Leaked Doc's to The Guardian prove Walker illegally coordinated with Conservative Groups

Here a LINK to the latest coverage where The Center for Media and Democracy's Mary Bottari breaks down just what was illegal in the Guardian story. Good stuff.

Last I checked, you can't break the law because someone on some future date will make what your doing legal. That's what Scott Walker did, and The Guardian newspaper proved that, by exposing leaked documents supposedly "sealed" by the Wisconsin Supreme Court:

WKOW: Documents that have been sealed by the Wisconsin Supreme Court have been leaked to The Guardian, which the publication has now posted online.

The documents reportedly show Governor Scott Walker specifically wanted campaign money to flow to Wisconsin Club for Growth.

This John Doe investigation involving Scott Walker centered around his 2012 recall campaign and whether it illegally coordinated with conservative groups, like Wisconsin Club for Growth. Walker vehemently denied that. 

Documents obtained by The Guardian reportedly indicate otherwise. They posted the leaked documents online Wednesday morning, along with a lengthy article.

Here's The Guardian's special Walker "presentation:"



The title of The Guardian piece is lifted from this section:

The not so shocking backroom directives claiming voter fraud and feigned whining about the Democrats stealing elections proves these are only talking points with no basis in fact. John Nichols wrote about it:

Assembly Democratic Leader Peter Barca of Kenosha told the Wisconsin State Journa; that the exchange shows Republicans “clearly had no qualms about deceiving Wisconsin voters. This latest revelation exposes the way the Republican spin machine works — they  were prepared to simply make things up,” Barca said.

And because proving money buys political influence is no longer provable in our courts because the Supreme Court activist conservative Justices said so,

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy: "Independent expenditures do not lead to, or create the appearance of, quid pro quo corruption."

And lead paint...?

The Guardian U.S., an arm of the British newspaper, reported that the billionaire owner of NL Industries, a producer of the lead formerly used in paint, contributed $750,000 to the Wisconsin Club for Growth in 2011 and 2012. The donations were made before and after Republicans approved two laws to help the industry — one in January 2011 and the other in June 2013.

Walker's campaign immediately said there was no sign the Republican governor had done anything wrong but did not directly address the donations from Simmons or the legislation touching on lead paint lawsuits.

Love this donation...looks like Walker's support for Trump is the quid pro quo:

And if you were wondering how independent our Supreme Court really is after taking massive donations from a few powerful individuals...check out Prosser's last line:

Oh, how about the mythical threat of election fraud? Oh, is it just "messaging" to dupe Walker supporters?

And this contained my favorite line out of the whole story: "send lawyers guns and money:"

Here's this afternoon's Thom Hartmann interview with The Guardian:

GOP stacked Courts Legislate from the bench, used to legitimize Radical Agenda.

Republicans are having a field day trashing the constitution with win after win in what is now our conservative activist courts, most notably the Supreme Court. They waited a long time for this, so it shouldn't be a surprise to anybody they’re using the court to push and pass everything. It’s almost comical. 

Republicans knew many of the laws they passed would be legally challenged, and welcomed the idea, knowing the courts were theirs to command.  

One Wisconsin Now pulled the curtain back on the GOP scheme to funded the campaigns of all four recent activist state Supreme Court justices:

Today’s state Supreme Court decisions supporting Gov. Scott Walker’s attacks on workers and voters were spearheaded by a four-member majority bloc that was elected through $8 million in spending by two of Walker’s biggest special interest supporters – Wisconsin Club for Growth and Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce … extremely active in the Supreme Court races in support of each of the most recent electoral efforts of Justices Annette Ziegler, Michael Gableman, David Prosser and Patience Roggensack. The four were elected to 10-year terms in campaigns from 2007 to 2013.

Gov. Scott Walker admitted he personally solicited contributions for the Wisconsin Club for Growth (WCFG) in 2011 and 2012. During early 2011, WCFG spent an estimated $320,000 plus in advertising surrounding Justice David Prosser's re-election race, and funded the entire budget of another group, Citizens for a Strong America (CSA), that spent over $800,000. 

A Wisconsin Democracy Campaign total of the spending on behalf of Justice Prosser, including his own campaign, showed that spending of WCFG, WMC and the WCFG-financed Citizens for a Strong America, provided 75 percent of the $3.5 million in spending on behalf of Justice Prosser. If the public financing grant obtained by Justice Prosser is removed as "spending," this figure leaps to a jaw-dropping 85 percent. 

A review of spending on behalf of Justice Michael Gableman, shows a similar and stunning lopsided percent from WCFG and WMC. These two entities provided in excess of 70 percent of the $3.2 million spent on his 2008 election campaign to the court.

Don't forget, Justice Prosser put his hands around the neck of one of the more liberal justices to make his point.

Prosser and other Activist conservative State Supreme Court Justices retaliate against Chair of Judicial Commission. Not Republican enough.

Justice David Prosser is "mad."

In this twisted radicalized conservative world we’re living in now, authoritarian rule is the name of the game, and anyone who doesn’t fall in line, is out. So goes the partisan activist conservative Supreme Court. It's a shot across the bow, and a gut check for anyone else who might want to keep their job on the Judicial Commission.

jsonline: Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson and two colleagues protested a decision by the court's conservative wing to reject the reappointment of the chairman of the Judicial Commission … Abrahamson and Justices Ann Walsh Bradley and N. Patrick Crooks (wrote) that the decision not to reappoint John Dawson - known in the legal community as a conservative - to the agency that handles judicial ethics came "over our objections" … the letter stated "In your case, the court is deviating from its practice."

I’ve written about this before, but it’s no secret to anyone who's been watching, something is terribly wrong deep inside the paranoid mind of David Prosser:

The letter drew an immediate rebuke from Justice David Prosser, who faces an ethics charge through the Judicial Commission. "Well, sure there is friction," Prosser said. "It's because the chief justice basically insisted that John be reappointed. And it's as if we didn't reappoint him, anybody who didn't vote for him was corrupt. And that word was used. It was basically a threat: If we didn't vote for John Dawson, the chief justice was going to expose this to the world."

Milwaukee County Circuit Judge David Hansher, a past chairman of the Judicial Commission, protested the high court's decision. "I find it appalling and unprecedented for the Supreme Court not to reappoint him to the Judicial Commission," said Hansher, who added that he was a supporter on Prosser's campaign committee in the race against JoAnne Kloppenburg last year. "I feel they have no shame."

It's pure retaliation:

Dawson said Friday that he had not seen the letter. Asked if he felt the Prosser case had played a role in the court's decision not to reappoint him, Dawson said he didn't know.

"I hate to think so," he said. "I can't speculate on that. And if I could, I wouldn't."

Untouchable: Prosser's mind finally snaps! Get this guy off the Supreme Court Bench!!!

Want proof Wisconsin has a conservative activist Supreme Court, controlled by a majority of authoritarian Justices who think they're all above the law?

Look no further than the case presented below by Justice David Prosser.

You'll see how easy it is for this particular justice to reshape the facts, the law, and to stretch reality to
fit the outcome he desires. This is nothing short of shocking. First, a short summary:

WSJ: The three alleged ethics violations stem from a June 13 incident in which Prosser acknowledges putting his hands around the neck of Justice Ann Walsh Bradley "to protect himself" and a February 2010 incident in which he admits calling Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson "a total bitch."

Prosser's twisted response is breathtaking:

State Supreme Court Justice David Prosser said that the Wisconsin Judicial Commission's investigation into his alleged ethical violations is itself a violation of his constitutional rights, according to a court filing. Prosser said that the commission "may not investigate or prosecute protected speech, advocacy and etiquette of Wisconsin Supreme Court justices when they are deliberating in confidential closed conferences. For an outside agency dominated by gubernatorial appointees to seek to breach the confidentiality of closed Supreme Court conferences in order to monitor, oversee and prosecute the speech and lawful conduct of justices would violate the separation of powers and disrupt the work of the Supreme Court.”

He also charged that the complaint is "frivolous" because all of the justices either witnessed or participated in at least one of the alleged incidents and "will never be able to sit as judges in this case."

Allowing complaints like the one filed against him also would deny justices the ability to defend themselves without violating the court's ethical rules requiring them to maintain confidentiality, Prosser said in his response.

Prosser was just reelected by conservative voters. If they have any standards at all, they would have to admit, there is something seriously wrong with him.

Trust Us, We're the Conservative Authority!! Take it from Justice Prosser

I'm posting this Sly in the Morning segment for one reason; it perfectly reflects the conservative campaign to vilify everything Democratic, everything liberal, everything not ideologically compatible. I hope you have time to listen to it. The underlying message is clear; liberals are trying to take away the conservative vote.

This is the marginalization of American citizens who are not conservative. We are the other. We are the takers of their votes through our recall system. We are the takers of everything they think they own, like the moral high ground, the courts, their odd interpretation of freedom and liberty spelled out in the constitution.

Talk radio propagandists Charlie Sykes tries like hell to discredit liberals everyday. And he's working from a growing enemies list, like the newly targeted Wisconsin Judicial Commission.

The message you'll hear from Sykes is not just how bad liberals are, but how conservatives are the only ones that can be trusted to administer the law. Over and over Sykes basically hits on one theme; liberals will do anything to take away the power of their VOTE, a threat that is now right up there with taking away God and guns.

What's surreal, is the point Sykes is making by using the oddest vehicle, a physically abusive conservative activist supreme court justice.

Justice Prosser above Law, Scrutiny! Claims the legal system "biased." Ya Think?

To quote the now legendary Rutles, “Shocked…..and stunned.”

Play that every time you read Justice Prosser's statements here. In one of the most amazing acts of arrogance, Justice David Prosser, a former Republican assembly speaker, is going to ask his fellow justices to recuse themselves from deciding his fate:

WSJ: Prosser said Monday he will likely ask other members of the court to recuse themselves from deciding on the disciplinary complaint filed against him last week — an action that, if successful, would appear to kill the case.

And to feed the right wing media machine, he wants the records of the Wisconsin Judicial Commission released to the public, so each and every line of their deliberations can be trashed unmercifully by Charlie Sykes, Jeff Wagner, Mark Belling and even lightweight Vicki McKenna. “Shocked…and stunned.”

Prosser … said … that he favors authorizing the Wisconsin Judicial Commission to release records of its deliberations in the matter to allow him and others to determine whether the commission was — as he charged Friday — politically biased against him.

Get that? Only the uncritical Republicans are unbiased. “Shocked…and stunned.”

Prosser contended that none of the other justices, including Crooks, should sit on the case. He said Crooks (who wasn’t there) could be influenced by his discussions with Bradley, Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson and detectives from the Dane County Sheriff's Office who investigated the altercation. Prosser asked, "You have six justices who were present at the scene ... You have justices with actual bias who are eyewitnesses and, in effect, parties."

Think of this as an insight into how Prosser thinks…decides cases. Waukesha voters should be embarrassed. But Prosser’s bizarre take on political power is so counter to the current authoritarian takeover by Walker and the Fitzgerald’s, that I'm “Shocked….and stunned”:

Prosser also charged that the Judicial Commission's makeup is inherently biased because five of the nine members are appointed by the sitting governor, who is a partisan. In his case, at least some of those who participated in discussion … were appointees of former Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle. Earlier this month, GOP Gov. Scott Walker appointed three new members for a total of five appointees.

But Prosser even topped his own outrageous musings with this ultimate “shocked…and stunned” observation:

He said he testified before seven of the nine commission members on Sept. 23 for three hours, and for another hour in front of six members on Dec. 16, but was not present for any votes. "The truth of the matter was, they were not interested in what my defense was or any provocation for my action," Prosser said. "They were only interested in my conduct.”

Choke! Everybody's out to get Justice David Prosser!

Here's more on Justice David Prosser, a look that provides for more than one or two OMG moments:

Fox6: On Friday, the Wisconsin Judicial Commission filed formal ethics charges against Justice David Prosser for allegedly put his hands on the neck of his colleague, Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, during a confrontation in Bradley’s office on June 13, 2011. 

My conservative friend in Milwaukee even defended Frank Gimbel, the commissions special prosecutor, as a good guy with no ax to grind. I'll take his word for it;

“This case is not about whether or not David Prosser is a good or bad person, whether or not David Prosser is a good or bad judge or what his judicial philosophies are,” Frank Gimbel said. “This case is about whether or not his actions in June of 2011, when he admittedly put his hands around the neck of a colleague are consistent with the ethical expectations that we have with our elected judges.”

But ideologues who go on and on about "personal responsibility," are always seeking refuge from their rhetoric through vilification of their critics:

“The charges filed by the Judicial Commission are partisan, unreasonable, and largely untrue,” Prosser said in a statement. “They will be vigorously contested because I am innocent.”

"Partisan" liars?

“I just don’t agree with that at all,” Gimbel said about Prosser’s statement. “The judicial commission is a non partisan part of the state government. The people that are on there are people of high integrity.” Gimbel also said that he has met with Prosser and his lawyer in hopes of reaching a settlement. However, that did not happen so the charges were formally filed.

After reading the surreal Prosser statement below, is there any question this guy has lost it?

“The charges filed by the Judicial Commission are partisan, unreasonable, and largely untrue.  They will be vigorously contested because I am innocent.  There are two essential points to consider:
(1)    The incident at the Supreme Court on June 13, 2011, was significantly different from what the Commission has alleged.  There would have been no physical contact between Justice Bradley and me if she had not suddenly and unexpectedly charged at me from a distance of about six feet with her right hand in a fist.  By her own admission, Justice Bradley intended to confront me "face to face" "in [my] personal space."  She did not demand that I get out of her office until after contact had occurred.  I never intentionally touched Justice Bradley's neck.  I never "choked" her or put her in a "chokehold." Justice Bradley's assertions that I did are false.

(2)    The Commission has been patently unfair in its handling of this matter.  It has not been interested in discerning the truth. It has been committed to making a political statement.  The Judicial Commission is trying to accomplish through this prosecution what some of its members failed to achieve at the ballot box."

What is this Republican preoccupation and focus on "the ballot box?" Republicans know their base buys into the notion that liberals are always trying to take-away their vote, which energizes them to give these bad actors another chance, all the while getting away with being lousy legislators.

http://fox6now.com/2012/03/16/prosser-facing-ethics-charges/