Will judge give Cochran a ‘get out of jail, free’ card in corruption case?

It will be intriguing to see just how a federal judge rules with regards to former 20^th Ward Alderman Willie Cochran, whom federal prosecutors say used funds meant for ward activities instead for personal use.

COCHRAN: Doesn't want to go to prison

Cochran has entered a “guilty” plea, and as expected is hoping his judge will be sympathetic. Although some may say “delusional” would be a more accurate descriptive term.

FOR COCHRAN IS the alderman who earlier this year sent his attorney a written legal brief in which he argued that prison time would be totally inappropriate. But because he apparently got confused in sending out e-mail, a copy was sent to the U.S. Probation Office.

For as Cochran stated, his actions would constitute political corruption. And history shows us that threats of incarceration haven’t done a thing discourage Chicago aldermen (or elected officials from anywhere, actually) from doing things that federal prosecutors believe do not serve the public good.

How else to explain the dozens of former aldermen who wound up ending their time in public service with a prison stint.

Cochran argued that a period of home confinement (say, six months or so) would be a more appropriate punishment for the alderman who solicited donations to provide financial support for a back-to-school picnic, a senior citizen event for Valentine’s Day and other holiday-type events.

PROSECUTORS, HOWEVER, SAY that Cochran took the contributions, then used the money for personal expenses.

Which is why they whacked him with a criminal indictment, resulting in Cochran entering a “guilty” plea back in March. No trial. A chance at a lesser sentence.

Sometimes, it seems these people don't understand the law

Except that Cochran seems to want us to think he didn’t do it – even though he submitted the guilty plea. It’s as though he doesn’t realize the significance of what it means to plead guilty. He’s going to have to take some sort of a legal blow when he comes up for sentencing on June 24.

Which is why the Chicago Sun-Times has reported this week that federal prosecutors are now demanding that Cochran get prison time.

THEY WANT HIM to get something along the lines of an 18-month prison sentence, which they say is close to the maximum sentence he could get. While admitting that if Cochran keeps trying a legal strategy along the lines of “I’m guilty, but I didn’t do it,” they’ll go for the max.

As in two full years of prison time. Which would put Cochran in line with the many other aldermen who wound up having to answer to the title of “inmate,” rather than “counselor.”

It would seem that Cochran has a tenuous grasp of what the law says, and means.

Which shouldn’t be surprising. Because one of the things that has often amazed me through all the years I have written about governing and the making of public policy is just how little officials truly comprehend legal issues.

EVEN THOUGH MANY of them are law school graduates and are certified to practice law, it would seem what they truly grasp are the mechanizations of politics. Which often differs greatly from what prosecutors will accept as legitimate.

These people want to criminalize govt.

Hence, the idea that some 30-plus aldermen ended up as criminals. That’s going back to 1973 – I’m sure the tally would be higher if you pushed the timeline back.

Although then again, legal interpretations used to be looser so that actions we’d now claim are criminal would have been regarded as legitimate, way back when.

Which may well be why federal prosecutors said they plan to enter into evidence the oaths of office that Cochran took when he became an alderman – perhaps they think elected officials need a reminder that the old cliché “talk is cheap” doesn’t apply, and that there’s a meaning to all the gibberish about “upholding” the federal and state constitutions.

  -30-

Presumption of innocence, unless it gets in the way of partisan politics

It is one of the pillars upon which our society´s criminal justice system is based – one is presumed innocent of any criminal charges they may face, until the moment they are found “guilty” by a jury of their peers.

BURKE: Not guilty until proven otherwise

That includes Alderman Edward M. Burke, who earlier this year was named in a criminal complaint alleging some improper activity (trying to shake down the operators of a Burger King franchise in his home neighborhood) – but who learned this week the charges against him are now upgraded to include a whole slew of criminal acts.

IT WOULD SEEM that the U.S. Attorney’s office for Northern Illinois (ie., Chicago proper) is planning on making a priority this year (and probably next) out of going after the man who has managed to survive a half-century in the City Council.

But instead of celebrating the 50-year mark with a gift of gold, there are those who want the color orange to eventually predominate (as in an orange jumpsuit like those worn by prison inmates).

Now I’m not trying to defend the conduct of Burke. I’ll be as interested as anyone else in seeing what kinds of details come out of any criminal proceedings that put Burke on trial before a jury of his peers – who will mostly be people who don’t have the clout to get out of jury duty.

It will be intriguing to see if federal prosecutors actually manage to prove their case against Burke to a degree they can get a criminal conviction against the already 75-year-old alderman who probably thought he’d finish up his time as a political elder statesman.

LIGHTFOOT: She wants Burke out NOW!!!

NOT AS A potential federal inmate colleague of the oft-despised former Illinois governor, Rod Blagojevich.

I don’t doubt, however, that some people aren’t willing to wait out the process – the enforcement of which is what gives our society the moral high ground and keeps our courts from being amongst the more tyrannical systems of the world.

Which is why I’m bothered by just how swiftly Mayor Lori Lightfoot jumped all over the Burke name this week in trying to demand his immediate resignation.

It would seem the one-time federal prosecutor is counting on her one-time legal colleagues at the Dirksen Federal Building to knock off the man who’s made it clear he doesn’t view her mayoral election as being some sort of great moment in Chicago history.

FRIAS: The lone acquitted alderman

WHICH ACTUALLY WAS the area in which Burke liked to think of himself as a master. He was the alderman who used to like to end City Council debates on issues with long, drawn-out statements that were loaded with historical trivia and political factoids that supposedly put every issue into context.

But which all too often made Burke seem like an overbloated ego with too strong a sense of his own self-importance.

Perhaps that’s the reason Lightfoot is eager to see Burke (who managed to win re-election earlier this year with ease) out immediately, and doesn’t feel like waiting for the courts to do their business and reach a “guilty” verdict that would force his immediate resignation.

Will it be the 'feds' challenging … 

It would be a lot fewer headaches for Lightfoot – even though someone of her legal background knows full well she doesn’t have the authority to force him to quit now. If anything, his continued presence at City Hall is more about political spite.

NOW IT’S VERY likely that a “guilty” verdict eventually will be reached. The process really is rigged against anyone whom prosecutors decide to go after.

Much is often made of the 30-plus aldermen who, since 1973, were found “guilty” of some sort of criminal act. Much less mentioned is the name “Ray Frias,” who is memorable because he’s the lone alderman indicted who ultimately managed to get a “not guilty” verdict.

So it may well be that Burke’s place in Chicago political history will be the most prominent alderman to wind up “doing time” for actions prosecutors deem criminal, but which some will try defending as, “the way Chicago politics works.”

… City Hall business-as-usual in Burke trial? Photos by Gregory Tejeda

Lightfoot may get her desire for a Burke-less City Council, but she’d better be wary of her own behavior. Because there’s also no doubt some might try to twist her own actions into criminal behavior – perhaps out of a desire they could add a mayoral name to the dozens of aldermen, Illinois governors and Congressmen, who have wound up doing time.

 -30-

Lightfoot “wins” battle; we’ll need to see how she prevails in the “war”

Mayor Lori Lightfoot had her first official meeting Wednesday with the City Council, and the aldermen didn’t go out of their way to try to humiliate her.

LIGHTFOOT: Prevailed, for now

Now as far as how Lightfoot treated the aldermen, that is debatable. For it could be that Lightfoot came ahead on her first political conflict, but may also have cemented a reputation that is bound to have her name taken in vain in certain City Hall offices.

LIGHTFOOT GETS CREDIT for a “win” because the council formally approved her picks for whom amongst them ought to be in charge of the various council committees.

Including the selection of 32nd Ward Alderman Scott Waguespack as chairman of the almighty and powerful Finance committee. While the senior-most alderman who was the long-time Finance chair, Edward M. Burke, got nothing.

Another council veteran who didn’t get any sort of committee posting was 9^th Ward Alderman Anthony Beale – who had been vocal in his criticisms of Lightfoot and made it pretty clear he didn’t think much of her mayorality. Regardless of the so-called historic nature of her term that many attributed to her.

For what it’s worth, Lightfoot’s committee chairmanships were approved by the aldermen by a voice vote. Meaning there is no recorded roll-call.

Will Burke and Beale (below) become … 

IT IS MORE a matter of the mayor deciding that the “ayes” had it, and as for the “nays,” well, she didn’t hear any, so she says her side prevailed. She won! She so declared it.

Which strikes me as just as much a political “boss” behavior as any of the past mayors from City Hall history whom the Lightfoot proponents are quick to lambast.

For what it’s worth, various news accounts of the council session place the number of potential critics at about 10 – which would mean about 40 supported Lightfoot. Although the Chicago Sun-Times went so far as to say there were four aldermen who voted “no,” with Burke and Beale most definitely being amongst them.

… a bi-racial coalition speaking out against Lori?

But we should keep in mind that nobody recorded a vote, so we can’t say definitively that either man was opposed. Because, after all, the “ayes” have it.

NOW AS FAR as Lightfoot’s appointments on Wednesday, she chose 18 of the 50 aldermen to have committees that they would oversee – thereby giving them some degree of influence; if not outright power.

The appointment that caught my attention was that of 44^th Ward Alderman Tom Tunney, who in addition to being Zoning committee chair also is now vice mayor. Not bad for an alderman whom the Ricketts family tried to single out for political defeat because he wouldn’t cater to all the whims the family had in the way they wanted the Lake View neighborhood surrounding Wrigley Field to be remodeled to the financial benefit of the Chicago Cubs.

Then again, there’s the way the new mayor gave the back of her hand to Burke – who has been an alderman for 50-plus years but now has brought national notoriety (if not outright shame and disgrace) to the City Council for the criminal investigation now pending against him.

At one point, Burke tried to lecture Lightfoot on the use of the pronoun “he” in her measure, and tried to play the moralistic high-ground by calling for gender-neutral terms – to which she cut him off.

WHEN HE TRIED to bring up other issues, she responded, “Alderman, please. I will call you when I want to hear from you.”

TUNNEY: Chicago's new vice-mayor

I don’t doubt that Burke took it as a personal snub, and it most likely was intended as such. For all I know, Burke and Beale (who had been a council committee chair under mayors Emanuel and Daley) may form an alliance – which could also wind up including several Latino aldermen.

Some of whom are miffed over the notion that only two of the 18 committee chairs came from their ranks. Which may be given the political spin of being a multi-racial and ethnic coalition of people who object to the coming of the Lightfoot years.

But then again, we have to concede, Lightfoot did say “please” before treating Burke as coldly as the legendary Richard J. Daley ever treated those opposing aldermen who suddenly saw their microphones turned off in mid-rant!

  -30-

How much of a change-agent can Lori Lightfoot really represent for Chicago?

Come Monday, Lori Lightfoot will take the oath of office essentially promising to uphold the constitutions of the United States and Illinois while overseeing the municipal structure of the city of Chicago.

Chicago's new 'first' family, Lightfoot, wife Amy and daughter Vivian. Photo by Lightfoot for Chicago

It is one that she has engaged in quite a bit of rhetoric implying she plans to revamp everything about the city. I also don’t doubt one bit that many of the people who voted to give Lightfoot three-quarters of the vote in last month’s election have visions of sugar plums dancing about in their heads.

ALMOST AS THOUGH the coming of Lightfoot is a Christmas holiday present for Chicagoans, along with residents of any other community whose operations are impacted by the Second City – only St. Nicholas’ visit has come along with the May flowers.

But I’ll have to admit that whenever I read the reports about how Lightfoot is going to come in and make significant change and is prepared to push around anyone who tries standing in the way of her vision – well, I’m skeptical.

Mostly because I can see all those political people of experience and influence who aren’t about to let their own amount of control be reduced by some woman who’s never held a day of electoral office before in her life.

Same kind of rhetoric once was used  … 

But then again, I also have been skeptical of the whole image that has been peddled about Lightfoot, the candidate. I actually think many of her backers have created an image of Lori that bears no reality as to who she really is.

THE LIGHTFOOT I saw during the campaign cycle (I never really paid much attention to her prior to this year’s elections, as did most Chicagoans, I suspect) had her experience with the U.S. attorney’s office in Chicago – along with a corporate law firm and that stint she did with the Chicago Police Board.

She may well be a prosecutorial-type who viewed city government from the perspective of trying to figure out who needs to be taken down a notch or two – and who now thinks she has the authority to do just that.

But we may well find out that the daily operations of the city may be beyond her grasp. As though she has a learning curve to go through before she can truly get a grasp on the city’s operations and trying to figure out which of its problems she can actually have influence over.

… to describe Jane Byrne's 1979 mayoral victory

Otherwise, she could find herself bogged down in the morass of the city structure. Which would result in Lightfoot finding herself four years from now having achieved nothing of lasting significance.

SHE COULD BE the woman who made it through her term as mayor having been thwarted by aldermen at everything she talked about trying to achieve, but couldn’t because aldermen weren’t about to be reduced to the level of insignificance that some of Lightfoot’s backers, I don’t doubt, dream she’s going to do.

Of course, I suspect that the number of people who were concerned about having a person of some experience in charge of city government is probably about 26 percent.

That figure is the number of voters who actually cast their ballot for Toni Preckwinkle in the run-off election back on April 2.

When you combine that percentage with the roughly two-thirds of Chicago’s registered voters who didn’t even bother to cast a ballot for mayor, you realize how embarrassing the 2019 election cycle was for the city.

'House that Rahm built' will host Lightfoot inauguration

THE REAL QUESTION may well be how much more embarrassing will it become if Chicago’s municipal government structure devolves into petty bickering by the over-bloated egos of those officials who are going to be in charge of our city – and the influence it exerts over other parts of our Midwestern society.

Now I’ll concede it’s possible that I could be underestimating Lightfoot or exaggerating the level of pettiness that the City Council will exert against her.

But then again, my years of writing about political influence in Chicago have taught me that far too many things have been wrecked by the egos of all who have managed to gain a majority of the vote in past election cycles.

So come 10 a.m., when Lightfoot takes her oath at the Wintrust Arena (a structure that likely wouldn’t exist if not for the vision of soon-to-be former Mayor Rahm Emanuel -- despised by many of Lightfoot's most vociferous backers), we’re likely to see for ourselves just how much (if any) of the political trash-talk stands a chance of becoming reality.

  -30-

How “weak” will Mayor Lightfoot be?

It’s one of the big jokes that people like to point out when they discuss the structure of Chicago municipal government – we have a “weak mayor” system.

LIGHTFOOT: Will she be the boss?

Meaning its supposed to be the 50 members of the City Council who really dictate policy with the mayor being an administrative figurehead. A notion that is hilarious in that we usually expect our mayors to behave like political bosses and the aldermen merely serving as “rubber stamps” who sign off on what the mayor tells them to.

BUT IT SEEMS that we may get a change in the way our city government operates.

Lori Lightfoot will begin on Monday the four-year term to which she was elected last month. She’s already made it clear what her priority will be – she wants to do away with the concept of aldermanic privilege.

That concept is one of the underlying principles under which our city has operated for decades. It’s the one that says that when it comes to zoning issues and development that relate to a specific ward, the judgment of the alderman is to reign supreme.

If an alderman wants a project to be developed in his/her ward, the other aldermen are expected to side with his/her desires. It gives the aldermen that little bit of power that encourages them to go along with the desires of the mayor on larger-scale issues.

CONSIDERING THAT MANY aldermen think the neighborhood issues are the reason for their existence, it reinforces the idea that they’re political “bosses” within their own wards.

But Lightfoot made it clear throughout her campaign for mayor she hates the idea of aldermanic privilege. She sees it as aldermen acting like mini-dictators.

Not so much that they stand in the way of projects that would provide serious development to Chicago. But that it encourages aldermen to behave in ways that require business interests to cater to political whims.

How hectic will things get at 'da Hall' Photo by Gregory Tejeda

With some aldermen acting as though their political enrichment is the all-important concern.

ALMOST AS THOUGH aldermanic privilege is nothing more than legalization of political bribery – a concept that the one-time federal prosecutor in Lightfoot finds abhorrent.

It’s almost like she’s still thinking like a member of the U.S. attorney’s office in saying she wants to go after the source of so much aldermanic power and influence.

Lightfoot has said her first order as mayor will be one that eliminates the concept of aldermanic privilege. She says that the aldermen are going to have to think of the needs of the city as a whole.

She also points out that, having won a majority of the vote in all 50 wards, she thinks that’s evidence she has the public’s support – and that many people will be inclined to think that aldermanic objections to losing their privilege is just a matter of being deprived a perk they should never have had to begin with.

BUT ALDERMEN AREN’T about to give up their influence so quickly. We may wind up seeing them go out of their way to remind Lightfoot who the “boss” of Chicago politics truly is.

New friend in Ivanka? Photo provided by White House

Things could get ugly, particularly after Tuesday, when Lightfoot is expected to meet with the council to discuss the aldermanic privilege concept in greater detail.

It may wind up being that the aldermen need some consoling to get them to pipe down with their objections. Because it seems some aldermen are upset that much of Lightfoot’s recent mayor-elect activity has focused on trying to win over the enthusiasm of the D.C. crowd instead of catering to the aldermen. That photograph of 5-foot, 1-inch Lightfoot being towered over by 5-foot, 11-inch presidential daughter Ivanka Trump really turned off a whole lot of Chicago political people.

Because no matter how much Lightfoot wants to assert her authority over ego-overblown aldermen, she’s going to have to remember how much she’ll need them if she’s going to accomplish much of anything on issues – while Ivanka probably won’t have much of anything to say the next time that Donald Trump feels compelled to utter another of his tweets-from-a-twit against the concept of Chicago.

  -30-

Is the presence of Democratic Socialists in City Council really much change?

The concession by Deb Mell of her defeat for re-election to her City Council seat (the one held previously by her father since 1975) has some speculating about the significant change our aldermen will undergo.

RAMIREZ-ROSA: Head of new 'caucus?'

Particularly with the fact that this means there will now be six (out of 50) of the city’s aldermen choosing to use the political label of “Democratic Socialists” to identify themselves – rather than straightforward Democrats.

YET I CAN’T really see significant change in the ways of the City Council. Other than that there may be a few more loudmouths willing to refuse to speak in lock-step with the desires of the mayor.

Then again, with this new mayor who will take over May 20, these not-quite Democrats may well wind up being Lori Lightfoot’s biggest allies. Unless they decide they just want to be outspoken opponents of anybody who happens to be mayor.

Much of my own feeling about the idea of Democratic Socialists in the City Council is based on the fact that most of these so-called radicals (five of the six) are going to be members of the Latino caucus.

Jeannette Taylor, the new alderman of the city’s 20^th Ward on the South Side, is an African-American woman. She’s the lone exception.

OTHERWISE, THIS DEMOCRATIC Socialist movement appears to be something that is a part of the Latino segment of Chicago. It could mean that paying attention to the Latino caucus will be the thing to do for individuals who want to see government officials who can’t get along.

GARCIA: If they challenge Chuy, that's radical

Yet that isn’t a radical idea.

If anything, the idea that Latino politicos aren’t a single, unified voice is nothing new at all. It is the reason why Latino political power and influence isn’t anywhere near as strong in Chicago as it should be.

The city’s Latino political people have always been something to be split into two groups – known informally as the Daley-type aldermen and the activist-type aldermen.

BASICALLY, THERE WERE those people of Latino ethnic origins who made the effort to become a part of the city’s government establishment – figuring that to become part of the system would ensure that the Spanish-speaking enclaves those officials represent would get their fair share of the municipal pie.

MELL: No more!

They were the ones who would ally themselves with the former Mayors Daley and be supportive – figuring that they weren’t a strong-enough entity on their own to be able to resist.

Then there were the activist types – the ones who figured that being too close to the Daley or their backers would merely prevent them from trying to advance their own goals for their communities.

If anything, watching the Latino caucus throughout the years has always been an adventure in political infighting, and seeing how the two groups would try to undermine each other’s efforts. Come Elections Day, they’d each be endorsing opponents to the other side – with hopes they could knock off some incumbents and shift the balance to their side.

NOW, IT WOULD seem that some people who would have been outspoken proponents of this latter-type group are giving themselves the formal label of Democratic Socialists – which, simply put, believes in the social freedoms of Democracy while thinking that the business principles of capitalism undermines any effort to achieve a Democratic society

Although there are times I wonder if the people who spew such rhetoric have merely spent too much time in their youths wearing those t-shirts with pictures of Che Guevara on them – without truly comprehending who Che was or what he meant.

I also think that those people who focus too intently on the “socialist” part of the label are missing the point – as I suspect the real Communists of the world would view the Democratic Socialists as the ultimate hostile enemy.

So is Socialism spreading to City Hall? Most likely, not really!

IT’S MORE LIKE the outspoken portion of the Latino caucus has given itself a new label, and has one ally amongst the council’s Black caucus. As far as the partisan split of the technically non-partisan aldermen, it is one Republican (Anthony Napolitano) along with the six (incumbent Carlos Ramirez Rosa, 35^th Ward, Daniel La Spata, 1^st Ward, Byron Sigcho-Lopez, 25^th Ward, 33^rd Ward, who beat Mell, Rossana Rodriguez-Sanchez, Andre Vasquez, 40^th Ward, and Taylor) Democratic Socialists.

Still likely to be the same nonsense at City Hall

Which means that 43 of the aldermen still identify themselves as standard-issue Democrats. Most of whom can’t “play nice” with each other – meaning the City Council still has potential for political chaos, just like usual.

  -30-

EXTRA: A 'bye, bye' to Rahm-bo

While Lori Lightfoot was in Springfield to meet with the Statehouse-types she’ll be doing business with for the next four years, soon-to-be-former Mayor Rahm Emanuel was the focus of activity at City Hall.

Even Rahm has a 'bubblegum' card

Where aldermen used Wednesday’s City Council session to praise the memory of the man whom many of them lambasted often during his eight years as mayor.

BUT IT SEEMS now that Emanuel is on his way out, aldermen are more than willing to venerate his memory.

Wednesday was a celebratory occasion because it was Emanuel’s last City Council meeting. By the time the council meets again, Lightfoot will have been inaugurated and will have to endure the constant headaches of dealing with her aldermanic colleagues.

For what it’s worth, Emanuel went along with the celebratory mode – taking in character the Hall of Fame baseball player Lou Gehrig, who when he was pushed into baseball retirement in 1939 said he was the “luckiest man on the face of this Earth.”

A moment that later was turned into pure Hollywood by actor Gary Cooper in the 1942 film about Gehrig, “Pride of the Yankees.” Which makes one wonder which actor will someday portray Emanuel, should anyone ever decide to give the cinematic treatment to his life.

EMANUEL PLAYED ALONG with the celebratory mode in moments such as when Alderman Carrie Austin said of Rahm, “You always stood tall even though you’re short.”

Gary Cooper played Gehrig -- who'd be Rahm?

To which the 5-foot, 7-inch Emanuel said, “I’ve got a big mouth.”

But then there was Alderman Edward Burke, who likes to view himself as the City Council’s oracle. Some were wondering prior to the council session whether he’d be willing to play along with the celebratory mode for Emanuel. Or could he use the chance to lambast Hizzoner?

He wound up informing us all that the word “Emanuel” (actually Immanuel) appears in the biblical Book of Isaiah as the protector of the House of David. Which Burke said meant that Rahm essentially was “protector of the House of Chicago.”

  -30-

Will Ed Burke be ultimate beneficiary of Solis “snitching” to the G-men?

Perhaps it’s the ultimate evidence of how superficial some people can be when they determine just who to cast a ballot for, but there’s a part of me that wonders if the recent reports of 25^th Ward Alderman Dan Solis will ultimately work (at least in the short term) to the benefit of Edward M. Burke.

SOLIS: Cooperating to cover own tracks

Burke, of course, is the half-a-century member of the City Council who now is the target of federal investigators who are digging into all sorts of political corruption. It seems much of the evidence they’ve accumulated against Burke comes from Solis.

IN THE FORM of Solis wearing wiretaps for the FBI so that he could get close to Burke and allow “G-men” to catch him on tape in the act of saying something self-incriminating.

Reports of Solis engaging in such activity with the FBI (as part of a deal by which they’ll agree to lesser criminal charges for things that Danny has done) came out this past week, and the reaction of many aldermen was shock, if not outright contempt, that one of their own would try to cover up his behind at the expense of a council colleague.

I’ve seen a lot of people quoting the ideals of organized crime, as expressed in films such as “Goodfellas” or “The Godfather” – the ideal of omerta and keeping silent about what one really knows.

Which to my mindset almost sounds like the real comparison ought to be to street gang culture and the idea of “don’t snitch,” particularly to law enforcement.

ALL OF WHICH means I can easily envision people wanting to think of Danny Solis or anybody like him as somehow worthy of retribution. How can “we” act in a way to make it up to Ed Burke?

Which makes me wonder if Solis’ Mexican-American ethnic origins will wind up coming into factor. Because Burke is the guy who’s facing all these allegations of his own alleged corrupt behavior at a time when he’s facing a re-election challenge.

With his challengers being people of Mexican ethnic origins themselves who are basing their campaigns against Burke on the idea that it’s time to dump the Irish guy whose ward is now an overwhelming (nearly 80 percent) Latino majority population.

BURKE: Could he become sympathetic figure?

I have no doubt that the non-Latino voters in that district will be motivated by the idea of keeping things the way they are. Will there also now be added an angry overtone of turning out in force on Election Day to keep those Latino voters from gaining any influence?

IT’S A STUPID, shallow and completely superficial line of logic. But it’s also something that would totally be in character with Chicago’s neighborhood mindset.

A Latino like Solis gets fingered as a significant part of FBI investigators and their case against the all-powerful, long-time alderman who had the influence to tell mayors what they ought to do within city government.

So now, the voters will think it somehow just to take it out on the three aldermanic candidates of Latino origins themselves who (as they probably see it) have the nerve to think they can run against Burke for his City Council post.

Combine it with the mindset of those such as the Fraternal Order of Police, which recently voted to endorse Burke’s re-election bid in the Feb. 26 municipal elections, and the significant campaign stash that Burke has accumulated for his own benefit – and I can easily see how Burke’s legal predicament can be overcome.

THAT IS, FOR now. Because it’s very likely that any effort to get an indictment against Burke with criminal charges more serious than the current allegations that he tried to shake down a Burger King franchise owner in his neighborhood will come up following the election process.

Burke could easily get re-elected, then indicted, before we reach the peak of the baseball season this summer.

So while I personally have an interest in the growth of Latino political empowerment and would be intrigued by changing ethnic demographics playing a role in Burke’s political downfall, I’m skeptical.

It’s more likely that ethnicity will somehow benefit Burke in the short-term – and that fact could wind up being most embarrassing to Chicago.

  -30-

Survival of Ed Burke? Or the creation of a new Latino political power couple?

So what’s going to be the outcome of this year’s aldermanic elections for Chicago’s 14^th Ward – one of those Southwest Side bastions that likes to think its all politically powerful because its alderman for the past 50 years has been Ed Burke.

BURKE: Latinos to decide if he stays, or goes

Because he’s the council Finance chairman and has been around so long, he has developed a certain undue influence as the aldermen other aldermen seek out for support, and whom mayors themselves think twice about before double-crossing.

BUT BURKE HAS the rumor mill running overtime in thinking he’s under the microscope of the FBI. Nobody knew for what until Thursday, when federal prosecutors filed extortion charges against the long-time alderman for allegedly trying to get the owners of a Burger King franchise to throw legal business to his law firm.

Even before the charges were known, Latino activists who have long noted the area’s growing population shifting from the white Irish of old to a growing mix of Mexican-Americans were thinking this is now the time to dump Eddie and replace him with “one of our own,” so to speak.

But the one thing Burke has going in his favor is that the ethnic vote could wind up being split. It seems that five candidates of Latino ethnic backgrounds have declared their candidacies to challenge Burke come the Feb. 26 election – and April 2 runoff, if necessary.

The last official population count of the city showed the ward with a 79.89 percent total of Latinos. This is NO longer a part of the white ethnic class that three decades ago rewarded Burke for his vocal opposition to Harold Washington’s time as mayor.

Patino and Ortiz (below), … 

WITH SOME 54,000 residents roughly, only 16.87 percent are white. Although many of them are the ones who have lived in the area for decades – if not all their lives. They may also be the ones who most strongly identify with the ward’s old identity – and could easily be swayed into thinking this is an election to keep things the way they were.

Theoretically, a 78.89 percent group ought to be able to mop up the floor with the 16.87 percent group. Particularly if one thing they have in common is that it’s not a black-friendly environment (only 1.5 percent African-American population).

But then we get back to the idea of there being five candidates who will be making the political appeal that it’s “time for change.” Split that majority up five ways, and the white minority becomes large enough to win. Especially if many of the Latino voters can be swayed into thinking that casting a ballot is not worth their time.

… the couple who topple the Burkes?

It was to that end that new Rep. Jesus Garcia, D-Ill., who wants to be viewed as the most-powerful Latino in Chicago politics, felt compelled to intervene in this particular election – making an endorsement of a 28-year-old neophyte to beat Burke.

TANYA PATINO HAS never held elective office before. Her education was in engineering, and Garcia said she could bring an interesting perspective to the City Council – where most aldermen merely think of construction projects as something that brings jobs to their district and puts sizable contributions into their campaign funds.

Patino also is, according to the Chicago Tribune, the woman who is dating Aaron Ortiz, the man who next week takes over the Illinois House seat that was held for many decades by Burke’s brother, Dan. The same elements that took down Dan’s re-election last year are now being turned on Ed.

So is the Ortiz/Patino pairing going to go into the books as the one that knocked the Burkes out of the local political scene altogether? Or will Ed Burke figure out a way to stretch what likely will be his backers’ enthusiasm into a large-enough group to win?

Don’t think this can’t happen. I still recall the 1990s when Republicans got control of the redistricting process and took the Illinois House map for the southwest side and tried to create a whole series of districts meant to bolster the number of African-American legislators.

Some things haven't changed since days of Harold

IN THEORY, THEY did. But in reality, a then little-known lawyer named Tom Dart (I first met him years ago when he was with the state’s attorney’s office at the courthouse in suburban Markham) decided to use his white ethnic Mount Greenwood neighborhood base up against the black majorities that comprised the surrounding neighborhoods within the legislative district.

That 1992 election saw Dart defeat a half-dozen African-American candidates and serve in the Legislature for a decade – eventually building up the greater kind of support that has enabled him to rise to his current post as Cook County Sheriff.

I’m also aware of many suburban communities where majority African-American populations have developed, but that the local governments are run by white people who’ve been around for decades and keep getting re-elected because the long-time residents care enough to turn out to vote on Election Day – while others don’t bother.

So I’d say it’s uncertain as to what the ultimate outcome of the aldermanic election will be – Burke’s continued political survival? Or Ortiz having to accept that his girlfriend could get elected to a position that (within the local political pecking order) outranks his?

  -30-

Burke busted? Or just ammunition to be used by Election Day challengers?

Just what should we think of the fact that FBI agents showed up Thursday morning at the City Hall and neighborhood offices of 14^th Ward Alderman Edward Burke, kicked everybody out without explanation, and began rummaging through the alderman’s files. 

Ald. Burke got himself involved earlier this year in an immigration-related dispute. Will he gain political points as a result? Photo by Gregory Tejeda

Federal investigators aren’t saying anything right away about what they’re looking for. In fact, the only visual image available early on was the sight of the windows and glass doors to the office being covered over with paper – so as to keep people from peeking in and watching just what the FBI is up to!

NOT THAT IT matters much at this point, or probably not at all, what the purpose of Thursday’s raids actually is.

Jesus Garcia thinks it offensive that Burke … 

For the people interested in deposing Burke from office will eagerly use the very presence of FBI at his offices and their suspicion as ample cause for voters to get all worked up and dump him from office come Feb. 26.

The fact is that Burke, who actually will hit the 50-year mark as a member of the City Council come March 12, is going to have serious challengers for his governmental post.

The other fact is that campaigns rarely delve into the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

THAT WOULD COME at a later date if federal investigators actually think they’ve found something that would warrant a criminal investigation. For campaign purposes in Election ’19, any rumor or trivial tidbit that can be made to sound offensive to the public will do.

… has worked as an attorney for Donald Trump

My point is that Thursday’s actions, in and of themselves, don’t constitute much. Particularly since federal investigators have probed Burke’s activity in the City Council in the past. Which Burke himself admitted to Thursday. "Once again, we will be cooperating fully and I am completely confident that at the end of the day, nothing will be found amiss in this instance either."

If Burke truly has any sense, he knows how to conduct himself in ways that prevent him from getting nailed with a criminal indictment.

It almost makes him a political equivalent of Tony Accardo, the long-time boss of organized crime in Chicago who back when he died nearly three decades ago had it said of him he was too smart to ever get busted, which is why he never spent a day of his life in jail.

BURKE’S REAL OFFENSE is the fact that his ward, consisting of neighborhoods on Chicago’s Southwest Side, has changed, just like many other neighborhoods, when it comes to ethnic composition.

In Burke’s case, the ultimate white Irish politico is now representing an area that is overwhelmingly Latino – Mexican-American, to be more specific.

Which is why it shouldn’t be a shock that the other four candidates who filed nominating petitions for the right to run against Burke come Feb. 26 are people of Latin ethnic backgrounds.

While Jesus Garcia, the newly-elected member of Congress from Chicago, is publicly saying that Burke is too tied into the political and business establishment of the city to actually represent the interests of his significant Latino population. Which may be why earlier this year, Burke was eager to publicly get involved in a political dispute over the use of the airport in Gary, Ind. (to which Chicago city government provides some funding) as part of the process of deporting people from the United States.

Burke envisions himself quite the Chicago historian

GARCIA INCLUDES AMONGST those acts the fact that back when Donald Trump was merely a businessman wanting to build that ugly towering structure of his along the Chicago River, he hired Burke to be his attorney and work the deal through the political process.

Burke may not be working for Trump any longer (and I’m sure Trump would be the first to denounce Democrat Burke these days). But it’s guilt by association. When combined with his past as being an outspoken critic of Mayor Harold Washington (which he has offered mea culpas for throughout the years), there are those who’d love to see Ed go down to defeat – just as they beat up on his brother, Dan, who served in the Illinois House of Representatives for many years.

Which means this campaign will get uglier for the man who likes to think he’s the historic voice of Chicago (he often likes to give lengthy speeches filled with historic tidbits). It will be far more than the upcoming ballot lottery to determine whether Burke or Jose Torrez gets the top spot come Feb. 26.

Because I have no doubt the political fantasies will arise about people being able to keep Burke himself from being able to run a credible campaign for re-election.

  -30-