September 11, 2014

John Doe prosecutor John Chisholm objects to what Stuart Taylor Jr. said about his anti-Walker vendetta.

Taylor quoted an unnamed source, a former prosecutor, who claims to have heard Chisholm speak of having a "personal duty to stop" Governor Scott Walker:
[The] longtime Chisholm subordinate [says that] Chisholm told him and others that Chisholm’s wife, Colleen, a teacher’s union shop steward at St. Francis high school, a public school near Milwaukee... "frequently cried when discussing the topic of the union disbanding and the effect it would have on the people involved … She took it personally."
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel says Chisholm "denied... that his two secret probes ... were motivated by a political vendetta arising out of his wife's profession as a public school teacher." I'm not seeing the text of Chisholm's denial — only the newspaper's paraphrase — but to say that the probes weren't "motivated by a political vendetta" (the Sentinel's words) is not to deny that he spoke of his wife's frequent crying and his concern for her in a way that made listener's feel that he had a personal and political mission.

One could talk about one's wife's feelings, express great concern for her pain, and still believe that you were capable of excluding your personal sentiments from your professional decision-making. Rightly or wrongly, you could think you were doing the compartmentalizing that ethics require. Rightly or wrongly, your co-workers might judge you to be failing to compartmentalize. What was true?

Chisholm's lawyer gave the newspaper text that it prints in its (presumably) original form:  "The suggestion that all of those measures were taken in furtherance of John Chisholm's (or his wife's) personal agenda is scurrilous, desperate and just plain cheap." That's just a passionate — some might say desperate — statement of outrage that asserts nothing factual. And note the word "all." That leaves the possibility that some of those measures were part of a personal agenda. Lawyers. You have to watch out for them, and when you have the advantage of seeing their original texts, you have a decent chance to see where they are hedging. The lawyer wants you to notice the very interesting words "scurrilous, desperate and just plain cheap." Refocus on "all," and you'll see how little the lawyer is saying.

Stuart Taylor quotes his unnamed source as saying "it was surprising how almost hyper-partisan [Chisholm] became." And:
Chisholm “had almost like an anti-Walker cabal of people in his office who were just fanatical about union activities and unionizing. And a lot of them went up and protested. They hung those blue fists on their office walls [to show solidarity with union protestors] … At the same time, if you had some opposing viewpoints that you wished to express, it was absolutely not allowed.”
Taylor got a response from Chisholm's lawyer. He called it "baseless character assault" and "inaccurate in a number of critical ways" — without, Taylor says, specifying what the inaccuracies were. He won't say it was nothing but lies. The hedging is obvious: "inaccurate in a number of critical ways." Which ways?! Were there blue fist signs hanging on the walls? Did people in Chisholm's office participate in the protests? Was there a fanatical, anti-Walker atmosphere in the office? Which part is inaccurate? Was it anti-Walker but not quite "fanatical"? Did some but not "a lot" protest? Were blue fists hung up in the office but not by so many people that it's fair to say "They"? I don't know, and given the pressure to be specific, the generic objection implies that there is something there.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel quotes "an attorney with Democratic ties who defended clients caught up in the Doe probe" who says that "he saw no evidence of political bias or union support in their dealings with Chisholm and his office" and that "he didn't observe signs with a blue fist." Would the unnamed defense lawyer even have been in the part of the office where the unnamed former prosecutor saw the blue fists? That the prosecutors behaved in a professional manner in their dealings with the defense lawyers doesn't say much about how they behaved behind the scenes, which is what Taylor's source purports to tell us about. If there really was an anti-Walker vendetta, the prosecutors would have known they had to hide it.

The Sentinel quotes another defense attorney, one who allows his name to be used, who also says he didn't see the union signs, but "he might have missed them." And "I never saw any blue fists but I saw a lot of red faces," which is funny, but I'm not sure what it means. Was he saying that the prosecutors seemed unprofessionally inflamed by a mission?

Reading these 2 articles this morning, I'm thinking that Taylor raised suspicions that Chisholm and his lawyers and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel have not adequately refuted. I want to see a specific statement from Chisholm that goes into the details, something more than expressions of outrage and denials that could be based on Chisholm's belief that he compartmentalized his prosecutorial decisionmaking and his personal political beliefs and husbandly tenderness.

Were there blue fist signs in the office and other expressions of support for unions and antagonism to Walker? What was the extent of participation in the protests? Did Chisholm speak openly about his wife's feelings in the context of the case? Taylor's article created a strong motivation to respond on that level, and neither Chisholm nor his lawyer provided that response.

UPDATE: The MJS purports to reveal the source, discussed in a new post.

156 comments:

sane_voter said...

I have learned that when you see something wrong, you pullout your cellphone and take a picture or video. Then there are no questions about veracity.

traditionalguy said...

Clearly a John Doe II case will be the only thing to see that laws are enforced. The Judges should freely issue search warrants to armies of investigators to go to the homes of every Democrat prosecutor and confiscate their computers and phone records until the legal system can get to the bottom of the extremely serious Blue Fist Poster Conspiracy.

By using the tried and true John Doe method all complaining will also be stopped until at least 7 years of deliberate court proceedings slowly wind down.

garage mahal said...

Old spin: Son of a preacher Scott Walker reported the theft that started John Doe I

New spin: Chisholm's hysterical crying union wife forced him to investigate Walker!

EDH said...

Clearly Althouse is "coordinating" with Scott Walker and needs to be investigated immediately.

MadisonMan said...

and you'll see how little the lawyer is saying.

That's true almost all the time.

Ann Althouse said...

I'm just trying to read the newspaper.

You know, people like to think lawyers are always lying. But the opposite is usually true. Lawyers are being careful not to lie. That's why their statements are worth looking at closely.

I could picture the average newspaper reader, encountering this Journal Sentinel article and thinking: So there was an allegation and a denial. He said/he said. It's a wash. Move on.

But you don't have to throw up your hands. The statements are there. These are people who are trying very hard not to lie.

This is how Clinton got stuck saying ""It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If 'is' means 'is and never has been' that's one thing - if it means 'there is none,' that was a completely true statement." He didn't lie, but he spoke carefully and said something true that he knew people would take to be more in his favor than it technically was. He figured he'd have his explanation later if anyone ever called him on it.

Now, people were disgusted when they heard the explanation. But the statement was always there to be examined and revealed for what it was. Oh! How I wish I'd been blogging then!

Ann Althouse said...

"Clearly Althouse is 'coordinating' with Scott Walker and needs to be investigated immediately."

The sad thing is that's almost not funny. But I do not believe the world I live in has become that threatening.

Original Mike said...

"But I do not believe the world I live in has become that threatening."

I believe that's wishful thinking. The "win at all costs" have made it that threatening.

LarsPorsena said...

Ann Althouse said...
"Clearly Althouse is 'coordinating' with Scott Walker and needs to be investigated immediately."

The sad thing is that's almost not funny. But I do not believe the world I live in has become that threatening.

9/11/14, 8:59 AM
-----------------------

Expect a letter from the IRS in the future. It won't be a refund.

WhoKnew said...

Garage,
Old spin that Walker reported the suspicions that morphed into John Doe 1 is generally admitted to be true. Do you have evidence it's not? These new allegations are about John Doe 2, so it's not new spin because we're on to a different subject.

Darrell said...

Didn't Garage tell us that Democrats had nothing to do with the investigation? And he's never wrong. . .

Birkel said...

Althouse's world is not that threatening.

Other people's lives are that threatening.

I wonder which of us the crocodile will eat last.

Fernandinande said...

frequently cried when discussing the topic of the union disbanding

Take some
pils.

Darrell said...

John Chisholm should only say--Two words. "Secret." "Routers."

Birkel said...

Darrell, [sarc]you have it all wrong[/sarc].

"garage mahal" only said that there was some Republican (or person who claims to have voted for a Republican from within the sanctity of the private voting booth) involved somewhere in the process and that means -- necessarily -- that no Democrat can be held responsible for anything related to the investigation.

Birkel said...

Did I need the [sarc] tags?

SGT Ted said...

His wife is a union official and cries about the duly passed law. Of course he went to the mats for her. The investigatorial abuse makes far more sense with that fact in mind.

Plus, he wants to get laid in the future and White Knighting this issue for her was his ace in the hole. So to speak.

Original Mike said...

Something new for me in Taylor's article was Chisholm continuing John Doe 1

"Chisholm’s staff had won a court order in May 2010 to start a secretive “John Doe” probe into the “origin” of the allegedly embezzled $11,242.24."

The "origin" of the embezzled money? That makes no sense? How the hell did he get a judge to sign off on that? That was Kluka, right? And why did she suddenly recuse herself? I suspect she all of a sudden started paying attention and thought "Shit, what have I done?"

Anonymous said...

Trouble when the Blue Fist starts fisting.

Darrell said...

Did I need the [sarc] tags?
No. Yes. Depends.

Garage has used this argument so many times, you can find an infinite variety of restatements. Some imply the crimes were so heinous that Republican prosecutors stepped in. Other times he just throws out a name and implies that person is not a Democrat.

Birkel said...

"No. Yes. Depends."
[joke]
Discussing "garage mahal's" verbal incontinence with reference to the leading adult diaper manufacturer is unnecessarily vulgar.
[/joke]

Big Mike said...

But I do not believe the world I live in has become that threatening.

You still don't get it, do you?

Beta Rube said...

This headline seemed silly to me last night, as if anyone thought Chisolm wouldn't deny everything.

His career and reputation now rest on this crushing of dissent masquerading as justice.

garage mahal said...

A nameless, anonymous lawyer is trying very hard not to lie, as reported by a right-wing Chamber of Commerce publication. Walker supporters will surely lap this up. "Seeeee!!"

garage mahal said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mark said...

I would love to hear something from this secret witness that isn't from a partisan organization.

Funny how quick people are to believe anything someone unnamed believes about their perceived political opponent. No matter the questionable source.

Original Mike said...

Also news to me is that Chisholm's wife is a teachers union shop steward. That little tidbit has never made it into the news articles I've read.

garage mahal said...

Also news to me is that Chisholm's wife is a teachers union shop steward. That little tidbit has never made it into the news articles I've read.

Is that even true? Who knows! Why is that supposed to matter? Who knows!

Original Mike said...

Why is that supposed to matter? Two reasons:

1). It provides motive for his actions.

2). Prosecutors should avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest. In fact, I believe they're required to.

Anonymous said...

Clearly Althouse is "coordinating" with Scott Walker

You may jest, but it wouldn't surprise anyone if that is true. It was just discovered that Walker is also coordinating closely with the Media Trackers, and he has shown that he wants to keep a tight leash on his message. An Amazon portal is an excellent way to anonymously funnel money to the bloggers who play ball.

Given how Althouse has repeatedly stated there isn't anything illegal nor immoral about Walker coordinating with "outside" groups, why shouldn't she get paid for all the work she has done on behalf of the Walker campaign?

garage mahal said...

1). It provides motive for his actions.

Because Chisholm's wife is in a union, that caused Walker to fund raise/coordinate with Club for Growth?

Anonymous said...

Prosecutors should avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest. In fact, I believe they're required to

Remember the big YAWN from this blog when it was discovered that Walker's attorney is married to an assistant for the judge that heard the appeal?

It only matters when they want it to matter.

Birkel said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Birkel said...

madisonfella @ 10:06 am

This, Althouse, provides clear evidence that you are wrong about the level of fear you maintain about the dangerousness of your world.

The crocodile is hungry, first or last.

Drago said...

madisonfella: "Given how Althouse has repeatedly stated there isn't anything illegal nor immoral about Walker coordinating with "outside" groups, why shouldn't she get paid for all the work she has done on behalf of the Walker campaign?"

So, to summarize the position of the left: noticing that Walker has done nothing illegal nor immoral is now a thought crime.

Can't say we didn't see that coming.

Drago said...

Garage suddenly, mysteriously, comes out against anonymous leaks from partisan sources to partisan outlets.

Of course, Stuart Taylor is no conservative or libertarian or republican.

Still, he happened to notice that the dems are behaving in strange ways in WI.

Thus, he too is "guilty".

Anonymous said...

Curious Birkel finally said something that is right: Allowing political candidates to secretly coordinate with anonymous groups leads to a dangerous and fear-filled world.

Since he knows this to be true, but is still actively and loudly opposed to sunshine laws and campaign finance regulations, is it safe to assume that Girkel wants our world to be more dangerous and full of fear?

Given the tone of his posts, he obviously wants the world to be more hate-filled.

Anonymous said...

noticing that Walker has done nothing illegal nor immoral

The Walker campaign has admitted to breaking the law, but just like every college kid that gets busted for weed, their defense is that it shouldn't be illegal in the first place.

Original Mike said...

Taylor used to be on television talk shows and I developed a lot of respect for him. Haven't seen him for awhile. I don't know his political leanings.

Big Mike said...

Given the tone of his posts, he obviously wants the world to be more hate-filled.

@madisonfella, a world that has you and garage in it can't possibly get more hate-filled.

Original Mike said...

"The Walker campaign has admitted to breaking the law,"

Against my better judgement, I'm going to ask what you're talking about.

Anonymous said...

And Drago, as usual, doesn't know how to read. Nothing was said at all about a "thought crime", rather simply pointing out that since Althouse sees nothing wrong with the Walker campaign coordinating their messages with outside groups why would it be a surprise if she was working with and being paid by the campaign?

You wouldn't find anything wrong with her doing so, would you?

Bob Ellison said...

"You know, people like to think lawyers are always lying. But the opposite is usually true. Lawyers are being careful not to lie. That's why their statements are worth looking at closely."

Very interesting comment. Misguided, I think, and unreasonably deferential to the legal profession.

Lawyers lie a lot. They're good at it. Your reference to Clinton's "the meaning of is" is a good swipe-- he was correct, within his twisted, lying world.

Truth is not strictly a rhetorical spasm.

AJ Lynch said...

When will newspapers be more like blogs and just print word-for-word what was said? Reporters really need to get out of the way - we don't want to read what they heard or what they think was said.

garage mahal said...

Just by coincidence, I'm sure, there is another document dump coming today from the first Doe.

look away from the email, stare at this Blue Fist

Drago said...

madisonfella: "And Drago, as usual, doesn't know how to read. Nothing was said at all about a "thought crime",..."

LOL

The left is completely invested in thought crimes.

Further, by not being vehemently anti-Walker you are already attempting to paint a picture of Althouse perfidy as a potential part of this non-crime.

Once again, the left attempting to criminalize that which is not criminal and that which the dems do every single hour of the day.

Drago said...

madisonfella: "he Walker campaign has admitted to breaking the law.."

LOL

Drago said...

Original Mike said...
Taylor used to be on television talk shows and I developed a lot of respect for him. Haven't seen him for awhile. I don't know his political leanings.

Taylor is a "liberal" in the old school (pre-60's) sense of the word.

It's important to note that leftists despise true liberals as much as they despise the right since true liberals stay true to principles and, as we see from their every utterance, madisonfella/garage/et al are not moored to any principles at all.

Principled consistency is, in fact, derided by the Alinsky's of the world.

Original Mike said...

I'm still waiting for madisonfella to explain what he meant.

Mike said...

Unlike their earlier prevarication about secret routers and whether Republicans were running the witch hunt, Garage and Madisonfeller now hang their hat on the confusion between express advocacy and issue advocacy. Hint: one is illegal under campaign finance law and one is not.

Walker has every right to raise money for outside groups (just like Harry Reid and Obama do ALL the time). And Walker further has the right to coordinate on ISSUE ADVOCACY which is what they were plainly doing. That this is NOT illegal was the reason the federal judge stopped the illegal John Doe witch hunt.

hombre said...

It must be a great comfort to Chisholm to think that if he compiles testimonials claiming he has integrity, he will no longer be judged by his conduct.

This is the Obama era, particularly for the Democrats. Forget about reality. All that matters is the blather.

Kazinski said...

What really surprised me was the Journal Sentinel editorial the other day saying the John Doe investigation s need to continue because the people have a right to know.

That's not a good reason for prosecutors to serve warrants in the middle of the night. The only good reason for prosecutors to investigate people is probable cause they committed a crime.

The JS should know better.

Original Mike said...

"The Walker campaign has admitted to breaking the law,"

So I guess madisonfella just made that up.

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
Just by coincidence, I'm sure, there is another document dump coming today from the first Doe.

look away from the email, stare at this Blue Fist"

These are the emails that prosecutors have had for years and produced no proof of criminal activity by Walker? What, other than getting you to jerk off into a tube sock for a few days, will these produce?

Darrell said...

Writing for the Legal Newswire, an American Media Institute investigator chronicled an interview with an unnamed Chisholm confidant – formerly a fellow prosecutor – to whom he explained his reasons.
Chilsolm's wife Colleen, he said, repeatedly broke down in tears and insisted he go after the governor following the passage of a 2011 budget law that trimmed the sails of the state's powerful public employee unions.
Mrs. Chisholm, a teacher, represented a union as her school's designated shop steward. Legal Newswire reported that she feared what would become one of the biggest reversals of labor power in American history.
His wife 'frequently cried when discussing the topic of the union disbanding and the effect it would have on the people involved … She took it personally,' Mr. Chisholm reportedly told his close associate, who has not come forward because he fears retaliation in the rough-and-tumble atmosphere of Wisconsin union politics.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2750225/Report-Crying-wife-drove-Democratic-DA-target-Republican-governor-s-staff-conservative-activists-five-year-investigation.html#ixzz3D1fvtDwO
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Original Mike said...

"What, other than getting you to jerk off into a tube sock for a few days, will these produce?"

Oh, I'm sure there's stuff the media can twist 2 months before the election. In the end, I expect Chisholm will succeed in his actual goal.

garage mahal said...

These are the emails that prosecutors have had for years and produced no proof of criminal activity by Walker

They didn't press charges on Walker. They did convict people working right down the hall who worked for Walker, whose activities directly benefited Walker. Don't you remember? Just kidding bro, you don't care.

Drago said...

Madisonella: "The Walker campaign has admitted to breaking the law,"

Original Mike: "So I guess madisonfella just made that up."

Well, of course.

Making up stuff is what they do best.

Drago said...

Listen to our favorite backwoods WI high schooler dance and weave to avoid saying that there is no evidence of Walker engaging in any illegal activity!

I R A Darth Aggie said...

Chuck Norris is the only one who has mastered the Blue Fist technique.

You've been warned, Mr. Chisholm.

Original Mike said...

@Drago: I figured there had to be some thin reed behind the claim. I'm disappointed he's got nothing.

George Mitchell said...

Ms. Althouse's comments also would be interesting vis a vis the charge by Steve Kravit that Chisholm had evidence of a Walker crime. This was in the online JS story last night. The paper scrubbed it when it learned that Kravit represents one of the prosecutors. Kravit supposedly is bound by the secrecy order but still felt comfortable making this claim, without specific evidence, and the paper was comfortable printing it.

Darrell said...

It's a crime to NOT give Leftists what they want.

Drago said...

George Mitchell: "Ms. Althouse's comments also would be interesting vis a vis the charge by Steve Kravit that Chisholm had evidence of a Walker crime. This was in the online JS story last night. The paper scrubbed it when it learned that Kravit represents one of the prosecutors. Kravit supposedly is bound by the secrecy order but still felt comfortable making this claim, without specific evidence, and the paper was comfortable printing it."

I wonder what garage thinks of this?

Just kidding bro, you don't care.

garage mahal said...

I wonder what garage thinks of this?

Why don't you finally take a stab at something, dummy.

FullMoon said...

madisonfella said...

Clearly Althouse is "coordinating" with Scott Walker

You may jest, but it wouldn't surprise anyone if that is true. It was just discovered that Walker is also coordinating closely with the Media Trackers, and he has shown that he wants to keep a tight leash on his message. An Amazon portal is an excellent way to anonymously funnel money to the bloggers who play ball.

Given how Althouse has repeatedly stated there isn't anything illegal nor immoral about Walker coordinating with "outside" groups, why shouldn't she get paid for all the work she has done on behalf of the Walker campaign?

Even a MF can crack a joke now and then.
I AM NOT DEFENDING MF, DON'T CALL ME BAD NAMES

FullMoon said...

It does not matter if his wife is union rep or teacher. If somebody causes a man's wife or children to cry, that man will generally do something about it.

A physically macho man might bruise up the perp.
A gangster might cap his ass.

Etc.

Darrell said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Darrell said...

A leftist not getting what they want is a reason for rational humanity to rejoice.

Drago said...

garage: "Why don't you finally take a stab at something, dummy."

I don't think I could dumb it down enough for you high school boy.

Original Mike said...

Maybe garage knows what law the Walker campaign has admitted breaking?

FullMoon said...

garage: "Why don't you finally take a stab at something, dummy."

I don't think I could dumb it down enough for you high school boy.


This stuff cheapens the comments. Even I know that, and I am no genius.

Drago said...

Original Mike: "Maybe garage knows what law the Walker campaign has admitted breaking?"

Unlawful destruction of secret routers?

Drago said...

FM: "This stuff cheapens the comments. Even I know that, and I am no genius."

Don't sell yourself short FullMoon.

You're a terrific slouch.

garage mahal said...

Maybe garage knows what law the Walker campaign has admitted breaking?

Walker won't say either way. Judge Randa did praise the defendants in his ruling that they basically found a way to circumvent campaign finance laws.

Original Mike said...

"Walker won't say either way. "

What? Madisonfella said ""The Walker campaign has admitted to breaking the law," but he won't explain his charge. I'm asking if you know what he is talking about.

I gotta go mow the lawn. Back later.

garage mahal said...

I'm not madisonfella so you will have to ask him.

John Stodder said...

New spin: Chisholm's hysterical crying union wife forced him to investigate Walker!

That's not "spin," garage, that's reporting, by one of the leading legal journalists in the country. If anything, he underhyped it, burying the lede in the middle of the story. Stuart Taylor Jr. is utterly credible, and I think Chisolm's lawyer's non-denial denial is confirmation. If your guy Chisolm is such a ballsy, calling them as he sees them prosecutor, he'd be interviewed about this himself, on camera, without the protection of a lawyer, by a truly neutral broadcaster, not a "how did it make you feel when your wife was dragged into it" kind of bathos-peddler.

He will do none of those things. This investigation was thoroughly corrupt and dangerous. I only hope your side gets reamed by the same process right quick, so they'll finally get interested in repealing this East German style of investigation.

Thunderstixx said...

You know, it's really too bad that the Sheriff's Deputies didn't start shooting the people they rousted out of bed at 3AM with guns drawn.
I mean they were no doubt guilty of major crimes by way of talking to someone even though we have freedom of speech. The First Amendment doesn't apply to Conservatives anymore. the ovomit administration has repealed it.
And the lib's in Madison know that they are the only ones that count anymore anyway.
By winning the election twice Walker does not have the right to govern let alone live anymore according to Segway and crying boy !!!!!

garage mahal said...

Chisholm's crying wife prompted an investigation into Walker's activities.....and lo and behold, they found a metric shit ton of suspected wrongdoing. How lucky was that! And, all involved were so innocent they tried changing Wisconsin laws two weeks after subpoenas were served.


Bwahahaha. Nice work fellas.

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
They didn't press charges on Walker. They did convict people working right down the hall who worked for Walker, whose activities directly benefited Walker. Don't you remember? Just kidding bro, you don't care."

Who worked right down the hall and was convicted of actions that helped Walker?

Todd said...

Curious George said...

Who worked right down the hall and was convicted of actions that helped Walker?

9/11/14, 2:35 PM


Top Men...

Also: and lo and behold, they found a metric shit ton of suspected wrongdoing

That word "suspected" takes any and all force out of the entire sentence. Suspected is not proven. Suspected is not actual. Suspected is simply "suspected". I suspect that over half the country is brain damaged. Have no proof but I suspect it.

garage mahal said...

Who worked right down the hall and was convicted of actions that helped Walker?

Kelly Rindfleisch, less than 25 feet away from Walker.

Todd said...

She was found guilty of campaigning on the government clock for Brett Davis, a Republican candidate for lieutenant governor in 2010.

The recent court-ordered release of thousands of Rindfleisch’s emails and related documents show her communicating with Davis’ campaign. But Rindfleisch noted that she used her own computer, phone and email, although she didn’t leave the government building to do so. The emails further confirm what the John Doe concluded — that Walker wasn’t found to have been involved in any wrongdoing


http://watchdog.org/136006/kelly-rindfleisch-john-doe-political/

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
Who worked right down the hall and was convicted of actions that helped Walker?

Kelly Rindfleisch, less than 25 feet away from Walker."

She wasn't convicted of helping Walker Corky, she was helping Brett Davis. And I know you aren't very bright, but one individual is called a persson, two or more are people. So you still need two...who are they?

Anonymous said...

I gotta go mow the lawn. Back later

But what if someone asks you a question while you're gone and you don't answer because you're gone? Wouldn't that mean you are ducking the question you didn't even see and thus have nothing at all?

When you're finished pondering that, read up on the the defense being put forth against the John Doe investigation. State law says that candidates can not coordinate with certain political organizations. Scott Walker and the various groups he is coordinating with are saying never mind the law, they should be allowed to coordinate with whoever they want to and so they did exactly that.

Just like the college kid smoking weed in his dorm room he knows what the law is, he just doesn't think it should apply to him because he doesn't agree with it.

Anonymous said...

I'm not madisonfella so you will have to ask him

No, you're Inga. Or maybe Penguin. Tho lately you've been some other guy named "Corky" as well.

It is hard to keep up with who the tin-foil-hat crowd is accusing of what.

garage mahal said...

She wasn't convicted of helping Walker Corky, she was helping Brett Davis

That's who the Walker campaign wanted as Lt Gov. You believe that Rindfleisch set up a router in Walker's office, without his knowledge?

Darrell said...

Secret. Router.

Michael The Magnificent said...

That's who the Walker campaign wanted as Lt Gov. You believe that Rindfleisch set up a router in Walker's office, without his knowledge?

Drink!

Original Mike said...

"But what if someone asks you a question while you're gone and you don't answer because you're gone?"

You were posting on the other thread at the time. But great, you're "back". And your "Walker campaign has admitted to breaking the law," turns out to be deceitful. I figured it was some picky uni thing, but I figured it had to be an actual "admission" and I wanted to know what it was. I should have known better.

Birkel said...

Did Top. Men.
Set up the Secret. Router.

???

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
She wasn't convicted of helping Walker Corky, she was helping Brett Davis

That's who the Walker campaign wanted as Lt Gov. You believe that Rindfleisch set up a router in Walker's office, without his knowledge?"

LOL

garage mahal said...

"LOL"

You're such a Walker flunkie it's actually pretty sad.

Darrell said...

The Router that dare not speak its name.

Drago said...

Garage called someone else a flunkie.

Now that's funny...in a secrety routery kind of way.

Darrell said...

Once I had a secret Router
That lived within the heart of me
All too soon my secret Router
Became impatient to be free

Now I shout it from the highest hills
Even told the golden daffodils
At last my heart's an open door
And my secret Router's no secret anymore

Crimso said...

"Kelly Rindfleisch, less than 25 feet away from Walker."

You should give that distance in meters. It'll make it sound both more authoritative and ominous at the same time.

garage mahal said...

To recap:

Chisholm convinced every GAB board member [consisting of Democrats and Republicans], 5 District Attorneys, 3 Democrats and 2 Republicans], and a Walker voting Special Prosecutor, to launch an investigation into Walker....because Chisholm's wife cried about Act 10. And this story came from an anonymous source.

Why not put this anonymous source on the stand? It could blow this investigation out of the water.

Something tells me somebody's poll numbers are going down the shitter.

Drago said...

Crimso: "You should give that distance in meters. It'll make it sound both more authoritative and ominous at the same time."

Walker was at least .004735 MILES from where this was happening.

Clearly, not nearly as nefarious as 25 feet!

Drago said...

Notice how garage, like all the lefty automatons (not everyone can be a general after all, the world needs ditch diggers too) simply resets to the Null Position and reiterates all of his baseline talking points when the going gets tough.

Predictable, inevitable.

Anonymous said...

And your "Walker campaign has admitted to breaking the law," turns out to be deceitful.

Now that you are "back" from "mowing the lawn" perhaps you can explain what Walker's and the various groups defense of the allegations are? From what I've read they are claiming that the campaign finance laws in Wisconsin, which they were aware of, are no longer valid because of Citizen United. What do you believe their defense is?

On a different note, are the Walker supporters saying there were no such routers in the office and that whole thing was completely made up? Or is it being claimed that there is nothing wrong with setting up a private network in a public building in order to circumvent open record requests?

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
"LOL"

You're such a Walker flunkie it's actually pretty sad."

This from a guy who claimed that multiple Walker staffers were convicted of taking illegal actions that helped Walker, and can name only one, and that person's actions were for someone other than Walker.

You're too fucking stupid to stop digging.

garage mahal said...

Drago follows me around every thread and comments on every single comment of mine - often multiple times -- then calls me an automaton. Sometimes I think he is an elaborate script bot written by somebody that wants to make conservatives look like morons. Irritating, redundant, grossly uninformed, and weirdly over-eager?

Original Mike said...

"From what I've read they are claiming that the campaign finance laws in Wisconsin, which they were aware of, are no longer valid because of Citizen United."

Where did you read that? (another serious question, though most people on this blog are laughing at me now.)

garage mahal said...

This from a guy who claimed that multiple Walker staffers were convicted of taking illegal actions that helped Walker, and can name only one, and that person's actions were for someone other than Walker.

The only hit for "multiple" on this page is you typing it.

You're too fucking stupid to stop digging.

Not too stupid enough to do this kind of digging. Walker dug his own hole. Hee.

Original Mike said...

"What do you believe their defense is?"

Read this, Corky

Drago said...

Script bot!

LOL

I'm still waiting for the secret router!

garage mahal said...

<.script initiated.: commenter "garage mahal" .insert= secret routers!@.>

Unknown said...

--The Walker campaign has admitted to breaking the law


LOL, Mrs Chisolm is that you???!?!?!?!?

Original Mike said...

"LOL, Mrs Chisolm is that you???!?!?!?!?"

Yeah, I'm feeling pretty stupid that he sucked me in. I'm a trusting soul.

Anonymous said...

"Walker's allies are acknowledging that the probe is grounded in Wisconsin law, but are claiming that prosecutors are enforcing a "zombie law" — allegedly rendered unenforceable by the U.S. Supreme Court — that the Walker campaign was purportedly free to ignore."

http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/gov-scott-walker-allies-knew-prevailing-interpretation-of-state-law-b99307863z1-267404011.html

Unknown said...

----Or is it being claimed that there is nothing wrong with setting up a private network in a public building in order to circumvent open record requests?


Or!!

is it being claimed ...that setting up a private network to avoid breaking campaign laws?

It really frosts me that Tom Barrett's wife - another teacher and dozens or hundreds of teachers can use their TAXPAYER provided computers and email systems to politic against Walker with not a whit of concern that they might be breaking the law.

http://mediatrackers.org/wisconsin/2012/05/14/exclusive-tom-barretts-wife-used-mps-email-to-lobby-enlist-campaign-help

http://www.maciverinstitute.com/2014/08/taxpayer-resources-appear-to-have-been-widely-used-to-lobby-erpenbach-on-act-10/

And lets not forget Milwaukee County Supervisors making taxpayer paid for mailings out of their districts to lay the ground for their campaign.


Milwaukee County Supervisor John Weishan has drawn scrutiny from some on the right for using county taxpayer money to send a mailing out to residents of the 15th Assembly District weeks before announcing his candidacy for the seat as a Democrat.

http://mediatrackers.org/wisconsin/2014/04/29/investigation-mke-county-supervisor-mailer

But some poor schub administrative assistant who's a republican makes a call on her personal cell phone from a government building and she's a felon.

This is growing intolerable

Unknown said...

I see nothing substantiated that Walker or his Allies made the admission that they were breaking a law in the citation. It is an unsourced attribution much as Stuart Rothenburg's description of Mrs Chisolm's withdrawal of sex until Johnny executed Walker.

If the lawbreaking were so evident, why wasn't Walker charged instead of tried in the press?

Chisolm wearing a brown shirt and breaking into homes in the early morning, making the wives of conservatives cry.

Drago said...

garage mahal said...
<.script initiated.: commenter "garage mahal" .insert= secret routers!@.>

Script bot and secret routers all in one!

Thanks garage!

Now that's customer service!

Anonymous said...

If the lawbreaking were so evident, why wasn't Walker charged instead of tried in the press?

Probably because the investigation was forced to a halt.

Tho, one could also ask if Obama has committed impeachable offenses then why hasn't he been impeached instead of just tried by the bloggers? I would say that sometimes these things go a little deeper than that, but is it safe to assume you'd say it is because Obama isn't guilty of any wrongdoing?

Original Mike said...

@madisonfella: You stated, "From what I've read they are claiming that the campaign finance laws in Wisconsin, which they were aware of, are no longer valid because of Citizen United."

I don't believe ( though I am open to be educated) that Citizens United has anything to do with Walker's "defense". You posted an article which, even though the phrase Citizens United appears in it, does not appear to advance your thesis. Educate me.

Drago said...

madisonfella: "Tho, one could also ask if Obama has committed impeachable offenses then why hasn't he been impeached instead of just tried by the bloggers?"

Well, it's obvious isn't it?

Impeachment is a political act executed by the House of Representatives followed by a "trial" by members of the Senate.

There can be any number of reasons why a political party/majority party might determine that it is not in the nations interest to impeach even if high crimes and misdemeanors have been committed by a party subject to the impeachment mechanism.

I doubt that it is comparable to statutory compliance with laws on the books.

Are there any other 8 grade level questions for which you require answers?

Drago said...

Original Mike: "I don't believe ( though I am open to be educated) that Citizens United has anything to do with Walker's "defense"."

It doesn't.

The left is simply trying to conflate express and issue advocacy in a way to turn non-crimes into "crimes" for political purposes against their political opponents.

Unknown said...

---Probably because the investigation was forced to a halt.

Probably because it was a witch hunt driven by an emotionally crippled union harpy who happened to be married to the DA.

Probably because the first phase of the John Doe ended without charges (except for an old lady making a phone call) and the document dump from that produced bupkiss.

Probably because the State judge and the Federal judge were asking WTF?

Probably because the (illegal?) accidental release of SECRET John Doe Phase 2 documents produced bupkis.

Probably because someone somewhere is going to ask what the Milwaukee taxpayers are getting for seven hundred thousand dollars in legal costs.

Probably because the prosecutors are facing civil fines for their abuse of citizens civil rights and rights to free speech.

Probably because Obama asks people to donate money to Organizing for America and other advocacy groups just about every f'ing day.

You know you are losing the argument when you have to talk about Obama and impeachment.



Anonymous said...

I don't believe ( though I am open to be educated) that Citizens United has anything to do with Walker's "defense". You posted an article which, even though the phrase Citizens United appears in it, does not appear to advance your thesis. Educate me.

First off, I have to say that there is no "thesis" involved, mine or otherwise. I'm simply repeating what has been reported from various outlets and organizations, not writing a White Paper nor am I up for a doctoral.

But I would be happy to help you understand more of what the investigation is about and the defense offered by Walker et al. Not having any idea of what you already know and don't know, a few questions need to be answered before proceeding: Are you of the belief that there are no campaign finance laws in WI in regards to candidates coordinating with other groups? Have you read the ruling from Randa that halted the investigation? What do you believe Walker and the other groups are giving as a defense for their actions? And can you please provide links to the articles/reports that lead you to believe as you do? Thanks.

Anonymous said...

Probably because it was a witch hunt

Even the conservative newspaper in Milwaukee, which endorsed Walker twice for Governor, has stated this is not a witch hunt and that both parties were investigated.

Probably because the first phase of the John Doe ended without charges (except for an old lady making a phone call)

Not just one woman but rather six different people, all felonies.

Your opinion on this issue is based on incorrect facts. Please become better informed.

Original Mike said...

I have no desire for you to educate me on any topic other than your claim that "[Walker's allies are] claiming that the campaign finance laws in Wisconsin, which they were aware of, are no longer valid because of Citizen United." I want to know what Citizens United has to do with it.

Unknown said...

---Are you of the belief that there are no campaign finance laws in WI in regards to candidates coordinating with other groups?


Well Thanks Perfesser!!!?!?!?!!!!!

And again you insist on denying the fundamental categorical difference between issue advocacy and express advocacy.


Under campaign-finance law, express advocacy is speech that explicitly supports the election or defeat of a candidate for political office. Ads by independent groups are generally identified as express advocacy when they use words like "vote for" or "cast your ballot for." Those ads count toward a group's percentage of political activities for the purposes of tax exemption and are considered to have a "political purpose" under the law.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/a-first-amendment-education-1409872299


Those who know do, those who don't know try to teach posters on Althouse who are low-information lefties.

Unknown said...

Under the law, coordination between a political campaign and an independent group is illegal only if it is the functional equivalent of a monetary contribution to the campaign. Imagine a candidate who calls an independent group and says, "hey, we've made an ad we'd like to run in the Milwaukee suburbs, but we're a little short on money. Can you do it?" That arrangement amounts to a contribution to a candidate, raising the risk of quid pro quo corruption, the standard the Supreme Court has said must be met for regulating political speech.

Short of that, neither collaboration among independent groups nor communication between independent groups and a political campaign is illegal. On the contrary, it is speech protected by the First Amendment.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/a-first-amendment-education-1409872299

Here ya go Perfesser. Study hard you'll catch on.

Anonymous said...

I want to know what Citizens United has to do with it.

Yup, you made that clear. Didn't I make it clear that I want the answers to my questions answered: Are you of the belief that there are no campaign finance laws in WI in regards to candidates coordinating with other groups? Have you read the ruling from Randa that halted the investigation? What do you believe Walker and the other groups are giving as a defense for their actions? And can you please provide links to the articles/reports that lead you to believe as you do?

I'm trying to avoid re-hashing a lot of stuff you may already be aware of, so please address those questions before we proceed. No shame at all if those questions leave you confused and befuddled, it is a complicated situation that isn't easily understood by many people.

Original Mike said...

You made the Citizens United claim, now you won't back it up. As I suspected, it was just a Tourette's outburst. It's a marvel you didn't yell "Koch brothers" too.

Unknown said...

I'd like a citation that John Doe 1 investigated both parties.

It was ice that Chisolm actually convicted an embezzler and a child pornographer, after Tom Nardelli requested the investigation into missing money. Normally its Democrats who are into child porn.

http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=74867

http://rakesprogress.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/child-porn-charges-still-haunt-nh-democratic-chair-ray-buckley/

http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1106/110609corpuschristi.htm

Anonymous said...

Under the law, coordination between a political campaign and an independent group is illegal only if it is the functional equivalent of a monetary contribution to the campaign

Which is exactly what the investigation was looking into: Were donations made that were the functional equivalent of a monetary contribution? The Wisconsin Club for Growth says it doesn't matter if they did or not, because in their opinion recent Supreme Court rulings, including Citizen United, made those laws null and void.

And other than having a different opinion than yours, why are you so personally hostile towards me?

Unknown said...

….the defense offered by Walker et al.

Yes, that lefty mendaciousness. The alynski identification of the Target. Read Randa's decision, Walker was not a party to the suit, nor was he a target of the John Doe


MADISON - A special prosecutor emphatically stated that Governor Walker is not the target of a John Doe investigation into the recall elections.

The special prosecutor issued the clarification Thursday after alleging a criminal scheme in the Doe documents.

http://www.jrn.com/tmj4/news/Prosecutor-No-conclusion-on-Walkers-activity-264748391.html



Anonymous said...

You made the Citizens United claim, now you won't back it up.

First you went on and on about how I wasn't "here" to answer your question immediately. Then after your question was answered and a link provided, you said that wasn't enough and demanded even more information and more links. When asked for you to answer a few questions of your own, in order to clear up what you do and do not know already, you completely refused to do so and chose to pout while implying I am suffering from a neurological disorder.

If you are interested in a good faith discussion then feel free to answer the questions put forth to you. But if you're just playing the same games "unknown" (gee, wonder who that is?) likes to play, then carry on with what you've been doing. In the end, facts won't change just because you want to stick your head in the sand when confronted with them.

Unknown said...

he Wisconsin Club for Growth says it doesn't matter if they did or not, because in their opinion recent Supreme Court rulings, including Citizen United, made those laws null and void.

You suggested reading the rands decision, but review the filing of Club for Growth, they did not base their suit on Citizens United but on """ First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United
States Constitution; the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. § 1983; and the doctrine recognized
in Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908)"""


http://media.jrn.com/documents/johndoelawsuit.pdf

They had gotten a previous judgement against the GAB in which the GAB agreed to a settlement, recognizing that it had overstepped its legitimate authority and violated the First Amendment.

Unknown said...

facts won't change just because you want to stick your head in the sand when confronted with them.

You come to the table with a deficit of facts and a surplus of untruths.

Unknown said...

BTW where's that cite that John Doe 1 investigated Democrats? Smells like pants on fire.

Anonymous said...

"Ads coordinated with a candidate can be regarded as in-kind contributions to the campaign, regardless of whether they expressly tell viewers how to vote. The existence of coordination is an indication that an ad is of value to a campaign, and therefore should be treated as an in-kind campaign contribution, subject to contribution limits and disclosure requirements."

"Wisconsin Club for Growth, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, and the Walker campaign have never denied coordinating over the millions of dollars of ads run during the recalls. They've only claimed that such coordination would not be illegal since it didn't involve express advocacy."

http://www.prwatch.org/news/2014/07/12548/wi-GOP-endorses-Walker-johndoe

Anonymous said...

"The law about how campaign finance rules coexist with free speech has been evolving since the U.S. Supreme Court decided the Citizens United case in 2010. The ruling did away with limits on spending by corporations, unions and other groups, saying such spending was considered free speech.

The more complex, sometimes overlooked and misunderstood rules about coordination remain.

In the Doe matter, three judges have made key rulings, all with a different take. Most recently, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Randa halted the investigation saying prosecutors had failed to make their case given the more wide-open landscape after Citizens United. The ruling is now on appeal to the 7th Circuit Court."

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/heart-of-john-doe-dispute-arcane-evolving-campaign-rules-b99295307z1-263912141.html

Unknown said...

BTW, when John Chisolm was investigating Democrats did he have the Blue Fist printed on his business cards?

Original Mike said...

"Then after your question was answered and a link provided"

The link came no where near addressing your claim.

Unknown said...

---The more complex, sometimes overlooked and misunderstood rules about coordination remain.


This is a very good reason for pre-dawn SWAT raids, gag rules and leaks to the friendly Democratic media!!

Anonymous said...

"First of all, the column did not criticize Republicans or anyone else for coordinating. It simply noted that Gov. Scott Walker and his supporters have declared that coordination between campaigns and outside groups engaged in issue advocacy is perfectly OK, a view two judges have endorsed, and asked if this was still occurring."

"But the state Government Accountability Board, which green-lighted the probe, asserted in a court filing that “an individual’s or an entity’s affiliation with a political party or cause plays no role in the GAB’s analysis” of whether laws may have been broken. It included extensive documentation of investigation and enforcement actions against Democrats as well as Republicans."

http://lacrossetribune.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/money-politics-john-doe-probe-perceptions-vs-reality/article_be496c70-1643-51bf-944f-729c55aeb453.html

Anonymous said...

"Wisconsin Club for Growth's allegations that prosecutors in the John Doe campaign finance probe selectively targeted Republican groups don't stand up to even limited scrutiny.

WCFG devotes seven pages of its federal complaint to what it calls "materially identical" conduct by Democrats or liberal groups, which it claims shows that WCFG and other "targets of the investigation were selected based on political views and associations."

Yet a review of the alleged acts of impropriety demonstrates that WCFG is grasping at straws. Many of the alleged acts of impropriety did not violate Wisconsin law. Others were investigated and dismissed. Others lacked any documentation."

http://www.prwatch.org/news/2014/02/12384/selective-prosecution-claims-john-doe-filings-fall-flat




Anonymous said...

leaks to the friendly Democratic media!!

When did the Wall Street Journal become considered a "friendly Democratic media"?!

Unknown said...

You linked to a vague comment on a lefty site. How about the Club for Growth Lawyer - from the lefty Milwaukee Journal?

"In fact, the prosecutors have not identified a single expenditure by the Wisconsin Club for Growth relating to Gov. Walker’s recall election, much less one that was coordinated with the Walker campaign," Rivkin wrote. He added that prosecutors "must be held accountable" for restricting citizens' ability to participate in political process.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/272612431.html

Pretty hard to do explicit denials when you are being tried in the press and are under a John Doe gag order.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/11/target-secret-wisconsin-probe-files-suit-claims-prosecutors-punishing-walker/


(See why this can be characterized as a witch hunt?)

Anonymous said...

madisonfella wrote;

"First off, I have to say that there is no "thesis" involved, mine or otherwise. I'm simply repeating what has been reported from various outlets and organizations, not writing a White Paper nor am I up for a doctoral."

This is the only link I've seen from you:


http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/gov-scott-walker-allies-knew-prevailing-interpretation-of-state-law-b99307863z1-267404011.html

9/11/14, 6:40 PM

madisonfella wrote;

" Then after your question was answered and a link provided,"

Wait, what?

You've made two claims.

"The Walker campaign has admitted to breaking the law,"

and

" Scott Walker and the various groups he is coordinating with are saying never mind the law, they should be allowed to coordinate with whoever they want to and so they did exactly that."

" From what I've read they are claiming that the campaign finance laws in Wisconsin, which they were aware of, are no longer valid because of Citizen United."

So I went to the link you provided to see if someone else, named Brendan Fischer, shared your opinions and gave evidence to your two claims.

He doesn't and he didn't. There is only one mention of Citizens United and it doesn't say anything like campaign laws are no longer valid due to citizens united.

He does say the allies of Walker make the excuses you put forward, so he shares your opinion there, but he doesn't say the Walker Administration does that, just their allies.

Maybe you should just admit you're wrong while you're still ahead?

Or there's always providing a link.....

Unknown said...

---When did the Wall Street Journal become considered a "friendly Democratic media"?!

Dan Bice at the Milwaukee Journal has a desk with a Blue Fist poster above it sitting in John Chisolm's office. John Chisolm lets him know when he's going home to his emotionally devastated Union Steward wife.

Anonymous said...

the Milwaukee Journal

Is that the same Milwaukee Journal that has endorsed Scott Walker twice for governor? And are you saying that is the only newspaper which received leaked information about the probe?

Anonymous said...

he doesn't say the Walker Administration does that, just their allies

I didn't say anything about the Walker Administration, rather the Walker campaign. But given the way most Republicans think now-a-days I can totally understand why you think those are both one and the same. Obviously Scott Walker thought so too.

Anonymous said...

Dan Bice at the Milwaukee Journal has a desk with a Blue Fist poster above it sitting in John Chisolm's office

Do you have anything to back up your claim that Dan Bice has a desk in John Chisolm's office?

Alex said...

Doesn't really matter. Walker is going down in flames as evidence by the polling. Burke will win in a landslide. WI voters do not want a criminal creep in there.

Achilles said...

The libs will get done here trying to find a hidden router... Just in time to tell us the IRS scandal is fake. Maybe the Republicans in Wisconsin are just better at destroying evidence than the justice department and the IRS who were caught red handed talking about it.

You couldn't make this stuff up. You can't be that stupid. That only leaves bad faith and the term enemy.

Douglas said...

Not being from Wisconsin, indeed, not ever having been in Wisconsin, except maybe once to go skiing (don't laugh), I find this whole episode alternately amusing and infuriating. It's amusing to see how bent out of shape the anti-Walker forces are, willing to toss principles that they presumably hold dear into the trash in order to "get" Walker along with anyone who might be defending or supporting Walker. It's infuriating for the same reason.

I still don't know the answer to the Federal Courts question that Prof. Althouse raised a couple of days ago (i.e., are the federal courts required to abstain here notwithstanding a blatant constitutional violation) but I did notice that Judge Easterbrook, in a casual remark, said that the secrecy order as applied to the targets of the investigation was flagrantly unconstitutional.

Mark said...

Yet they had zero issues with secrecy and seemed unwilling to break secrecy and unseal documents as the media lawyer petitioned. The secret evidence was perfectly fine with them, they seemed to consider compare it to grand jury procedures

I found that section of the arguments enlightening, as the judges were very defensive of secrecy there and made their opinion on interfering with current state court cases (Club for Growth is suing in multiple venues) quite clear.

Ann Althouse said...

"You may jest, but it wouldn't surprise anyone if that is true. It was just discovered that Walker is also coordinating closely with the Media Trackers, and he has shown that he wants to keep a tight leash on his message. An Amazon portal is an excellent way to anonymously funnel money to the bloggers who play ball. Given how Althouse has repeatedly stated there isn't anything illegal nor immoral about Walker coordinating with 'outside' groups, why shouldn't she get paid for all the work she has done on behalf of the Walker campaign?"

What would be wrong with a political candidate communicating with a new media writer? If you have some law that purports to make that illegal, I'm quite certain that violates the First Amendment.

I could become quite the star if they tried to persecute me for that, and maybe someone HAS looked into whether I've ever been contacted by any Walker people. Maybe they looked and looked very hard, because they wouldn't have found anything.

But I do get email from the Democratic Party all the time, probably because I gave money to Russ Feingold when he first ran for office (and to his now-ex-brother-in-law, who still serves in the Wisconsin legislature).

I subscribe to Walker's YouTube feed to get new ads to blog about, and I follow him on Twitter. I keep a Google alert on his name. The truth is I have no interest in meeting with him or his people openly or secretly. I don't blog like that. I'm a consumer of media, just like everyone else.

The in-person stuff from real life is just me wandering about in my natural environment. It was weird when the protests happened here, but for me, it was mainly a very special photo-op, more artistic than political.

Ann Althouse said...

"… Walker is also coordinating closely with the Media Trackers, and he has shown that he wants to keep a tight leash on his message…"

Well, they'd be truly dumb if they thought that would get anything good out of me as opposed to backfiring.

BTW, I don't know what "Media Trackers" is, and I'm not accepting your characterization of Walker's master-dog relationship with it.

Unknown said...

Now you can see for yourself, Althouse, what you get if you dare to stand against the machine, or even not to be full-throated in support of the machine.

There is no distinction, except left and anti left. That which is anti left: is to be destroyed. There is a parallel with Islamofascism, not to say Islam, and I do think Nazism (for the race everything, outside the race, nothing).

Added to the indices of the projection favored by the left is this Manichaenism, of the things they do that they accuse their enemies of doing.

Be so good as to remember that the next time you are tempted to flirt with the Democratic Party at any level of government. They would shoot you in the face for three votes.

Thunderstixx said...

Alex...
BWAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!
Now that is funny right there !!! I don't care who you are, that is funny right there !!!
You lib's kill me, you are so incredibly stupid, you just lost about 10% of your voting base with photo ID being required at WI polls as at least 10% of the people that vote for lib's are fraudulent and will not be able to vote in this election !!!
BWAHAHAHA !!!
Yah, a real landslide, just like the recall of Scott Walker you guys sunk millions of dollars into. How did that landslide work out for you???