Mary Burke, the Democratic candidate squaring off against Gov. Scott Walker, took a shot at the first-term Republican by saying the release of recent emails shows that he sets a "low bar for campaign ethics."ADDED: The liberal blog Blogging Blue wrote about the Bjork hire last October:
Now Walker's allies are firing back.
Jon Thompson, a spokesman for the Republican Governors Association, pointed out this week that Burke has hired Tanya Bjork, who was convicted of two misdemeanors in 2005 for altering public records and soliciting campaign funds in the Capitol. Bjork is a senior adviser with the Burke campaign.
Thompson said Bjork's role with the campaign "completely invalidates" Burke's criticism of Walker over information found in the release of more than 27,000 pages of emails from a Walker aide during the 2010 election.
"Before Mary Burke preaches about ethical standards, she needs to take a good long look in the mirror," said Thompson, whose group has been running a six-figure ad campaign attacking Burke.
Ultimately, I’m disappointed in the move because in hiring Bjork, the Burke campaign sacrifices the political “high road” it would have been able to take in regards to Gov. Scott Walker’s close ties former aides of his who were convicted of criminal behavior while they were working for then-County Executive Walker.That last point is very close to something I was going to say when Scott Walker was criticized last month for letting a convicted criminal appear on the stage — along with a dozen other Wisconsin citizens who'd recently gotten new jobs.
However, while bringing Bjork on board as a member of the Burke campaign is troublesome, at what point do we continue to demonize her for the mistakes she’s made in the past without giving her a second chances to prove she’s learned from those mistakes? There’s absolutely no denying Tanya Bjork broke the law, but she took responsibility and was punished for the crimes she committed, and she should be given an opportunity to move in a positive direction.
Christopher Barber, a 32-year-old welder ... wore his welding helmet and work gloves on stage. He waved to the audience in the Assembly chamber as he left the podium and Walker turned around and applauded.Walker was barraged with bad publicity, even though he didn't know that Barber had been convicted of third-degree sexual assault, he only had Barber standing behind him in a group for a few seconds, and he would not have included him if he'd known. I didn't get around to blogging about this, because contrary to what some of my fellow Wisconsin citizens may think, I don't jump at every occasion to defend Scott Walker. But if I'd gotten around to it, I would have said that it's good when someone who has served time in prison is able to become a productive member of society.
"Every time we help someone find a job, it makes for a strong home, a stronger community, and a stronger state," Walker said during his speech as Barber and the others stood behind him.
I'd have been happy to see Scott Walker share the stage with a whole group of convicted criminals who have now found jobs. Do people want someone who has served time to be a pariah for the rest of his life? It's not as if Walker hired someone who committed a crime into a position of trust, which is what Burke has done with Bjork. And note that Bjork's crime involved dishonesty in a position of public trust.
Cruel neutrality. That's my approach. I hope that hurt.
AND: I note the potential for arguing that a "registered sex offender" like Barber is different from people like Bjork who were convicted of a crime, served their sentence, and are now going forward without an equivalent official mark of disrepute warning others of a propensity to commit crimes like that.
But why don't we keep a "dishonest public servant" registry for people convicted of crimes like Bjork's? What's the point of these registries? Only to signal that past crimes create a risk of future crimes and to give us the opportunity to take precautions. Why are we suspicious of Barber's character -- in relation to his work as a welder — but not to Bjork's — in relation to her work in politics?
পোস্টগুলি
৯২টি মন্তব্য:
Burke needs to put on her big girl pants to play this game.
So burke accuses walker of doing the sort of stuff that her staff have already been convicted of doing?
That's solid ad material for somebody...
the Burke campaign sacrifices the political “high road”
Ha ha, funny joke. Everyone knows democrats never lose the high road no matter what.
"There’s absolutely no denying Tanya Bjork broke the law, but she took responsibility and was punished for the crimes she committed, and she should be given an opportunity to move in a positive direction."
Actually, I agree with that position. The problem is, and call me cynical if you like, but I don't see this kind of forgiveness coming from the left. Take the Scott Walker emails, a Democrat prosecutor sifts through 27,000 pages of emails looking for something to charge Walker with. Can't find anything, so the case is dropped. I don't care if you are a Republican or a Democrat, that looks like exoneration to me. Yet, all I see from the left is..."he's a criminal"..blah blah blah. So, would this writer be so charitable when one of those Walker staffers pays his/her debt to society and moves on to a senior post in a different GOP candidates campaign? only time will tell, but my money is on the writer being predictable and blasting whoever hires one of those staffers.
All I want to see is some consistency. Democrats claim a Republican war on women, but right now there is a Democrat congressional rep sitting in a jail cell for sexual assault, and the party doesn't censure him let alone kick him out. The Democrat rep from Maryland beat his wife, and he stayed in for years. Look how long the Filner mess played out. Republicans are only marginally better, as they seem to resign when caught (wide stance guy and the family values vidoe while I'm cheating on my wife guy). But they shouldn't be doing those things to "get caught" in the first place.
All I want to see is some consistency.
You won't.
One last point, did Blogging Blue critcize Walker for having the ex-con welder on stage?
Good post.
Althouse asked?
"Do people want someone who has served time to be a pariah for the rest of his life?"
Unfortunately the answer is yes many people do want former convicts to be pariahs for life.
Although the Democrats claim to be all for the underdog they are as bad or worse than Republicans in this regard -- unless the individual can be useful to them of course.
Big Mike- yeah, I know
"One last point, did Blogging Blue critcize Walker for having the ex-con welder on stage?"
Yes: here.
Will this shape up to be just like Feingold's first victory, minus the Feingold option?
For better or worse, the 27,000 emails are reducing support for Gov. Walker.
I don't think that's rational, as you're sure to find something if you release 27,000 emails from any political office. But not everyone pays attention, they just notice the bits and pieces that float by at the Journal-Sentinel and other sites.
So I think it's necessary to fight back, as the purely defensive stature will still lose just a little bit more each day.
But if there's something real to fight back with- as there appears to be here- so much the better.
I thought most of Bjork's crimes were sartorial.
"One last point, did Blogging Blue critcize Walker for having the ex-con welder on stage?"
Yes: here."
And that is my point exactly. Their position toward Tonya Bjork is admirable in my opinion, but since that position is only in the service of one side, it's obvious they're just a bunch of partisan hacks there. Fuck em.
So burke accuses walker of doing the sort of stuff that her staff have already been convicted of doing?
Burke didn't run an illegal campaign operation out of her office. Walker did. That's why Walker will not answer one question regarding it.
Garage: You should offer yourself up as a witness for the Walker crime. You say it with such certainty, a certainty that three years of double secret investigations could not arrive at, that you personally must have been involved or know someone who was.
Or just keep calling someone a criminal who is not, while ignoring someone who is.
I thought most of Bjork's crimes were sartorial.
That goose has been worn.
Burke didn't run an illegal campaign operation out of her office. Walker did.
Prove it.
Is Burke the best the Dems in Wisconsin can put forth?
You say it with such certainty, a certainty that three years of double secret investigations could not arrive at,
Prosecutors testified that Walker personally participated in the email system. He personally ordered his staff to promote him online, which is also illegal. Why he wasn't charged is a good question. But if the rallying cry is "Prosecutors didn't have quite enough to charge me", good luck with that.
Prosecutors testified that Walker personally participated in the email system.
In Wisconsin, they allow prosecutors to take the stand?
Mr. Hoist, meet Mr. Petard.
garage: Why he wasn't charged is a good question.
A good answer would be: Because they had nuthin'.
Good luck with the convicted accusing the alleged approach.
"Why he wasn't charged is a good question. But if the rallying cry is "Prosecutors didn't have quite enough to charge me", good luck with that."
So as not to appear partisan, I'm sure.
Comedy gold.
"Is Burke the best the Dems in Wisconsin can put forth?"
Sort of. She's rich, so can self-finance her campaign. The Dems/unions shot their wad on the protests/recalls 3 years ago.
"There’s absolutely no denying Tanya Bjork broke the law, but she took responsibility and was punished for the crimes she committed, and she should be given an opportunity to move in a positive direction."
I can see the Burke Campaign press release now: Bjork's parole officer vouches for her integrity.
...or...
Tanya Bjork is not a crook anymore.
There are two Americas and two sets of rules.
The right is held to strict scrutiny and no error is ever forgiven (Romney in high school, Walker in college). Notably, human rights are a point of fashion, and once-fashionable beliefs become evil hating hatey hate in mere months.
The left is forgiven all transgressions, as their intent is moral (Clinton, Obama, Byrd, etc.)
In short, all that is not the latest lefty belief is doubleplus ungood badfeel wrongthink.
Asked Landgraf: “Is it at all uncommon to see County Executive employees like Mr. Nardelli communicating using private e-mail addresses with members of the Scott Walker campaign?”
Answered Budde: “It’s very common.”
Later on, Landgraf asked, “Based upon your search of the Rindfleisch e-mails is there any reason to believe that there may have been general use of laptops in the County Executive’s Office?”
Budde: “Yes there is.”
Landgraf: “Did you find any e-mails written by the County Executive himself suggesting that there may have been use of County laptops in the — personal laptops in the County Executive’s Office?”
Budde: “Yes.”
And that is why I can't bring myself to trust the left to act in good faith. Why every position that they advocate is suspect. Especially anything cloaked in the language of fairness or equiality. What they really mean is "equality and fairness for those that we like". Even the Filner resignation is suspect, he wasn't goingto resign, leftists lined up to defend him even with half a dozen incidents. How refreshing it would have been for the city council to say "You're done, pack your shit, clean out your desk, don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out." And don't get me started on Bill Clinton. And right on time, Garage shows up to make my point for me. Inga, your turn.
“Consider yourself now in the ‘inner circle,’ ” one county employee wrote to another in March 2010 after instructing her to check a non-public e-mail account frequently during the day. Referring to the future governor by his initials and his chief of staff, the employee continued,
“I use this private account quite a bit to communicate with SKW and [Thomas] Nardelli.”
I really don't understand what the big deal is here. Everyone who voted for Obama & The Chicago Way shouldn't have a problem with something so rookie, basic & trite.
It's not like Walker removed the locks from taking donations via credit card.
Why he wasn't charged is a good question
What a mystery. If only there was an explanation! LOL!
Garage:
"Prosecutors testified that Walker personally participated in the email system."
Can you give us a link to this "testimony?" Were they under oath? Why were they testifying? To whom?
Poor Garage, all that "meat" and his prosecutors couldn't even indict the sandwich.
And his poor unions blew their Spring Break money on #phail recall elections.
Keep shaking that tiny fist, dude.
Garage: If we had ham we could indict the ham-n-eggs if we had eggs.
Garage:
Here is an insider tip. I have three email accounts. On occasion I use the wrong one to communicate with a client. They. Do. Not. Know. It. Is. A. Different. E. Mail. Address. Than. My. Business. E. Mail.
@garage, I'm not sure why I think this, but somehow I get the idea that you are full of slobbering hatred towards Scott Walker.
Did you make you work for a living, or something?
Ariens, Barber’s employer, wasn’t aware of his felonies or DUI convictions, either. Was he straight with them, because I’ve never filled out an application that didn’t ask about felony convictions?
I agree that Burke loses the high road in hiring Bjork. We know about her convictions via the common "dishonest public servant" list, Google. The same "dishonest public servant" list shows former Milwaukee County Exec Walker staffer, Kelly Rindfleisch, who had previously been granted immunity in the similar state "caucus scandal" 10 years ago - the biggest political scandal at the Capitol in memory. Now, she has been charged (currently out on appeal) with four felony counts alleging she engaged in similar illegal fundraising on behalf of former lieutenant governor candidate Brett Davis, a Republican.
Perhaps Bjork has rehabbed herself into societal asset (and Barber, as well). My hope is they have – time will tell. Kinda seems like Rindfleisch has not.
Can you give us a link to this "testimony?" Were they under oath? Why were they testifying? To whom?
From the link you can go to the actual John Doe docs if you like. Link
You guys would make probably the shittiest investigators on earth. "who? huh? wha? er? sometimes I use different email accts?"
Poor Garage, all that "meat" and his prosecutors couldn't even indict the sandwich.
Again, great campaign theme. "I won't discuss anything, but I didn't get charged!" Yet.
Garage: So there is no "testimony" from the prosecutors. This is "testimony" you made up.
Sorry, dude, but the shitty investigators and prosecutors seem to be on your end.
All that horseshit and still no pony for garage.
IT'S THE SERIOUSNESS OF TEH CHARGE, BITCHES, NOT THE ACTUAL EVIDENCE.
It's very amusing. Such blatant partisan bullshit, we could grow top dollar weed with it.
Mrs. e -
Point well taken re:Rindfleisch. Sorry but I am a two strikes kind of guy. Anyone can make a mistake, but to do it twice shows a character flaw. That is why if the same standard was applied by both parties to the respective other side, I wouldn't necessarily count Bjork's hiring against Burke. If I was an elected official in Wisconsin, there is no way that I would hire Rindfleisch in any capacity that would reflect on me.
Again, after 3 years of investigation by partisan prosecutor with no charges looks like an exoneration to me. Exoneration doesn't seem like a bad campaign slogan.
Your cites appear to be emails from staff, not the county executive himself. Are you saying that an executive must be held accountable for the actions of his/her staff 24/7/365? If so, you should direct this much passion toward 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Cause that executive has much to answer for: IRS, AP, James Rosen, Richard Windsor emails (there is a subject that should be close to your heart), and a long list of others.
On the other hand, if your desire for justice is only due to the person's political party, and you are willing to let the current occupant of the Oval Office off the hook, then shut your pie hole.
Garage: So there is no "testimony" from the prosecutors. This is "testimony" you made up.
From the link: "Most of the hearing involved sworn testimony from David Budde, chief investigator with the district attorney’s office"
investigator
Are investigators prosecutors in Wisconsin? I know things can get weird in Madtown, but I didn't think they let the detectives try the case, too.
garage mahal said...
From the link: "Most of the hearing involved sworn testimony from David Budde, chief investigator with the district attorney’s office"
Hey Corky, Budde isn't a prosecutor. And here from your link
At a secret hearing the day before the 2010 fall election, an investigator for the Milwaukee County district attorney testified that he had uncovered email evidence that Scott Walker, then-county executive, was LIKELY AWARE of campaigning by his staff on county time using personal laptops and a secret wireless Internet router.
So a Walker Recall Petition signing investigator came up with info that proved nothing, other then IN HIS OPINION, Walker knew.
What a tool.
"garage mahal said...
Again, great campaign theme. "I won't discuss anything, but I didn't get charged!" Yet."
Any day motherbitches! Any day!
So a Walker Recall Petition signing investigator came up with info that proved nothing, other then IN HIS OPINION, Walker knew.
So you don't believe an investigator, or a person on Walker's staff who said Walker participated? Walker won't say either way--if you had to take a stab at this, what do you think? Did Walker know?
And again, the issue of the investigator is relevant. By signing the recall petition, his conclusions become suspect. It goes back to my point about the left acting in bad faith. Every assertion from the left is suspect since they let their own off the hook. Y'all went to the well once too often. This country was founded on the idea that people are equal before the law, we fought a war with our own countrymen over it, amended the constitution to make it crystal clear, but you don't want equality before the law, just fluid standards that are unreachably high for those you perceive as the "other side", yet so low as to be laughable for those on your side.
One of the first national articles I saw last week opined that this email dump would go no where if it is all "inside baseball".
Here is a definition of inside baseball:
The phrase "inside baseball" refers to a detail-oriented approach to the minutiae of a subject, which in turn requires such a specific knowledge about what is being discussed that the nuances are not understood or appreciated by outsiders.]
I bolded the "nuance" - that is key. So, someone like Garage is focusing on the nuances, pretty much anyone else doesn't give a crap.
However, someone like Garage should be more careful with the nuances, lest he look like a blundering idiot.
Just in this tread:
Example #1 - Garage M said: Prosecutors testified that Walker personally participated in the email system. Other commenters have already pointed out how Garage crapped on himself with that lack of attention to nuance.
Example #2- Garage M said: He personally ordered his staff to promote him online, which is also illegal. Has anyone testified that they were "ordered" to do that, or "asked"? Important distinction, wouldn't you say, as far as legality.
How much has this investigation cost the WI taxpayers?
The Milwaukee taxpayers?
Milwaukee can't afford this.
It's like Chicago continually filing gun control lawsuits and losing. Those cost the taxpayers 10s of millions.
Services are suffering for a lost cause.
Mrs.e said...
"I agree that Burke loses the high road in hiring Bjork. We know about her convictions via the common "dishonest public servant" list, Google. The same "dishonest public servant" list shows former Milwaukee County Exec Walker staffer, Kelly Rindfleisch, who had previously been granted immunity in the similar state "caucus scandal" 10 years ago - the biggest political scandal at the Capitol in memory. Now, she has been charged (currently out on appeal) with four felony counts alleging she engaged in similar illegal fundraising on behalf of former lieutenant governor candidate Brett Davis, a Republican.
Perhaps Bjork has rehabbed herself into societal asset (and Barber, as well). My hope is they have – time will tell. Kinda seems like Rindfleisch has not."
---------------------------
THIS.
And don't forget, John Doe II is ongoing.
Burke didn't run an illegal campaign operation out of her office. Walker did. That's why Walker will not answer one question regarding it.
If Walker did, certainly, charges would've been brought.
Prosecutors testified that Walker personally participated in the email system.
Ironically, those same prosecutors could've charged him for that.
Wonder why they didn't.
Can't fathom why some might think the witch hunt was a witch hunt.
garage, you keep citing this evidence that wasn't enough to even generate a grand jury indictment.
Those don't require a lot to get.
Again, great campaign theme. "I won't discuss anything, but I didn't get charged!" Yet.
So, is Burke running on "At least MY criminals get indicted and convicted?"
I'm betting that works poorly.
Perhaps Bjork has rehabbed herself into societal asset (and Barber, as well). My hope is they have
Yeah, I'm betting you will hold their feet to the fire.
You're a hack. Why deny it?
And don't forget, John Doe II is ongoing.
Truly terrifying things. With the big bag of nothing JD1 generated, we can expect even MORE nothing with JD2.
Just throwing this out there: Perhaps investigators thought Walker knew because he corresponded with the "inner circle", and members of his staff talked about Walker participating in the "inner circle"?
"garage mahal said...
So you don't believe an investigator, or a person on Walker's staff who said Walker participated? Walker won't say either way--if you had to take a stab at this, what do you think? Did Walker know?"
I believe the investigator stated HIS OPINION accurately. My issue is with stating it was a fact, which is a lie, which is your SOP. Now which of Walker's staff said he participated.
As far as what I think? I don't think he did. Millions of dollars, years of examination, came up with nothing. This was a witch hunt, with convenient leaks timed to help with the recall effort. Why has the Milwaukee DA done nothing to find out who was illegally leaking the info to that asshole Dan Bice? Because it was all part of the plan.
By the way, all my left friends have moved on to "Is the new standard, anything short of criminal charges OK?". Better hurry if you want to catch that bus.
It's fun to watch G.M. stamp his feet about an issue that is already dying out. I especially enjoyed his argument that prosecutors "testified" that Walker had broken the law.
Actually G.M. they were stating an opinion, an opinion tainted by their political opposition to Walker not to mention the fact they neglected to charge him with a crime that they "testified" he committed.
Using the same standard, you also "testified" that Walker is guilty.
Back to your bubble GM.
Bjork is a progressive Democratic political operative. Those are simply the two offenses she's been caught at so far/. Point to anything in Democratic politics that suggests otherwise.
RecChief said...
The problem is, and call me cynical if you like, but I don't see this kind of forgiveness coming from the left.
That's not cynicism, it's reality. Last week on this site leftists demanded Nugent be made a pariah - or words to that effect (which he should be). But certain leftists in turn made excuses for Al Sharpton whose actions are far more reprehensible. Not simply failed to demand pariah status, but actually made excuses for him.
At the very moment they were noting that the right's unwillingness to distance themselves was damning (which was not fully true, many on the right did so) they were in turn failing to distance themselves from either Sharpton or the leftists defending him. Yet it never ocurred to any of them that they fail their own standard, nor would they care if they did realize it.
Didn't garage and/or Inga criticize Walker for having a felon on stage with him?
As far as what I think? I don't think he did.
So why won't Walker just simply say he had nothing to do with it? He can't, or won't. He's not even denying he did anything wrong. Only that he wasn't charged.
Has Bill ever said he didn't rape Broadrick?
Can't find anything, so the case is dropped.
Case wasn't dropped, but rather it resulted in convicting six people, including two of the Governor's top aides, of various crimes.
One of the convictions was for child pornography. (If you only get your news from Althouse you probably wouldn't know about that) Is that crime not considered "anything" by the GOP?
"garage mahal said...
So why won't Walker just simply say he had nothing to do with it? He can't, or won't. He's not even denying he did anything wrong. Only that he wasn't charged."
Dude, because he really doesn't give a rats ass what idiots like you think. I know that in your little echo chamber this is all the rage, but the rest of the state doesn't care. He knows he didn't do anything wrong, he knows that he won't be charged, and any comment other than the one he gave just plays into the hands of the left who want this to be an ongoing discussion.
Pretty simple to understand.
Really garage, what kind of idiot thinks they are going to find some compelling evidence in the newspaper that was missed by a multi-year, multimillion dollar investigation?
You.
"One of the convictions was for child pornography. (If you only get your news from Althouse you probably wouldn't know about that) Is that crime not considered "anything" by the GOP?"
I'm glad that person was convicted. So let's take your point further--> the investigation resulted in 6 people being charged and convicted but no charges for Walker. Looks like exoneration to me. Since you bring up sex crimes, let's take a look at Bill Clinton whose wife is running for President. He had sex with an intern and lied about it. Hillary threw the women harassed by Bob Packwood under the bus without a backward glance. As for Executive accountability, I note that Lois Lerner is scheduled to testify to Congress next week. Should we start a countdown like Garage did for the emails?
Again, after 3 years of investigation by partisan prosecutor with no charges looks like an exoneration to me
Again, most people who rely on this blog for their news are under the impression that no charges were even filed, let alone any convictions.
Again, a lot of people are wrong about that. Actual fact of the matter is that there were six people indicted and all six were convicted.
Dude, because he really doesn't give a rats ass what idiots like you think. I know that in your little echo chamber this is all the rage, but the rest of the state doesn't care
"I don't give a fuck what the citizens of the state I govern think." Great bumper sticker!
They are smarting than you though, the RGA just dropped a 7 figure ad the day the emails dropped.
It's true, some people won't care and Republicans would vote for him if he was sitting in prison. I have no idea what some people see in this repulsive maggot. Attracted to their own perhaps.
the investigation resulted in 6 people being charged and convicted but no charges for Walker. Looks like exoneration to me
Based on that kind of logic, then would you also say Obama has been exonerated for Benghazi,Fast and Furious, and all the other scandals he has been caught up in?
I think Barrack is slimy and dirty. But since no charges have even been filed against him does that mean you believe he is actually guilt-free?
madisonfella - were charges against Scott Walker filed as a result of this investigation or are you just being pedantic in order to divert attention that there is no there there?
"Based on that kind of logic, then would you also say Obama has been exonerated for Benghazi,Fast and Furious, and all the other scandals he has been caught up in? "
No I would not say he has been exonerated because those investigations have not concluded.
All this talk of master criminals must be distracting for Ms. Burke. She hasn't yet been able to state a cogent position on Act 10, the Holy Grail issue of Wisconsin lefties.
"But Liebenthal, who goes by the name Capper on his blogs and is a Milwaukee County employee, was accused by a conservative group of doing the same thing in 2010. He, however, received only a 10-day suspension from work and had to forfeit $2,051 in county pay. After seizing his work computer, prosecutors with Chisolm’s office found Liebenthal had engaged in political activity at work, but decided not to file charges."
Equality before the law for me, but not for thee says Chris Liebanthal
I would not say he has been exonerated because those investigations have not concluded.
Since this current investigation is not yet concluded why are you already exonerating Scott Walker et al?
It is obvious to me that Bill Clinton is a scumbag rapist, but since the only crime he was actually convicted of was perjury does that mean you find him to be "exonerated" of all those sexual assault claims?
JOhn Doe I isn't concluded? I was aware that a second one is ongoing, with no charges. But if the first John Doe investigation is still ongoing, I was mistaken.
As far as Bill Clinton, he admitted to having sexual relations with an intern, so how can someone be exonerated of an act that they admit?
you're trying to hard to be clever
Like I noted with Garage Mahal's posts, it's about nuance when you are doing inside baseball.
Madisonfella said:
One of the convictions was for child pornography. (If you only get your news from Althouse you probably wouldn't know about that) Is that crime not considered "anything" by the GOP?
Maybe some people at Althouse are smart enough to look it up?
State of Wisconsin vs. Brian B Pierick Waukesha County Case Number 2012CF000022:
No child pornography conviction, or charge showing there.
Here is maybe the source of the child porn item:
href="http://wisdems.org/case-files/brian-pierick">WIDems - Scott Walker Case File: Brian Pierick"
When the District Attorney seized Mr. Russell's work and home computer as part of the investigation into Mr. Russell's embezzlement of funds from a charity for military veterans and their families, prosecutors discovered what appeared to be child pornography and sexually explicit online chats with a minor.
"what appeared to be child pornography" does not mean convicted"
Nuance - pay attention to the details!
Trying that WI Dems link again:
WI Dems - Scott Walker Case File: Brian Peirick
Based on that kind of logic, then would you also say Obama has been exonerated for Benghazi,Fast and Furious, and all the other scandals he has been caught up in?
Except the investigation og Benghazi specifically limited its scope to nobody at the top of the chain and didn't actually investigate much.
As far as F & F, Obama used executive privilege with Holder in a move nobody seems to understand how it is permissible.
Walker was hit by a witch hunt to access to everything.
It is obvious to me that Bill Clinton is a scumbag rapist, but since the only crime he was actually convicted of was perjury does that mean you find him to be "exonerated" of all those sexual assault claims?
He was disbarred for perjury and numerous people close to him were convicted of assorted crimes.
So, exonerated?
"Do people want someone who has served time to be a pariah for the rest of his life?"
Of course they do, if the crime is of a sexual nature and perpetrated by a man.
Here's the summary of third degree sexual assault by the Wisconsin legislative reference bureau:
Wisconsin Statutes, prohibits sexual intercourse without consent. It also prohibits nonconsensual sexual contact involving intentional ejaculation or emission of urine or feces if such conduct is either for the purposes of sexual degradation or humiliation or sexual arousal or gratification (Class D felony).
The conduct in the second sentence is pretty bad. You would think that the conduct in the first sentence was really bad too, until you read the definitions of first and second degree sexual assault. First and second degree sexual assault cover all non consensual intercourse where there is force, drugs, deception, intimidation and other such conduct. Third degree sexual assault involves no force, intimidation or deception. It's just someone saying that she had sex with a guy but did not actually want to. If the jury buys it, or the DA threatens a higher degree and offers a compromise that a vulnerable defendant can not refuse, the guy is branded a sex offender for life.
Women having sex against their will without force, intimidation or deception (which includes date rape type drugs)? It's reprehensible to make such a thing a crime. How the hell does a woman let that happen in the first place.
(Fourth degree sexual assault is a sexual touching without consent that does not involve penetration. That I get. I do not get a penetration without consent that is not otherwise forced as a crime. He said she said with nothing more should not make someone a criminal.)
Elections have consequences, Garage.
In Wisconsin, two recent elections have had the consequence of endless and usually mindless outrage against Scott Walker by the group that could not defeat him.
In Wisconsin, two recent elections have had the consequence of endless and usually mindless outrage against Scott Walker by the group that could not defeat him.
The two most recent elections in Wisconsin have produced President Barack Obama and Senator Tammy Baldwin. Go to any MJS political comment thread and see if you can't find mindless outrage at Obama.
As mindless as thinking Hawaii is in asia? or thinking austrians speak austrian? or pronouncing it "navy corpseman"?
Much, much dumber than that. Yes.
Priceless comedy from Garage (but I repeat myself): "Only other people are mindless." What a kidder!
---- Again, most people who rely on this blog for their news are under the impression that no charges were even filed, let alone any convictions.----
What a nice lefty skew. You and garage spend months saying 'the investigation' will have Walker in a cell …… but now 'its a successful investigation because some of Walker's staff were caught in real crime.
I also note that if we just read your comments none of us would known that Walker initiated the parts of the investigation that got the embezzler and the child prone guy.
Rather than bantering with the pigeon pooping on the table...
How did Bjork "take responsibility" for their crime(s)? Did she turn herself in, and say 'I dun it?' Or, as I would expect most criminals to act when the writing is on the wall, become extremely remorseful, express apologies and state ' I take full responsibility' while being carted off in handcuffs?
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন