Editorial: National media miss mark on Rod Blagojevich

One of the fascinating aspects of the Rod Blagojevich saga has been watching the national media’s interpretations of and reactions to the tribulations of the former governor.

Perhaps most amusing — and, from our perspective, most annoying — has been the extent to which the commentariat most distant from Illinois has either gotten things wrong or concocted opinions that defy reality.

The latest examples came in the wake of last week’s jury deadlock on 23 of the 24 charges against Blagojevich, when the editorial pages of The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post decreed victory for the defense and the end of the federal prosecutor’s career.

The Wall Street Journal invoked martyrdom for Scooter Libby and former Chicago Sun-Times owner Conrad Black at the hands of U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald in its demand that Fitzgerald resign his office immediately.

“This pattern points to a willful prosecutor who throws an exaggerated book at unpopular defendants and hopes at least one of the charges will stick, even as he flouts due process and the presumption of innocence when the political winds are high. If Mr. Fitzgerald doesn’t resign of his own accord, the Justice Department should remove him…,” the Journal thundered in its Aug. 19 editorial.

Here in Illinois, we have a different perspective. Former U.S. Sen. Peter Fitzgerald, who selected Patrick Fitzgerald (no relation), has likened the prosecutor’s presence in Chicago to that of Eliot Ness — the legendary G-man whose outsider status made him effective against Al Capone 80 years ago. Patrick Fitzgerald has shown no tolerance for the “politics as usual” attitude that long was prevalent in Illinois government. The result has been dozens of convictions, including those of two former governors.

On the same day the Journal demanded an end to Patrick Fitzgerald’s career, The Washington Post declared, in an editorial headlined, “Federal prosecutors should not retry Rod Blagojevich,” “In an extraordinary rebuke, Mr. Blagojevich was convicted on only one of 24 counts against him.”

Sorry, visitors from afar, but if not for one stubborn juror, Blagojevich would be facing decades in prison instead of five years. He was not acquitted on a single charge. That’s hardly an extraordinary rebuke. And the Post repeats one of our greatest sources of irritation with national coverage of the trial: “The most explosive accusation was that Mr. Blagojevich was trying to sell his ability to appoint someone to fill President Obama’s former Senate seat.”

The alleged selling of the Senate is what got Blagojevich arrested. The connection to the newly elected president made it national news. And, without doubt, some of the most explosive language was heard in FBI recordings pertaining to it. But to Illinoisans who endured six years of Blagojevich as governor, his alleged pay-to-play shakedowns are equally if not more explosive. They were systemic in the administration. We can only imagine how many other, similar acts might have gone undetected.

Fitzgerald’s investigation was one of the most extensive in Illinois government history. We’ve already seen convictions of various Blagojevich associates and underlings. We’ve heard the wiretap conversations. Illinois deserves a definitive answer on the remaining charges.

If a jury agrees with The Wall Street Journal that Fitzgerald persecutes rather than prosecutes, or simply hasn’t proved his case, it can say as much with an acquittal.

As for The Washington Post’s belief that a mistrial amounts to an exoneration on the remaining counts? We believe there’s a reason why the justice system allows for retrials. In this case, we say let the system work as designed.

The State Journal-Register of Springfield, Ill.