Will Gov. Rauner commit political suicide w/ immigration-related move?

To listen to the ideologues of Illinois, Gov. Bruce Rauner is going to do some serious

RAUNER: On the outs w/ ideologues

harm to his political reputation next week, if he follows through with his talk that implies he’s going to sign into law a measure meant to restrict law enforcement across the state from meddling into immigration enforcement.

Most famously, Chicago and Cook County, have declared themselves to be sanctuary cities – where people who might not have legal residency status to be in this country don’t have to worry every time they come into contact with local police for a traffic ticket or other matter.
 

TRUMP: Most definitely in good standing

EVEN SOME SUBURBS such as Evanston and Oak Park, along with nearby cities such as Gary, Ind., have declared themselves welcoming cities, which is a status meant to ensure that local police don’t get involved in federal immigration enforcement unless essential for local interests.

Now, the General Assembly this spring approved a measure it calls the Trust Act, which would prevent Illinois law enforcement entities – including local cops across the state – from arresting or detaining anyone based on suspicion of illegitimate immigration status.

Local police would only be allowed to detain a person who is not a .U.S. citizen or legal resident if there is an arrest warrant for that particular individual.

To many people, it is merely common sense that local police are busy enough enforcing local laws and that federal authorities are the ones with jurisdiction to handle the nuances of immigration law – which go farther than the notion of deporting everybody who isn’t like themselves.

BUT TO THE ideologues who support these kinds of ridiculous crackdowns (and likely idolize all of Donald Trump’s stupid-talk on the issue), the fact that Rauner has called the Trust Act “very reasonable” is offensive. The fact that both the Chicago Sun-Times and Chicago Tribune reported that he is inclined to sign the bill on Monday is a major negative action.

WALSH: Rauner is 'done'

One Republican legislator from the part of Illinois near St. Louis said that Rauner approving this measure would be the “last straw” that would tick off rural Illinoisans who have been solid Rauner backers.

The Sun-Times quoted Republican activist-types, including former Rep. Joe Walsh of the northwest suburbs, as saying that Rauner approval for this measure as dooming him politically. “Governor Rauner is done,” Walsh said in Trump’s favorite medium – the 140 characters of Twitter.

Now as one who has followed the political debate over immigration policy and the need for reform for years, it doesn’t shock me to learn that the ideologues are taking a hard line that bears no tie to rationality.

IT WOULD SEEM the fact that Rauner has gone through his two-plus years as governor openly hostile to much of Chicago’s interests to try to garner the rural support isn’t sufficient.

Showing quarter on this issue is one that would undo everything else. Just as it was no accident that the Trump presidential campaign’s initial inanity was to criticize Mexicans and much has focused on non-Anglo people with strong ethnic ties to other parts of the world, they want the governor to behave in the same manner.

Would a Trump pardon for Arpaio be viewed ...

Even though amongst law enforcement officials, the concept of jurisdiction is a strong one, and cops usually are aware of when they have no authority to take on a particular incident. So why they’re expected to run roughshod over jurisdiction in immigration cases really makes little to no sense.

Of course, what these ideologues want is for someone to reinforce their own irrational hang-ups about our society. Trying to apply logic won’t work for Rauner in this case.

I WASN’T KIDDING when I wrote that they want more nonsense-talk like that of Trump – who just this week while in Phoenix hinted he’s inclined to give a pardon to former Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio. He’s the cop who throughout the years was so vociferous in his efforts to crack down on immigration that he violated federal court orders that were meant to restrict him from harassment.

... similar to when President Ford pardoned Nixon?

Arpaio faces sentencing in October for his contempt of court conviction, and he could get some jail time – a thought that would please many people who have been harassed by him throughout the years. Yet Trump says he’s inclined to offer a pardon – which would pre-empt the possibility of incarceration.

A move that would be perceived by some as more despicable than when then-President Gerald R. Ford pardoned Richard Nixon for his Watergate-era offenses.

I have no doubt that some will lionize Trump if he does that, just as they will lambast Rauner if he follows through with his talk on the Trust Act. Stances that actually say more about the depraved ideals those people have, more than anything about the governor or president themselves.

  -30-

Now they want to “lock up” Rahm? "Sanctuary city" will be battleground

It never fails to amaze me the level of nonsense that gets spewed by people with regards to immigration policy, particularly when the topic of sanctuary cities arise.
 

Will 'sanctuary' cities be the first issue...

Chicago is one such place – where people whose immigration status is uncertain are supposed to not fear interactions with local police because our cops don’t automatically turn over such information to federal immigration officials.

IN SHORT, GETTING pulled over for a traffic ticket or a petty offense will be treated solely as the petty offense it is, and not balloon into an immigration hearing with deportation consequences.

But now that we’re in the era where we will soon have a “President Donald J. Trump” who campaigned on the notion that he was going to give rise to the number of deportations from this country and otherwise keep out people he deems undesirable, it has some wondering what happens next.

I stumbled across an Internet comment (anonymous, of course) from someone who wants the new president to start punishing local officials, including our very own Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who don’t get with the program on immigration enforcement.

“Trump could even prosecute Rahm for things like obstruction of justice and could lock that dirty little f*cker up for the rest of his miserable life,” he (or she) wrote.

GEE, FIRST THESE people were chanting at the Republican convention for the incarceration of Hillary Clinton. Now they want the mayor of Chicago locked up for not fitting their ideological hang-ups. For people who probably think they’re “real Americans,” I find it odd they’re so eager to turn this country into a police state!

But the pressure is being put on cities that made themselves sanctuaries because there are those ideological nut cases who want to make people not like themselves miserable. Perhaps they’re the ones who found something logical in that “self-deportation” nonsense that Mitt Romney spewed four years ago during his failed presidential bid.

But now we’re going to have to see just how far Trump is willing to carry out the trash talk of his campaign. There are those people who voted Republican because they want to believe he didn’t mean anything he said literally.

 

... upon which Rahm and Trump clash?

Yet the honest truth is that there also are those people who were most enthusiastic to vote for Trump because they WANT to believe him literally, particularly on the immigration issue.

IF TRUMP’S FIRST presidential act isn’t the full repeal of the executive orders issued by Barack Obama to offer comfort to young people who were brought by their parents without full immigration status, they will revolt.

They will want the punitive action by the federal government against urban areas in general, and sanctuary cities like Chicago in particular.

For what it’s worth, the mayor has said this week the city is not about to give up its sanctuary city status – which was enacted before he became mayor and is largely a symbolic policy. Chicago officials made it known they’re not looking to bully non-citizens.

Not that it means anyone in Chicago is immune from prosecution. For federal immigration officials have agents in Chicago on the search for those who are not supposed to be residing in this country. They can still investigate and prosecute cases.

IT JUST MEANS they have to do their own legwork, instead of being able to rely on the Chicago Police Department for some free assistance.

OBAMA: How quickly will immigration views die?

Considering that immigration is an issue that lies beyond the Chicago Police jurisdiction, it only makes sense they should butt out. Immigration officials are the ones trained in the nuances of immigration law and understand it better than a beat cop who pulled someone over for driving with a busted tail light.

We’ll have to see just how this whole issue shakes down. I don’t doubt some are eager to see urban areas punished for this issue – although the real reason is more a matter of partisan politics rather than anything else. For the urban areas, particularly places like Chicago, did NOT vote for Trump’s presidential ambitions.

They are the reason why Hillary Clinton will win the popular vote so overwhelmingly (which is what all those polls were reflecting when they showed her likely to win the presidential election) despite losing the Electoral College, and I’m sure Trump is a vindictive-enough individual to be willing to find a way to try to crack down on his political opponents.

  -30-

Illinois GOP wants us to dump all over Lisa Madigan; what else is new?

MADIGAN: Doing her job!

Somebody needs to have a serious sit-down with Illinois Republican Chairman Pat Brady to explain to him the way in which lawyers and government work. Because it is clear from his rhetoric on Friday that he’s taking advantage of people who don’t have a clear concept – all so he can score some cheap political points.

Brady on Friday issued a statement that is meant to get the GOP faithful all worked up over the indictment this week of Cook County Board member Bill Beavers – who got hit on assorted tax charges.

DA FEDS. THE G. The I.R.S., to be specific. In short, the federal government is going after Beavers for the way in which he did not (allegedly) report his use of campaign contributions and county expense accounts for personal purposes.

In his statement, Brady wants to know why Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan didn’t catch Beavers first.

He says she has “not undertaken any significant public corruption investigations in her nine years in office,” and wants us to think of the highly-qualified daughter of the speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives as some sort of incompetent boob.

“It is mind-boggling that in a state where the last two governors stand convicted of corruption, that ranks as the third-most corrupt state in the country, and is home to Chicago, ranked as the most corrupt city in the country that our chief law enforcement officer has yet to undertake any significant public corruption investigations in her nearly 10 years in office,” Brady said.

NONSENSE, I REPLY.

Despite all the nonsensical uses of forms of the word “corrupt” in that last part of his statement, there is one thing that Brady states that is just flat-out wrong.

The Illinois attorney general is NOT the “chief law enforcement officer” in this state.

Her office does contain some functions that cause its collections of legal minds to get involved in criminal law on occasion. But the attorneys on the state payroll mostly deal in matters of civil law.

IF ANYTHING, LISA Madigan is the attorney for Illinois state government. When the state gets sued, she is the one who represents it. When the state’s agencies with some enforcement powers decide to take someone to court, it is Madigan’s staff of attorneys who handle the legal brawl.

It is probably most accurate to think of the Illinois attorney general’s office as the law firm used by state government – and Lisa Madigan as its administrator.

People who want to think that she’s packing a badge in her purse and is prepared to whip it out and start arresting people really are missing the point of what her authority is.

So the idea that Madigan would be finding a reason to investigate Beavers, or any of the other political hacks who have wound up finding themselves astray with the law, isn’t quite right.

THERE’S ALSO THE fact that the acts that Beavers (and, in fact, many of those who have been caught up in various government corruption probes) have done things that are explicit violations of federal law. That is particularly true of Beavers – whose actions to bolster his own pension and use his county expense account are completely legal, in and of themselves.

It is the fact that Beavers is alleged to have not acknowledged his use of the money as additional personal income, and may have filed his income tax returns in a way to try to cover up this use, that is the crime the feds say Beavers committed.

If Madigan’s aides had come across some sort of evidence that Beavers had done this, their proper course of action would have been to turn it over to the I.R.S. so their investigators could handle the matter.

It wouldn’t have been to take a show-boating stance on the matter to try to gain attention for herself. That would have been inappropriate – and the ideologues who Brady is trying to reach out to are usually the first to get upset about governments stepping on each other’s jurisdictions – but only if it is a Republican-leaning government that is being told what to do by someone else.

WHICH IS TO say that Brady’s rhetoric is nothing more than nonsense. He wants people who might not spend every waking hour studying the finer nuances of differing levels of government to think that something is being mishandled – when, in reality, nothing is.

I realize that Brady is a political operative whose “job” is to get people all worked up to the point where they would actually consider voting for Republican candidates for elective office.

But just because Pat feels the need to spew a line or two of trash-talk to try to gain himself some attention in the feeding frenzy that will take place with regards to the Bill Beavers story does NOT mean we, the people of Illinois, ought to feel the least bit obligated to take his talk the least bit seriously!

  -30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: The Capitol Fax newsletter on Friday asked people to express their view on whether Pat Brady’s attack on Lisa Madigan was “fair.” The Illinois GOP used their Facebook site to direct people to the newsletter so that they could say it was.