Rep. Craig threatens to investigate John Doe leak...unlike the Club for Growth's leaks to the Wall Street Journal.

Without an open admission of guilt, the only standard now granted by the US Supreme Court to determine if money had a corrupting influence, Republicans had Christmas early today.

The Supreme Court let Scott Walker and the state Supreme Court off the hook. My conservative friend in Milwaukee emailed me a link to the story with the message, "Ha, ha."

Feed me...more money!

My friend, like all Walker/Trump voters, are more concerned with shoving their "leaders" corruption in our faces than acknowledging the criminal takeover of our state.

But the Walker win wasn't enough. It's now time to send a message to anyone else thinking about challenging our one party authoritarian state; investigate and publically shame, ridicule and destroy all dissenters. According to Republican Rep. David Craig:  

This ends an unfortunate chapter of government chilling free speech in Wisconsin. It is more important than ever that a special committee in the legislature with subpoena power be empaneled to take sworn testimony in this matter. The legislature needs to determine if abusive behavior was engaged in by those involved in this investigation and to determine whether those charged with the public trust have acted maliciously by intentionally leaking sealed materials in violation of state policy."

Never mind Eric O'Keefe's Club for Growth's leaks of secret John Doe information. If anyone wants to "chill free speech," it's Craig and his fellow corrupt Republican legislative criminals. Ha, ha.

Hey Wisconsin Republican Voters, feeling manipulated and played for suckers yet?

While illegally obtained information leaked to the public about Democrats makes sense to Republicans, they’re quick to discount equally damaging disclosures leaked about their own deceptive tactics to trick their own voters…because they can without blowback?

Now hear this: Republicans were caught, plain and simple, lying about election fraud as a defensive tactic to piss off their base, sending them into a blind rage. As a side note and former radio talk host, I can't imagine duped right-wing talkers are too happy knowing they got played:

Jensen

JS-Dan Bice: Republican insiders discussed ginning up concerns over voter fraud in the days after then-Supreme Court Justice David Prosser narrowly defeated challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg in April 2011.

"Do we need to start messaging 'widespread reports of election fraud' so we are positively set up for the recount regardless of the final number? I obviously think we should," wrote Steve Baas, a senior vice president with the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce, to a group of conservative operatives on April 6, 2011, a day after the Prosser-Kloppenburg contest.

"Yes. Anything fishy should be highlighted," wrote former Assembly Speaker Scott Jensen, a Republican. "Stories should be solicited by talk show hosts."

Asked to clarify his email, Jensen said on Wednesday, "The British newspapers are world famous for printing illegally obtained information. I am disappointed that is now the standard at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel."

“Guilty as charged” is the phrase I think Scott Jensen was looking for in that word salad about the British media.

Election Fraud Bullshit: Let the above comments be "exhibit A" in the court arguments against the long list of voter suppression laws based on outright lies:

Rick Hasen, a national election law expert, said on his blog on Wednesday that the email exchange suggests that much of the talk about voter fraud is "all about manipulating Republican public opinion." He added, "This cynical 'messaging' is sadly validating of what many of us have said."

Caught, but Deny, Deny, Deny: When asked about the John Doe emails trying to gin up fears over voter fraud just in case the supreme court election didn't go their way, Republican Rep. Robin Vos skipped right over the apparent ploy, and quickly blamed angry liberal Wisconsinites committing fraud and "doing all kinds of different things, to try to gin up the number of voters." Gee, wouldn't want more voters.

This grotesque example of projection tells us a lot about what Republicans would do themselves, and definitely, have:

Vos: "...the election worked out just fine....it's the reality of what we worry about in every election with the "left." Where they're willing to do whatever it takes to win, even if it means things like "smokes for votes," and all the things that we've seen in the past. It was wide spread. And now with voter ID we have a lot less concern."

First, "smokes for votes" involved bribing the homeless with cigarettes to vote, so voter ID would have not have had an impacted...and the millionaire responsible got caught and paid a fine. Gee, the election laws on the books worked. But "all the things we've seen?" Searching my blog...:

Bradblog: All eight (Republican) defendants in Clay County, Kentucky's election fraud trial have been found guilty today by a federal jury. Six of those eight were high-ranking election officials, including the county clerk, a circuit judge and the school superintendent.

The community organization ACORN has never been charged with, or found guilty of aiding in the illegal casting of a single vote. Ever. Anywhere. No actual evidence has ever been presented in support of such a charge either

From Upfront with Mike Gousha.

Guardian Leaked Walker Emails "Exposes Democrats' Contempt for the Law?"

Brazen arrogance?

When I read the Federalist story summarized below, "Wisconsin John Doe Leak Exposes Democrats' Contempt for the Law," it immediately brought to mind the Club for Growth's Eric O'Keefe's leaked John Doe 2 information. Ah, it all seems incredibly hypocritical. As reported by The Progressive:

In November 2013, a little-known conservative activist named Eric O’Keefe brazenly disobeyed a court order and leaked information to The Wall Street Journal editorial page about a secret “John Doe” investigation involving campaign finance violations ...  O’Keefe launched a series of suits against the prosecutors leading the investigation, continued to leak information about the probe, and publicly denounced it as a “partisan” attack on free speech. 

Tables Turned: When you consider what O'Keefe did, and the shocking silence on the right about disobeying the rule of law, the phony outrage written below is that much more outrageous:  

Wisconsin John Doe Leak Exposes Democrats’ Contempt For The Law By Daniel Payne;

The John Doe squad’s evidence could reasonably be considered corrupted. But someone involved in the whole affair ignored the court order and leaked a set of sealed documents to The Guardian.

It is clear that someone involved in the John Doe investigation, incensed that a court had slapped down his or her gross abuse of state power, decided to disobey a court order and attempt one final time to destroy Walker’s political career … the leak is nonetheless troubling, chiefly because it underscores yet again the persistent lawlessness of much of American liberalism.

This is not an aberration. Much of modern American liberalism’s tactics rest upon a vicious set of double standards and abuses of government power. Breaking the law is clearly no impediment for liberals in this case. What matters is making the Right scared to assert itself in politics and contentious public debates.

UPDATE: 9/18/16: Rep. Robin Vos was asked on Upfront with Mike Gousha why no one called for special prosecutor when John Doe information  was leaked by the targets of the investigation. You'll laugh, you'll cry:

AG Schimel argues Walker illegal campaign coordination legal now, retroactively, to US Supreme Court.

Nothing says political elite than seeing Scott Walker order his Republican Attorney General Brad Schimel to declare his past illegal activity legal. And that's after his march-in-lockstep legislature passed a law allowing campaign coordination with issue advocacy groups, which at the time was illegal.

According to the WSJ story, elites can get off breaking our laws by just changing it later; “Walker and the Republican-controlled legislature have since changed the law making the alleged activity legal.”

Attorney General Brad Schimel asked the U.S. Supreme Court Monday to reject a review of a halted criminal investigation into Gov. Scott Walker’s recall campaign, Schimel’s filing argues the court should reject the appeal because Walker and the Republican-controlled Legislature have since changed the law making the alleged activity legal and prohibiting the use of secret “John Doe” proceedings in investigating campaign finance violations.

Yes, Schimel offered that argument up to the U.S. Supreme Court. Wow.  Skip the legalities, right? And how does prohibiting John Doe investigations of campaign violations help his argument? But the following reason was a head spinner: 

“The people of Wisconsin thus made as clear as they possibly could that they wish to put this unfortunate chapter behind them,” Schimel wrote.

The “people?” Oh, he means those highly partisan representatives controlling all branches of government. Got it:

Walker’s 2012 recall campaign violated election laws regulating coordination between campaigns and so-called issue advocacy groups that have backed Republicans and conservative Supreme Court justices. 

Republicans to expose John Doe Witnesses and their Statements. Anyone feel like talking now?

Are Republicans f**king power mad? In one of the most crass and intimidating efforts ever, in the name of “oversight,” Republicans want to expose witnesses and their statements, despite the promise of immunity and confidentiality in closed John Doe probes.  JS:

Republican lawmakers … want the (John Doe) records — and the power to arrest prosecutors and others to force them to testify before a legislative committee … AB845, would create a legislative committee with subpoena power and anyone who failed to show up could be arrested and brought before the committee to testify, the bill says“…to carry out the duties and powers" of the committee.

Ah, the POWERS of the committee. After shielding themselves from all future John Doe investigations, Republicans are now sending the message that if you get involved in anyway, and talk, they’ll call you before their committee. 

State Rep. David Craig (R-Big Bend), the lead sponsor of the bill in the Assembly, said the move is needed to ensure John Doe investigators and others in law enforcement are not abusing their power. "It's really secret areas of government that the Legislature really should have oversight over." 

Madison attorney Lester Pines questioned whether such a law would be valid, saying he didn't believe legislators could gain access to records that have been sealed by court order.  "They have no idea what they're doing," said Pines, a Democrat who in recent years has sued over a number of laws enacted by Republicans. "People testify in John Does under promises of immunity and confidentiality. 

And like everything else, Republicans are solving a problem based on a complete fiction:

Craig acknowledged that the proposal would allow lawmakers access to all of the records from the now-closed John Doe II. He said that considering the claims of predawn "paramilitary raids," lawmakers should be able to review how such probes have been conducted to determine whether there were "imprudent decisions by law enforcement."

At a public hearing Wednesday on the bill, Jim Palmer of the Wisconsin Professional Police Association warned that a number of the state's major law enforcement organizations have serious concerns about the proposal … the measure would likely compromise ongoing criminal investigations, undermine local control and limit law enforcement's ability to respond quickly in emergency situations.

With the Supreme Court in shambles, Justices go on Loony Tunes Rants Trashing election law, like Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce intended.

Imagine, after 4 decades (and coincidentally with Republicans firmly in charge), the 4 partisan conservative activist Justices suddenly noticed our campaign laws have been too broad and unconstitutional. The actual unambiguous law blocking coordination between campaigns and outside groups is now seen as ambiguous and too broad. Who knew? Just like that…

…Justice Michael Gableman found collaboration between issue groups and campaigns was not illegal … the special prosecutor has employed theories of law that do not exist.

And while the leaders of big money special interests whined and released private information barred by the John Doe law, the Justices decided to prevent the investigators from offering their side:

The justices didn't hold oral arguments to avoid disclosing private information. Key details about the probe have emerged in news reports, opinion pieces and a wave of litigation against investigators.

The most ridiculous complaint centered on the investigations lack of arrests and convictions. Hmm, I wonder why…

…stalled for 18 months after a lower court judge…

The tortured logic of the majority conservative justices...:

…found collaboration between campaigns and issue groups is allowed because such groups don't explicitly tell people how to vote.

I guess if the message is the same between the two groups, that’s just a coincidence from like-minded conservatives. And suspicions of lawbreaking, all theoretical, cannot be investigated because that would infringe on the 1^st Amendment:

…it makes clear campaigns can work closely with outside groups … R.J. Johnson simultaneously served as an adviser to the club and Walker's campaign … allowing more political money to flow without the names of donors being disclosed.

Acting as if they were at a bar ranting endlessly about issues not even before their court, the Justices didn’t just trotted out conservative radio talking points, they also played up the “Republicans are victims” card:

Those in the majority raised questions about the way the probe was conducted, with Gableman writing that the search warrants were executed as "pre-dawn, armed, paramilitary-style raids" and Prosser writing in a concurrence that the subpoenas were "so extensive that they make the fruits of the legendary Watergate break-in look insignificant by comparison." The appeals court ruled in favor of prosecutors in the challenge that dealt with technical issues about how the probe was conducted. 

Todd Graves, an attorney for the club and its director, Eric O'Keefe, said in a statement that Chisholm and the accountability board until now "acted like playground bullies without fear of restraint from the courts."

Attorney General Brad Schimel said the ruling "closes a divisive chapter in Wisconsin history."

This thing call “law” is so inconvenient. Maybe Schimel missed the time Scott Walker boasted how he would “divide and conquer” labor in the state. That chapter hasn’t closed.  

Unconstitutional for 4 decades: Thank god we discovered the mistake when the GOP took over:

The Government Accountability Board's Chairman, Gerald Nichol, said the ruling reverses how election officials have interpreted campaign finance laws for four decades. Daniel Weiner, senior counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, said in a statement the court "has made campaign finance law extraordinarily easy to evade. No other court has gone this far and for good reason — it is a misreading of the law and threatens fair and transparent elections."

Balls to the Wall Bizarro World: Connecting the dots on this one was easy. Jaw dropping and outrageous, here's how Wisconsin Manufactureres and Commerce (WMC) bought off the court. 

Step 1: Got their justices elected:

WMC, which has received some funding from the Wisconsin Club for Growth and is the state's largest business lobbying group, spent an estimated $2.2 million for Ziegler; $1.8 million for Gableman; $1.1 million for Prosser; and $500,000 for Roggensack.

Step 2: WMC then went ahead and wrote the Justices recusal rules that wiped "conflict of interest:"

2. In a 4-3 decision, the Wisconsin Supreme Court adopted the Realtors and WMC’s petitions. The petitions sought clarification that a judge does not need to seek recusal where it would be based solely on a party in the case sponsoring an independent expenditure or issue advocacy communication in favor of the judge. the and Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce (“WMC”) and Wisconsin Realtors Association (“Realtors”) filed separate petitions (that) sought to amend the Judicial Code of Conduct.

Step 3: WMC can now drum up taxpayer outrage over the cost of the public's futile effort to stop business from shredding campaign finance laws, and :

WMC president and CEO Kurt Bauer said, "Taxpayers deserve to know how much of their money was wasted on this unlawful and unconstitutional investigation, and the targets deserve an apology from the prosecutors and GAB regulators who have violated their rights."

Already a Laughing Stock, Wisconsin Supreme Court clears Walker, kills off John Doe probe, orders evidence Destroyed.

It's a funny thing when a state supreme court justice declares someone innocent before ever knowing if that was true or not:

WISC: On a 4-2 vote (the majority coming from the Wisconsin Supreme Court's four conservatives), has ordered an end to a wide-ranging and secret probe into alleged election law violations during the Republican Gov. Scott Walker's 2012 recall campaign. 

Justice Michael Gableman, writing for the majority wrote, "It is utterly clear that the special prosecutor has employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing. Let one point be clear: our conclusion today ends this unconstitutional John Doe investigation," Gableman wrote ... found a key section of Wisconsin's campaign finance law is "unconstitutionally overbroad and vague."

The court ordered all all property seized in the investigation returned to its owners and all copies of evidence destroyed.

Justice Shirley Abrahamson, our former Chief Justice until Republican legislators targeted her and tossed her out, summed it up well when she wrote, "the majority opinion's theme is 'Anything Goes,'" and that we'll never know if the individuals involved were guilty or innocent. jsonline:

“The majority opinion will deny the people of this state the opportunity to determine once and for all whether the targets of the John Doe investigation are guilty of systematically violating Wisconsin's campaign finance law through undisclosed campaign coordination. The majority opinion adopts an unprecedented and faulty interpretation of Wisconsin's campaign finance law and of the First Amendment.'"

Of course more liberal justices can't be trusted or believed, so may I present to you a conservative special prosecutor:

Francis Schmitz, the (Republican) special prosecutor leading the investigation, has written in court papers that one or more of the justices should not have participated in the case because the groups being investigated had spent millions of dollars to help elect those justices. None of those justices agreed to step aside.

So how much money did each litigant spend to elect and influence the court's conservative justices?

The Wisconsin Club for Growth is estimated to have spent $400,000 for Ziegler in 2007; $507,000 for Gableman in 2008; $520,000 for Prosser in 2011; and $350,000 for Roggensack in 2013. WMC spent an estimated $2.2 million for Ziegler; $1.8 million for Gableman; $1.1 million for Prosser; and $500,000 for Roggensack. In addition, Citizens for a Strong America — a group funded entirely by the Wisconsin Club for Growth — spent an estimated $985,000 to help Prosser.

The justices … say political spending on its own is not enough to force a justice off a case.

So money doesn’t have a corrupting, or even slight influence over our elected officials, which is what Citizens United was all about? Sure, and the SCOTUS even said so in 2009 in a West Virginia case.

Blue Jean Nation's Mike McCabe, who's former watchdog group Wisconsin Democracy Campaign tracked campaign spending, talked with libertarian leaning talker Mitch Hank. It appears the federal Supreme Court may have every reason to strike down our courts corrupt conclusion, that's if John Doe prosecutors challenge their decision. Here's an audio section of that conversation:

  

Keep in mind, Walker told contributors that if they wanted to keep their identities secret, they should send their money to the Wisconsin Club for Growth. Nothing wrong there, right?

jsonline: "The Governor is encouraging all to invest in the Wisconsin Club for Growth," said an April 28, 2011, email from Kate Doner, a Walker campaign consultant, to R.J. Johnson, an adviser to Walker's campaign and the advocacy group. "Wisconsin Club for Growth can accept corporate and personal donations without limitations and no donors disclosure ... As the Governor discussed ... he wants all the issue advocacy efforts run thru one group to ensure correct messaging,"

Why conservative voters aren’t outraged is a mystery to me, unless they think Republicans will never lose power in the state. Personally, this power grab may benefit Democrats in the long run if they fully utilize the structure and dominance the GOP is cluelessly putting in place:  

Republicans who control the Legislature have put on their agenda plans to rewrite campaign finance laws, overhaul how John Doe probes are conducted and restructure the Government Accountability Board. They have been waiting for the court decisions before advancing those bills and could take them up this fall. 

Wisconsin Watchdog Scott Walker's lapdog!

Wisconsin Watchdog, once known as Wisconsin Reporter (only minus the reporting), is playing up to the ignorance of it intended readers, with the piece I screen captured below. This online rag is implying the Milwaukee DA is telling Scott Walker to keep his mouth shut about the John Doe investigation. In reality, DA John Chisholm warned Walker that  making defamatory false statements is a chargeable offense.

Keep in mind, a John Doe judge ordered secrecy for all the parties involved. Even Walker made that clear hundreds of times. Of course republican special interests defied the order...so much for the rule of law.

Walker gave this response to WISN’s Mike Gousha: "As you know, as I've pointed out many times in the past when we've talked about this, the law's pretty clear in this state," Walker said. "Anyone who knows anything about a John Doe can't talk about it. Anyone who doesn't know anything about it shouldn't talk about it. So, I've not commented on the Doe itself because I've abided by the law."

Mr. Unintimidated was told to shut up? But conservative activist Eric O'Keefe and the Wisconsin Club for Growth played the victim, and opened their trap.

A director of the Wisconsin Club for Growth told Fox News he was defying a secrecy order in a probe of his group and the campaign of Gov. Scott Walker. O’Keefe said: “Yes. An unconstitutional secrecy order. And I'm defying the secrecy order.”

Of course he knows it's unconstitutional, who needs the courts. Ironically, some of their secret emails were released exposing their nefarious plans.

The article makes the case that Walker can lie if he wants about the DA, even defame his character; it's "political" free speech, a 1st Amendment right. Walker also claimed a raid to collect evidence was pure intimidation:

...criticism that they had ordered aggressive raids on the homes of targets...

But it wasn't that at all:

Chisholm: "Look at the use of the word ‘raid’ for example. Sounds scintillating. But lawfully executed, judicially approved search warrants are not ‘raids.’ I have not trained for or participated in a ‘raid’ since leaving the Army, where it has a very real technical definition.”

Walker could also prove his allegation by releasing some of the secret information, but...

Watchdog's one-sided story skipped the DA's response completely, which would have changed the story and cleared them:

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm suggesting Walker could be criminally charged for lying, “As to defamatory remarks, I strongly suspect the Iowa criminal code, like Wisconsin’s, has provisions for intentionally making false statements intended to harm the reputation of others.”

Special prosecutor Francis Schmitz, a self-described Republican, said “I invite the governor to join me in seeking judicial approval to lawfully release information now under seal … Such information will show that these recent allegations are patently false." Chisholm said he agreed … "Stripped of niceties, Mr. Schmitz is saying the governor is deliberately not telling the truth."

But Watchdog M.D. Kittle didn't write the column to defend the 1st Amendment, he wrote it to character assassinate the Milwaukee DA, who just happens to be a Democratic enemy of the state. 

Schimel to blindly defend all state laws no matter what! What about law banning coordination with third party groups? "I'm not sure."

Waukesha DA Brad Schimel's scatterbrained answers in Friday's Attorney General debate was an unnerving revelation for this viewer. Lazy and simplistic, Schimel hopes to hide his inability to make sound legal judgments by making the ridiculous pledge to defend all laws passed by the legislature. Who doesn't see through that one, really, we're grownups here aren't we?

Saying Schimel is unprepared for the job as the state's top cop would be understatement. Even at this late date, he's still waffling on the issues. The shocking clip below, completely missed by the media, shows Schimel already contradicting his promise to defend all state laws. Asked if he would simply defend the state law banning coordination between third party groups and political candidates, like Scott Walker did, Schimel is suddenly "NOT SURE." Am I the only one who noticed this mind-bending flip flop (at 2:48 in the video)?

Cudos to Mike Gousha for pursuing Schimel on this question. Schimel even forgot what law Gousha was talking about. Truly frightening:



It's likely Schimel will never be prepared for the job. Even unenlightened self absorbed radio talk hosts like Vicki McKenna nailed it early on. I put together a number a audio clips that proves McKenna right for once:



Thanks to the Mic's Devil's Advocates for coming up with the McKenna clips.

Walker, Vos dance to tune of Wisconsin Club for Growth, propose disbanding independent GAB oversight.

Who controls Scott Walker and our state legislature? The conservative party bosses at Wisconsin Club for Growth, that’s who.

And when the Club bosses are unhappy, Republican legislators develop new and aggressive "leadership" skills, that coincidentally fall in line with the Club.

After rearranging the bits and pieces in the Journal Sentinel article by Patrick Marley, you’ll see why. From the very beginning, Rep. Robin Vos has bashed the Government Accountability Board because he thinks that they, or any independent group, cannot actually be nonpartisan. That's impossible. Under that false premise, Vos thinks the controlling party should make all the partisan appointments they want, same difference. Checks and balances:

jsonline: Prosecutors and the Government Accountability Board have been looking into whether the club or other conservative groups illegally worked with the campaigns of Gov. Scott Walker and other Republicans during the 2011 and 2012 recalls.

You don’t threaten or challenge conservatives. The clubs boss Eric O'Keefe sued the Milwaukee DA, making it clear he wasn't happy with Republican inaction. Vos sprung into action, and sued the accountability board because of their redesigned ballot and to make them look bad. It was stupid, so even a conservative Waukesha County judge dismissed the case. In an uncontrolled hissy fit of authoritarian rage, Vos declared on the Wisconsin Radio Network (audio from WPR):

"Kevin Kennedy (head of the GAB) has to go. He needs to be gone, he is an embarrassment and I can't say it any more emphatically than I am right now. I promise you that two years from now when we're sitting here the GAB will not be in the current format that it is currently put together. It is dysfunctional, it is unresponsive and it is totally undemocratic."

Vos, under pressure from the Wisconsin Club for Growth's party bosses and others, said he will change the elections board to one that is loyal to the authority. A sure fire way to instill confidence and integrity in our elections. 

In the meantime, party boss O’Keefe will use its vast financial resources to make an example of the GAB and the DA's office, not because of their duty to provide oversight, but because they had the gall to picked a “fight” with the real party bosses.  

O'Keefe said Chisholm had started the fight over campaign finance laws that he claims has shut out conservative voices from the state's political debate. But "my team will decide when it's over," O'Keefe said.

And like every Republican "plan," there isn't one:

Phony GOP Partisan Problems

Vos said he's unlikely to have a concrete proposal for changing or replacing the accountability board before the election.

Of course this is all speculation, based on the purely coincidental actions by Vos and the Club's party boss.

And what kind of guy is Eric O’Keefe? Check out his comments on conservative talker Vicki McKenna’s radio show:

 “I have read some about rape and I have talked about rape and I am saying this deliberately. The reactions that I got from the people I interviewed were similar to a rape victim.”

John Doe 2 back on?...Federal Court Reverses Conservative Activist Judge Randa.

When a conservative activist judge like Rudy Randa gets slapped around by the Federal Appeals Court like that, you've got to just scratch your head. If this were a liberal judge, we'd never hear the end of it. But "stand with Walker" trolls, tongues tied?

Judge Randa thought he could just change every law he didn't like, whether it's before him or not. That's what I would call authoritarian activism.

Surprise, Walker is still connected to the investigation, that remains on hold. WisPolitics:

A federal appeals court today reversed an injunction ending a John Doe investigation into coordination between conservative groups and Gov. Scott Walker's campaign in the recalls. 

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals also reversed Judge Rudolph Randa's ruling rejecting an immunity defense by state prosecutors who were sued by targets of the investigation. The court also sent the case back to district court with instructions to dismiss the suit, "leaving all further proceedings to the courts of Wisconsin." Randa sided with the Club for Growth in issuing an injunction to halt the probe. 

But the 7th Circuit ruled today Randa improperly issued the injunction because federal law says a U.S. court may not interfere with state court proceedings "except as expressly authorized by Act of Congress, or where necessary in aid of its jurisdiction, or to protect or effectuate its judgments." 

The court did not hold back:

jsonline: "What we have said shows not only that an injunction was an abuse of discretion but also that (as prosecutors) all defendants possess qualified immunity from liability in damages," wrote Judge Frank Easterbrook in the decision.

"It is not possible to treat as 'bad faith' a criminal investigation that reflects (the U.S. Supreme Court's) interpretation of the First Amendment," he wrote. "Public officials can be held liable for violating clearly established law, but not for choosing sides on a debatable issue."

Because of that, prosecutors and investigators involved in the case remain immune from lawsuits, Easterbrook wrote.

Walker flaunts work with outside group to after Rep. Mark Pocan.

Coincidence? I think not. Thanks to Cognitive Dissidence for bringing this to everyone's attention.

For months, Rep. Mark Pocan has been interested in seeing the governors air travel record, because after all, he’s been making the rounds…a lot.

Pocan included the exact timeline in his sites post to prove Scott Walker’s campaign contacted an outside source to harass and threaten Pocan with a similar request.

On Friday, the Pocan campaign for Congress put a request into the Wisconsin Department of Administration for Governor Scott Walker’s air travel from June 4 to September 5, following a previous request for the balance of his time as Governor.  Campaign staff personally delivered the request at approximately 10 a.m. Friday, September 5 and confirmation email was sent at 10:36 a.m. CST from the Walker administration.

At 12:33 p.m. CST that same day, an allegedly independent, disreputable right-wing organization, Media Trackers, sent Representative Mark Pocan’s official office in Washington a request for his official travel schedule, through September 1.  That request came just hours after the Pocan campaign made the request of Governor Walker’s office.

Who else would have known about the request? No one but Walker:

“You’d think that a Governor who’s flirting with his second John Doe investigation for his direct complicity with outside groups in an illegal scheme to circumvent campaign finance laws would be a bit less tone deaf to continuing to flirt with outside groups so flagrantly,” said Pocan. “I guess Governor Walker thinks his quest for the Presidency holds no bounds, and that’s pretty much what we’ve seen as we go through his travel records.”

Representative Pocan’s Congressional office immediately complied with the request, compared to Scott Walker’s 70 day lag on the first open records request. “Politicians like Scott Walker will do anything and say anything to get ahead, even to the degree of trashing our campaign finance laws and even common sense,” Pocan said.

Walker's clueless act gets world wide belly laugh!

I thought this had the right amount of skepticism.

Here's Ed Schultz with DPW's Mike Tate and fact buzzsaw Ruth Conniff from The Progressive Magazine cutting through the crap:

"Perp" Walker in deeper trouble: shown illegally coordinating with two national groups that run ads supporting candidates!!!

Maybe one of the big questions involving the now held up John Doe 2 investigation should be about the judges: Why would Reserve Judge Gregory Peterson and Judge Rudolph Randa think to stop the probe when so much evidence is pointing to possible illegal coordination between the Walker campaign and outside groups? Did they really think there was nothing there? 

jsonline: Peterson and Randa — the two judges who have heard the case — concluded nothing illegal had occurred because the groups engaged in issue advocacy and did not tell people how to vote. Schmitz contended that doesn't matter and such coordination can still be illegal if the coordination with Walker's campaign was done with the intention of helping him politically.

Forget the Wisconsin Club for Growth for now, in a new revelation, that the Journal Sentinel now says has been withdrawn from the courts web site:

Gov. Scott Walker's campaign illegally coordinated with two national groups on political advertising in a way that went further than what had been previously known. One group mentioned in the newly available filing is an arm of the Republican Governors Association that has run ads backing Walker since 2010. The other, the Republican State Leadership Committee … Unlike the Wisconsin Club for Growth, those groups explicitly back candidates in filings with the state Government Accountability Board.

According to prosecutors, R.J. Johnson sought and received campaign strategy from an unnamed representative of the Republican State Leadership Committee. "Need to know what you are up (to) and the content of your spot. We are drafting radio to complement." Johnson wrote.

Once secret, not secret, back to secret again:

The document describing the alleged coordination between Walker's campaign and the Republican Governors Association and Republican State Leadership Committee is from a once-secret filing made in February 2014 … filing is from a trove of hundreds of pages of records that were unsealed Friday by a federal appeals court. Within hours, the documents could no longer be accessed on the court's website after some claimed the court had inadvertently made public some records that were meant to remain sealed. (The documents are available on jsonline.com.) 

From Politico comes this national coverage and two of the 6 "must read passages" from the John Doe document dump that isn't getting a lot of attention here:

-“Our efforts were run by Wisconsin Club for Growth … who coordinated spending through 12 different groups.” Keith Gilkes, who managed Walker’s 2010 campaign and served as his chief of staff until leaving to manage the recall campaign wrote,“Most spending by other groups was directly funded by grants from the club,” he suggested the governor say. “Wisconsin Club for Growth raised 12 million dollars and ran a soup to nuts campaign.” The new filings explain that the main group was a conduit to transfer money to a dozen other groups. Citizens for a Strong America, for example, got $1.52 million from the Wisconsin Club for Growth. The Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce association got $2.5 million during the two-year period.

-“Let them know that you can accept corporate contributions and it is not reported.” The quote gets to the heart of the legal issue about whether Walker’s team tried to illegally sidestep state campaign contribution caps.

No Question, Walker pushed illegal coordination with Outside Group.

Scott Walker came right out and said that he wanted to illegally coordinate his campaigns message with the outside group, Wisconsin Club for Growth.

"The Governor is encouraging all to invest in the Wisconsin Club for Growth," said an April 28, 2011, email from Kate Doner, a Walker campaign consultant … Doner wrote to Johnson that Walker wanted Wisconsin Club for Growth exclusively to coordinate campaign themes. "As the Governor discussed ... he wants all the issue advocacy efforts run thru one group to ensure correct messaging," she wrote.

In the jsonline article, this line stood ou

Prosecutors contend candidates and outside groups cannot collaborate on their messaging and strategy. Walker and the club have contended they can, because the club's ads do not explicitly tell people who to vote for or against.

It's not the advocacy ads, it's coordinating the message.

The following should give everyone an opportunity to see who's really calling the shots politically in Wisconsin. And right wing trolls teasing liberals about their obsession with the Koch brothers, explain yourselves now:

In September 2011, Doner sent an email to Walker and others with brainstorming ideas for raising money for the Wisconsin Club for Growth. Among them: "Take Koch's money," "Get on a plane to Vegas and sit down with Sheldon Adelson," and "Go heavy after (corporations) to give."

7th Circuit Court skeptical, wants good reason for John Doe 2 Conservative groups to remain Anonymous.

Slowly but surely the wheels of justice turn....

Twin Cities: A federal appeals court is asking two unnamed parties related to an investigation into Gov. Scott Walker's 2012 recall campaign and other conservative groups to explain why they are entitled to remain anonymous.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday asked the unnamed parties (Wisconsin Club for Growth) to address that in briefs due in September.

Scott Walker's inadvertent Admission of Guilt in John Doe 2?

The Center for Media and Democracy's PR Watch review of the SB 654 drafting files pretty much proves Scott Walker knew he was on the wrong side of the law, and tried to cover up his crime with legislation that would exempt him and his donors from similar activities in the future.

The author of the legislation, the uncomfortably odd Sen. Mary Lazich, was the perfect choice to carry out Walker's legal slight of hand. 

New documents indicate that just weeks after the first subpoenas were issued in Wisconsin's "John Doe" criminal campaign finance probe in October 2013, senate Republicans had begun working to change state law to legalize the activities under investigation.

Legislative Republicans surprised many in the state in March of 2014 when they tried to rush Senate Bill 654 through the legislature to explicitly carve-out an exception to the state's campaign finance statutes for so-called "issue ads" ... The John Doe investigation was never mentioned during testimony on SB 654 , even among the bill's opponents.

Senate elections committee chair Sen. Mary Lazich (R) had begun working on the bill five months earlier, in October 2013 -- just weeks after secret John Doe subpoenas were issued to Wisconsin Club for Growth, the Walker campaign, and other groups.

The timing provides further evidence that the legislation was designed to have an impact on the conduct under investigation in the John Doe. Jay Heck, Executive Director of Common Cause Wisconsin, now says "this is more than coincidental." "I'm just in disbelief at how brazen this is," he said. 

More talk about Walker's John Doe 2 Problem...

Republicans can't get enough of the idea that money is free speech. Hey, maybe we should print more of it? Money is freedom they can hold in their hand. And "freedom" has always been tied to buying something, like big gulps, unhealthy food in school lunches, incandescent light bulbs, guns, junk insurance policies across state lines, politicians with campaign contributions. That's freedom, and that's money.

Ed Schultz with The Progressive's Ruth Conniff:



Al Sharpton with a few clips of WTMJ's Charlie Sykes and Walker:



Here's the Democratic Party of Wisconsin's web ad that is surprisingly good:

A Defensive Walker makes the case to do away with "partisan" Democratic District Attorney's. There's only one real party...

It’s not the denial by Scott Walker that’s unsettling, but his suggestion that only Republican DA’s can be trusted with the law and “nonpartisan” investigations. These subtle comments provide the emotional gun powder for agitating the base. Maybe the media should ask Walker why he thinks Democratic DA candidates shouldn’t run for office.

In his desperate attempt to contain the damage, he let it slip in this editorial:

“The truth on the widely covered John Doe is that two judges, one state and one federal, reviewed the accusations of partisans within a Democratic District Attorney’s Office and determined their theories have no merit or basis in law.”

What does that say about Walker’s respect for elections and those who see things differently...like Democrats?

The enemy among us: Walker’s “above the law” arrogance toward "petty liberal partisans" opposed to his one party ideal of government and “truth” is unnerving:

Each of these judges explicitly issued judicial orders that these partisan prosecutors must end their investigation immediately. These are the truths that need to be stated over and over again to fight the slander directed at me and our campaign by my political opponents.

Walker the Victim: Remember, this is about pay-to-play, campaign funding that pushes the limits and attempts to get around the law, whether legal or illegal. This isn’t about his failed agenda, it’s about elections controlled by big government corporate special interests. 

Bottom line; why wouldn't conservative prosecutors be considered just as partisan? 

Still, many in the media proceed as though the opinion of the partisan prosecutors … ignore the truths I have stated above. No charges. No case. Watching the media frenzy, it is clear that this is what happens when someone takes on the big government special interests. I will not back down. We will continue to fight using the truth...

Judge Randa Blocks Media Access to John Doe 2 Documents to hide possible Walker Lawbreaking.

Republicans have touted the wonders of conservative judges and justices for the last decade. They aren't shy about nominating strictly conservative candidates. And no one seems to think that’s odd. Due to that, activist conservative judges have never felt more arrogant and powerful. They’re now rewriting law and legislating from the bench. Like Judge Rudy Randa.

Referenced in a nice piece at Rock Netroots, it appears Judge Rudy Randa’s partisan nature bubbled over:

Wisconsin Reporter: In a scorching critique, U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Randa verbally hammers the prosecutors in a politically charged John Doe investigation for seeking “refuge in the Court of Public Opinion, having lost in this Court of law.” The federal judge’s stinging assessment of the prosecutors-turned defendants in a civil rights lawsuit came in a ruling Thursday that rejects in part unsealing a raft of records related to the investigation, a move that Randa believes is needed to protect two unnamed intervenors in the matter.

The prosecutors, in a filing last month, criticized conservative activist Eric O’Keefe and his Wisconsin Club for growth ... “(It is) beyond irony that the plaintiffs and their counsel now ask the Court to block media access to the documents that outline the investigation and detail the reasons why the plaintiffs’ conduct was subject to scrutiny,” the prosecutors claimed.

Is Walker Guilty of Coordinated Spending in Violation of Campaign Law? Here’s a legal look at the possible violation:

jsonline: Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California-Irvine who authors a popular blog on election law, said Thursday that the Citizens United case didn't go quite as far as many people think it did. The ruling left intact certain limits on coordinating such spending with candidates or their campaigns, restrictions similar to the Wisconsin laws.

"We're talking Wisconsin law" in the John Doe case, Hasen said, "but it’s fairly analogous. All kinds of issue advocacy can count as coordination, and therefore be illegal," depending on the specifics. Both Hasen and another election law expert, Ohio State University law professor Daniel Tokaji, think Randa's interpretations of the law will not be shared by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

"I was flabbergasted by some of the things he said that were like applauding coordination," Hasen said. Tokaji said coordination is illegal for good reason, because it "raises the specter of corruption," and the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the purpose of preventing the exchange of cash for political favors. He said the new documents don't suggest the prosecutors looking into the Walker campaign were biased.

Ilya Shapiro, from the Cato Institute, called Thursday's developments "sort of a non-story" and a "fishing expedition" that doesn't change anything. Shapiro predicts the 7th Circuit will affirm Randa's findings but "with less sweeping rhetoric" on narrower grounds.