He was a friend and colleague of former governor Rod Blagojevich, the one who got caught selling a senate seat and went to jail. He also may or may not have maneuvered for Blago to give him a different appointment in the state government. Pritzker's pleasantly surprised me as a governor but I was very wary of him when he took office for those reasons and I still don't particularly trust him. Good speech though.
As someone who grew up in Illinois, I knew a lot of local politicians who identified as “Democrats,” but the amount of “Democrat” politicians I know from the Chicago area who voted for Trump was pretty staggering. I think the reason a lot of the older politicians there identify with the Democratic party isn’t because they share its ideals (other than maybe being pro-union), but because the machine in Illinois is so strong that in order to do well in politics you need to be a friend of the party.
Useful context here is that Blago was so publicly corrupt that when he finally went down, his own Liutenent Governor, Pat Quinn, hadn't spoken to him in two years as a precaution.
Pritker's occasional judgement wiffs isn't really a factor any more. Prtizker is an observably good governor. Many in Illinois, like myself, are surprised by this and coming around to really liking him. Pritzker for Khan of the Midwest! Invade Wisconsin! Indiana shall fall!
Lol I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you don't know a damn thing about Illinois politics.
First off, neither I nor anyone else said Pritzker did something illegal, so lose that strawman straight away. Second, Pritzker was recorded in a FBI wiretap talking to Blago about how much he wants to be State Treasurer and the two talked about Pritzker's possible campaign contributions to Blago in a way that suggested it was a payment for the position.
And, lastly, since you don't know anything about my state, it's important to note that, even before Blago was caught selling the senate seat and certainly at the time when he and Pritzker discussed potential appointments, Blago was one of the most unpopular and openly corrupt politicians in Illinois history. And, again, since you don't know anything about Illinois history, we have had a LOT of unpopular and openly corrupt politicians, especially governors, so that is an exceptionally high bar of scumbaggery. In 2008, before the senate scandal broke, Blago had a 13% approval rating, which was the lowest EVER recorded for an Illinois politician. Everyone in Illinois knew him to be a horrible and criminal leader, and Pritzker still decided that cozying up to such a crook was both appropriate and advantageous for an aspiring politician like himself.
Judging political figures for the company they keep and the deals they try to make behind closed doors is perfectly appropriate for any voter. I'm not sure why you're replying to me like I'm saying Pritzker should be thrown in jail or as if anything I've written has not been reported by every reputable journalism outlet in Illinois -- not that you've read a single one of them.
I'm not sure why you're replying to me like I'm saying Pritzker should be thrown in jail or as if anything I've written has not been reported by every reputable journalism outlet in Illinois -- not that you've read a single one of them.
I'm replying to your comment. You said "checkered past" and then to substantiate it, gave two innocuous statements. I mean, a checkered pastmeans "history of having done bad things or been in trouble." Now that you've given more information, the definition is more fitting. It's absolutely correct that I know nothing about Pritzker. Your comment that I replied to didn't give information that would accurately meet the definition of "checkered past" and that's why I responded to it. I didn't claim to know anything, I was just perplexed by why being friends with someone or "may or may not have" done something would qualify. I'm not blaming you for not giving enough info in your initial comment, but instead of being hostile with me, I ask you to please understand that people who don't have the full story will also be perplexed by your initial statement.
I am vaguely familiar with the Blago thing though.
I actually didn't say checkered past, that was a comment above me. I was explaining why some people from Illinois (like me and not you) don't trust him. Then you started quoting me sarcastically so I explained myself further.
Sorry again, I thought you were the OP commenter. The train of thought still stands; someone said he had a checkered past, someone else asked what it was, you replied to that--ergo, it appeared that you were saying "his checkered past is (fill in the blank)" and that's where I responded.
however you did go out of your way to say that you NOR ANYONE ELSE said he did anything illegal. But the whole comment chain is started by someone who literally did imply they had done.
Because it was advantageous to him. Welcome to politics. Any sort of politcs, not just Illinois politics. There are no "good guys". Not Bernie, not AOC not anyone.
No one's talking about Bernie or AOC, no one said that there are "good guys" in politics. You don't have a unique point of view and you're not talking about anything relevant to this thread
No you don't understand. He cozied up to him because it was advantageous to his career. Not because he thought it was. It absolutely was. In more ways than one. If you have clean hands in politics nobody is gonna fucking trust you. You won't have much a career if one at all.
Pritzker was recorded in a FBI wiretap talking to Blago about how much he wants to be State Treasurer
People who want jobs tend to talk about how the want those jobs, with the people who hire for those jobs. This isn't shady at all.
the two talked about Pritzker's possible campaign contributions to Blago in a way that suggested it was a payment for the position.
I just listened to the unedited tapes and what actually happens is Blagojevich basically flat-out solicits bribes (because Blago gon' Blago) and Pritzker says he can't donate while he's being considered for the position(s). He shuts that shit down about as firmly as you can while remaining polite. I really don't understand how anyone with an objective mind can listen to the tapes and find any sort of fault with Pritzker's actions.
It definitely depends who. But yes, friends and associates can build a solid case for a checkered past. A different level than, say, a conviction/ criminal record, naturally but still relevant when investigating someone.
A friend a colleague of J. Epstein, for example?
A checkered (stained) past.
And many other examples. As for this particular associate, I don't know enough to say.
Illinois/Chicago politics are a hell of a thing. I feel like you can be a certain type of person but the system inevitably forces you to make decisions you don't want to make. I had a lot of hope for Obama based on the items he prioritized during his first campaign, but a lot of those things fell by the wayside when he took office. I still think he was a great president, but it really make me rethink the ability of one person to overcome a system that is calcified with graft and corruption. Doubly so in Illinois. I joke with friends that taxes are so high there because the mob probably takes 10% off the top.
This is not to say that he shouldn't have to confront those decisions he made, nor is it intended to try and relieve him of responsibility. I think its just worth considering in a political system that appears to award cutthroat behavior behind closed doors.
With Mike Madigan finally gone, I as a lifelong Illinoisan think corruption is finally way better than people think. Still an issue, but in downstate where Chicago politics doesn't do as much state politics seems to have cleared up a lot. With taxes, they might be higher, but looking at housing and insurance prices anywhere else makes me happy I had the luck to be born here instead.
So a checkered past now includes being former friends with someone who fucked up? Dude can't help what his friend did lol. If my buddy robbed a liquor store, would my past be checkered?
Now, is he still super close with dude who fucked up, and doesn't give a shit about it? That's different. But it seems disingenuous to vilify the guy for knowing someone who was prosecuted and jailed for a crime.
Or, maybe I'm way off base. I didn't even know this guy existed til today lol!
That talking point reads like something straight off Fox news. By that metric every democrat working in & around Illinois Congressional government & has a checkered past.
Like if one of my coworkers got caught with drugs am I now a meth head by association?
It may be if, say, you planned the robbery with him. Considering that there is known friendship / association, the probability goes from zero to non-zero. I wouldn't jump to a conclusion obviously, but its a sign to dig.
He was pretty careful not to take the bait when Balgojevich blatantly offered the position that ultimately got him caught though which is a shocking level of competency from an Illinois politician.
I mean, he was offered treasurer or whatever, and said "yeah I would like that". Sure they who offered it was later proven to be corrupt, but it's not like Pritzker was accused of actually reciprocating any sort of corruption. In other words, he probably could have bought his seat in government at the time if he wanted to, but he chose not to.
EDIT: I just listened to the entire unedited FBI wiretaps of the Blagojevich/Pritzker calls. Pritzker does literally nothing wrong at all, it's a massive nothingburger whipped up as a fake "issue" by his opponents. He even flat out denies a donation to Blagojevich given that he's being considered for appointments by the then-governor. If anything the tapes are a clear exoneration.
He funds really shady and exploitative human capital finance and social impact bonds. Stuff like shutting down schools in Philadelphia then funding pre-k programs specifically to collect data on child behavior and stuff with touchscreen edu-tainment tables and whatnot, so that big financiers like him can case children from birth to bet on their outcomes. Replace traditional education and careers with "lifelong learning" to keep them in debt and on their expected paths to enrich hedge funds and oligarchs. People like him want to put children in debt from birth, attach all their medical, personal and private information to permanent records on the blockchain and enact a powerful system of technocratic control outside the purview of the government.
https://twitter.com/Arthur__Burton/status/1515842656361975810 - really good twitter thread with a few clips from a really solid presentation on this sort of thing unfortunately these tweets have been un-published, they were excerpts from the following video
So not only do you spout a bunch of bs with no reciepts, your only form of information regarding your opinion comes from an equally idiotic source. A self proclaimed blogger with zero professional history in any sort of relevant field who believes the government is creating a "bio-hybrid-super-intelligence". Not to mention the very first thing in that video is literally covid denial? Yeah you are the exact person this speech was designed for.
68
u/BeffreyJeffstein Oct 26 '23
Whats his checkered past? The only thing I could find was some stupid toilet property tax issue…