Staring disaster in the face on Tuesday, Democrats are running scared. And some are even running as Republicans.

Thomas Kilbride is running to be “retained” as a State Supreme Court Justice in Illinois. He needs 60% of voters in the 3rd District, which comprises a band across the middle of Illinois from the Mississippi River to Indiana, to re-elect him.

Kilbride is a Democrat, according to Wikipedia’s State Supreme Court page for Illinois, and received $600,000 from the Democratic party in 2000 when he first ran. But Republicans and conservatives in his District will be forgiven for being confused about that, because they’ve recently been bombarded with campaign flyers indicating Kilbride is a Republican.

Here’s the front and back of that flyer, which Illinois Review originally posted.

Kilbride needs the conservatives in his district, who are already energized to vote against the Obama-Pelosi-Reid big-government agenda, to think he’s a Republican and therefore not vote him out of the Supreme Court.  That’s why he puts a big fat Republican elephant on the front of his flyer, which is titled “Election Alert for Republicans.”

Thus, we discover just how desperate Democrats are to retain power this year.

Normally, we’d chalk that up to smart, albeit dirty, Illinois politics. But Kilbride has taken this a step further by telling voters he is a Republican, when he’s not. That’s fraud. Moreover, on the back side of the flyer proclaiming his conservative values, he uses “we” 9 times and “our values” 4 times, further cementing in voters’ minds that he is something he is not: a conservative Republican.

The only not-astonishing thing about this story is where Kilbride is getting all the money for this. Kilbride has raised $2.4 million to save his job from the standard liberal groups: “House Speaker Michael Madigan and organized labor,” says the Chicago Tribune.

Madigan, by the way, makes Nancy Pelosi look like a nursery rhyme when it comes to controlling the Illinois House. Speaker Madigan directed the Illinois Democratic Party to give Kilbride $1.42 million. The Illinois Federation of Teachers has pitched in with almost half a million bucks as well. Check out all of Kilbride’s 2010 donations here:

Kilbride Contribution Analysis 2010

Why is Illinois’ version of Nancy Pelosi on steroids giving all this money to Kilbride?

The Chicago Tribune nails it:

“Why would Madigan put so much money in a judicial election when he’s also trying to save his members in the House? Precisely because he wants to save his members in the House — for the next decade. The legislature will soon draw new districts. The Supreme Court will rule on that map. In effect, the court will decide which party holds the upper hand in the House and Senate for the next 10 years. In 2001, Kilbride joined other Democrats on the court to uphold the map drawn by Democrats. Every Republican on the court voted against that map.”

It’s ironic then, that this powerful machine is trembling in fear of Cedra Crenshaw, a conservative, middle class, African-American mother in Will County, Illinois!

Why is the machine afraid?  Because a new class of leadership is starting to develop.  These new leaders threaten to end the shell game of taxes, politics, and patronage. Cedra Crenshaw is one of those new leaders, and she’s is running for state senate against one of the Chicago Machine’s rubber-stamp apparatchiks.

She’s  an accountant who wants to spearhead a forensic audit of Illinois state government.  A former auditor at Deloitte and Touche, Cedra supports an audit of the half a trillion dollars of Democrat controlled state spending during the blow-off historic corruption of Blagojevich/Quinn.  The Democrat Machine- contractors, politicians, and patronage army- stand in naked fear of the result that such an audit would bring.

Such an audit would fumigate thousands of campaign cash-for-patronage hires in agencies, boards and commissions; rescind bloated, rigged bid or mis-awarded contracts; stop the stealing, waste, and legalized graft that do-nothing, ribbon-cutting pork hounds like Cedra’s opponent  -  Sen. A.J. Wilhelmi -  thrive on…at your expense.

“I envision an audit that would not only institute controls on future spending,” said Cedra, ” but provide evidence of possible criminal acts of fraud to prosecute.”  Wow, that’s a tough mom!

So what is the Chicago Machine doing?  They are using political tricks intentionally written into Illinois unconstitutional election code.  These tricks, written in Springfield and honed in Chicago,  have brought out President Barack Obama’s top Illinois election lawyer and the General Council of the Illinois Democratic Party, Michael Kasper to challenge Crenshaw’s candidacy.

The arguments that Kasper used were the same arguments that have been rejected by the Cook County Board of Elections.  The local papers have editorialized on Crenshaw’s behalf.  After five weeks of consideration, word is that sometime today- on Friday before the 4th of July, while everyone is on vacation- the Will County (Democrat dominated) Board of Elections is going to railroad Crenshaw’s candidacy.

We must all go forward together, or it all ends right here!

Immediately, Crenshaw’s legal team will appeal the insider election board’s decision to the circuit court of appeals.  All legal experts agree that she’ll win that appeal. DONATE TO CAMPAIGN FOR LEGAL DEFENSE. In question is a new state law that conflicts with the old law in regards to candidate nominating process.  Crenshaw handled her process in the same manner that similar Democrats handled their processes under the new law!

The challenge isn’t the only “Chicago honed” ballot scam that the Democrats have pulled on Crenshaw.  A Christopher Pedersen filed petitions as an “Independent Conservative” for the offices of Governor, US Senate, Secretary of State, State Senate and State Representative with no signatures!  Then the Illinois Democratic Party put out a very derisive press release that Crenshaw was a hypocrite to “challenge” this guy’s ballot access in her state senate race!  Chicago Democrats are simply trying to muddy the waters on the baggage-free Crenshaw…

Cedra Crenshaw is just “One Mom” who decided she’d had enough of the Chicago Democratic Machine and she “was going on offense”.  Slated four hours before the nominating deadline, Crenshaw and her team then collected 2,100 petition signatures over the next two weeks and fought her way into the Illinois state senate race.

As we mentioned above, Crenshaw’s opponent, A.J. Wilhelmi, is a typical member of Illinois’ political establishment.  It’s been said, he “has a lot of friends”.  Wilhelmi has so many friends that in 2008, he couldn’t even vote to give the people of Illinois the right to remove corrupt Gov. Rod Blagojevich from office.  Wilhelmi voted “present”!

Illinois doesn’t need to elect more people who are “friends”  of our corrupt system.  We need people who will UPSET that system.  Cedra Crenshaw understands that cozy insiders are driving her city, county and state into a ditch filled with red ink and bankruptcy filings.  That’s why you should stand with Cedra and demand that challengers who followed the rules get on ballot.

Not much has changed in Chicago since 1996 – politicians are still looking out for special interests, increasing taxes, and creating hurdles to keep legitimate candidates from the ballot.

I am Cedra Crenshaw and I am running for the Illinois Senate in the 43rd District. Until a few months ago, I was just one mom in a process of political evolution. After a brief career in auditing, my husband and I started a family and thus began the trifecta of marriage, mortgage, and motherhood which catapulted me into the conservative that I am today. I stepped from being reactive to pro-active when I ran for Precinct Committeeman this past February. I wanted to carry the message of conservatism to my neighbors and help influence my local party with my principles and values – but I’m just one mom.  I’m one mom who waited for someone to step forward and challenge incumbent State Senator Arthur Wilhelmi and force him to defend his record, which has helped to decimate this state. But no one came forward and I’m not waiting any longer. I’m going on offense. And today I’m one mom who is taking on the machine of Chicago patronage politics as represented by Senator Arthur Wilhelmi.

When I arrived on the scene as one mom against the Chicago political machine, it didn’t take career politicians and their hired help long to line up a challenge to my candidacy.

The Will County Electoral Board has heard a frivolous objection filed by Joliet resident Robert L. Davis which challenges the signatures on my nominating petitions. My opponent, State Sen. A.J. Wilhelmi is represented by Michael Kasper, who is one of the country’s top election attorneys. Kasper’s client list includes former President Bill Clinton, Rahm Emanuel, U.S. Rep. Michael Madigan, U.S. Senator Dick Durbin, Congressman Phil Hare and, that once aspiring Chicago politician, President Barack Obama.

Referred to as “one of Michael Madigan’s favorite weapons.”, Kasper has a new screwdriver in his tool box with a state law dated January 1, 2010, which regulates placing candidates in vacancies. The new law deems that candidates must collect the same amount of signatures from residents as the candidate who ran in the primary. Additionally, the candidate must be chosen by their party and collect the signatures within a 75-day time period that begins the day after the primary.

While Kasper baselessly contends that some of my signatures were collected prior to the moment I officially became a candidate, the fact remains that I have met all of the requirements of the new law.

This stands as another example of career politicians avoiding the will of the people by denying them the right to select their state senator. By eliminating an expensive race, incumbents are able to preserve their war chest and glide unopposed into another four-years of tax and spend politics.

Wilhelmi is part of the Chicago political machine that has decimated Illinois. He voted to hike the income tax by 66 percent. And when he wasn’t voting for more taxes, Wilhelmi stood in the way of reform, as he voted “present” on giving the people of Illinois the option to recall former Gov. Rod Blagojevich. And now, his actions clearly indicate that he is running scared from his voting record, the electorate, and myself.

The fate of my candidacy rest in the hands of the Will County Electoral Board. The Board is comprised of one Republican and two Democrats. Following a May 24 hearing, the board stated they would consider the issue and announce their decision in writing at an unspecified date. The citizens of the 43rd Senate District still don’t know if they will get a competition for their vote this Fall, or a coronation for a cog in the Chicago Democrat Machine. As I await their decision, I continue my quest to put more accountants and fewer lawyers in Springfield.

[Ed Note: If you're interested in helping Crenshaw in her fight against the Chicago machine now spread to Will County, Board members numbers are Mary Petro -- 815 727 8453; Pamela McGuire -- 815 727 8592; and Sandra Schultz Voots -- 815 740 7615.]

The document was drafted by lawyers based on O’Keefe’s statements, and was intended to be offered as the factual basis for his plea. O’Keefe confirmed for me that this document is an accurate account of what happened.

What Really Happened in New Orleans

Factual Basis

On January 25, 2010, Messrs. James O’Keefe, Stan Dai, Joe Basel, and Michael Flanagan (collectively “Defendants”) entered the Hale Boggs Federal Building located at 500 Poydras Street, New Orleans, Louisiana (“Hale Boggs Building”), with no intent to commit a felony, but rather an intent to engage in political speech with respect to pending national healthcare legislation (the “Healthcare Bill”). During the several days before their entry to the Hale Boggs building, Defendants discussed opportunities to engage in independent journalism and political advocacy. One of the ideas raised during those discussions was a method to test the truthfulness of Senator Landrieu’s statements as to the reason for the inability of Tea Party members and other Louisiana constituents to contact her staff on the telephone to discuss her vote on the Healthcare Bill. The Defendants were advised that this was a recent story in the news in New Orleans.

Prior to the Defendants’ arrival in New Orleans there had been picketing of the Senator’s office by Tea Party Members and others. The controversy about Senator Landrieu’s phones was described in a prior news article as follows:

“We were stunned to learn that so many phone calls to Senator Landrieu have been unanswered and met with continuous busy signals,” Perkins said. “We asked them to call their Senators. They could get through to Senator Vitter, but not Senator Landrieu.”

“Our lines have been jammed for weeks, and I apologize,” Landrieu said in interview after giving a speech on the Senate floor Tuesday.

As a result, the Defendants devised what was, in retrospect, a poorly thought out plan to test the veracity of Senator Landrieu’s statements. The plan settled upon was for two of the Defendants to dress as telephone repairmen and, wearing an audio and video camera hidden in one of the hard hats they wore as part of their disguise, enter Senator Landrieu’s office and interview her staff while a third Defendant recorded the interviews using a second audio and video camera.

The group devised a plan involving disguises because they believed that if they simply entered Senator Landrieu’s office and identified themselves as journalists they would not likely receive truthful answers. They thought it likely that Senator Landrieu’s staff would be more candid with a repairman than a reporter. Looking back, the Defendants now recognize clearly that this plan was imprudent, and produced unintended security concerns and consequences that none of the Defendants anticipated. The Defendants agree that they should have anticipated these consequences and regret that they decided to proceed in that fashion.

Upon entering the Hale Boggs Building, the Defendants presented their real drivers license identifications to security officials and were not questioned as to the purpose of their visit to the Hale Boggs Building or where in the Hale Boggs Building they were going. Before passing through security, the Defendants placed all of their equipment (including all recording and video devices) through the security x-ray machines, as requested by the Hale Boggs Building security employees.

After passing through the Hale Boggs Building security checkpoint, the Defendants proceeded to the 10th floor, where Senator Landrieu’s office is located. Senator Landrieu’s office was and is open to the public and the Defendants entered through its open door. They spoke with members of Senator Landrieu’s staff, then separately left the Senator’s office and exited the Hale Boggs Building.

A short time later, the Defendants were “detained” by Federal Marshals. They believed they would be released when the US Marshals realized that they were journalists and immediately explained to the commanding US Marshal that they were journalists investigating whether Senator Landrieu wasn’t answering her calls.

Despite truthfully explaining, in detail, to the FBI and Federal Marshals that their purpose was solely to ask questions (and record the questions and answers) of Senator Landrieu’s staff regarding recently published statements by constituents that calls to Senator Landrieu’s staff concerning her vote in favor of the pending Healthcare Bill were not being returned and about the Senator’s public statement that her office phones had been “jammed,” Defendants were charged in a criminal complaint with a felony:

by false and fraudulent pretense enter and attempt to enter real property belonging to the United States of America with the intent to commit a felony: to wit, willful and malicious[s] interference with a working and use of a telephone system operated and controlled by the United States; in violation of Title 18 United States Code Section(s) 1036(a)(1), 1362, and 2.

At approximately 8 pm, the Defendants were taken from the Federal Building to the St. Bernard Parish Jail. The Defendants remained in jail overnight and were then transported the next afternoon in red jumpsuits and hand and leg irons back to the Hale Boggs Building where they were “arraigned” before Magistrate Judge Louis Moore, Jr., who released them on personal bonds of $10,000.

O’Keefe clarified to me that he and his companions entered only the public reception area of Sen. Landrieu’s office.

O’Keefe’s attorney Michael Madigan is scheduled to appear on Fox News Sunday tomorrow morning to discuss the prosecution.

More to come later today, including a post about the First Amendment implications of the judge ordering the destruction of the footage of O’Keefe’s foray into Landrieu’s offices, and a post about New York Magazine’s retraction of the errors I highlighted here the other day.

By its design, the legislature in Springfield consolidates all power in the hands of four people: Tom Cross, Christine Radogno, Mike Madigan and John Cullerton. Those are the Republican and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate. Power is consolidated through the process by which bills see the light of day. In the Illinois legislature, there’s only one way for a bill to be heard and debated: the rules committee. Not surprisingly, each of those four folks are head of the rules committee for their side in the House and Senate. As such, the head of the two rules committees have carte blanche over what bills will and won’t see the light of day. So, if any legislator wants their bill to get a hearing in the House, Michael Madigan must approve. You can see how such a process could corrupt, and does.

Second, there’s absolutely no transparency. At the beginning of each legislative session, the legislature is allowed to pass any number of “shell bills.” These are bills that literally are blank, or shells. Then, when leadership, Madigan et al, feel it’s time for that bill to become law, they go into a backroom somewhere, negotiate, and come out with a full bill. They wait no more than 24 hours and force a vote. Even if a legislator wanted to read the bill, they wouldn’t have time. So, bills become law and then media scrutinizes them and leaks all sorts of embarrassing details, only by then it’s still law. We’re seeing a similar process playing out in the current national health care legislative process.

This process played out to a “T” in the campaign finance reform legislation. After Blago’s indictment, public pressure was so extreme that Madigan et al’s hands were forced. They brought a campaign finance reform bill to the floor. Then, at the last minute, they went into a back room, cut a weak compromise, and took a watered down version to the floor. This should have come to no one’s surprise. The four people in charge are the main beneficiaries of the current campaign finance structure and they are the ones in charge of “reforming it”.

This process also played out in Emil Jones’ last term. (he was head of the Senate until this latest term) He was allied with Blago. Meanwhile, Madigan opposed Blago. As such, legislation literally came to a halt. All Blago proposed bills were killed in the House and all Blago opposed bills were killed in the Senate. So, nothing got done.

The problem of course was that the power struggles of three pols played out for the entire legislature. That’s because the power of the legislature is centered in only four people.

So, what’s the solution? Illinois activis, John Bambenek, has proposed the Putback Amendment. Here’s what the amendment would do. First, it would create a unicamarel legislature. Each district would be represented by three Representatives. There would still be primaries but a minimum of two candidates would come out for each party. Second, it would impose a term limit of four terms. Each term would last two years. It also eliminates the “shell bill” process and forces only texted bills to the floor. Beyond this, it would create a discharge petition process. If leadership refuses to give a bill a proper viewing, the sponsor can get 25 of 177 legislators to sign a discharge petition and this would force said bill to the floor. Finally, it would create a mandatory seven day period between when a final bill is finalized and voted upon. That way the public would have time to digest it and embarrassing details would come out before it passed not after.

Currently, Bambenek is collecting signatures. He needs 500,000 by May to get the amendment on the ballot in November. If it’s on the ballot, it would either need 50.1% of all the voters or 60% of those that vote on the amendment. Typically, far fewer people vote on amendments than vote in total.

Citizens can in fact add amendments to the Illinois constitution as long as they are “structural and/or procedural” in nature. Because that’s a vague description, all potential amendments wind up in front of the Illinois Supreme Court. In fact, only six such amendments have been attempted in history and five have been ruled unconstitutional and never passed that stage.

Beyond having its constitutionality challenged, Bambenek expects the validity of each and every signature challenged. There are 102 counties and 110 voting jurisdictions in Illinois. As such, the amendment could be challenged in the Illinois Supreme Court and in 110 separate election jurisdictions all simultaneously. If it happens to pass, but passes in a close vote, you can also bet that a vote recount will be requested. All of this will have to adjudicated as well.

The Illinois political machine is the one to challenge this amendment and it will be the machine and its lawyers that will challenge each and every phase of the amendment though Bambenek tells me he’s prepared for each and every litigation phase.

Here’s the full text of the bill.