* Greg Hinz…
The Illinois State Board of Elections has taken the first step to probe whether a political spending group run by Chicago political activist and talk radio host Dan Proft illegally colluded with GOP gubernatorial nominee Darren Bailey in last year’s election.
At its meeting yesterday, the board agreed with a hearing examiner that “justifiable grounds” exist “with some basis in fact” to believe that Proft coordinated with Bailey’s campaign in efforts to promote Bailey, then a state senator, and bash his Democratic rival, incumbent Gov. J.B. Pritzker, who was re-elected. […]
The key matter referenced in the board report was a series of interviews Bailey granted to Proft for his radio show during the campaign. Among other things, the two repeatedly suggested that, because of high crime rates under Democratic officials, Chicago “isn’t a safe place to live.” Proft later echoed that theme in his PAC ads, repeatedly blaming Pritzker for letting crime get out of control. […]
In his rebuttal brief, Proft’s attorney asserted that merely appearing on a radio show and discussing issues of importance “doesn’t indicate any kind of control.” All of the items referenced in the TV ads and in stories in faux newspapers published by a Proft firm were based on information that was readily available to the public without any coordination, the attorney said, accusing Democrats in the case of engaging in “a fishing expedition.” Attorneys for Proft and Bailey had sought to have the board dismiss the case.
There’s more.
- DuPage Dad - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 3:19 pm:
But they’re People Who Play By The Rules?
Grifters gonna grift.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 3:22 pm:
“ People Who Play By The Rules”… snarkingly silly.
Proft once losing tens of thousands before in filings, this type of thingy ain’t no accounting error.
- H-W - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 3:25 pm:
According to Proft’s attorney, “All of the items referenced in the TV ads and in stories in faux newspapers published by a Proft.”
Wait. What? Proft’s attorney going on record to claim Proft publishes faux newspapers is an interesting sidebar.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 3:26 pm:
It’s funny to watch Dan Proft lose, but does this set any precedent for other campaigns would be my first question. Lots of redboxing going on as discussed before.
- ste_with a v_en - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 3:27 pm:
Proft was the Bailey campaign.
- Sox Fan - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 3:29 pm:
I read that as Hinz calling the newspapers “faux”
- Big Dipper - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 3:31 pm:
Hasn’t Vallas been doing the same thing?
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 3:41 pm:
H-W, there are no quotation marks around what you put quotation marks around.
- ste_with a v_en - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 3:45 pm:
Will this hearing be available on the ISBE website?
- Pundent - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 3:57 pm:
Good for the ISBE to take this up. But unfortunately it will just result in more victimhood by people who’s irrelevance has been aptly demonstrated. And I also expect that the ILGOP will fuel that sense of victimhood. But more importantly for the party, the continued association with the likes of Proft and Bailey will be an albatross that keeps the party from winning anything of consequence.
- Too cute by half - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 4:00 pm:
Proft lies at every opportunity, the only reason he has a platform is because he has rich backers and conservative base will listen to anyone that plays into their agreement bias. His show is basically an ongoing inkind donation to any maga candidates, and he regularly spreads conspiracy theories about his political opponents.
When I occasionally have the great displeasure of hearing a segment of his show, I can use it as a sort of reverse fact check because I know he’s full of it.
- Hot Taeks - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 4:17 pm:
I doubt any punishment will come out of this as campaigns collude all the time in a post-Citizens United World. I do believe that Proft-Uihlein spending kept Bailey reasonably close as in losing by low single digits instead of 15%+ to Mr. Pritzker.
- Hot Taeks - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 4:18 pm:
Oops. Sorry. Meant low double digits.
- Amalia - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 4:28 pm:
Running for popcorn before reading……
- Pundent - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 4:34 pm:
= Proft-Uihlein spending kept Bailey reasonably close=
Losing is losing. And they lost by a lot. And not just the Bailey race. For the second cycle in a row the ILGOP won no races of consequence. Grifting aside, for all that colluding it isn’t getting them anywhere. And maybe that’s the point. I would expect that both Proft and Bailey will look to monetize this moment. And sadly it appears that the ILGOP sees grifting (and grievances) as more important than winning.
- ste_with a v_en - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 4:51 pm:
If you look up the expenditures for Starfish Consulting, looks like Proft pulled in over 600,000 in one year with his PAC.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 4:58 pm:
All that money going around and through Proft, and yet the $38-$40k that Proft seemingly lost was “oops, my bad”?
Lemme me clear, I’m not saying someone is gaming the whole reporting system, I’m not saying that, no.
If there is a colluding, I’d there a betting on the grift being enough that the fine is merely a cost of doing grifting?
- H-W - Thursday, Feb 23, 23 @ 5:38 pm:
@ Rich
My mistake then. I listened to the audio link, and thought the reporter said the attorney said. I guess I read too much into the audio.