nixon US Judge (Mississippi) (appointed by Lyndon Johnson in 1968) Was impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate for perjury on November 3, (1989)

    Now that’s an admittedly brief sampling of some of our leadership’s more publicized scatology over the last 20-some years. But any indication of a “White politician pass” will have to be found elsewhere, because the DOJ web data tracks no such bias.

  18. Geeba and Nick, “Boss” is still a relevant read and Royko was just the man to write the story. He once did a column about the essential, shoe-leather difference between the parties (both of which were/are unutterably corrupt) that I remember, and remember to be correct, some 40 years later. He was something as was Studs Terkel, Terkel’s book “Working” was amazing. I didn’t know I could be as moved (across the whole spectrum of emotions) by a book of interviews with people about their jobs.

  19. Henman,

    “Isn’t it odd that the only people who are tested by the Government on American civics are the much vilified foreigners whose greatest hope is to become an American citizen? Maybe the one test that should be mandatory in High School would be the citizenship test.

    I think passing it should be a graduation requirement. From your mouth to the FSM’s noodley ? ears?

  20. Gene H.-

    I suspect that I would do better than the average guy on the street on the citizenship test. I also suspect that I would be greatly embarrassed by my score compared to the average immigrant taking the test.

    I am totally opposed to Federally mandated tests in Grade Schools and High Schools in the U.S. My older brother and his wife are retired teachers and their two daughters are now teachers in the Chicago Public Schools. None of them ever needed to be prodded by the Fed. Govt. to teach with excellence. The Fed. tests are a distraction and a waste of time in a well run school system, in my opinion.

    I do agree with you that the citizenship test should be taught in the upper grades of high school, not only to learn the basics of how our system works (or should work), but also to learn respect for the people who come here, learn our language, learn our history and institutions, and proudly become Americans. May they always continue to come.

  21. HenMan,

    I’m in total agreement over the uselessness of standardized testing in general, but I think there is a difference between the kind of standardized testing of your example (and Elaine’s many examples on the subject) and a “standard test”. Part of the function of schools is to prepare students to be good citizens. Making the citizenship test a standard part of the curriculum seems to be just good sense and for the reasons you note. If we expect naturalized citizens to have that base knowledge as a predicate for their citizenship, it only makes sense we demand the same of natural citizens. Unless the government wants the bulk of the citizens to be ignorant of civics for some reason . . . hmmmm . . . kinda makes one think someone(s) may have a nefarious agenda out there. ;) I was really lucky in high school and junior high. I had two excellent teachers on the subject: Mrs. Conn (7th grade Civics) and Mr. Black (12th grade American Government). I’m pretty sure it’s safe to say both made an impression on me and without standardized testing.

  22. The govt. is happy to keep it’s citizens dumb and uninformed, akin to “keeping them barefoot and pregnant.” It’s up to individual social studies teachers to work it into the curriculum. I did it, and a few others I know did also. Most just kept to the script like good union workers.

  23. Damn, being devoid of logic and reason, I am dumbfounded that I agree with Gene H as should he be. /snark

    The original purpose of the public school system was to make good citizens, not high wage earners. A “standard test”, as determined within a State, on history/civics is necessary to achieve that goal. Without it, you don’t understand this country and you are simply a transferable citizen, you could live anywhere culturally similar.

    As for my public education, I couldn’t graduate elementary school without passing an essay test on basic Constitutional questions, including clearly identifying the gist of each of the first 10 Amendments. I had rigorous history/civics teachers until the late 60s, when it began to fall apart (by rigorous I mean both detailed specifics and the broad sweep of meaning).In the 7th grade I had to write a detailed test essay regarding the Treaty of Versailles which included lands transferred, resource tonnage transferred, industrial output transferred, all restrictions on Axis production, and it’s social impact; the production restrictions especially leading to the BMW motorcycle; that’s a joke except that the Treaty actually did lead to the BMW motorcycle). I wish I could remember her name but I can only remember that she had a brown eye and a blue eye.

    In the 11th grade I had my first taste of social historian and that has stuck with me for context. I’m excoriated on conservative blogs when I point out how war weary Americans were by early ’45; neither blockade nor Operation Downfall just wasn’t politically acceptable once we had the Bomb). My 12th year, rigorous American civics leaving me with no misunderstanding about the “Freedom of the Press” nor the extant of “Freedom of Speech”. Religion we can quibble.

    Lastly, this is way OT from Professor Turley’s post on J. Jackson Jr., yet I didn’t hijack the thread.

  24. Nick,

    “The govt. is happy to keep it’s citizens dumb and uninformed”.
    The government doesn’t do that. It misinforms, it spins, it even hides information, but it doesn’t keep us dumb and misinformed except for the very last. It’s other institutions that do, and Pogo is right, it’s us.

    Ever read a newspaper report on a police incident then watched the video? How many of your fellow citizens take a policeman’s word as unassailable? Even when they’re faced with their lying eyes? (I separated the two questions because juries often go with their lying eyes, but the general populace on blogs often find excuses or make up crap wholesale, such as “he called them names” when the video shows otherwise). Even when testilying is a known among police yet seldom covered in the news, any news other than bloggers?

  25. Ariel,

    You underestimate the bad actors in government. They like a stupid populace but that doesn’t preclude them using spin as a control mechanism too. One enhances the other.

  26. Gene H.,

    “Bad actors” isn’t germane to “The govt. is happy to keep it’s citizens dumb and uninformed”. That statement doesn’t mean “bad actors in government” it means government, no distinction between “bad” and “good” within. So it doesn’t make the distinction you claim I underestimate. My response was to the exact meaning of that statement, not the interpretation of “bad actors in government”. But if we have to go there, Woodrow Wilson and FDR are icons in the Democratic mythos, yet Wilson with his Sedition Laws was near fascist (he had tendencies in his economic theories prior to Mussolini), and FDR is the man responsible for J. E. Hoover’s domestic spying on political dissidents (c. 1937 by directive to Hoover). Still the quote I addressed was “The govt. is happy to keep it’s citizens dumb and uninformed”, not the interpretation “the bad actors in government are happy to…”.

    “You underestimate the bad actors in government” is thus a non sequitur in context. BTW, and at odds with your perception, I don’t. Neglecting the usual lies and misrepresentations from Congress and the President (Bush starts with a “B” and Obama with an “O”, the difference regarding truth diminishes rapidly from there), I’m familiar with the Maine fraud, the Tuskegee Syphilis experiment (patterned after a much earlier Norwegian experiment), the Atomic Radiation experiments, the 2nd Gulf of Tonkin fraud, and the latest revelation on Cold War aerosol tests over the mid-West. It’s like he wrote: the “State is the name of the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly it lies; and this lie slips from its mouth: “I, the state, am the people”.

    My point was that we do not get our information from government, other than when our real sources of information swallow what government says. In general, we have historians, journalists, and lay people who try their very best to keep us informed, but often fail when they swallow the government version. That the government is happy to keep it’s citizens dumb and uninformed doesn’t mean that it does keep us that way or that we are. That would only be true if the government was the only source of information. It isn’t, and fails when it tries to be.

    However, government statistics are great, often contradicting the latest government stance.

  27. UPDATE: Former U.S. Prosecutor Negotiating Plea Deal For Jackson Jr.

    “CHICAGO (CBS) – A former U.S. attorney representing embattled Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. is negotiating a plea deal with the federal government, CBS 2 has learned.

    CBS 2 Chief Correspondent Jay Levine has the exclusive details.

    The plea deal would end Jackson’s 17-year career as a congressman representing Chicago’s South Side and suburbs.”

  28. ““Bad actors” isn’t germane to “The govt. is happy to keep it’s citizens dumb and uninformed”. That statement doesn’t mean “bad actors in government” it means government, no distinction between “bad” and “good” within.”

    If that’s what you want to think, sure, but personally I think there is a manifest case that anyone who wants to keep the populace ignorant so as to better control them is a bad actor.

    “So it doesn’t make the distinction you claim I underestimate.”

    If that makes you feel better? Whatever.

    “My response was to the exact meaning of that statement, not the interpretation of “bad actors in government”. But if we have to go there, Woodrow Wilson and FDR are icons in the Democratic mythos, yet Wilson with his Sedition Laws was near fascist (he had tendencies in his economic theories prior to Mussolini), and FDR is the man responsible for J. E. Hoover’s domestic spying on political dissidents (c. 1937 by directive to Hoover). Still the quote I addressed was “The govt. is happy to keep it’s citizens dumb and uninformed”, not the interpretation “the bad actors in government are happy to…”.”

    Look! There’s a giant gorilla climbing up that red herring. And it’s carrying some argument by verbosity! Or is that Fay Raye?

    ““You underestimate the bad actors in government” is thus a non sequitur in context. BTW, and at odds with your perception, I don’t.”

    Argument by non-sequitur. That’s close to logically cogent defense, but not quite. Too bad close isn’t the same thing as is, Ariel. For the fallacy of argument by non-sequitur there must be a disconnection between the premise and the conclusion. Having a premise that you don’t agree with, namely that bad actors will try to keep you ignorant and lie to you for the purpose of manipulation, is not a disconnect between my premise and conclusion.

    “My point was that we do not get our information from government, other than when our real sources of information swallow what government says. In general, we have historians, journalists, and lay people who try their very best to keep us informed, but often fail when they swallow the government version. That the government is happy to keep it’s citizens dumb and uninformed doesn’t mean that it does keep us that way or that we are. That would only be true if the government was the only source of information. It isn’t, and fails when it tries to be.”

    Okay, but that in no way invalidates my point, namely that bad actors in government will try to keep you ignorant and lie to you to control you. This evidence bolsters what my argument, not dismantle it. Why? You have a disconnect between my premise and conclusion and your conclusion base on them,. My argument was:

    Premises –

    Explicit: The government likes a stupid populace but that doesn’t preclude them using spin as a control mechanism.

    Explicit: One enhances the other, i.e. ignorance makes it easier to lie to you and manipulate you and a primary way to keep you ignorant is by lying to you.

    Implicit: Those who would lie to you and keep you ignorant for the purposes of manipulation are bad actors.

    Conclusion – You underestimate the bad actors in government when you said, ““The govt. is happy to keep it’s citizens dumb and uninformed”.
    The government doesn’t do that. It misinforms, it spins, it even hides information, but it doesn’t keep us dumb and misinformed except for the very last.”. They will and does use both – forced ignorance and deception – against the populace.

    “It’s other institutions that do” is a valid observation but it is not relevant to the fact that bad actors in government will and do use both – forced ignorance and deception – against the populace. It’s a weak form of straw man as I never asserted that government was the sole provider of information or disinformation.

    Your conclusion was that my statement was logically fallacious when it was not so simply because you disagreed with a premise of it. Disagreement with a premise is not prime facie disproval of a premise and in your attempt to disprove my premises you revealed the very kind of disjunction your logical process that you accused me of – argument by non-sequitur – coupled with a straw man with a dash of red herring for spice..

    That was a much better counterargument than your one about the word “Eskimo”, but it still fails and ironically enough for being partially itself a non-sequitur. You at least left the argument from emotion out this time. Arguing against the argument of another is not simply further arguing that you are correct. That is insufficient. You must also invalidate the oppositions logic and evidence.

    Much better show this time though.

    Leaving off the argument from emotion is a serious improvement.

  29. You can always count on GeneH to find the long way around getting to his point.

    At which…point…you are too tired to point out how he was wrong. And GeneH wins by submission of boredom.

    Yikes. Anways just checking in to see how my little Marxists were handling the loss of one of their own.

    My favorite over-the-top reaction was BettyKath’s ramble against the white man. That is some major denial girl.

    PatricParamedic’s beatdown response should shut her up…one would think.

  30. “At which…point…you are too tired unable to point out how he was wrong. And GeneH wins by submission of boredom because you are unable to compose a rational evidence based counterargument.”

Comments are closed.