Who are you to be questioning us? Is anybody shocked the attitude exists?

I have written about enough governmental entities throughout the years to know that officials really don’t like being questioned.

Questioning the coppers? None of ya bizness!

By anybody! About anything!

SO I CAN’T say I’m shocked to learn of the Chicago Tribune report detailing how the Chicago Police Board did a pseudo-investigation about everyone who, in the mindset of the coppers, had the nerve to think they could speak out at their public meetings.

Those laws requiring that governmental entities do their business in public? That doesn’t really mean people are enthused about the possibility of having their actions scrutinized. Or as one-time Mayor Richard M. Daley once put it, “Go scrutinize yourself. I get scrootined every day.”

In fact, I don’t doubt that police in particular don’t want anybody else looking all that closely to the ways and means by which they enforce the laws. Which, sadly enough, are just like sausages – it would sicken you to know some of the things that occur in the name of justice.

So according to the Tribune, it seems that some 60 people who filed the requests to speak before the Police Board were actually investigated prior to being permitted to speak.

THE POLICE KNEW in advance if there was anything they could use against the individuals who wanted to speak out against police practices. I suspect that in their mindset, they were prepared to arrest anyone who tried to speak out – if they could get “the goods” on them to back up a charge.

And then we wonder why some people are less-than-trusting of law enforcement personnel in general, and uniformed police officers in particular.

The Tribune actually pointed out that the 60 people whom they found were investigated date back to 2018, but found officials admitting that the background checks, which is how police prefer to think of them, actually date back years further.

It reeks of intimidation, almost as though people are supposed to know better than to want to question the police. Which actually reminds me of a Cook County sheriff’s deputy I once knew who complained about how some officers took their authority far too seriously.

AS I REMEMBER him asking theoretically, “Who really polices the police? It’s nobody.”

Although like I said, it seems public officials in general really don’t care for scrutiny.

I remember one board of education I used to write about on a regular basis that always made a point of publicly disclosing every single person who sought information through the Freedom of Information Act, which is supposed to be about making the details of government operations easier to obtain.

But instead, this school board viewed it as a trouble-maker list; those people who had the nerve to think they were entitled to find out what was really happening. Just think how dangerous those people would have been if they had police powers just like the coppers themselves?

  -30-

71 years later, and yet the Woody Guthrie tune remains ever-so relevant

Good bye to my Juan/Good bye Rosalita
Adios mis amigos Jesus y Maria
You won’t have a name/When you ride the big airplane
All they will call you/Will be ‘deportees’
--Plane Wreck at Los Gatos/Woody Guthrie (1948)

  -0-

It’s kind of scary to think that a song composed some 70-plus years ago remains so dead-on accurate this far into the 21^st Century. Yet that seems to be the case with the famed protest tune “Deportee.”

Composed and originally performed by Woody Guthrie, the same man who gave us “This Land is Your Land,” the tune has come to be associated with folk singer Pete Seeger and has been covered by so many differing artists – including some such as Dolly Parton and Johnny Cash whom I’m sure many would think fit the profile of the “real America” the ideologues claim they support.

THE SONG WAS motivated by Guthrie being offended by the New York Times account of the Jan. 28, 1948 plane crash near Los Gatos Canyon – not far from Fresno, Calif. Guthrie was bothered by the fact that the report clearly identified the members of the flight crew , while merely dismissed the 28 migrant farm workers on their way back to Mexico as “deportees.”

Which, I would suspect, is exactly the way that the proponents of the immigration raids that President Donald Trump has been screeching and screaming about for months would like to see happen yet again.

The raids were supposedly (or at least according to the rumor mill that Trump is openly encouraging) set to occur Sunday – possibly in the early hours. Many hundreds, if not thousands, of foreigners whom the ideologues are determined to think of as criminal just for their very existence in this country will be woken up from their sleep, hauled off by authorities, and eventually put onto an airplane taking them to Brownsville, Texas – where a bus will then transport them across the border to Mexico.

The last thing we’re supposed to think about is the fact that these individuals are human beings, with lives and individualities. Who probably are doing work in this country that make a worthwhile contribution to our society.

NOT THAT THE ideologues want to hear any of this kind of talk. It was just a week ago I encountered someone (who actually is a decent-enough human being) who tried to justify his nativist thoughts by saying he’s really only against Somalis – whom he claims are absolutely refusing to assimilate to the ways of life of our nation.

I don’t doubt that any effort to do reporting on the actual deportation process to bring humanity to these people will be regarded as somehow being un-American. Although to me, the actual “un-American” conduct is having the authorities bust down people’s doors and haul them off – possibly before anyone is truly awake and aware of what is happening. Just like in the modern-day Russia or North Korea whom Trump claims aren't really all that bad!

Now it’s always possible that the anticipated deportations won’t be as extensive as some fear – and are merely trash-talk meant to feed the mini-mentalities of those people who want to think Donald Trump is a true patriot – rather than just an egotistical buffoon with a bloated view of his self-importance. Maybe Monday will feel like a relief.

But the way in which the Trump-types keep insisting they’re targeting people with arrest records in this country (and could accidentally pick up others in the process) makes it seem like Guthrie was on to something all those years ago when he wrote: “They chase us like outlaws/Like rustlers, like thieves.”

  -30-

Buttigieg seeks Jackson redemption

Pete Buttigieg’s presidential campaign is a confounding mess – he’s raising a significant amount of money that would give him a chance to be a competitive campaigner, yet he has many would-be black voters thinking he’s the devil incarnate.

BUTTIGIEG: In trouble with black voters

So what does he choose to do? He gets himself a spot on the program Tuesday of the Rainbow/PUSH convention held every year in Chicago.

IN SHORT, HE seeks out an audience with none other than the Rev. Jesse Jackson himself – hoping that Jackson will give him the political equivalent of a papal blessing that would get many black voters to quit thinking in terms of Buttigieg as the absolute last of the two dozen presidential aspirants whom they’d consider supporting.

Buttigieg, at 37, is amongst the youngest of the presidential dreamers, and he has attracted some support from the kind of people who want to believe that everybody else is far too old to be in charge of the federal government.

Youth, vigor, somebody who understands (and is fully a part of) the world of the 21^st Century! Which is why he was able to raise some $24.8 million in donations during the second fundraising quarter – more than any other candidate.

He may have the kind of campaign cash that could make him competitive with the Bernie Sanders’ and the Joe Biden’s of the political world. But the man whose political background is serving as the mayor of South Bend, Ind., also is turning out to be the guy that black voters want to see go down to an embarrassing defeat.

AS IN THERE are some black voters who not only want him to lose, they want him to become politically-damaged goods to the point where he’d never be able to run for any government post again in the future.

It stems from an incident in South Bend where the local police were involved in a shooting incident in which a black man was killed.

It didn’t help that the officer was equipped with a body camera and a squad car with a video camera, yet neither one managed to record the incident – which might have backed up the officer’s claims that the man was armed with a knife and was brandishing it.

JACKSON: Being sought for his aid

Also the fact that Buttigieg himself has let himself get bogged down by the whole affair – making himself seem weak and indecisive and potentially helping to cover up details in the whole affair.

SO THE MAN who is openly in a gay marriage who’d like to think he’s the natural choice of all progressive-minded people has one segment of the Democratic electorate wishing he’d drop dead.

And some Democratic political operatives thinking that Buttigieg himself is just too flawed to unite the various factions that comprise the modern-day Democrats.

Hence, Buttigieg seeks redemption in the form of Jesse Jackson. Who had a meeting with the mayor, then allowed him to speak at the Rainbow/PUSH forum gathering.

But the most important part may well be the words from Jackson himself, who said he thinks the accounts many people have heard about what is happening in South Bend are distorted, and that Buttigieg has handled things about as well as any political person could.

“HE’S HANDLED AN awkward situation well by being transparent,” Jackson said of Buttigieg, while also tossing out a potshot against Indiana state law that actually forbids municipalities from having residency requirements for their police officers and firefighters.

SANDERS: Can 'Mayor Pete' beat him?

The fact that cops in South Bend don’t have to live in the city (only within an adjacent county) means local residents don’t necessarily trust them, and view them as something of the equivalent of an “occupying force.”

A description that I’m sure law enforcement types will resent, and one that could come back to bite Buttigieg on the behind if he gets perceived as having too much support from Jackson.

Although for now, I’m sure “Mayor Pete” would gladly accept a Jesse Jackson blessing, if only it results in turning black voters into a segment that eagerly awaits his electoral defeat in the 2020 presidential election cycle.

  -30-

Mixed message on urban violence

Call it the advantage of multiple news organizations reporting happenings – we get a more-thorough picture of reality.

Or perhaps it is the concept of dueling news organizations – with the various sides unable to agree on what they want the message to be. Which still results in a greater picture of what is occurring within our society.

THOUGHTS THAT RUN through my mind as I peruse reports by the Chicago Sun-Times and WBBM-TV – both of which purport to be about the levels of violent crime and murder that are occurring in Chicago.

With some individuals of a certain ideological leaning eager to want to believe that the city of Chicago is amongst the grubbiest, grossest, most violent places that exist within the United States – if not anywhere on Planet Earth.

Which is a gross exaggeration, although there are certain neighborhoods where the levels of violence seem so intense that we have to wonder how we as a people could ever have let conditions get so out of hand in those places. Although many of us choose to cope with such conditions by ignoring such places altogether.

The Sun-Times took the angle in a story published Monday that this very weekend that marks the half-way point through 2019 is yet another of a bloody morass that is modern-day Chicago.

THE HEADLINE ALONE says it all – 56 shot – 4 fatally – in Chicago over weekend.

With a subhead pointing out one incident alone on Saturday where five people were shot on the Near West Side, although in that incident, it should be noted that all five individuals were able to get themselves to area hospitals where they were ‘treated and released’ for their wounds.

Bloodshed galore. It’s a wonder we don’t have Donald Trump engaging in yet another Twitter-motivated rant about how gory Chicago has become.

But then, there was the CBS-operated station in Chicago, which came out with a story the same morning indicating the number of shootings in Chicago are down for 2019 – compared to the past.

ALTHOUGH WBBM-TV INDICATED that this was a particularly harsh weekend of violence in Chicago, overall, it seems there are signs of improvement.

Some 1,229 shootings in Chicago through Sunday – about 100 less than the first half of 2018 and lower than any year since 2015.

Also, we have 236 murders in Chicago thus far this year – which the TV reports indicate is 21 less than the fist half of last year.

And certainly might put Chicago at about 260 or so slayings for this year – if things continue at this rate. Far less than the recent years when the homicide totals reached 700 or more (or the late 1980s when Chicago would easily come close to 1,000 murders annually.

SO WAS THIS Chicago Police Department spin control in trying to give us a bigger picture about the amount of violence and crime occurring in Chicago? Or is it ideological prattle to come up with tales of how bloody and out-of-control the city was on this past weekend?

Or is it really evidence that “facts” can be found to justify any point of view one wants to take on just about any issue.

Personally, I’m inclined to think that some people use the story of urban violence in such ways as to confirm whatever ideological hang-ups they have about life and our society – wanting to further lambast whomever or whatever they have contempt for.

Then again, to those four people who were killed this weekend prior to Independence Day in Chicago this year, it WAS a most-tragic period of time – a moment that their families will forevermore mourn for its great loss!

  -30-

Trump talk more about scaring people silly, not accomplishing anything

I’m not sure how seriously we ought to take the latest round of Trump trash talk that says, beginning Sunday, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials will step up their efforts to remove from this country those individuals who haven’t dotted all the “I’s” and crossed all the “T’s” involved in getting a valid visa.

TRUMP: Sunday's the day; no more foreigners

Trump says the efforts will focus on certain cities, places that he thinks are so-called hell-holes that have too many foreigners. Yes, our very own Chicago is on the list.

SO ARE WE going to see people getting picked up, hauled away in a van, and wind up being processed for removal from this country?

Is this weekend literally “the end” of their stay in the United States for some 1 million people, as President Donald Trump insists?

I don’t doubt there are individuals who will, by coincidence, come to the attention of federal immigration officials and wind up being processed for removal this weekend.

But let’s be frank (or should we be Francisco?) here and say I doubt there will be much of a coordinated effort taking place across the more urban areas of our nation, all at the whim of Donald J. Trump.

FOR ONE THING, I suspect such an organized effort is beyond the organizational skills of federal immigration officials. If anything, it might be better to study how many people continue to evade the attention of immigration this weekend, or in coming weeks.

I suspect that Trump’s trash talk is more about el Donaldo thinking he can scare the chones off of so many Latinos by making them think the end is near for their search of a better life in the United States.

Because the dreaded la Migra is going to come and get you, similar to how some people like to tell their children tales of the boogeyman coming to take you away.

PRITZKER: The protector?

Trump thinking he can terrify Latinos (and anybody else who isn’t “white American” enough to satisfy his definition of “belonging” in this country) probably gives him a tingle of joy. Although for all we know, that ‘tingle’ is really just the president wetting his pants.

OR MORE IMPORTANT, it could be something he says just to give his silent majority (which is most definitely not silent and really only consists of about one-third of our society’s population) a jolt – to the point where they’ll sing his praises and talk up a storm about how we need “four more years” of a Trump presidency.

It’s political rhetoric, not serious public policy. Because it is delusional to think that Trump could seriously achieve the notion of removing more than a million people from this country without causing a sudden vacuum in our society.

Then again, I have to wonder about the three bills Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed into law on Friday – all related to immigration and preserving the notion that our state government views the federal immigration officials who get worked up over xenophobic fantasy as political nitwits.

Illinois now forbids the private detention centers that immigration officials want to hold all these foreigners until they can get around to deporting them. Also, non-citizens will be able to apply for financial aid if they’re accepted at state colleges.

AND LOCAL LAW enforcement officials across Illinois will be prohibited from cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials. Which theoretically means immigration officials will have to do their own work in terms of enforcing federal law. Local cops will stay out of it.

Which ought to make sense to everybody. Except for nativist ideologues who want to view police of all types as a unified force that harasses people who aren’t exactly like themselves.

As much as Trump is trying to gain the support of those ideologue-inclined individuals, Pritzker wants people to know clearly that he (and Illinois) is on the complete opposite side of this political equation.

Think of it this way; Trump wants to scare up the foreigners, while Pritzker wants to frighten the ideologues who can’t comprehend a society that is accepting to all. What does it say about you personally if you side with Trump and his trash talk?

  -30-

Is Lightfoot providing a mayoral “plus” or “minus” for the Chicago P.D.

Mayor Lori Lightfoot is putting together the team of people who will comprise city government for the next four years, and it was interesting to see her initial moves that relate to the Chicago Police Department.

JOHNSON: Same police superintendent

Eddie Johnson, the man who became police superintendent after long-time law enforcement veteran Garry McCarthy was sacrificed by Rahm Emanuel to try to appease people p-o’ed about the shooting death by a police officer of teenager Laquan McDonald, is being retained.

IT’S USUALLY not at all unusual for a new mayor to want to have her very own police chief – someone whose political loyalties would be to her.

So if Johnson were really to be thrown out on his keister, now would have been the perfect time to do so. Nobody would have questioned it. If anything, it would have been expected.

For Lightfoot to keep the veteran Chicago police officer (beginning with the department as a patrolman back in 1988 is a sign of confidence in his professional abilities. Or at least evidence he hasn’t done anything that would offend Lightfoot.

So perhaps Lightfoot, whose past professional experience includes a stint as head of the Chicago Police Board, is not about to make radical changes in police operations – if she’s keeping the same person in charge.

BUT THEN, THERE’S the other decision she made on her first full day in office as mayor. As in the one involving her personal security team.

For the mayor of Chicago usually has a special detail within the Police Department whose duties include protecting the mayor, accompanying her to all public appearances, and usually serving as the driver of the mayoral automobile.

Yes, that’s a sworn police officer behind the steering wheel, while also keeping his eyes open for any potential that could become a threat to the mayoral persona.

SMITH: New head of mayoral security

Only not this time!

FOR LIGHTFOOT IS hiring the services of Silver Star Protection Group to handle her mayoral security detail. That company is run by James Smith – who prior to going into business for himself worked as a corrections officer at the Cook County Jail, then served for 26 years as a U.S. marshal based in Chicago who was in charge of providing protection for Supreme Court justices and other federal officials.

Perhaps it’s only logical that Lightfoot, who once also served as a prosecutor with the U.S. attorney’s office in Chicago, would turn to someone with a sense of federal law enforcement to provide protection with herself.

But as the Chicago Tribune reported Wednesday, Smith is married to Margaret Houlihan-Smith, who once was a managing director for United Airlines and now works as a lobbyist both for United and AT&T.

Is it a conflict for a lobbyist to now have a direct tie to the mayor? Is it the kind of thing that could be a mini-scandal in and of itself? As though it creates the appearance of a conflict of interest!

WHO’S TO SAY. For what it’s worth, a whole series of questions to various officials along that line of questioning resulted in a whole slew of “no comment”-type responses. Or maybe I should say, “nunayabizness”-type answers.

LIGHTFOOT: First law enforcement picks

Does the new mayor not trust Chicago police enough to ensure that no one tries to harm her while in office? Is she rewarding someone who comes from similar outside-the-established circles that she thinks she can trust better?

Or does James Smith really have a skills set that just isn’t possessed by anyone within the Chicago Police Department? That is something we’ll have to see.

While we also see if the retention of Johnson as police superintendent is a sign that the Chicago Police Department is on the right track, and not about to undergo significant change. Or is it really just a matter of Johnson getting about a year on the job before getting pushed into what she’ll call a “retirement” so she can make room for a police chief of her own pickings.

  -30-

Who’s more absurd, Trump or Rahm?

Both men are political people who have developed reputations for being the kind of guys who expect to be able to bark out orders – and have them followed.

EMANUEL: Wants Smollett to pay up -- or else

Both Donald Trump and Rahm Emanuel like to think they’re tough guys who can stand up to anybody on any situation – and ultimately see their viewpoints prevail. Yet I’ve been wondering of late which one is capable of taking an issue most out of line with any reasonable approach to thought.

I’D LIKE TO think it is our un-illustrious president – who throughout his time in office has always been willing to pander to his ideologue nitwits and their irrational hang-ups with regards to anything related to Mexico.

Yet after listening to our soon-to-be former mayor, I can’t help but think it’s a good thing the man has only about a month left on his term, with replacement Lori Lightfoot lined up to take over the reins of city government come May.

Because Rahm is behaving like he’s in desperate need of a vacation. Eight years at the helm of Chicago city government means he needs a rest.

I’m sure some will be grossly offended that I’d think of Emanuel’s behavior as being as absurdly over-the-top as anything that Trump has done during his two-plus years as president. But it does seem to be that way.

TRUMP: Continues his Mexico rants

FOR IT SEEMS that Jussie Smollett, the television actor who had criminal charges against him dropped for an incident that police contend was an effort to stage a crime, really has got under Emanuel’s skin.

Emanuel claims he wants the actor to repay Chicago some $130,000 – to recoup the costs to the Police Department for what they say was the false investigation report he filed when he claimed he was attacked, taunted, and even had a noose placed around his neck.

Smollett, of course, has insisted all throughout that he did nothing wrong and really was a crime victim. This week, he formally rejected Emanuel’s request to repay the city anything. Still insisting he’s innocent.

Emanuel is now threatening the formality of a lawsuit by Chicago against the actor – with other city officials saying they’d like to see Chicago refuse to provide tax credits to benefit any cinematic or television production that employs Smollett.

O'CONNOR: Tell Trump and Emanuel to stifle

I CAN’T HELP but think of such behavior as Trumpian in nature. It either is pure theater that would show Emanuel’s sense of drama to make him even more skilled than Smollett.

Or else Emanuel truly is delusional if he thinks there are any conditions under which Smollett would ever repay a single cent to Chicago.

Because for whatever reason, the Cook County state’s attorney’s office dismissed the charges. Whether it’s because the police or prosecutors screwed up some procedural move that would make it impossible to get a criminal conviction that would stand up, the case is over. It would be better off to let it go – enough damage has been done to Smollett’s reputation. He’s permanently tainted.

JACKSON: Trump's cinematic alter ego?

But Emanuel has got that streak of Trump in him – he can’t let it go. Just like Trump with his recent line of thoughts saying he wants to close down access to the United States through the Mexican border.

TRUMP THIS WEEK had to realize that such an action was irrational and impossible to enforce. He’d be better off following the advice of Carroll O’Connor’s old “Archie Bunker” character and “stifling” himself.

SMOLLETT: Could Jules get him to pay up?

Instead, he’s trying to offer up rhetoric implying he’s making a concession – he’s giving Mexico one year to clean up its act, so to speak. Or else he’ll crack down on them with tariffs on Mexico-produced automobiles. Or maybe he'll shut down the border anyways -- unless he does something truly vile such as forcing Mexican people to eat what Taco Bell offers up as food!

It almost makes me think he thinks he’s the Samuel L. Jackson's "Jules" character from "Pulp Fiction," going into his diatribe about "striking down with great vengeance and furious anger," before killing someone.

Of course, I also suspect that both men would take such a comparison between themselves as the lowest-form of insult. All the more reason we’ll be better off when Trump follows Rahm into the ranks of former government officials.

  -30-

News report hedline a ‘fantasy come true’ for some twisted souls amongst us

I know I’ve written a few commentaries published here indicating how some will only be satisfied with the ongoing saga of Jason Van Dyke when there are reports about how he was killed in some sort of prison inmate brawl.

A most-definitely un-romantic Valentime's hedline

To that end, Thursday must have been a very sad day – what with the Chicago Sun-Times giving us the front page hedline “Van Dyke Beaten in Lockup.”

THE ATTACK SUPPOSEDLY took place on Van Dyke’s first day at the federal correctional center in Danbury, Ct. – within just a few hours of him being placed in a cell amongst the prison’s general population.

No word on the exact nature of the attack. As in was it a batch of black inmates who wanted to beat the stuffing out of the cracker, or white inmates who wanted a shot or two at beating on a cop?

Or maybe it was a bizarre mixture, as in Van Dyke is the factor that can unite the various factions of societal slugs who are amongst the prison populace.

To me, the sad part of this story is that I can easily envision way too many people amongst us back here in Chicago taking some sort of pleasure out of the Sun-Times hedline – which also is turning up in news organizations across the nation on account of the Associated Press doing their rewrite to spread the word.

IT’S ALMOST LIKE on a certain level, we want to let the thugs amongst us make our correctional centers are hellish a place as they can possibly be. Is it our way of giving the one-time bullies of our school yards something to aspire to?

As in they can be stupid and go to prison and have the run of the roost once they get there?

For what it’s worth, Van Dyke’s wife did her part Thursday morning to spread the story by making herself available for television cameras – where she was quick to denounce prison officials for not keeping her husband in strict segregation from other inmates.

Van Dyke's new 'humble abode,' for the time being

Which has the potential to backfire. Are we going to get a significant share of the public eager to believe that Van Dyke got what he deserved, and probably warrants much other constant abuse for the next few years – or until the Illinois Supreme Court gets around to ruling on a measure by the state Attorney General’s office

That could result in Judge Vincent Gaughan being forced to impose a harsher prison sentence than half of six years, nine months.

OF COURSE, THERE are the people who envision Van Dyke having to do another 30 or 40 years in prison until he finally dies. Which strikes me as a depressing line of thought for people to have – if they must be obsessed with Van Dyke’s life, their own must be incredibly lacking.

It’s not like I’m overly sympathetic to the plight of Van Dyke. But I do find it contemptible the degree to which some are going to find joy in his agony. Which invariably is going to motivate those amongst us willing to excuse the misbehavior of law enforcement into thinking their guy is the ultimate victim.

Although it should be noted that Van Dyke’s being placed on the East Coast, albeit in a minimum-security facility.

Illinois Corrections Department officials made the arrangements to have Van Dyke do his time elsewhere largely because they figured his very presence in a local prison facility would lead to exactly the kind of incident that occurred in Danbury.

EVEN DURING THE time that Van Dyke did at the Rock Island County Jail awaiting sentencing, he was kept in segregation away from other inmates.

So it will be interesting to see exactly how the one-time Chicago cop manages to cope with the next few years, and if officials outside of Illinois are willing to take any precautions to protect inmate safety in this case.

I know I’ve heard various prison professionals say there’s only so much that can be done to protect the inmates, and that ultimately the inmates need to be entrusted to behave themselves.

But I suspect we’re going to keep getting similar stories about Van Dyke’s plight in prison, and a certain segment of us are going to take far too much pleasure from reading them.

  -30-

Everybody upset w/ Van Dyke verdict

I suspect there was a moment, however brief, of joy when Judge Vincent Gaughan said “81 …,” giving people the impression that a former Chicago cop convicted of the shooting death of a 17-year-old black teen was about to put the 40-year-old cop away to rot in prison for life.

VAN DYKE: Nearly 7 years

But then, Gaughan continued with “… months,” not years.

AS IN GAUGHAN decided that his prison term will only last a period of just under seven years – of which he’s already served three months in the county jail out in Rock Island, Ill.

Considering that the family of Laquan McDonald came out and said Friday that they thought a prison term of at least 20 years was essential for Van Dyke to be properly punished.

And, in fact, prosecutors themselves made a recommendation of an 18- to 20-year prison term for Van Dyke.

But Gaughan ultimately chose to concoct a prison term based off the fact that Van Dyke was found guilty of a second-degree murder charge, and not to factor in all those additional counts of aggravated battery with a firearm – which in theory could have made for a prison term of nearly 100 years possible.

“A JOKE AND a slap in the face,” along with a slew of obscenities, was the reaction of McDonald’s family to the prison sentence after the sentence was handed down following a day-long sentencing hearing that occurred Friday.

McDONALD: Gone nearly as long as Van Dyke

But Gaughan made a point of saying he figured “100 percent” of people were going to be offended by his sentence. I don’t doubt that, because Van Dyke’s family made emotional pleas saying they have already suffered severely by the loss of Jason to incarceration for any length of time.

As it was, they argued that a sentence of probation would have been appropriate. Which I don’t doubt was an idea of great offense to the McDonald family. As it was, Laquan’s uncle read a letter into the record on Friday that was written as though it was crafted by McDonald himself.

Telling us that he was trying to make something of his life, give up his drug addictions, and that Van Dyke, by firing the 16 shots into his body, deprived him of that opportunity.

GAUGHAN: Upset 100 percent of people

THERE IS ONE thing that has to be conceded – it could have gone much worse for Van Dyke. He’ll be about 46 years old when he is released from prison. In short, he has a chance to put together a “rest of his life.” Even though I don’t doubt he’ll view the next six or so years as the most hellish experience he’ll ever have to endure.

It’s not going to be a pretty experience for a law enforcement officer. But some people see this whole Van Dyke ordeal as being about making police suffer.

If anything, they’re even more upset by the ruling earlier this week that three police officers facing criminal charges for filing false reports about what it was Van Dyke did to McDonald were NOT guilty.

There are those who wanted Van Dyke to rot in prison, and see a complete crackdown on the Chicago Police Department. Anything short of that is going to cause them to feel nothing but contempt for our legal system.

THEN AGAIN, THERE probably is nothing that would please those individuals. Some people get way too hung up on the concept of retribution. Even though what we as a society ought to be trying to do is figure out the way to move beyond this incident.

McCARTHY: Would win be seen as police victory?

Because the reality of the whole affair is that there’s nothing that can be done to bring Laquan McDonald back to life. There’s nothing that will restore the type of life that Jason Van Dyke had, or will protect his family from the harm they’re suffering as a result of what happened on that October night of 2014.

Of course, there could be one coming blow in the near future that would further “rub it in” the very notion that law enforcement is protecting itself, and NOT the public. What happens if Garry McCarthy somehow wins the mayoral election of February and run-off of April?

For McCarthy was the police superintendent who lost his job because of Van Dyke’s actions. Would the people eager to protect the police image be strong enough to make him our city’s mayor?

  -30-

Chicago’s homicide rate down for another year, but is anyone swayed?

For the second straight year, it appears Chicago’s tally of homicide will decline, and certainly isn’t anywhere near how high it reached back in the days of some three decades ago.

Workload not as violent, but it doesn't feel easier

Yet let’s be honest; I have no doubt that the instant another incident occurs that we’ll get another diatribe from Donald Trump and his ilk about just how god-awfully violent the Second City is.

AS THOUGH THE key to our improvement is to replace our elected officials with people inclined to sympathize with this Age of Trump we now live in. Allowing ourselves to be perceived as “blue” and the reason why Illinois is so intensely hostile toward Republican interests is the real reason for the diatribes.

For I doubt the people who make such absurd statements really care about the conditions in Chicago. It’s just another partisan piece of rhetoric they can use against the political opposition.

I doubt they care in the least about the people who actually have to suffer in the parts of Chicago that provide the bulk of the incidents that comprise most of the city’s homicide rate. If anything, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that the ideologues who most complain about the city’s statistics related to violence think the people who are the brunt of the incidents are to blame for their own circumstances.

That’s the reason why I have such hostile reactions toward anybody who tries to make an issue of the homicide total – which in coming days is going to get another update.

FOR WE’RE IN a New Year. As of Friday (Dec. 28), there had been 570 people killed by the deliberate actions of another human being (which is the very definition of ‘homicide’). When one adds in the weekend running through incidents as late as midnight Monday, that’s bound to increase a bit.

But it would take a total bloodbath for the death tally for Chicago to exceed the 675 of 2017, which itself was lower than 2016 – which is starting to appear more and more like some sort of statistical fluke.

Rather than a return to the days of the late 1980s into the early 1990s, when it was typical for there to be between 900 and 1,000 homicides per year – which means the recent spurt isn’t even close to what this city used to experience.

Not all explosions are celebratory fireworks

I’ll be honest and admit that era sticks in my mind particularly harshly; largely because that’s back in the day when I worked for the now-defunct City News Bureau of Chicago and the daily activity of the Chicago Police was on the forefront of my mind.

BUT EVEN THEN, the bulk of violent crime in Chicago was contained to certain neighborhoods. There were parts of Chicago where a single violent death would be considered a major headline, while other parts of Chicago would have so many incidents that most of them were never covered beyond anybody but a “City News” kid reporter.

The sad part of this story is that, according to a Chicago Tribune report on Monday, it appears the leading police districts for violent crime will be Harrison on the West Side and Englewood on the South.

Which, to be honest, were the leaders for violent crime back in my own police reporting days.

It’s as though nothing has changed, and certain parts of Chicago continue to get the brunt of everything that is wrong with the city – while other parts manage to benefit from the city’s improvements of recent decades.

WHICH IS WHAT I’m sure the ideologues will complain is some form of hypocrisy on the part of Chicagoans – talking up our strengths while ignoring those of us who don’t fall into certain demographics.

TRUMP: Numbers won't matter, he'll complain!

Yet I’d also note that the ideologues are more than willing to see certain peoples amongst us (most often, the ones of us whose complexion doesn’t resemble their own in the least) continue to suffer from violence and the other societal problems that are brought about by such attitudes.

As in they’re merely interested in using a high homicide tally to tag the rest of us with a dirty brush. And as for the people who will suffer, I can’t help but think of those who (invariably) will perish in the early hours of Tuesday – starting off a new year with the same ol’ nonsense,

You just know someone will be hit by stray shrapnel from a nitwit who thinks the way to kick of 2019 is to fire off a weapon into the air; hitting an unintended target several blocks away.

  -30-

Police replacement a political perk of winning, holding elective office

It’s one of the perks of being elected mayor of any community – you get the power to have your very own uniformed, professional law enforcement type as your police chief, and that chief is totally susceptible to your whims.

JOHNSON: Politics puts job on the line

Whoever wins the office of mayor of Chicago come the Feb. 26 election (and likely April 2 runoff) is going to have the fate of Eddie Johnson in his/her hands. In all likelihood, the police superintendent of Chicago is likely to be unemployed shortly after the May inauguration.

IT’S JUST THE way it is. Being a police chief isn’t a lifelong appointment. It is a job you hold so long as the mayor is approving of you.

So when Toni Preckwinkle comes right out and says she’s going to replace Johnson if/when she becomes mayor, a part of me wants to credit her for being incredibly honest.

Not that I necessarily approve of the reason she has for wanting Johnson out on his keister. But at least she’s not trying to engage in some political rhetoric or high-minded doubletalk about her intentions.

These thoughts came to my mind Monday night while watching one of Preckwinkle’s many mayoral opponents on the WTTW-TV program, "Chicago Tonight." Susana Mendoza had the question put to her directly – would she be intent on picking a new police chief? And who, pray tell, could it be?

PRECKWINKLE: Wants points for firing chief

MENDOZA TRIED TO make it seem as though it is to her credit that she wouldn’t answer – offering up a high-minded rhetorical rambling about how it’s premature to be engaging in such talk about replacing public officials since she’s not actually elected mayor yet.

That sounds nice. In a certain goo-goo mentality way of thinking, it might be admirable.

Yet it also strikes me as being a load of, how shall I say it, horse hockey!

The simple fact is that a police chief post of any type is – by definition – one in which the person serves at the will of the elected official. Invariably, a new mayor brings in a new person to run the police department for them – in ways that are befitting the persona of the new mayor.

MENDOZA: Wants points for not saying

IN FACT, ONE of the few police superintendents in Chicago I’ve ever heard of who didn’t immediately get replaced upon the election of a new mayor was that of LeRoy Martin – who gained the post from Harold Washington and remained in charge of the police even after Richard M. Daley was elected in 1989.

Of course, Daley the younger wound up serving more than two decades as mayor and wound up going through his share of police superintendents after Martin retired in 1992.

The point being that it’s pretty much a sure thing that Eddie Johnson’s time as superintendent – which dates back to 2016 – will end some time next year. The new mayor is going to view having a police chief who owes their presence in the job to her/him as one of the perks of the job!

Particularly if Garry McCarthy winds up somehow winning the mayoral election. Being a former police “chief” in both Chicago (where Mayor Rahm Emanuel fired him in a move he wrongly hoped would make the “stink” over the shooting death of Laquan McDonald fizzle away) and Newark, N.J., I’m sure he’ll have strong thoughts about how his superintendent should behave – and will expect his new “top cop” to follow instructions from City Hall very closely.

AS FOR PRECKWINKLE, she’s admitting she wants to replace Johnson because she says she thinks he is a significant part of the problem in terms of the distrust a portion of the population has for the police department in Chicago.

McCARTHY: Cop turned mayor? Maybe!

“He refused to acknowledge that there was a code of silence in the police department,” Preckwinkle told the Chicago Sun-Times. “I don’t think that’s an honest statement.”

Of course, there are those who think this attitude is more evidence of Preckwinkle behaving like a political “boss,” which is exactly what they’d really like to see removed from municipal government.

Some people may even vote against Preckwinkle for this very attitude. Although if we want to be honest, Johnson’s 30-year career with the Chicago Police is likely to end in retirement – regardless of who prevails on Election Day.

  -30-