Will Foxx wind up paying politically for her attempt to do the “right” thing?

The Chicago Tribune gave us a disclosure this week with regards to the criminal charges eventually dismissed against actor Jussie Smollett – hinting that it was an act of legal overkill by officials to seek 16 criminal counts against him for his alleged “lies” to police about a racially-motivated attack against himself.

FOXX: Two-day gaffe becomes lifelong screwup

The newspaper managed to get ahold of text messages within the Cook County state’s attorney’s office – and found a message from State’s Attorney Kim Foxx herself.

ONE THAT SAID Foxx thought Smollett was just a “washed up celeb who lied to cops,” and that, “when people accuse us of overcharging cases, … 16 counts on a class 4 (felony, the least severe type) becomes exhibit A.”

Implying that Foxx, in her own mind, thinks she’s protecting the public from legal overkill – prosecutorial-types wanting to lock up everybody in sight they can get ahold of.

There’s just one problem with this line of logic – and it applies even if you fully buy into the notion that Smollett was being victimized by law enforcement-types in this whole matter; which ties back to a January incident where the actor filed a complaint with police saying he was the victim of an assault with racial overtones.

As though he, as both a black and gay man, was the one being persecuted – first by two bigoted thugs (who supposedly put a noose around his neck while telling him “This is MAGA Country”), then by cops and prosecutors who were eager to make him out to be the criminal.

IT WAS ONE of the first rules I had pumped into my head over and over back in the days when I was a cop-type reporter for the old City News Bureau. Police DON’T file criminal charges against people.

Prosecutors do!

Police make arrests, and their investigations provide the basis for the state’s attorney to file criminal charges against people. But there are cases when police arrest someone, and the resulting charges don’t match up with the severity that police think is warranted.

So if this really was a case where Smollett was grossly overcharged, it was Foxx’ own staff that did the overcharging.

THIS MAY BE the biggest reason why it is absurd that the criminal case against Smollett was closed and the records sealed. Because the lack of information creates so much uncertainty about what is really going on.

Personally, I have no problem in believing that the charges had to be dropped because of some legal error that would have made getting a criminal conviction that would stand up under legal appeals impossible to obtain.

But if what we’re learning from text messages is true, it was the state’s attorney’s office itself that seriously screwed up. Which makes all the secrecy nothing more than a matter of covering up the ineptitude of the state’s attorney’s office.

The problem, however, is that some people want to believe the criminal case – which to me always stunk!

YES, THE IDEA of a racial attack that included the rhetoric implying this Age of Trump was to blame was just TOO perfect to be believable. Truth usually isn’t that clean or perfectly set up. I can comprehend why police heard the story early on and thought it was worthy of closer inspection.

But this whole affair would have a better chance of dying down if prosecutors had admitted it was their own overkill. We’d have had a day or two of taking pot shots at Kim Foxx’ reputation, then we’d get bored and move on to the next so-called controversy.

Instead, this issue is going to linger and there will be people determined to use it against Foxx when she seeks re-election in 2020. It may well become the lede of her obituary when the day comes that her life’s legacy needs to be written. Foxx, who botched Smollett investigation, dies, it will read. Or something like that!

Of course, the real issue is that many people are offended that Smollett gets off without prosecution. As though real justice would have been served by allowing an overkill of legality to proceed. And Foxx, who may really believe she was trying to do the “right” thing, winds up getting taken down as a result.

  -30-

How fickle our electorate can be

It can be amusing to see just how quickly we, the voters of Chicago and Cook County, can turn on the political people we elect.

FOXX: Legal savior, now demonized

Almost as though all we really want to do on Election Day is “throw da bums out,” rather than try to judge public officials on their merits and pick the best qualified people.

IT MAKES ME think that just about three years ago, the public sentiment was such that people were looking for an excuse to dump State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez from office. The popular sentiment amongst many was that anybody with sense would choose Kim Foxx to be the county’s head prosecutor.

Sure enough, Foxx won the Democratic primary of 2016. Very few people were the least bit upset to see Alvarez depart – with some wishing she could have suffered something much more severe as part of public officials being prosecuted for the shooting death of a black teenager by a Chicago cop.

But now? How times change!

Foxx is finding herself demonized for the fact that the state’s attorney’s office decided to drop the criminal charges that had been filed against actor Jussie Smollett.

POLICE SUPERINTENDENT EDDIE Johnson is “furious.” Soon-to-be former Mayor Rahm Emanuel says he wants Smollett to have to reimburse Chicago for the cost of the police investigation (some $130,000) against him.

ALVAREZ: Will her legacy change?

Many pundits are going about saying that Foxx will have to take the blame for the failure of Chicago’s law enforcement community to get a criminal conviction of sorts against Smollett.

Heck, some people are going about speculating that even the now-demonized Alvarez wouldn’t have let Smollett walk away unprosecuted – and capable of going around saying he’s the victim of police incompetence.

People already are gunning for Foxx to be dumped from office when she faces re-election in 2020. From reformer looking out for the protection of the people to corrupt hack. It took her just a couple of years. She may never be capable of shaking this stain from her public persona.

WHICH IS SOMETHING we probably ought to keep in mind when it comes to other political posts.

PRECKWINKLE: Once progressive, now a hack

Take mayor, for instance.

Toni Preckwinkle went through her time as alderman and as Cook County Board president with something of a “goo goo” reputation, and was supposed to be the political progressive amongst the 14 candidates who tried becoming mayor in this year’s election cycle.

But when Preckwinkle made it to the run-off stage of the electoral process against a candidate so much like herself, Preckwinkle’s experience made her the “political hack.” Opponent Lori Lightfoot has tried to claim her inexperience in electoral office merely means she hasn’t had the chance to become tainted by it all.

PRECKWINKLE IS BEING demonized now with the issues that her challengers in the 2016 county board presidency campaign tried unsuccessfully to use against her. We’re hearing now more about that pop tax the county tried imposing a few years ago. That issue’s time has come.

LIGHTFOOT: How long 'til electorate turns on her?

Of course, this trend is ongoing. So perhaps before we get all absorbed in the notion of Lori our government savior who’s going to shine a light on everything, keep in mind that it could easily shift gears and voters will rant and rage about how they could ever have been silly enough to think Lightfoot deserved election.

Perhaps her lack of experience, once she has to go up against the political powers-that-be will be such that the electorate will turn on her. It will be intriguing to see how quickly that shift happens, and just what the issue will be that will sway the electorate against her.

Not that I’m feeling all that much sympathy for any of the candidates. Or even for the government that is supposed to represent our interests. For the fact is that we usually get a government of the quality of the people whom we elect. Which means we tend to “get” what we deserve come Elections day.

  -30-

Not a political revolution on Tuesday, no matter what some want to believe

I’m sure there will be those individuals who will contend a serious change in our government was achieved, what with the way voters in Cook County dumped State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez.

Still have my sticker

Anita is the one whom it seems will wind up taking the fall for the police shooting death of Laquan McDonald, as her opponent, Kim Foxx, managed to get a serious voter margin over her.

SO MUCH SO that people can’t argue the presence of a third candidate in the Democratic primary took votes for Anita – Foxx got a solid majority. With particularly strong voter turnout for her in the South Side and surrounding suburbs.

In short, the portions of metro Chicago that have majority African-American populations where people were outraged over the shooting death of McDonald that got captured on video.

The people who have been screaming for Mayor Rahm Emanuel to resign and are frustrated to realize he could care less what they think will have to settle for defeating Alvarez’ re-election bid (she was seeking her third term as head of the county prosecutorial office).

Let’s hope they remain pleased if, in a couple of years from now, the criminal trial of the police officer who shot and killed McDonald (he faces multiple counts of murder) does not go the way they want and the cop gets acquitted (which is always a real possibility).

BUT FOR THOSE people with the Beatles’ song “Revolution” running through their minds, I’d say “Pipe down!” Because dumping Alvarez – while significant – is about as big as things got on this Election Day.

FOXX: The new state's attorney

U.S. Senate hopeful Andrea Zopp, who was hoping that the same people who voted Foxx into the Democratic nomination for state’s attorney would also support her, didn’t do so well.

Her numbers were so weak that the various newsgathering organizations rushed to declare Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., the winner for the Senate right when the polls closed at 7 p.m.

And as for “the Bern,” Sen. Sanders of Vermont would seem to be nothing more than a mild case of suntan in Illinois and elsewhere. For it seems Democrats in this state preferred Hillary Clinton. Then again, so did Democrats in all the states where ballots were cast on Tuesday.

HILLARY, THE PREFERRED candidate of the Democratic Party establishment, continues her progress toward gaining the presidential nomination for the November general election.

CLINTON: She didn't get 'berned' in Illinois

While the one-time “Party of Lincoln” continues to shame the reputation of “Honest Abe” with its desire to nominate obnoxious New York real estate developer Donald Trump for a bid for the White House.

If anything, the intriguing part of Tuesday’s activity may well be the turnout.

It wasn’t that big in Chicago proper – Board of Election Commissioners officials say it was less than the 53 percent of registered voters who turned out in 2008 when hometown boy Barack Obama first ran for president.

BUT IT WAS high in the suburban areas – so much so that the Washington Post made a point of acknowledging the desire of our suburbanites to make sure to cast their ballots.

For what it’s worth, I have one Facebook friend who tells the story of how his parents did not cast their ballots because the lines were so long at their polling place in suburban Buffalo Grove and they couldn’t wait.

While I know my own parents in suburban Homewood saw the long lines of would-be voters waiting to use the touch-screen machines to cast ballots, and wound up deciding to fill out paper ballots instead, rather than wait in line.

All in all, it makes me grateful I used an early voting center to cast my votes a couple of weeks ago. Particularly since any attempt to consider Tuesday’s outcome revolutionary gets dumped all over by the outcome for Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago.

Da winnah, and still champeen!

NOT ONLY DID he solidly crush the challenger who received campaign funding from people loyal to Gov. Bruce Rauner, his preferred candidate of Julianna Stratton managed to crush state Rep. Ken Dunkin, D-Chicago – the legislator whose refusal to support Madigan on several issues undermined the so-called “veto proof” majority that Democrats use as their club over Rauner’s head.

Political retribution was achieved. And how revolutionary can things be if the big winner for the night is the high-and-mighty “Mr. Speaker?”

  -30-

Foxx wants us to not look behind the curtain w/ Preckwinkle standing behind

I found it interesting to learn of the new campaign advertising spot for state’s attorney hopeful Kim Foxx that tries to emphasize her independence.

The new spot tells us of how she experienced first-hand as a child the mean streets of the old Cabrini-Green public housing complex, and makes us think that she identifies with the problems of the segment of our electorate most offended by the behavior of incumbent State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez.

YET THAT ADVERTISEMENT was something I first saw included in a Thursday morning e-mail message from Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle – the woman for whom Foxx worked most recently as her chief of staff.

There are those people who want to believe that the Foxx campaign is merely a tool by which Preckwinkle is trying to assert her own authority over other governmental units.

The combination of the concepts of independence and political ties seems to me to be a strange one, particularly since the Preckwinkle e-mail (officially from the Preckwinkle for President electoral committee) is a fund-raising pitch.

A ploy for us to make contributions of $5, $10 or $25 to the Foxx campaign fund, so as to allow Kim to have “the resources to fight back against these attacks.”

WITH THE ATTACKS being those people determined to point out every potential flaw of the Preckwinkle administration in charge of the Cook County Board, then claim it’s all Foxx’ fault since she was in charge of running Preckwinkle’s county government staff during much of that time period.

How truly independent is Kim Foxx ...

“Kim Foxx’ opponents are trying to discredit our efforts to transform Cook County government,” Preckwinkle wrote in her Foxx fundraising pitch.

So for all the efforts to claim that Kim Foxx is her own woman, she’s going to be clung to by the Preckwinkle people who see that any attacks on her are also going to be blows to themselves.

I’m sure Toni Preckwinkle doesn’t want her own future governance being hindered by the politicking that will take place during the next month over who gets the Democratic nomination for Cook County state’s attorney.

SO SHE THROWS in the appeal for small-scale donations, which is what some political people like to use so they can create the impression that they’re not tied to corporate and other big-money interests.

... from her former boss?

Of course, all those $5 contributions can add up, and potentially into sums that sway the bigger-money people into taking a candidate serious enough that they wind up kicking in their money too.

All too often, those interests want to throw out their money to as many potential candidates as possible – so they can claim they backed “da winner” regardless of which candidate actually wins.

Insofar as Foxx’ actual commercial spot is concerned, it tells us how violence and pleas for help “they’re still here” in urban communities where the issue of violence being caused by the police is not some fantasy too ridiculous to take seriously. Whether that’s enough to get a majority to vote for Foxx, rather than just turn her campaign into the preference of the third of the Chicago population that is African-American, has yet to be seen.

HOW THIS SPOT will play among the electorate and make them want to actually vote (rather than being turned off by whichever nitwit candidates remain in the presidential field by the time the March 15 primary comes along) will be determined.

 

PFANNKUCHE: Takes on Dem winner come Nov.

Although I wonder if there will be even less interest come the November general election when the eventual Democratic nominee claims the right to challenge Republican Christopher E.K. Pfannkuche in the November general election.

Who, you might ask? I must confess that the only reason I know the name is because I remember him prosecuting cases I wrote stories about back when I was a reporter-type person at the Criminal Courts Building for the City News Bureau of old.

Even then, what I most remember about him was that he liked to be identified in copy with his middle initials, but would never actually tell me what they stood for. Maybe by the time November rolls around, I’ll finally learn the answer to that question.

  -30-

Will Dems follow orders, back Foxx?

The Cook County Democratic Party put the word out Thursday – loyal Democrats are supposed to back Kim Foxx’ bid to be the new state’s attorney.

FOXX: The official choice of Dem party

With the party deciding to slate her bid over that of incumbent State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez and challenger Donna More, it means that the political operatives in charge of getting people to actually turn out and vote for Democrats on March 15 will be under orders to stress votes for Foxx.

OR, IF THEY happen to be among those people who just can’t bring themselves to vote for the woman who was once chief of staff to county board President Toni Preckwinkle, they will be under orders to keep their mouths shut and do nothing to interfere with Foxx’ campaign operations.

Personally, I remain unsure how the election for a new state’s attorney this year will turn out.

I don’t doubt that people upset by incidents involving police violence against black people will be in place, and there will be some people more than willing to see incumbent Alvarez go as punishment for the fact it took her office about a full year to decide to prosecute the Chicago cop who shot Laquan McDonald to death.

Even those who I’m sure want to protect the interests of Mayor Rahm Emanuel. Sacrifice Anita, but keep Rahm!

BUT THE FACT is that Foxx will not be in a head-to-head political fight against Alvarez come the Democratic primary. More, a one-time federal prosecutor who also has been involved with the Illinois Gaming Board, has her own share of supporters.

The overly-simplistic way of viewing this fight is to say Foxx will dominate the South Side and suburbs where significant numbers of African-American people live (she is a resident of suburban Flossmoor), while More will be the preferred opposition to Alvarez for North Side and suburban voters who are overwhelmingly white.

PRECKWINKLE: Will she decide election?

Which could result in a split that gives Alvarez just enough voters to win a three-way fight.

So what does this decision to slate Foxx really mean?

IF IT IS a factor in getting North Side and suburban political types to get on board with the program for Foxx, it could be significant. It could be what enables her share of the vote to top Alvarez – particularly if it drives More’s campaign into irrelevancy.

But the one thing I have learned about being around political people is their talk in public often does not match their actions.

RAUNER: Will ties help, or hurt, More?

I could very easily envision a whole batch of whispering taking place up north that enables More to keep getting voter support – even though publicly the officials will claim they’re going along with the political party’s pick on Thursday.

For all I know, the fact that More has a record of financial ties (as in campaign contributions) to Gov. Bruce Rauner could wind up being a boost for herself – even though I’m sure both Alvarez and Foxx will go out of their way to make More out to be the governor’s lackey because of it.

IN SHORT, I remain confused about how this particular election will turn out – and remain convinced that the race for Cook County state’s attorney will be the prime campaign at stake on March 15.

ALVAREZ: Any love for Anita these days?

U.S. president? Forget it! Who really cares which of those clowns running in both major party’s political primaries manages to take Illinois voter supports? Just a bit more evidence of the overly-local tendencies Chicago and suburban voters tend to have when it comes time to walk into the voting booth on Election Day!

And one that could provide yet another anecdotal story about how the political parties just don’t mean as much these days as they did in the days of “the Machine” when “Boss Daley” could bark orders at who should get elected to office.

Somehow, I don’t think Preckwinkle has the same boss-like tendencies.

  -30-

EXTRA: Could racial split boost Anita?

It was a common theme I read expressed on the Internet on Wednesday; Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez is despicable because it took her office two years to figure out that a cop who hit a handcuffed suspect warranted criminal charges.

Will suburban incident ...

I saw countless people use this incident to claim it as all the more evidence of why we should dump Alvarez when we get the chance come the March 15 Democratic primary.

BUT THERE ALSO was another common theme I noticed, and it is the reason I wonder if we’re going to have a whole mess of peeved voters come March 16 who are going to say they voted against Anita, only to have her get re-nominated.

... impact state's attorney's election?

For there are two challengers to Alvarez for the Democratic nomination for state’s attorney – and this threatens to become a campaign with a racial split that could see Anita get more votes than either; even if not enough to claim a voter majority.

There are some people who say Alvarez’ incompetence is all the evidence we need to justify a vote for Donna More. She seems to have some political people of electoral influence on her side, and prominent criminal attorney Sam Adams, Jr., came out publicly in her favor.

ALVAREZ: Benefits of incumbency

Yet there are other political people of an African-American racial flavor who seem to be equally vociferous in claiming that Alvarez’ incompetence is all the evidence we need to justify a vote for Kim Foxx.

FOXX IS A former chief of staff to Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle, who is the big cheese giving her political backing enough to think seriously of running.

FOXX: Is Preckwinkle backing enough?

While More is a former assistant state’s attorney and prosecutor herself who can claim the potential financial support of Gov. Bruce Rauner and the other wealthy people who backed his campaign.

In short, she could have the kind of money that allows her to be competitive.

MORE: Could she be the North Side's favorite?

While I have heard some observations (which are predictable) that Foxx’ political reach doesn’t extend beyond the South and West side neighborhoods in Chicago, and perhaps those southern suburbs (Foxx herself lives these days in suburban Flossmoor) that have majority African-American populations.

THIS COULD BECOME the election where all the white people who want to dump Anita Alvarez go for More, while all the black people pick Foxx.

As for the Latino segment of the electorate, nobody is going to dominate them. Not even Alvarez, whose own background as a career prosecutor in the state’s attorney’s office who gained the top post in the 2008 election cycle makes the more activist of Latino voters suspicious.

It really could turn out that if one candidate cannot ultimately dominate the Alvarez opposition (I don’t doubt that many people upset over the death of Laquan McDonald blame her even more than they blame Mayor Rahm Emanuel), the challengers could split about 65 percent while Anita could wind up winning with about 35 percent of the vote.

And the fact that a videotape exists of suburban Lynwood police officer Brandin Frederickson cold-cocking a criminal suspect in cuffs inside the police station won’t matter all that much.

  -30-

No matter how unpopular, can anyone put up a serious challenge to Alvarez for state’s attorney this year?

I don’t doubt that some people are outraged at Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez, and not just because it seems her office took way too long to decide to prosecute the shooting death of a black teenager by a white Chicago cop that some want to view as an open-and-shut case.

But I still wonder if Alvarez’ chances of political survival are based on the idea that all the people who can’t stand her won’t be able to unite behind a single challenger.

BECAUSE AS OF now, there are two people saying they’ll run against her in the March election for the Democratic nomination for state’s attorney.

We have Kim Foxx, whom it seems is the preference of Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle, and Donna More, herself a career prosecutor and part of the legal community.

I found it amusing to learn of a Public Policy Polling poll this week that actually had Alvarez with 33 percent voter support in the lead.

It placed Foxx in second place with 24 percent, and More with 11 percent at this point in time.

ACTUALLY, I SHOULD write that Foxx is in third place, because “undecided” was actually in second place 32 percent. Which is understandable – it’s early. How many rational people have given any thought to the March primary elections?

Only the political geeks (such as myself) who can’t comprehend that real people have lives and won’t give much thought to down-ballot races for another couple of months.

It’s always possible that a Foxx/More brawl could wind up splitting people so much that the people who always are inclined to back an incumbent could be just enough to win this election.

Particularly if it is true what I hear that More has the potential to tap into wealthy contributors and have the campaign fund that could allow her to be competitive. We probably shouldn’t presume that it would be “Foxx” finishing in second place in this election cycle.

ALTHOUGH IT’S ALSO possible that some of those contributors could come back to bite More in the behind. She’s already drawing criticism for the fact that she was one of Gov. Bruce Rauner’s financial supporters in the 2014 gubernatorial election cycle.

Making some say her claims of being a Democratic partisan are nothing but a crock if she was one of the people who “sold out” Pat Quinn to give us the current governor and the budget stalemate that makes Illinois government the peak of our political foolishness these days.

But I’m not ruling her out, because I don’t doubt some of those people who were itching for a political statement would view More as providing a shakeup similar to what Rauner thinks he’s doing at the state government level.

Then again, maybe Foxx will be the second place finisher and More will wind up being the person who deprives her of enough Alvarez opposition votes to actually be capable of winning the election.

OF COURSE, IT’S still early. It’s 90 or so days to March 15 and the primary that probably will be dominated by thoughts of presidential hopefuls. There still is time for both Foxx and More to fall into the political trap of saying something stupid that gets exaggerated into a major scandal that allegedly shows up unfit either woman is for public office.

Not that I expect Alvarez’ perception to change. I suspect the people who always were opposed to her will remain so, and there’s nothing she can do to improve. She just has to avoid sinking herself lower than she already is.

Because she’s not that far from “36 percent.” That’s the level of support that Harold Washington got in the 1983 primary for mayor. A majority of Chicagoans that time around desperately wanted – for whatever reason – either Jane Byrne or Richard M. Daley.

While I’m not comparing Anita to Harold, let’s be honest. This primary could become a brawl between Foxx and More that winds up maintaining the status quo.

  -30-