Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 - Brown denies he said it *** April?
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Posted in:
* More from today’s appearance by Gov. Rauner on Dan Proft’s show…
Proft: …A story this week about a city attorney who failed to disclose evidence that you’re required to disclose in discovery and now a judge has had to intervene yet again and say there’s going to be a new trial in the wrongful death case of someone else who was killed by a Chicago Police Officer back in 2011. It seems like we need an ARDC investigation, a state investigation—not that Lisa Madigan will do it—, a federal investigation; we need a lot of investigations into a lot of the moving parts in city government.
Rauner: Well that’s right, unfortunately what I’ve heard in the last two days is that Mayor Emanuel has come out and he’s opposed to a federal investigation of the legal department for the City of Chicago, right immediately after one of the attorneys for the city has been accused by a judge of withholding evidence. It’s so…
Proft: Mind-boggling
Rauner: It is. How tone-deaf can you be? I mean how—it’s incredibly disappointing. Why would the mayor fight the investigation of that department, given these facts? Just the way he fought the federal investigation—the civil rights investigation—of the shooting incident. It’s just out of touch and it’s a failure of leadership.
* The Question: Do you agree or disagree with Gov. Rauner’s decision to speak out on this topic? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 2:47 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 - Brown denies he said it *** April?
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Why wouldn’t he?
Comment by A guy Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 2:52 pm
I disagree because I think he is setting a dangerous precedent against himself. Chicago is a obviously a very large and important city, but there’s a better way to handle this in public than to completely throw the Mayor under the bus. It’s pretty unprofessional His statement goes beyond simply making a statement of his position and proceeds to speculate on the Mayor’s unnecessarily.
This is sort of fun coming from a guy that was apparently camping in Northern Africa while a disaster area was being declared within his own state — I for one can’t wait to see the result of the FOIA’s for email and phone communication with the Governor while he was out of the country.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 2:53 pm
Rauner isn’t a careerist go-along get-along who makes wish-washy neutral statements.
Comment by anon. Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 2:55 pm
Handle your bidness first, sir. Was he still “crying” about Laquan McDonald on the flight to Spain?
Comment by LizPhairTax Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 2:55 pm
Yes. Rahm stepped in it first.
Comment by walker Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 2:56 pm
There are(unfortunately)some things so broken that only the feds have the resources to ‘fix’.
Comment by Quip Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 2:56 pm
He is a governor and is not involved in this situation. Commenting on this case by a governor can be used as cause for a mistrial.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 2:57 pm
Yes of course it is a relevant issue for the governor to speak on. Should we actually listen? Probably not. If you want to be critical of someone else’s poor performance, you should do your job to begin with.
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 2:59 pm
Rauner isn’t a careerist go-along get-along who makes wish-washy neutral statements.
Obviously. Unfortunately, he is the governor, so that means he has responsibilities that he doesn’t seem to be smart enough to understand.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 2:59 pm
I think the governor is right to speak out on this even though I do not believe he sincerely cares about the underlying issues. I believe the governor is simply trying to embarrass Rahm and take advantage of the mayor while Emanuel is weak.
Comment by Precinct Captain Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:00 pm
This is a matter of public importance and interest.
The Mayor is hypocritically trying to blame the Governor for “holding kids hostage” by not lavishing the CPS with state money that doesn’t exist. The Mayor is dead meat now; he covered up one shooting and even his legal department is part of the problem. He will fire Steve Patton , which is an admission that he can’t appoint decent people ( see McCarthy and Bird-Bennett! Who else has the courage to publicly chastise the Mayor?
Comment by Let'sMovetoNorthDakota Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:00 pm
Can I be frank? I don’t think Rauner is smart enough to stay above the fray.
Comment by Dome Gnome Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:03 pm
Rauner should remember that what goes around comes around. If I was in his shoes, I’d be trying harder to make friends instead of making enemies, which is all he’s doing by commenting on this.
Sure seems like the Governor could use more friends. Maybe he’d actually get something done if had a little help.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:06 pm
despite my disdain of Rauner, what’s he going to do, sit there and to respond to Proft? the point is kinda moot.
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:06 pm
I said that ruaner shouldn’t be invloved. It has nothing to do with the problems facing the State and the budget mess. It is a needless distraction.
Comment by Huh? Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:13 pm
Rauner is way late to crticizing rahm and the gop. Shameful. U really have to wonder whose side they are on. His apoearance on rinky dinky no audience AM 560 WIND is just another reminder of how much he pays people like proft to be outraged about laquan.
Comment by go4it Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:16 pm
Pot, meet Kettle.
Comment by Jane Doe Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:16 pm
In all honesty, I don’t think he’s speaking out “on the topic,” I think he’s just sticking it to Emanuel out of pettiness.
I’m sure they’ll make nice again at a later date.
If the governor is concerned about public safety issues, perhaps he might want to develop a game plan to enforce the state law regarding the mentally ill and guns.
If he can find a copy of the state Constitution, he’ll see that faithful execution of the law is one of the many duties of the governor.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:17 pm
He is free to say as he likes. But does he ever have an internal editor who listens to what he is saying? How tone-deaf can you be? Words like ‘out of touch’ and ‘failure of leadership’ can easily bite back at a needed time.
Comment by z Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:18 pm
He was asked the question and I think he should have answered. I think he went a bit too far in his criticism of the Mayor. The Governor certainly isn’t helping anything with his attacks on the Mayor. A better response would have been “yeah, there should be an investigation so we can get to the bottom of what exactly happened.”
So I guess my answer is yes he should have jumped into the fray but that his answer wasn’t the best way to do it.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:18 pm
Disagree. This smacks of cynical opportunism, not an actual concern with the underlying problem. The governor has taken no tangible actions in his capacity as the state’s chief executive to actually address the problem of police misconduct. There’s a state police force. Why not conduct a pro-active review to determine if any of the problems that we see across the country are present at the state level? What about other actual SOLUTIONS Rauner can provide to local governments in his capacity as governor? Wasn’t there just a task force on local governing units?
The reality is that Rauner is concerned about this issue for the same reason he seems to be concerned about any issue- it gives him leverage to push his turnaround agenda.
Comment by Scmods Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:20 pm
Rauner is full of it. How long did it take him to say anything. He and the Republicans and all of the people he pays (i.e .Proft) waited until everyone else condemned Rahm before stepping in. Fake outrage is no outrage.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:21 pm
I just don’t see how this helps him leverage support for his agenda. A better statement would have been that this is an issue for the city and the feds to address and he instead is focused like a laser on resolving the state’s budget crisis.
Comment by Dance Band on the Titanic Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:23 pm
Comment on this for us Bruce:
You employ someone at one of your nursing homes who hasnt done any work in their 1st year.
Would you fire them?
Can we citizens fire you for dereliction of duties?
Once your house is in order Bruce, then please feel free to speak up.
Oh, by the way, where is your Constitutionally Mandated Balanced Budget?
Comment by Jack Stephens Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:34 pm
It occurs that a ‘governor’ is supposed to be supporting and helping governmental units in his state.
Apparently not with this guy.
Comment by sal-says Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:41 pm
” How tone-deaf can you be?” Sorry, BVR but I could ask the same of you!!!!
Comment by illini Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:42 pm
Buy, sell, or hold. Rauner is probably a hold. But, Rahm is a sell; the party is nearly over
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:45 pm
I think the Governor expressed a valid and proper opinion on the subject. I just wonder if he realizes that a Federal investigation might include a full fledged review of the Mayor’s communications.
Comment by Triple fat Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:45 pm
My opinion is very similar to Demoralized’s. I agree that his comments were not in moderation, but more in the extreme.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:53 pm
Amen, A guy. Why wouldn’t the Gov.? Will anyone really argue Rahm wouldn’t do at least the same?
Comment by Georg Sande Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:56 pm
So tired of the campaigning. Let’s see some governin’!
Comment by Stuff Happens Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 3:56 pm
I have no love for this governor, in fact, I think he’s an unmitigated disaster. But…the culture surrounding the code of silence in law enforcement is incredibly dangerous, and disenfranchising, to the citizenry at large, and I welcome any and every voice to speak out about it, whether that voice comes from genuine concern or is disingenuous pandering, which honestly, I think Rauner’s comments are. The mayor saying this abhorrent code doesn’t extend to the corporation counsel’s office is just a flat out lie considering what we now know. The attorney who resigned, I hope, will be sanctioned in some way.
Snitches get stitches may be the saying on the streets, but they learned it from the cops who’ve been practicing the same code for decades
Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:02 pm
Rahm served it up on a platter for him.
If Rauner’s strategy was to cut a deal on the budget and win some concessions, it would have been a mistake. But since he is going to Hulk Smash! his way through the next three years, he’s got no reason to hold back.
Comment by Century Club Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:07 pm
A trustworthy man would choose to do a gut-check before a gut-stomp on his buddy.
But nobody would confuse such a man with the Governor.
Stomp away, I say, Bruce.
http://www.enotes.com/shakespeare-quotes/hoist-with-his-own-petard
Comment by crazybleedingheart Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:10 pm
I’m with Bidenopolous: what we should be talking about here is how do you fix the depth of dishonesty & official corruption, not what BVR says one way or the other. Over time, more & more folks will come to realize there’s no possible improvement here until Rahm DOES leave. His resignation WILL eventually come.
Comment by The Historian Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:11 pm
Rauner’s in campaign mode which means trash all Democrats, Madigan and Emanuel top the list. He won’t agree on a budget until he gets his union-busting demands. He has zero accomplishments to show for his first year in office and he’s happy for the death spiral of this state so he can continue to blame key Democrats without doing anything himself to end this mess.
Were his comments helpful or even appropriate? No, but he really doesn’t care about what’s appropriate at this time. Everything in this state is bad, bad, bad because of the Democrats and that’s all he’s going to be talking about long past the primaries.
Comment by Wensicia Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:13 pm
Cities are a creation of the state legislature. The state legislature should investigate Chicago. Anyway, Rauner has every right to say what he wants about Chicago’s failures. It’s long past time people who who in Chicago government are held accountable.
Comment by Steve Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:16 pm
The ARDC does not have the power to conduct an investigation of an agency but may only investigate allegations that an individual attorney violated one of the professional rules of conduct. What Rauner or Rahm could do is to ask the Illinois Supreme Court to investigate the City Law Department. Remember how Preckwinkle whined in a letter to the Chief Justice about every agency in Cook County so the Supreme Court agreed to conduct an inquiry into pre-trial services? The Illinois Supreme Court controls the law licenses. Most attorneys are more afraid of that than of the Justice Department.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:17 pm
“Commenting on this case by a governor can be used as cause for a mistrial. ”
Maybe, if it were highly publicized, occurred mid-trial, and any of the jurors admitted to reading or hearing about it.
But this statement? Now? When there’s not even an investigation much less an indictment or trial? Not happening.
Comment by JoanP Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:17 pm
Voted “Agree”
“Why?”
People will hold, and have held Rauner accountable, so I hope the governor keeps that in mind when speaking on this subject.
I also agree with - Wordslinger -.
This is really about the pettiness more than making it about the subject at hand.
That’s fine. But, remember that when you’re down, and you’re gettin’ kicked, justifiably… or even when it’s not.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:38 pm
While it is unfortunate that it wasn’t until Proft and Rauner thought they could score political points by standing up against police abuse and cover ups, I’m glad they finally did so.
Too bad offering a balanced budget would not score political points, or we would be in far better shape.
Comment by Gooner Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:39 pm
Rauner can speak out about this matter, but others can talk about Rauner’s perceived failings. Emanuel is fair game, but so is Rauner - and neither are doing a “bang-up” job at the moment.
Comment by Christopher Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:40 pm
By the way, am I the only laughing out loud over Dan Proft’s claim over the past two days or so that he cares about poor people in Chicago?
Comment by Gooner Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:45 pm
Typical of Rauner…for him it’s all about posturing and ego and trying to “one up” the Mayor during a politically vulnerable time. But what about the millions of Chicagoans who the Governor represents? What about the kids who go to CPS whose education hangs in the balance? Sadly, I don’t think they are in the equation. This isn’t the business world, the goal is not to “win.” The Governor is supposed to be governing…but I’m afraid he has no idea what that means.
Comment by Oh please.... Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:55 pm
Governor Rauner and his Republicans are in an historic power struggle with the Illinois Democratic party. Credibility and honesty likely will play a large part in the ultimate resolution.
USDC Judge Chang provided a startling, well crafted and detailed opinion exposing significant fissures in the Democrat run law department in the state’s largest Democratic city in the state’s largest Democratic county.
Gov. Rauner commenting on the issue was appropriate.
Comment by Cook County Commoner Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:56 pm
I don’t think Rauner likes tossing people under the bus. I think he like running them over and that’s exactly what he did today with Rahm. Rahm is now another hood ornament on Rauner’s VW bus. I agree with Demoralized statement @ 3:18.
Comment by No Longer A Lurker Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:58 pm
Did Proft ever think to ask Rauner if he shed any tears for the poor kid who got shut out so his daughter could illegally” go to a Chicago Public High School?
Comment by Roscoe Tom Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:59 pm
“How tone-deaf can you be?” the governor asked without a trace of irony or self-awareness.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 4:59 pm
I voted disagree with the decision, but I’m not sure if I disagree with the fact that he spoke or with what he chose to say. I’m just so exhausted by his unhelpful campaign-style rhetoric (right with you StuffHappens @3:56) that moves nothing of substance forward while the most vulnerable among us suffer under a budget crisis he treats so cavalierly (and, I argue, created).
Comment by Not It Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 5:09 pm
Rauner could have easily side stepped the question. Bashing Rahm does not help Rauner reach any discernible goals.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 5:18 pm
Rahm, over a period of time has clearly not handled this well. At all. No one is throwing Rahm under the bus. He has in essence thrown himself under the bus, and people in Chicago and elsewhere deserve to know how other elected officials and leaders feel about it. I would hope that our state’s governor regardless of party would have something to say about the situation, the cover-ups, the suspect proprietorial acts necessitating retrial, and the payouts. The national media is very hostile to Rahm at this point and surely no one thinks Rauner is controlling the news cycle. Rauner had everything to gain and nothing to lose by criticizing Mayor Emanuel.
Comment by Responsa Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 6:21 pm
I voted no.
As a citizen of Illinois I have a right to a budget. As a taxpayer I have a right to fiscal responsibility.
Since my rights don’t mean squat his right to pontificate is hereby eliminated.
Comment by Sir Reel Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 6:28 pm
I voted no, see MrJM 4:59 and Sir Reel 6:28, couldn’t say it better.
Comment by burbanite Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 6:47 pm
He was bothering talking with Dan Proft….about anything, and expecting to be viewed as credible?
Comment by Elliott Ness Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 6:54 pm
Doesn’t Gov. Raunger have his own problems to deal with? How about a balanced budget proposal? How about the fact that Illinois ranks last in percentage of educations cost paid by State funds. How about the fact that the previous fact makes us incredibly dependent on local property taxes to fund education of our children? Additionally, the fact that this way of funding education causes an even greater disparity in the QUALITY of the education our children receive. How about the fact that we’re the State with the worst credit rating. Which is caused by the fact that we’ve had a structural deficit for decades due to inadequate revenue and an antiquated system of taxation that happens to be incredibly regressive? In conclusion, this one term fluke might benefit from alot less talking BS about a “turn around agenda” and a little more working at the JOB YOU WANTED….. governing the Land of Lincoln.
Comment by qualified someone nobody sent Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 8:48 pm
Kudos to the Governor for exercising leadership. It’s time that the elected government get control from the unelected bureaucracy, and that includes police unions who have a stranglehold on the state legislature when it comes to criminalizing police misconduct.
Get rid of the one year statute of limitations for 1983 federal civil rights suits imposed by the Municipal Tort Immunity Act for starters, so victims of police criminals can have a fair chance at redress in court.
It took 20 years to prosecute Jon Burge, and it took the U.S. Attorney’s office with the weight of the Federal Govt. to do it, and they were only able to prosecute for perjury, not torture.
Comment by Payback Wednesday, Jan 6, 16 @ 9:52 pm
Disagree. He ought to focus on his own wheelhouse.
Comment by NoGifts Thursday, Jan 7, 16 @ 5:44 am
I don’t understand some of the implications that Rauner should not have commented on potential indiscretions from City attorneys in order to curry favors related to the budget proposals. If I was Rauner, I would continue to press Emanuel on this issue. And I don’t even like Rauner.
Comment by W.S. Thursday, Jan 7, 16 @ 12:06 pm