EXTRA: A Cullerton, but not THE Cullerton, gets indicted by the feds

I have no doubt that some people are wetting their pants with glee at the word that a Cullerton, one of the most prominent of political families in Chicago history, got busted by the feds.

CULLERTON -- The federally-indicted one

Sure enough, officials announced that state Sen. Tom Cullerton, D-Villa Park, faces a criminal indictment on some 41 criminal counts. The kind of people who are eager to see a Chicago politico get busted because it fits into their own ideological hang-ups are the ones all excited.

THERE’S JUST ONE problem. The Cullerton who’s the big name these days is John, who serves as president of the Illinois Senate. He’s also the one who’s a direct descendant of the many Cullertons who have been prominent on the Chicago political scene – both within City Hall and Cook County government.

Tom is actually a distant cousin to John, and from a different branch of the Cullerton family tree.

Anybody who thinks they FINALLY nailed a Cullerton ought to relax This isn’t the major deal you might want to fantasize it is.

Just to give you a clue, Tom is actually a DuPage County resident, and once served as mayor of suburban Villa Park. Not exactly a City Hall denizen!

HE’S NOW A part of the DuPage legislative delegation – which is a fact I’m sure infuriates the long-time DuPage residents. The ones who remember back when DuPage County was the base of the Illinois Republican Party and when DuPage was one of the most Republican of counties that could be found anywhere in the United States.

Now, a Cullerton (which in Chicago political circles is a name almost as prominent as “Daley” itself) has a seat in DuPage. Which, I’m sure, is a prominent motivation for locals to want to tag Tom with some wrongdoing.

Mess him up, and maybe dump him do they can replace him with a good ol’ fashioned GOPer (the kind of Republican who reveres the memory of Abraham Lincoln and the days before the Party of Lincoln sold its soul out to the ego of Donald Trump).

I’m not saying that’s the only reason Tom Cullerton got himself indicted. But you can’t underestimate the significance of that element.

CULLERTON -- The prominent one

NOW WHAT ACTUALLY is Cullerton (Tom, not John, although I don’t doubt there are those who will openly encourage any confusion about who’s who within the Cullerton clan) to have done wrong.

It seems from March 2013 to February 2016, Cullerton received a salary as a Teamsters union official, along with bonuses, and allowances to cover the cost of his cellphones and automobiles. He also received health insurance and pension benefits for his “work” with the labor union.

Which prosecutors contend was minimal. He didn’t really do work for the union – although he took their money (more than $252,000). Which has prosecutors insisting it’s criminal, and worthy of embezzlement charges.

It seems the fact that Cullerton took a pass on health insurance benefits he was entitled to as a state legislator (accepting the union’s health plan instead) was not enough to keep him in the clear legally.

HE’S NOW GOING to have to face criminal charges, and likely will be added to the “hit” parade of politicos who got themselves busted. The political prominence of his moniker will add to the impact.

What would feds do for Daley descendant?

Although it should be noted that Cullerton’s indictment came just days after the guilty plea of Teamsters boss John Coli, who supposedly demanded payoffs from a film studio. In exchange for legal considerations, it seems Coli is now talking about union business – including his ties to Tom Cullerton, whom he allegedly set up with the no-work job to begin with.

Could Cullerton be the fish Coli tosses up to prosecutors who figure they get a bigger case if they can bust a “Cullerton,” even if it’s not one of the really big-name Cullertons whose own activities may be even worse?

It makes me wonder how much the federal prosecutorial types would give if they could build up a case against someone with the “Daley” name – no matter how small-fry the actual individual is?

  -30-

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-

EXTRA: Burke ‘not guilty,’ or so he pleads; Lightfoot still wants him out!

Long-time Alderman Edward M. Burke entered his legal plea in court on Tuesday, saying he was “not guilty” of any of the criminal charges for which federal prosecutors are now trying to have him put away for up to some 20 years in prison.

BURKE: Claims innocence

For the record, Burke is charged with racketeering, conspiracy to commit extortion, two counts each of attempted extortion and federal program bribery and eight counts of use of interstate commerce to facilitate unlawful activity.

NOT THAT SUCH a plea was unanticipated. The shock would have come about if Burke were willing to actually admit to doing anything illegal. His defense is likely to be that the strongarm tactics he uses is merely the way Chicago government operates.

Which could be why Mayor Lori Lightfoot is so eager to keep ranting that Burke ought to resign his post in the City Council – the one that he won so easily back in February even though he had Latino activists trying desperately to dump him from office.

Lightfoot followed up Burke’s plea at the Dirksen Federal Building with her own statement saying the alderman must go NOW!!!, even though he’s under no legal obligation to do so. It’s federal prosecutors who must prove their case in court before Burke can be removed from office.

Which wouldn’t bother me so much, except that it’s the third time Lightfoot has called for Burke’s resignation in the less-than-a-week it has been since Burke’s criminal indictment became publicly known.

FOR SOMEONE WHO is herself a former federal prosecutor, she has to know her pleas for resignation are meaningless. Is she really that much of a broken record?

I can’t help but think that every time from here on in that she opens her mouth on this issue, she merely builds up Burke’s reinforcement to want to fight this charge in court.

LIGHTFOOT: Keeping up rhetoric of resignation

And also bolsters the Burke backers who probably don’t have any serious objection to what he is alleged to have done. Yes, those people do exist!

Ed Burke’s fate will be decided in due time, most likely in the next couple of years – it takes time to work one’s way through the judicial process. And if Burke is destined for a dismal fate, there’s no need to rush it just to appease the ego of Chicago’s newest politico.

  -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-

Just what constitutes Justice?

VAN DYKE: What will be left of life?

I can already hear the rants from people who fear that justice (or is that Justice! with a capital “J”) won’t be served in coming weeks.

The would-be defendants whom some are eager to see prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law (if not beyond the extend, with the mythical “book” being thrown at them) are none other than Alderman Edward M. Burke and former police officer Jason Van Dyke.

BURKE: Does he still have a political life?

VAN DYKE, OF course, is the white police officer who was found guilty last year of criminal offenses in the 2014 shooting death of a teenager who happens to be black.

While Burke is the long-time alderman named in a criminal complaint suggesting that he went too far in terms of shaking down a business that wants to remodel a Gage Park neighborhood Burger King franchise.

The very franchise, in fact, where Laquan McDonald, the black teenager, was shot nearby on that night in ’14 when he didn’t stop fast enough to satisfy Van Dyke’s concerns.

It seems that federal prosecutors would like to strengthen their criminal case against Burke by getting a grand jury to indict him on some sort of charge – perhaps something far more significant than he currently faces.

WHICH IS WHY attorneys were in court this week. In theory, prosecutors had until Friday – the next scheduled court date – before they would have to put up or shut up, so to say. Instead, an extension was granted. May 3 is now the significant date.

A fact that will anger those people so eager for a Burke criminal conviction that they dream of it being the factor that knocks him out of the running for the Feb. 26 municipal elections.

Legal notoriety? Or is all publicity good?

Even if the 14^th Ward aldermanic race stretches to an April 2 run-off (which is very likely), it means the elections will be over before we know exactly what will become of Burke on the criminal justice front. He could easily wind up being re-elected before actual charges are known.

It will complicate the desires of those who just want Ed Burke out of office – and really don’t care much about the specific details. It sort of makes it easier for Burke to focus on campaigning for re-election if actual criminal charges are theoretical.

AS FOR FRIDAY in court, it now means nothing for Burke. But for those eager to see criminal justice action that day, the focus will be solely on Van Dyke.

For he’s the one found guilty of second degree murder and multiple counts of aggravated battery with a firearm. Theoretically, he could get multiple sentences for each charge that could have a minimum of 96 years in prison.

A sentence that would appease those people eager to see a cop go to prison for what they will forevermore see as a racially-motivated slaying. But prosecutors admitted this week there is a way to interpret the sentencing guidelines so that Van Dyke could theoretically get 15 years of actual prison time.

At age 40 now, he’d be 55 upon release. Which would still allow him a chance to have some life left in freedom – even though it will be his aging years, as the rest of what’s left of his youth would be spent in prison somewhere.

IT WILL BE interesting to see how Judge Vincent Gaughan interprets the law in this case. I have no doubt everybody’s going to be outraged – from those who want Van Dyke to get some form of probation up to those who want him to get a lengthy, demoralizing prison term then want him to die at the hands of his fellow inmates.

GAUGHAN: Expected to impose sentence Friday

Which is a sick attitude to have, but it is one that becomes all too common amongst the general public. The very reason why we don’t let public sentiment play too much of a role in criminal cases.

Similar to those who would like to see Ed Burke get hauled off to the pokey, so to speak, as punishment for all the ideologically-motivated acts he committed throughout his 50 years in the City Council.

Public sentiment all too often leads to rash acts that, in and of themselves, are an injustice.

  -30-

Is Trump’s word worth anything?

Just a thought that has been bopping about my brain quite a bit in recent days; what if President Donald J. Trump is just toying with the mindset of 40892-424?

TRUMP: What will he do with Rod?

That number, of course, being of federal Bureau of Prisons inmate Rod Blagojevich, whom Trump last week started up a public stink about by suggesting he’s inclined to consider clemency for the one-time Illinois governor.

FOR WHAT IT’S worth, Blagojevich this week formally filed the request to the president seeking some form of pardon from the 14-year prison term he’s now serving – and of which he has completed about half.

Now, it’s truly in the hands of Trump as to what will happen.

Trump may have spewed a lot of trash talk last week about how Blagojevich was merely guilty of saying stupid things and how he thinks the prison term is excessive – even though the legal system all the way up through the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled in ways to uphold the conviction and sentence.

But from the three-plus decades of time I have spent writing about government, politics and the legal system, one thing I have learned is that some people truly are evidence of the cliché “talk is cheap.”

AND IF YOU look at this objectively, Trump has already gained everything he would expect to get out of granting any form of clemency to Blagojevich.

If he were to decide to do nothing and leave Blagojevich in the Colorado-based prison where he has been held since 2011, I don’t think he’d suffer a thing.

If anything, he’d probably gain a bit in the public estimation of the people who are inclined to want Rod to rot in prison for the full 14 years of his sentence (they’re probably offended that his scheduled release in May 2014 means he gets one year, four months of time off for good behavior).

BLAGOJEVICH:Pondering his fate

As for the idea that Trump went back on his word, the majority of people already think Donald is an untrustworthy character (remember the 3 million more in 2016 who wanted “President Hillary R. Clinton?”). His reputation wouldn’t suffer in the least.

THE THOUGHT THAT Trump is merely trying to stir up trouble, particularly amongst those in the Chicago political establishment who would have a personal interest in the Blagojevich case’s eventual outcome, has been bopping about my brain ever since Trump opened his mouth on the issue.

It stepped up even further this week when White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporter-type people the president hasn’t made up his mind about what to do with Blagojevich – no matter what he said the week before.

“The president hasn’t made a final decision on that,” she said. “But as you know, the president doesn’t base his decisions off the criticism of others, but on what he thinks is the right decision to make, and that’s what he’ll base it on.”

So was last week just an effort to stir up rage and anger amongst Chicago Democrats – almost none of whom actually voted for him two years ago?

BECAUSE THE THING that consistently has had me wondering is, “What does Trump think he gains from granting any form of clemency (even a commutation of a prison sentence to ‘time served’) to Blagojevich.

The one trend that has cropped up in seeing the way Trump uses presidential pardon power is that he uses it to reward his allies. Granting a pardon to one-time Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio so he could avoid serving jail time allowed Trump to protect a person who shared his extremist attitudes on immigration – while also offending the people whom Trump has been trying to demonize since ‘Day One’ of his campaigning.

What high  court thought no longer really matters

Even though Blagojevich was far from anything resembling a social liberal on issues, to the ideologues inclined to like Trump, that makes not one bit of difference.

Although if Trump really wanted to perform some form of “justice,” he’d let the Blagojevich request for clemency sit idly by and do nothing with it. Just like Blagojevich was the guy who, as governor, rejected 93 percent of the just over 1,000 clemency requests he acted on – while doing nothing with another 2,800 requests from people whose last chance at relief was gubernatorial consideration.

  -30-

Brown wants to be mayor; can she win 2019 election before being indicted?

It’s not unheard of for someone under criminal suspicion by federal investigators to run for government office. Heck, the taint of a possible indictment doesn’t even always scare voters off from casting a ballot in support of someone.

Is this for real?

Yet I suspect that Dorothy Brown, the Cook County Circuit Court clerk who now has visions of running for mayor come the 2019 election cycle, may well go into the political history books for an over-bloated sense of self-importance.

FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS HAVE long focused their attention on Brown’s behavior as a court clerk and political official, even though as of yet she has not been indicted for anything.

Yet the reports have been intense enough that her name always gets tossed about whenever political corruption is the topic of discussion.

So should Brown, who has been a part of the local government for nearly two decades, seriously be thinking of herself as a challenger to Mayor Rahm Emanuel when he seeks re-election come the Feb. 26 municipal elections?

My guess is she figures there’s so many other challengers (it could be as many as one dozen in the non-partisan election format) that she has as good a chance as anybody else in finishing in second place – which would put her up against Emanuel in an April 2 run-off election (provided that Rahm doesn’t get a clear majority in February).

Just a couple of past politicos who ran ...

BUT COULD BROWN, who some say solicited cash and gifts from her employees – in exchange for promotions, actually overcome the political stink of suspicion and win anything? For her part, Brown says people are lying to federal investigators about her. Or is this a way of bloating her ego in the months prior to the federal government handing down an indictment?

Would this ultimately be the “achievement” for which Brown will be remembered on political scene – the candidate who got indicted in mid-election cycle!

Of course, there have been many names in our political past who wound up having to deal with the suspicion of criminal allegations being floated against them.

... for office with taint of indictment

Rod Blagojevich, whose name cropped up in the news recently when the Supreme Court of the United States rejected a final attempt at appealing his conviction, had suspicion and the FBI against him when he sought re-election in 2006.

YET HE MANAGED to win a second term in office by dumping so much rhetorical crud (including some outright slander) against the reputation of Republican challenger Judy Baar Topinka. It wasn’t until more than two years later that the U.S. Attorney’s office came down with the indictment (which actually was motivated by his actions in the days following the 2008 presidential election of Barack Obama).

Blagojevich was in position to pick Obama’s replacement from Illinois in the U.S. Senate, and prosecutors claim he blatantly solicited payoffs from people interested in getting the appointment.

There are some who think that if Blagojevich hadn’t been so arrogant in his behavior while under investigation, federal investigators might not have been able to get anything on Rod – and the resulting years of criminal proceedings and his incarceration wouldn’t have occurred.

Is that what could happen with Brown? Her having the nerve to run for mayor while under suspicion will motivate prosecutorial-types to find something on her? I’m sure there are some who will fantasize about Brown being carted away in handcuffs by FBI agents just before she could take the mayoral oath of office.

THE OTHER “BIG name” politico who pops into my head is Dan Rostenkowski, the Northwest Side member of Congress who used to be the all-powerful House Ways & Means chairman before he got busted for what some considered a petty offense – purchasing some $22,000 in stamps from the House Post Office, then converting them to cash for his personal use.

EMANUEL: Trying to laugh off his challengers

This came up during his re-election bid of 1994, and the 36-year member of Congress ultimately lost to Republican Mike Flanagan, who lasted but one two-year term before being replaced by none-other-than Blagojevich in his days before becoming governor.

Can Brown be more successful than Rostenkowski was in overcoming suspicion in swaying voters to back her bid for higher office?

Or will her scheduled announcement Sunday that she’s running for mayor merely be the beginning of an absurd election cycle, one which Emanuel himself on Thursday described as a, “political improv show … audition(ing) more cast members.”

  -30-

Is it now in Donald, he Trusts, for Rod?

What a surprise – the Supreme Court of the United States on Monday let it be known it was not inclined to do anything with regards to the case of former governor Rod Blagojevich.

BLAGOJEVICH: Hair color long gone

The governor (a.k.a., inmate no. 40892-424), who is roughly half-way through the prison sentence he’s now serving at a federal facility in Colorado, had hoped the Supreme Court would consider his legal argument that federal judges in Chicago judged him too harshly.

IN HIS WILDEST fantasies, I’m sure they would have given him a prison term so short that it could be said he had already served his time. He’d be going back home to his wife and daughters immediately.

But no, the Supreme Court seems to believe there are no great legal questions that need to be decided in the Blagojevich Affair. Meaning there’s no reason for them to do anything at all.

Which also means that Blagojevich’s 14-year prison term remains in place. That’s the one that (if he qualifies for all the good behavior provisions for early release) would have him out in May 2024.

Just over six years from now. Blagojevich (the governor whose criminal behavior seems to be that he expected to be rewarded for his actions – particularly for the appointment he was entitled to make when Barack Obama gave up his U.S. Senate seat in 2008 to become president) will be free.

CONSIDERING THAT HE’S already served just over six years in prison, it could be said it’s just a matter of time – that the worst of things is over.

Although during those past six years, Blagojevich was clinging to hope that the courts would “see the error of their ways,” so to speak, and give him some ruling that he’d claim to be vindication. Now, he’s going to have to go through the next six years thinking of himself as “just another criminal.”

For it seems the number of legal appeals possible for Blagojevich have run out. Unless he could come up with some new, and previously unknown, evidence, there’s no reason for a judge to consider his case again.

TRUMP: Rod's last-ditch hope for sympathy

And even if he did, the argument most likely would be made that it’s too late; he should have said something earlier in the process.

LITERALLY, ABOUT THE only option for Blagojevich is some form of federal clemency from none other than the president himself.

Considering how erratic the behavior and thought process of Donald J. Trump is on so many issues, there’s certainly no guarantee that he’d be inclined to even consider acting on any measure related to Blagojevich.

I’m also sure that even if Trump were to think of any kind of pardon, it probably would be used to discredit the president. It would be regarded as being amongst his most stupid of actions – and this is a man who during first 16 months of his presidency has made many lunatic decisions. Bottom line? Anybody who needs to rely on Trump for a favor is truly desperate.

Now it’s always possible that a future president could grant some sort of action favorable to Blagojevich. Although that likely would come someday after his release from prison. There’s likely nothing left to be done to get him out of prison early.

DESPITE THIS ATTITUDE, I have to admit it disgusts me the level to which certain people seem compelled to demonize Blagojevich – who during his time as a public official in Illinois was more a goofball than a truly corrupt figure.

Disgusting? Or ha ha-type funny?

In particular, I can’t help but agree with one-time First Lady Patti Blagojevich, who called “disgusting” what I’m sure Gov. Bruce Rauner thinks is a joke (as in, funny, “ha ha”) the filter he paid to have created on SnapChat.

One that allows people to put a comical version of Blagojevich’s now-history coif of hair on a picture of themselves – along with a placard depicting Rod’s federal inmate number.

Maybe the people inclined to rant and rage that Rod Blagojevich was shown too much mercy by the courts will think it funny. Perhaps they’d also like to see an image with a dunce cap superimposed on the current governor?

rod  -30-

Pardoned Arpaio cheats ‘justice,’ yet someone must pay. Will it be Trump?

It wasn’t surprising to learn that President Donald J. Trump would feel compelled to grant a pardon (his first act of clemency) toward one of the most repulsive characters ever to wear a law enforcement badge.
 

TRUMP: President of the xenophobes?

Offensive? Yes. Immoral? Of course!

BUT IT IS totally in character when one considers Trump would not want to be a guy who would want one-time Maricopa, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio punished. He probably thinks it wrong that a law enforcement officer would wind up having to do jail time – even the miniscule sentence that Arpaio was facing.

So the president went ahead and used his power of clemency to undermine the federal prosecutors who got a criminal conviction earlier this year against Arpaio, and were seeking his sentencing come October – when he was likely to face up to six months in jail (probably at a minimum-security facility where extra effort would be made to ensure he was not attacked by other inmates).

Arpaio will never have to face that moment of standing before a judge and hearing that he’s now just another convict. He’ll never have to sit in a cell as punishment for his crimes.

Which, in all honesty, was a moment that a segment of our society was eager to see happen. I suspect that Trump feeling nothing but spite for those people most repulsed by Arpaio were his strongest motivations for issuing a pardon.

FOR ALL I know, Trump may not even truly comprehend what it was that Arpaio did wrong that brought his time as the Phoenix area’s sheriff before prosecutors to begin with.

Arpaio is the guy who likes to think he’s the rough-and-tough lawman who cracks down on criminals. He’s the guy who ran his jail under overly harsh conditions, and he was the one whose deputies often conducted raids of Latino neighborhoods in search of people without valid visas to live in this country.

I’m sure some nitwits will claim that Arpaio is merely the guy who made jail inmates wear pink underwear. But he was the guy who was calling for harassment of people with no real probable cause. Unless you believe being Latino is criminal?

ARPAIO: Won't do the time for his crime

What ultimately got Arpaio into legal trouble is when the courts ruled that the sheriff’s tactics exceeded the limits of the law, yet he persisted with them anyway.

BECAUSE HARASSING PEOPLE whose ethnic origins lie within Mexico was more important to him than actually following the letter of the law to which he was supposed to uphold. Particularly ironic considering that Arizona’s origins lie within Mexico and the Spanish colonies, and one could argue that the people Arpaio was protecting were the real “foreigners.”

But with Trump’s desire to rely solely on the xenophobes with particularly irrational hang-ups with regards to Mexico, it’s no wonder he’d seek to protect Arpaio.

Particularly since his campaign promise of erecting a wall along the U.S./Mexico border is one likely never to come true, he has to be able to claim to have done something that the nativist element of our society. Does protecting Arpaio from having to do laundry detail while serving time in a minimum-security prison facility make up for it? I’m sure Trump is hoping so.

What is going to make this particular pardon stand it is that Arpaio really didn’t fit the usual guidelines for clemency. Usually, someone has to wait a few years before they can even apply for a pardon.

THE POINT BEING that the person in question must actually serve the time. The point of a pardon being to ease the level of shame they must go through during the rest of their lives because of their actions that put them in prison for a stint.

Wonder what he thinks of pink shorts now?

In that regard, Arpaio is likely to go through his life as an unapologetic ass who will “get away” with his actions that brought great harm to people. He’ll probably die thinking he did nothing wrong – even though the Supreme Court of the United States itself has said that accepting a pardon IS an admission of guilt.

But karma has a way of biting back; someone is going to have to suffer for this act of clemency being issued.

Which could wind up being Trump himself, since he has now besmirched his legacy in ways that he likely will never fully appreciate as the xenophobic president, but which the Trump name will have a hard time living down for generations to come.

  -30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: A poll last week by OH Predictive Insights said only 21 percent of Arizona residents wanted the president to offer clemency to Joe Arpaio – who ceased being sheriff last year after losing a re-election bid. It will be interesting to see how big a plummet Trump takes in his own approval ratings; as he had only 35 percent support in the Gallup Organization’s presidential approval poll taken just before he issued his clemency Friday night – likely hoping people would be focused on Hurricane Harvey’s devastation in Texas to pay any attention to Arpaio.

What you think of Blagojevich situation says more about you than him

One-time Illinois first lady Patti Blagojevich may be “dumbfounded” and “flabbergasted” at the federal court judge who on Tuesday refused to reduce the prison sentence her husband, Rod, is serving.

 

BLAGOJEVICH: Could hair dye restore that mane?

But I can’t help but think that there were many people out amongst the masses who cheered quite loudly when they learned during the lunch hour that U.S. District Judge James Zagel re-imposed the same 14-year prison term that he originally gave to the former Illinois governor.

A FEDERAL APPEALS court in Chicago may have decided last year that five of the 14 counts that Rod Blagojevich was found guilty of were improper and tossed them out.

But that still left Blagojevich guilty of nine criminal counts and prosecuting attorneys at the federal courthouse in Chicago were determined to believe that those counts were the most severe and still amounted to acts worthy of a lengthy prison sentence – and not just the usual 18-month stint at the federal correctional center in Oxford, Wis., that often jokingly is referred to as an “Oxford education.”

It may be that only Patti Blagojevich and the couples’ daughters, Amy and Annie, thought there was a serious chance that Zagel would impose a new prison sentence that would result in significantly-less time having to be served at that correctional center in Colorado, or anywhere else.

Most people were getting worked up at the prospect that the overall sentence would be reduced significantly from the 14-year term to about five or six years – which if it had happened would have basically made his time already served sufficient.

WE COULD HAVE had our former governor back in our midst some time by year’s end.

But Zagel likely made himself popular with the public when he made his own comments – the ones about how he wasn’t swayed by the good behavior of Blagojevich while in prison.

“Those people, Zagel said, “knew him from inside the prison. They don’t know him” like we do in the outside world.

And there most definitely are those in our society vengeful or petty enough to want maximum suffering to take place in this instance. Blagojevich’s case brings out a gut emotion in many of us that goes far beyond the facts of the case.

PARTICULARLY FOR THOSE people who want to believe that just about anything political has a touch of criminality involved, and fantasize for the day that Hillary Clinton, her husband Bill and Barack Obama wind up serving prison time.

And probably think that the time served by former Illinois Gov. George Ryan (just over six years) was also a worthy point to let Republican politicos know what can happen to them if they stray from the conservative ideological line.

So in the end, it didn’t matter much that Patti Blagojevich publicly pleaded for mercy, asking that her husband be set free so that he could at least be a father to the couples’ younger daughter (the elder one is off attending college).

It probably also didn’t matter much that Blagojevich himself was contrite and apologetic and said all the things that legal officials usually want to hear about an inmate feeling contrite and apologetic.

BLAGOJEVICH TOLD US he realized the suffering of his wife and daughters in recent years is his fault, and how much of his past political ambition was improper. “I had a lot of ambition before. I learned that some of that is overrated.”

A comment to which I’m sure some amongst us scoffed and sneered before we go back to thinking of the roughly eight years of time that Blagojevich will still owe to the Bureau of Prisons.

In fact, there may be one significant detail that came out of Tuesday’s hearing at the Dirksen Federal Building – the image of Blagojevich broadcast over closed-circuit television from his prison in Colorado most definitely showed that Rod’s hair has, indeed, gone grey. Which, if he had been free and continuing in politics all these years likely would have happened anyway.

Just look at Obama these days – although he can claim it as being from the stress of having Congressional Republicans thwart his every governmental desire, rather than a fear of being caught in a prison yard brawl!

  -30-

Another blast from Chi political past; could ‘Fast Eddie’ return to prison?

It almost feels like the “G-men” of Chicago are engaging in Old Home Week lately.

VRDOLYAK: From before the feds paid him mind

First, we learn that former House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert – one of the few Illinoisans to ever rise to that exulted position – was indicted on charges he violated federal laws concerning bank withdrawals; supposedly to come up with money to pay off someone else to keep quiet about long-ago wrongdoings.

NOW, WE’RE GETTING word that former 10^th Ward Alderman and Cook County Democratic Chairman-who-turned-Republican Edward R. Vrdolyak is the subject of federal investigators.

As of now, Vrdolyak isn’t charged with anything.

But Daniel Soso, an attorney from suburban Alsip, is indicted on federal tax evasion charges. The Chicago Sun-Times reported Sunday that the Soso indictment makes reference to an “Individual A” who may have been involved.

And the newspaper said it has sources contending that Vrdolyak is the aforementioned “Individual A” being referred to.

I PREVIOUSLY MADE reference to a similarity between Hastert and Vrdolyak in that both came to the attention of federal prosecutors long after their time on government payrolls was complete.

Vrdolyak already has served a 10-month prison term for charges contending that he arranged for a kickback in the sale price of a Gold Coast neighborhood building, in addition to any legal fees he would have been entitled to for his legal services.

MEDRANO: Not many pols get 2nd conviction

Is he now going to face the possibility of another prosecution? This one likely to produce a significant prison term? Is someone determined to see that Vrdolyak leaves this mortal realm of existence by being pronounced dead in a prison infirmary?

The newspaper says the latest case relates to the 1998 settlement of Illinois’ lawsuit against tobacco companies – a $9.1 billion payment, which means significant money.

PROSECUTORS ALLEGE THAT Vrdolyak, although not registered as one of the attorneys involved in the case, were paid a portion of the settlement; and did not comply with the regulations set by the state Attorney General’s office for receiving such payments.

HASTERT: Another pol facing not-relaxing retirement

So what should we think? Did Vrdolyak somehow get payments for work done under the table? Or for helping somebody to meet somebody else connected to the case?

We really don’t know what it is that Vrdolyak is purported to have done; other than that the “I” word is being flouted about – and that if he were to be prosecuted for something a second time, it would put “Fast Eddie” in a unique situation.

He and Abrosio Medrano, who also has separate convictions and wound up being returned to prison for a much lengthier sentence than his first stint of incarceration.

IS THAT GOING to become the Vrdolyak legacy? Or is he going to get the support of the East Side and other 10^th Ward residents who once relied on him to be their voice at City Hall – and some of whom still think of him as the person who “saved” their neighborhood.

Of course, what he was saving them from was what was represented by the election of Harold Washington as mayor. Which is why I’m sure there are some people who are more than glad to see Vrdolyak suffer these legal predicaments.

What this case is all going to come down to is trying to figure out what exactly constitutes a legal fee? Why shouldn’t Vrdolyak have received some money if he truly did legal work? I’ve already seen some Facebook commentary implying that prosecutors should, “leave Eddie alone.”

It is interesting that Vrdolyak’s attorney told the Sun-Times that the case was so long ago (17 years) and that his client is now 77; some people will feel sympathy for “Fast Eddie.” But will more be eager to see him carted off to prison yet again?

  -30-