ryr8828 Posted March 8, 2023 at 12:00 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 12:00 PM On 3/8/2023 at 1:03 AM, mab22 said: Thanks for going deeeep on them. Now do Caulkins. 😉 Are you in charge of the circular firing squad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 8, 2023 at 12:05 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 12:05 PM ^^^ 😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 8, 2023 at 12:56 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 12:56 PM Bishop still going at it today. haven’t watched it yet though, but the recusal questions are the subject Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 8, 2023 at 01:34 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 01:34 PM Basically the hornets nest is kicked and Pritzker is gonna have to answer to why he broke his own law regarding donations and if the judges he bankrolled should recuse themselves from cases in which he is defendant, which is both the gun ban case and the SAFE-T act case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiliconSorcerer Posted March 8, 2023 at 03:12 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 03:12 PM Everyone should write the Chicago Tribune and comment on their article asking the question if the justices should recuse themselves. I did but they don't like me anymore either. To: letters@chicagotribune.com Their automated response: (note rules) Thank you for writing the Chicago Tribune opinion team. Because of the number of letters we receive, we can't respond to everyone individually. Please look at our guidance below. If your letter fails to comply with our criteria, it may not be considered. Before sending us a letter, be sure to type your letter in the body of the email. Do not attach it as a document. Please note: • Letters must be NO MORE than 400 words. • Provide us with your full name. (No letters will be published anonymously or with only first names.) Also provide your contact information, including city and state, as well as your phone number for verification purposes. If your letter is chosen, your city/town will be printed with your name. All other contact information will remain private. • No more than four signatures will be printed with a letter. We are looking for: • Timely responses to current events and Tribune news and opinion content. • Thoughtful criticisms of elected officials. • Both serious and whimsical observations of our local communities, our state, our nation and human nature in general. • Personal stories that will resonate with readers. • Pieces that sincerely advocate for legislation or a cause. We are not looking for: • Open letters to elected officials and other people. • Self-serving advocacy or promotional pieces. • Ax-grinding rants. • Poems. We prefer to edit and/or trim letters as little as possible, but we reserve the right to do so. Thank you again for reaching out to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 8, 2023 at 04:16 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 04:16 PM Blue Room Stream’s account retweeted Bishop regarding this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2smartby1/2 Posted March 8, 2023 at 05:32 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 05:32 PM Good info! Illinois is rotten to the core. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 8, 2023 at 08:47 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 08:47 PM (edited) Pritzker asked about it and he is MAD!!!!’ He made excuses (blamed the right-wing media) and walked away 🤣🤣🤣 Edited March 8, 2023 at 08:49 PM by steveTA84 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt B Posted March 8, 2023 at 08:51 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 08:51 PM On 3/8/2023 at 2:47 PM, steveTA84 said: Pritzker asked about it and he is MAD!!!!’ He made excuses and walked away🤣🤣🤣 I like how he categorized 1 million to each judge as “some money” like he found some change behind the couch and gave it to a campaign. He was lead donor for at least one of the judges campaigns and he is lead defendant on a case they are hearing. This is very different than cutting a hundred dollar check to the DNC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 8, 2023 at 09:19 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 09:19 PM (edited) Edited March 8, 2023 at 09:19 PM by steveTA84 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Q Public Posted March 8, 2023 at 09:26 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 09:26 PM Maybe he can get some lock-up hacks from Rob. This is the one we know about... how much more is there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 8, 2023 at 10:57 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 10:57 PM (edited) Buuusted. Caulkins not asking the judges to recuse and just wants a “fair judgement”. That’s not the attitude of someone who wants to win Edited March 8, 2023 at 11:03 PM by steveTA84 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:11 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:11 PM Pritzker didn't look mad to me, just dismissive. As far as Rep. Caulkins being 'busted' that sounds a bit like suggesting nefarious intent. I would wait for more facts before I would go that far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:17 PM Author Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:17 PM I think it's possible that Representative Caulkins is trying to avoid the appearance of making this a political argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryr8828 Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:28 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:28 PM This Caulkins vs Devore with people choosing sides is a clownshow making everyone look like clowns. The only dog I have in this fight is wanting to keep my 2A rights. I will admit that Devore starting this feud makes me suspicious of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:31 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:31 PM (edited) Caulkins should be demanding recusal. If he’s expecting them to do the right thing, he’s going to be sorely upset. If the reverse was happening, we all know the Democrat would be demanding the judges step aside. I’ll eat crow on that if I’m wrong. Regarding DeVore, I don’t care who wins, as long as someone wins here and doesn’t just throw their hands up. Caulkins was given this on a silver platter and there’s no denying anything regarding the content, especially since we have prior SCOTUS precedent on an issue that mirrors it. It should be used Edited March 8, 2023 at 11:32 PM by steveTA84 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:34 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:34 PM On 3/8/2023 at 5:17 PM, mauserme said: I think it's possible that Representative Caulkins is trying to avoid the appearance of making this a political argument. While true (maybe he’s giving them time, none of us can read minds, only what’s in front of us), I guess we shall see in time. Luckily, the federal cases will be further along before May anyways, so maybe both cases (DeVore’s and his) will be moot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:36 PM Author Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:36 PM He's likely following the advice of his attorney, who may have some insight we don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:41 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:41 PM https://www.thecentersquare.com/illinois/article_cdff6172-be06-11ed-a9e4-5357b48209ca.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share (The Center Square) – Gov. J.B. Pritzker said Wednesday that despite his million-dollar donationsto two Illinois Supreme Court justices last year, they are independent and should not have to recuse themselves from two high-profile cases before them in which the governor is a defendant. Pritzker donated a total of $2 million from two separate accounts to then-Illinois Supreme Court candidates Mary O’Brien and Elizabeth Rochford, $1 million each. Those candidates are now justices on the bench of seven who will hear separate challenges to the state's no-cash bail provision (next week) and to the state's gun ban and registry (in May). Pritzker signed both the SAFE-T Act and the gun ban into law and is a defendant in the lawsuits challenging their constitutionality. Responding to a question about the donations, Pritzker said it was "ridiculous" to suggest that anyone who received money from him should have to recuse themselves. “If you’re suggesting that the fact that I gave money to let's say the Democratic Party or the committees that supported candidates means that everybody who’s received any money has to recuse themselves from anything to do with the state of Illinois, that’s ridiculous,” Pritzker said at an unrelated event in Springfield. “And I’ve certainly never asked anybody to vote a certain way or decide on a case a certain way. I would never do that. I never have and I never will.” Independent observers say judges should recuse themselves where there is any hint of conflict of interest.Chris Forsyth with the nonpartisan Judicial Integrity Project in Colorado told The Center Square that trust in the judicial system is crucial in American society. “If we don’t have confidence in the opinions the judicial branch issues then our judicial branch is failing,” Forsyth told The Center Square. Pritzker also said Wednesday that he didn’t violate campaign finance laws he signed last year in making the donations. The 2022 law capped contribution limits in such campaigns to $500,000 from “any single person.” Pritzker's $2 million in donations $1 million each – came from two separate counts, $500,000 to each from both Pritzker’s political campaign and his revocable trust. Illinois House Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch, D-Hillside, also was a top donor to the justices with O’Brien receiving $350,000 and Rochford receiving $150,000 from The People for Emanuel Chris Welch fund. Welch is another top defendant in the gun-ban challenge and the challenge against Illinois’ no-cash bail law that’s currently on hold pending appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:41 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:41 PM On 3/8/2023 at 5:36 PM, mauserme said: He's likely following the advice of his attorney, who may have some insight we don't. True Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tip Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:46 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:46 PM If they do recuse and he doesn’t get a favorable ruling he’s hurting. If they do recuse and he gets a favorable ruling he’s good. If they don’t recuse and he gets a favorable ruling he’s good. If the don’t recuse and he doesn’t get a favorable ruling there’s grounds to continue… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dumak_from_arfcom Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:59 PM Share Posted March 8, 2023 at 11:59 PM On 3/8/2023 at 5:41 PM, steveTA84 said: https://www.thecentersquare.com/illinois/article_cdff6172-be06-11ed-a9e4-5357b48209ca.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=user-share Responding to a question about the donations, Pritzker said it was "ridiculous" to suggest that anyone who received money from him should have to recuse themselves. “If you’re suggesting that the fact that I gave money to let's say the Democratic Party or the committees that supported candidates means that everybody who’s received any money has to recuse themselves from anything to do with the state of Illinois, that’s ridiculous,” Pritzker said at an unrelated event in Springfield. “And I’ve certainly never asked anybody to vote a certain way or decide on a case a certain way. I would never do that. I never have and I never will.” We should have our cases transferred back to Judge Gilbert then. No reason for Gilbert to recuse for simply being a trustee at SIU - a much weaker potential conflict of interest. No, nothing to see here. Besides.. JB didn't tell them to decide a case a certain way, and he never will, and we can take him and his missing toilets at his word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mab22 Posted March 9, 2023 at 12:08 AM Share Posted March 9, 2023 at 12:08 AM On 3/8/2023 at 5:36 PM, mauserme said: He's likely following the advice of his attorney, who may have some insight we don't. You mean the one he told to step aside while he answers the question? He could have let his attorney respond, then follow up after that. His actions tell me he is running the show, not the attorney. I get that we don't want to accuse anyone of nefarious actions, and we will have to see how this plays out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted March 9, 2023 at 12:32 AM Author Share Posted March 9, 2023 at 12:32 AM On 3/8/2023 at 6:08 PM, mab22 said: You mean the one he told to step aside while he answers the question? He could have let his attorney respond, then follow up after that. His actions tell me he is running the show, not the attorney. I get that we don't want to accuse anyone of nefarious actions, and we will have to see how this plays out. If you're talking about the guy that stepped away from the microphone in the Bishop on Air tweet Steve posted at 4:57 PM, he looks like Representative Windhorst to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 9, 2023 at 12:36 AM Share Posted March 9, 2023 at 12:36 AM Yeah it’s Windhorst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 9, 2023 at 02:17 AM Share Posted March 9, 2023 at 02:17 AM (edited) and a lawyer in one of our federal cases Edited March 9, 2023 at 02:18 AM by steveTA84 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted March 9, 2023 at 03:22 AM Share Posted March 9, 2023 at 03:22 AM There is one simple question everyone in Illinois should be asking, since these justices are not needed to deliver a just ruling, why don't they simply step aside and put to rest all doubt they are bought and paid for by JB? If they fail to step aside and ultimently rule in favor of JB, literally no one (that is being honest) will believe they are/were impartial... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 9, 2023 at 03:37 AM Share Posted March 9, 2023 at 03:37 AM (edited) ^^^ if they don’t step aside, a whole new can of worms is opened because they would be violating settled SCOTUS law we can potentially see what’s gonna happen sooner though Both Pritzker and Welch (named in highs this one and the gun case) are defendants Edited March 9, 2023 at 03:38 AM by steveTA84 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveTA84 Posted March 9, 2023 at 12:59 PM Share Posted March 9, 2023 at 12:59 PM Greg Bishop on him (Pritzker) again today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted March 9, 2023 at 01:45 PM Author Share Posted March 9, 2023 at 01:45 PM Ya' know, sometimes letting your opponents step in it on their own can be a strategy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts