October 2, 2014

Stuart Taylor Jr. advances his John Doe investigation story by publishing his long list of questions to the prosecutor John Chisholm.

I'm not surprised that Chisholm declines to answer Taylor's long list of questions, even though Chisholm did speak up in response to Taylor's original attack and seemingly went to some trouble in an effort to to impugn Michael Lutz. Lutz was Taylor's unnamed source for the article that depicted the prosecutor and his office as highly politicized and openly antagonistic to Governor Scott Walker.

The questions standing alone go a long way toward rehabilitating Lutz after the attack on his credibility and they also work to restate and emphasize Lutz's original charges against Chisholm. Taylor observes that Chisholm has generally denied that he had a political agenda, but that he doesn't seem to have denied the specific allegations that Lutz had made. This corresponds to what I wrote when I saw Chisholm's response:
Reading [Taylor's original attack and Chisholm's response], 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.
So I'm pleased to see Taylor taking this approach — with far more detailed questions —and I'll reprint Taylor's questions below:

1. In a September 12 article by Dan Bice, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel said that Mr. Leib “said Thursday that Lutz had left a message threatening to kill Chisholm and his family in the past year. He did not provide audio of the voice mail.” Was this an accurate and complete report of what Mr. Leib said to Mr. Bice, and of what Mr. Chisholm told Mr. Leib?

2. Mr. Lutz has said in response that while he may have used harsh or even inflammatory words, he never said anything that he intended or that Mr. Chisholm interpreted to be a threat to harm anyone. Does Mr. Chisholm challenge this statement by Mr. Lutz?

3. If Mr. Chisholm does challenge it, how does he explain his failure either to prosecute Mr. Lutz or to report him to appropriate authorities for making a death threat, which would have been a crime?

4. And what, if any, steps did Mr. Chisholm take to protect himself and his family from Mr. Lutz? Armed guards? Moving his family to a safe location? Having Mr. Lutz tailed? Anything at all?

5. Mr. Lutz has explained the alleged death threat roughly as follows: He feared on the basis of one or more phone conversations that his best friend and former police partner, Jon Osowski (also the brother of Mr. Chisholm’s wife) was in trouble, and perhaps suicidal, so that he (Mr. Lutz) requested help in urgent phone calls to the Chisholms, expressing increasing and agitated concern, and possibly saying something that might be twisted out of context as threatening. Finally, Mr. Lutz has said, says, Mr. or Mrs. Chisholm or both went out into the night to help Mr. Osowski. Does Mr. Chisholm deny the accuracy of this account?

6. Mr. Lutz has also said that Mr. Chisholm has played the recording for him and that the two of them “laughed about” the episode the next day. Does Mr. Chisholm deny this?

7. In light of the evidence that is now available, will Mr. Chisholm or Mr. Leib or both retract and apologize for accusing Mr. Lutz of making a death threat?

8. If not, will you repeat that you believe that Mr. Lutz made a genuine death threat, and thereby show that you are not concerned about possible liability for libeling Mr. Lutz?
That ends the set of questions about the "death threat," so the numbering goes back to 1:
1. As far as I know, neither Mr. Chisholm nor anyone else has ever suggested a motive for Mr. Lutz to lie about Mr. Chisholm. Do you maintain that he had a motive to lie and, if so, what was it?

2. Mr. Lutz has said that his motive for making allegations of bias against Mr. Chisholm was and is that “I don’t like what he has done in regard to political speech that he disagrees with.” I am not aware that anyone has challenged the truthfulness of this statement. Do you challenge it?

3. Mr. Lutz has said that at least before this September, he had been friends with John and Colleen Chisholm for more than a decade. Do you deny that?

4. He has added that has visited the Chisholms’ home several times and gone to dinners, after-work functions, and other outings with one or both of them over the years. Do you deny that?

5. He has also added that he gave $200 in August for a Chisholm campaign fundraiser. Do you deny that?

6. When Mr. Lutz went into private practice, Mr. Chisholm wrote a memo (of which I have a copy) to him dated July 27, 2011, saying that his service “has been exemplary,” that his “dedication and hard work … have proved to be invaluable,” and that “I am extremely grateful for the service you provided.” Do you deny that?

7. In a previous letter of recommendation (of which I have a copy), in November 2007, Mr. Chisholm wrote that Mr. Lutz had been “one of the best investigators in the Milwaukee police department” and had “removed some of the most dangerous offenders from the streets of Milwaukee” while combining “a remarkable memory with unceasing hard work and courage.” Do you deny that?

8. Mr. Lutz has said that in late 2010 or early 2011, he heard Mr. Chisholm and others in the DA’s office express anger at the newly elected Scott Walker, who Mr. Chisholm said had backed away from an agreement to support statewide stepped pay raises for DA’s and their assistants. Do you deny that?

9. Mr. Lutz has added that Mr. Chisholm complained that Mr. Walker had “lied to my face” about stepped raises. Do you deny saying anything like that?

10. Mr. Lutz said the following in a May 20, 2012 email to an unidentified person, a copy of which he gave me, while saying that it accurately described a conversation he had with Mr. Chisholm in or about March 2011: When “I was a Special Prosecutor in the DA’s office and [Wisconsin Supreme Court] Justice [David] Prosser approached me to do a [pre-election] video spot about how the decision authored by him about the guy who shot me was a very important ruling for Police officers in general, DA Chisholm … stated that he couldn’t allow me to do it and he wants to stay as far away from these Republicans as he can.” Do you deny saying anything like that?

11. In the same email, Mr. Lutz added that Mr. Chisholm “went on to say how he knows that Act 10 would eventually end up in the [Wisconsin] Supreme Court and didn’t want Prosser to decide on the case.” Do you deny saying anything like that?

12. Also in the same email, Mr. Lutz added that roughly eight months after this conversation, Mr. Chisholm’s “liberal block of DA’s, 80% of them, are actively campaigning, emailing, and even verbally bashing Walker at charging conferences.” Do you deny that?

13. Mr. Lutz has said that Mr. Chisholm told him that his wife, Colleen, a teacher’s union shop steward, had been repeatedly moved to tears by Gov. Walker’s policies regarding public employee unions. Do you deny saying anything like that?

14. Mr. Lutz has said that Mr. Chisholm told him that his wife “frequently cried when discussing the topic of the union disbanding and the effect it would have on the people involved.” Do you deny saying anything like that?

15. Mr. Lutz has said that Mr. Chisholm told him that he felt that it was his “personal duty” to stop Gov. Walker from curbing public employee unions. Do you deny that?

16. Mr. Lutz has said that Mr. Chisholm told him that his wife had joined public demonstrations by one or more unions against Walker’s policies in 2011. Do you deny saying anything like that?

17. Mr. Lutz has said that Mr. Chisholm made most or all of the statements numbered 10 through 16 above while the two of them (and perhaps one or more others) were speaking in Mr. Chisholm’s personal office in or about March 2011. Do you deny that?

18. Mr. Lutz has said that in the first half of 2011 (roughly), many of Mr. Chisholm’s subordinates were very strongly opposed to Walker and his union-curbing policies. Do you deny that?

19. Mr. Lutz has said that a number of subordinates of Mr. Chisholm joined public protests in 2011 against Walker’s policies. Do you deny that?

20. Mr. Lutz has said that some Chisholm subordinates hung images of blue fists on their office walls in 2011. Do you deny that?

21. I believe that Gov. Walker’s Act 10 and perhaps related legislation or policies caused cuts in take-home pay for Mr. Chisholm and his subordinates, as for other unionized public employees, in part by requiring them to pay for previously free or inexpensive health insurance, pensions, and perhaps other benefits. Do you deny that?

22. The cuts in take-home pay for Mr. Chisholm and/or some of his subordinates were roughly 10 percent or more. Do you deny that?

23. One or more of Mr. Chisholm’s subordinates will be entitled under current law to a pension in excess of $1 million each. Do you deny that?

24. Mr. Lutz told me that Mr. Chisholm told him that as a result of Act 10, Colleen Chisholm’s union local disbanded and that she was very upset about this and the effect it would have on members and former members. Do you deny that?

25. The impact of Mr. Walker’s polices on the Chisholms’ finances also included whatever pay Mrs. Chisholm had previously received from her union. Do you deny that?

26. I have reason to believe that Mrs. Chisholm had been receiving more than $20,000 a year in gross compensation from the union. Do you deny that?

27. I have been told that after I published some of Mr. Lutz’s allegations without identifying him, the DA’s office developed a list of people who might be my source. Do you deny that?

28. I have also been told that there were as many as 10 or 12 people on that list. Do you deny that?

29. I have also been told that Mr. Lutz was not on that initial list. Do you deny that?
UPDATE, July 26, 2015: Lutz dies, apparently by self-inflicted gunshot wound.

101 comments:

garage mahal said...

You know your career trajectory is not headed in the right direction when your primary source for a story is a racist, violent drunk who made a death threat against the target of your story.

Michael K said...

Garage, I don't think he ever identified you as his source.

Meade said...

But enough about Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg, garage. Let's stick to Wisconsin.

EDH said...

Seems garage got the memo, which never involves raising questions to be answered objectively and fairly.

Patrick said...

I notice how Garage's allegations, even if true, do not constitute a denial, any more than what Chisholm said. Which is the point, of course.

Anonymous said...

"Let's stick to Wisconsin."

This could employ the use of tar and feathers...

Mark said...

Didn't Club for Growth already sue Chisholm in Federal Court and lose?

As he cannot sure him a second time, they are going to smear him in public now?

This has gotten disgusting and I am appalled you have put your blog behind these allegations.

garage mahal said...

30. What did you do to make the honorable Mr Lutz make a death threat against you, Chisholm? HUH?

MadisonMan said...

I'll be interested to read the answers. I suspect a stonewalling will occur instead.

Bob Ellison said...

Mark, "One of those activists, Eric O’Keefe, and the Wisconsin Club for Growth, which he runs, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit saying that the entire investigation is a political vendetta designed to deny conservatives freedom of speech.

"O’Keefe won a strongly worded decision by U.S. District Judge Rudolph Randa in May, but a federal appeals court in Chicago recently set aside Randa’s ruling on federalism grounds. Expressing no view on the merits of the dispute, the three-judge panel found that O’Keefe had ample remedies available in Wisconsin courts."

Are you still appalled?

phantommut said...

Liberal Mark is shocked that anyone would question a Good Democrat's character and/or motivations.

Meanwhile Garage is throwing spitballs he's fashioned from all the documentation that shows Chisholm actually thought pretty highly of the erstwhile anonymous source.

Those two should get together. They're obviously the yin and yang of the Wisconsin Left.

Original Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
phantommut said...

MadisonMan, Chisholm is a lawyer, and as such knows that any response at all would be a Bad Idea.

The key to moving forward on this story is Jon Osowski, his sister, and their ties to Organized Crime, er, Labor.

The picture that develops from the questions is that the Osowski's aren't the most stable people in Milwaukee. If I were a reporter I'd be looking for debris from their activities for leads and hooks.

Original Mike said...

I am appalled that Dan Bice never reported Colleen Chisholm's position as a Teacher's Union steward. We have Stuart Taylor and Ann Althouse to thank for disseminating that information.

10/2/14, 8:26 AM

Curious George said...

"Mark said...
This has gotten disgusting and I am appalled you have put your blog behind these allegations."

LOL That's some funny stuff there.

tim in vermont said...

This is what democracy looks like. "Show me [the political opponent], and I will show you the crime." - Stalin

OK, Stalin said "Show me the man."

tim in vermont said...

This has gotten disgusting and I am appalled you have put your blog behind these allegations. - Mark

Sorry Mark, I just wanted to bold that in case people in need of a belly laugh missed it.

Bob Ellison said...

Maybe Mark was trying for irony.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Mark said...

...I am appalled you have put your blog behind these allegations.

Just to be clear, to which allegations are you referring? The allegations of illegal campaign coordination, or the allegations that a death threat was made?

Seeing Red said...

Disgusting and appalled on the allegations, what about the thuggery of the DA?

The abuse of power?

james conrad said...

Why keep beating a dead horse, everyone already knows that Wisconsin is a cesspool of Dem party corruption.

Curious George said...

Althouse: "...even though Chisholm did speak up in response to Taylor's original attack..."

"...when I saw Chisholm's response..."

maybe I missed it, but that POS Chisholm has never responded himself. There was a quoted non-denial by his attorney, and some paraphrasing by that other POS Bice on what he said, but nothing from Chisholm.

We'll what develops from this. Chisholm won't answer the questions, because he would have to lie, and he still won't come out looking good. But if there is no response from his office, or no support follow up from that asshole Bice, then you know stuart has hit paydirt and i Hope he goes in for the kill.

Headless Blogger said...

I recall that in or about March 2011 my co-worker told me on several occasions about how upset his school teacher wife was about Act 10. He said that her union was telling her things that got her extremely upset, even to the point of tears.

So the allegation about Chisholm's wife crying about Walker/Act 10 fall within the realm of reason.

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
You know your career trajectory is not headed in the right direction when your primary source for a story is a racist, violent drunk who made a death threat against the target of your story."

$20 he does not,and never has, worn an "I Tappa Kegga" T-Shirt in public.

garage mahal said...

But if there is no response from his office, or no support follow up from that asshole Bice, then you know stuart has hit paydirt and i Hope he goes in for the kill.


Earth to Cult: The investigation didn't start in Chisholm's office. It started at the GAB, which was chaired by a Republican at the time, who Walker then sacked because he authorized the investigation.

The first thing you need to do to get out of a cult is to realize you're in a cult.

cubanbob said...

Only a leftist would be appalled that an organization devoted to economic growth would contribute to a campaign. Much better from their perspective that only rent-seekers and parasites, their natural constituency succeed.

If Walker is re-elected and should the state elect a Republican majority in the legislature then the best revenge they could impose is expanding ACT 10 to all public sector employees and stripping prosecutors of their qualified immunity along with making public sector employees contribute to their health and retirement plans like the private sector workers do. It's time elected officials be responsible with the taxpayer's money.

traditionalguy said...

Stuart Taylor, Jr. has stopped preaching and gone to meddling. His cruel repetition of known facts could be a war crime like water torture.

The only question to be answered is whether Taylor, like Walker, can be indicted for making a Union bully cry.

Bob Ellison said...

garage mahal, look in the mirror.

james conrad, everyone does not already know about the leftist cesspools. Most Americans, who are among the most politically sophisticated citizens in the world (I await leftist responses to that declaration), are unaware of leftist cultism.

It's a tiring job, but we have to keep pointing it out. Wisconsin leftism is unknown to most Americans. Probably most political junkies have some idea about Massachusetts leftism and maybe California leftism, but the real nature of it-- the self-hating, power-hungry, freedom-killing thrill of leftism-- is not taught in schools and not understood among the general electorate.

Anonymous said...

Is it just me or is Curious Drago getting more and more violent in his language as we get closer to the election? He must be really angry, the Ppor guy can barely get through any post without spewing obscenities. Kind of lame really.

But it is even lamer how Althouse is doubling down on the blue fist posters hanging in the DA's office. Obviously that Amazon portal won't click itself; hence the constant need for the red meat.

Seeing Red said...

And u keep reacting to the meat. Lolol

Seeing Red said...

Mehhhh, blue fist posters in Cheddarland, Mao posters in various Obama campaign offices during the campaign. Hiring that guy Van Jones. Nothing to see here, move along.

damikesc said...

You know your career trajectory is not headed in the right direction when your primary source for a story is a racist, violent drunk who made a death threat against the target of your story.

...but you have to deal with the D.A you're dealt with, amirite?

This has gotten disgusting and I am appalled you have put your blog behind these allegations.

He's never actually ANSWERED any of these questions. I know, it's silly to expect PUBLIC OFFICIALS to answer the questions of the PUBLIC, but hey, let's keep up appearances.

But it is even lamer how Althouse is doubling down on the blue fist posters hanging in the DA's office.

All Chisholm has to do is say that they weren't there.

Which he hasn't.

Original Mike said...

Chisholm is too busy preparing an October Surprise to answer any stinking questions.

Drago said...

Madisonfella: "...Curious Drago.."

I wish you would make up your mind who i am supposedly sockpuppeting with.

Btw I very rarely use even mildly obscene language in my posts.

DanTheMan said...

>>All Chisholm has to do is say that they weren't there.

> Which he hasn't.

Everybody's phone has a camera these days. I suspect the instant he denies it, the picture gets posted.
Or it never happened. In which case it would be foolish to make the accusation.




cubanbob said...

"But it is even lamer how Althouse is doubling down on the blue fist posters hanging in the DA's office. Obviously that Amazon portal won't click itself; hence the constant need for the red meat."


If they had a poster of a red hammer smashing that blue fist I would definitely click on her Amazon link to buy it.

Curious George said...

madisonfella said...
Is it just me or is Curious Drago getting more and more violent in his language as we get closer to the election? He must be really angry, the Ppor guy can barely get through any post without spewing obscenities. Kind of lame really.

Ahhh Penguin another tell

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
The investigation didn't start in Chisholm's office. It started at the GAB"


Earth to Tappa Kegga Boy: This is bullshit.

FullMoon said...

Ya know, some of these specific questions make me wonder if Lutz has photos or recordings proving his allegations.

I'll bet the D.A. is wondering the same thing.

Anonymous said...

FullMoon: good point. Certainly adds some gamesmanship to the mix.

garage mahal said...

Earth to Tappa Kegga Boy: This is bullshit.

What's bullshit about it, Culty?

David Hampton said...

It is my fervent hope that the good people of Wisconsin drive a stake through the heart of the fanatics who degrade that fair state. Much of what is wrong with this country is directly attributable to the lawless behavior exemplified by the anti-Walker crowd stuck in the 60's revolution. Their belief that the end justifies the means is a constant misery inflicted on themselves and their fellow Americans. The Barbarians are not at the gate, they are in our institutions wreaking havoc on generations of clueless students bereft of the lessons of history dooming themselves to repeat it.

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
Earth to Tappa Kegga Boy: This is bullshit.

What's bullshit about it, Culty?"

Dude, from your cited source:

Milwaukee County prosecutors launched the probe in the fall 2012 into possible illegal coordination between Walker's campaign and conservative nonprofits during the recall races.

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm asked for help from Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, who declined. Officials with the accountability board then agreed last summer to get involved, playing a role in getting prosecutors in four other counties to join the John Doe.

When your mom said you were special, she was right short bus.

garage mahal said...

And why did the GAB have to vote on anything? Why did Walker get rid of the Republican Chair on the GAB?

Former judges on the state Government Accountability Board voted unanimously last year to authorize the investigation of fundraising and spending by Gov. Scott Walker's campaign and his allies during the recent recall elections, according to a Tuesday court filing.

FullMoon said...

7. In a previous letter of recommendation (of which I have a copy), in November 2007, Mr. Chisholm wrote that Mr. Lutz had been “one of the best investigators in the Milwaukee police department” and had “removed some of the most dangerous offenders from the streets of Milwaukee” while combining “a remarkable memory with unceasing hard work and courage.” Do you deny that?

Spy camera/video-audio recorders available through Althouse porthole. "Car alarm remote" or spy pen cost about ten bucks.

Anonymous said...

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm asked for help from Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, who declined

CuriousDragoBirkelGeorge (aka Blue Emu) points this out, yet fails to mention the reason Van Hollen gave for declining to investigate. Any guesses why he omitted that tidbit?

paminwi said...

Garage at 8:15am: maybe Chisholm should just play the tape he says he has so we can all hear what Lutz had to say. Lutz said during a radio interview that he had no problem with Chisholm playing the tape.

What Lutz said the "threat" had to do with was a situation with Chisholm's brother in law (a policeman and Lutz's former partner for 4-5 years). So.....rant at your buddy Chisholm and get him to release the tape instead of smearing someone who has consented to interviews.

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
And why did the GAB have to vote on anything? Why did Walker get rid of the Republican Chair on the GAB?"

LOL, keep tap dancing Corky. You were wrong. Chisholm started this mess.

RecChief said...

"The first thing you need to do to get out of a cult is to realize you're in a cult. "


Pretty good advice, perhaps you, Inga (madisonfella), and ARM should follow it.

Curious George said...

madisonfella said...
Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm asked for help from Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, who declined

CuriousDragoBirkelGeorge (aka Blue Emu) points this out, yet fails to mention the reason Van Hollen gave for declining to investigate. Any guesses why he omitted that tidbit?

Uh, that was garage's source Penguin, and the part I cited rebutted his point. As far a JB VH, I didn't leave anything out, why he declinesd to investigate wasn't pertinent to who started the investigation.

Same ole Penguin.

garage mahal said...

LOL, keep tap dancing Corky. You were wrong. Chisholm started this mess.

What *did* the GAB vote on? And why did they have to vote?

RecChief said...

"garage mahal said...
LOL, keep tap dancing Corky. You were wrong. Chisholm started this mess.

What *did* the GAB vote on? And why did they have to vote?"


Ahh, the old Deny, Deflect, Counter-accuse gambit. kind of a tired strategy, but I odn't look for originality from the left.


Larvell said...

Shorter Althouse: "Maybe I shouldn't have been so quick to dump on Taylor after that hack wrote his hit piece on Taylor's source."

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
LOL, keep tap dancing Corky. You were wrong. Chisholm started this mess.

What *did* the GAB vote on? And why did they have to vote?"

The decided to join the investigation after the fact, nothing more.

This constant need for you to make this bipartisan with stupid examples like this GAB BS, or that Schmitz "is a Walker supporter" is laughable, and predictable.

Two years, thousands of man hours, millions of dollars, NOT ONE CHARGE.

Anonymous said...

Was funny how Curious Birkel stopped his whole "You're Corky! You're Inga! You're Penguin" shtick after Meade pointed out he can't even get the most basic detail right with his accusations, yet it looks like he is now doubling down on his "look, there is another squirrel!" routine.

Pretty pitiful. Makes me wonder who exactly he thinks he is fooling.

Anonymous said...

There have been seven felony convictions from the John Doe investigation, and yet some people (or one person with many names?) still insist there has been no criminal charges?

Can't wait to see how the Blue Emu spins that one.

garage mahal said...

The decided to join the investigation after the fact, nothing more.

LOL. "the[y] decided to join" in? What the fuck dude, you're hopelessly lost.

"MADISON, Wis (WSAU-Wheeler News) New court filings show that the state Government Accountability Board authorized the John Doe probe into Republican campaign activity in Wisconsin's recall elections." link

So key word there is, obviously, is "authorize". Meaning they had to okay the probe.

Anonymous said...

"This constant need for you to make this bipartisan with stupid examples like this GAB BS, or that Schmitz "is a Walker supporter" is laughable, and predictable"

Exactly! My cousin's mailman knows this woman who once talked to a guy who saw a tattoo of the Blue Fist on Schmitz's butt cheek.

His left butt cheek, of course, because the guy is a lefty leftard leftarian. How much more proof than that do you need?

mccullough said...

Lutz should sue Chisholm for libel. Move to another state and then sue him in federal court.

Curious George said...

"garage mahal said...
"MADISON, Wis (WSAU-Wheeler News) New court filings show that the state Government Accountability Board authorized the John Doe probe into Republican campaign activity in Wisconsin's recall elections." link

So key word there is, obviously, is "authorize". Meaning they had to okay the probe.

Okaying the probe is not starting it.
The GAB has no authority to authorize a criminal probe. Sorry. The joined in this witchhunt, but it started with Chisholm.

garage mahal said...

Lutz should sue Chisholm for libel

Sue him for what?

Anonymous said...

I always assumed that he calls him "Corky" in homage to the down syndrome kid from Life Goes On

Really? If what you say is true then Curious RecDragoBirkel is even more of an asshole than I first thought. And I already thought he was a huge asshole. Seriously, what kind of adult behaves in public as such?

Anonymous said...

Newspaper article reports that the GAB authorized the investigation. Sleazy guy on the internet, who gets his jollies by constantly calling others a retard, says the GAB can't authorize anything at all.


Hmm. Who to believe?



Curious George said...

"madisonfella said...
Newspaper article reports that the GAB authorized the investigation. Sleazy guy on the internet, who gets his jollies by constantly calling others a retard, says the GAB can't authorize anything at all."

Well, his claim was that it was started by the GAB, and he had to move the goal posts. It was started by Chisholm. It's not me saying it Penguin, I have posted source after source.

RecChief said...

"madisonfella said...
Newspaper article reports that the GAB authorized the investigation. Sleazy guy on the internet, who gets his jollies by constantly calling others a retard, says the GAB can't authorize anything at all.


Hmm. Who to believe?
"


Leftist commenter who can't think for him/herself subtly changes quote in biased newspaper to assert an alternate meaning.

Curious' asertion was that it started with Chisholm this partial quote from Dean Nickel "the GAB's ... approval of the investigation" suggests something different. How does not one give unanimous approval to something if it it's not started by someone else? If you start it, you have already given it approval, no?

Try again

garage mahal said...

Newspaper article reports that the GAB authorized the investigation. Sleazy guy on the internet, who gets his jollies by constantly calling others a retard, says the GAB can't authorize anything at all.


Hmm. Who to believe?


I'm telling you it's a cult.

RecChief said...

"madisonfella said...


Really? If what you say is true then Curious RecDragoBirkel is even more of an asshole than I first thought."

Leftist commenter who can't think for self and changes identities frequently accuses others of doing same.

No imagination. funny though

mccullough said...

Garage,

I said sue him for libel. Chisholm said Lutz threatened his family. Lutz said that's not true. And Chisholm didn't press charges.

damikesc said...

Everybody's phone has a camera these days. I suspect the instant he denies it, the picture gets posted.

My guess as well. It's probably true and photos likely demonstrate it, but since most people suspect he's a hack, it wouldn't be useful to release unless he denied it.

Then you can make him a hack and a liar.

garage mahal said...

I said sue him for libel. Chisholm said Lutz threatened his family. . Lutz said that's not true.

"5. Mr. Lutz has explained the alleged death threat roughly as follows: He feared on the basis of one or more phone conversations that his best friend and former police partner, Jon Osowski (also the brother of Mr. Chisholm’s wife) was in trouble, and perhaps suicidal, so that he (Mr. Lutz) requested help in urgent phone calls to the Chisholms, expressing increasing and agitated concern, and possibly saying something that might be twisted out of context as threatening. "

LOLZ

mccullough said...

Garage,

I didn't say he'd ultimately win the suit. He said he didn't threaten to kill Chisholm's family. Chisholm said he did.

Lutz has a good faith basis to sue for libel. He might not win, just as Chisholm might not win his case against Club for Growth.

Francisco D said...

There really was not much more to say on this thread after Michael K and Meade responded to Garage's talking points. I think they made the perfect response.

Why do people take this paid mouthpiece/troll seriously?

garage mahal said...

He said he didn't threaten to kill Chisholm's family. Chisholm said he did.

I don't think Chisholm publicly even acknowledged the alleged death threat. Maybe Lutz could sue Dan Bice. Lutz does admit making the call, drunk.

mccullough said...

Garage,

According to Lutz, Chisholm played him the recording of the call the next day and they laughed about it.

Chisholm could respond to this as well as say whether or not he had a recording of the call and whether he not he still has it.

phantommut said...

Garage, the claim is that Lutz threatened to kill Chisholm and his wife. Chisholm is a DA. As an experiment, why don't you call Chisholm (don't have his home number? call his office) and threaten his family. See how long you're walking the streets.

garage mahal said...

According to Lutz, Chisholm played him the recording of the call the next day and they laughed about it.

So Lutz should sue Chisholm ....for what again?

mccullough said...

Garage,

He should sue him for libel. Chisholm told his lawyer to tell Bice that Lutz threatened to kill his family. Lutz denies this. Chisholm never pressed charges, calling into question his credibility about this incident.

That's enough for a libel suit. Again, Lutz might lose at the end of the day, like Chisholm might lose his John Doe case.

garage mahal said...

Chisholm told his lawyer to tell Bice that Lutz threatened to kill his family.

I suppose that may be true, but I'm not sure how you would know that.

Anonymous said...

mccullough brings up a good point. If Chisholm is really telling lies about Lutz in order to smear him then where is the libel suit?

mccullough said...

Garage,

Bice reported that Chisholm's lawyer told him that Lutz threatened to kill Chisholm's family.

So it could be three things (or a combination of them):

1. Chisholm's lawyer never told Bice this.

2. Chisholm never told his lawyer this.

3. Chisholm never authorized his lawyer to tell Bice this.

Since no one can know for certain, Lutz could sue all three of them for libel and make allegations in the alternative.

One would think that 1. wasn't true because Bice would risk his career, and also Chisholm's lawyer never came out and said he didn't tell Bice that Lutz threatened to kill his family.

One would think that 2 and 3 aren't true because Chisholm's lawyer would be disbarred and also Chisholm has not come out and said he never told his lawyer this or never authorized him to talk to Bice.

So the inference is that Chisholm told his lawyer to tell Bice that Lutz threatened to kill his family.



garage mahal said...

Bice reported that Chisholm's lawyer told him that Lutz threatened to kill Chisholm's family.

I'm reading the original Bice story on this and I don't see that mentioned anywhere. That's why I asked.

garage mahal said...

@mc

Scratch that, I was reading a different article.

Drago said...

madisonfella counter-accusing others of sock-puppetry.

garage counter-accusing the right of "cult"-like behavior.

All reminiscent of how the Soviets/Castro/et al used to lecture the west on "real" personal freedom.

Drago said...

madisonfella: " If Chisholm is really telling lies about Lutz in order to smear him then where is the libel suit?"

If Chisholm is not telling lies about Lutz why hasn't Lutz been arrested?

mccullough said...

Garage,

Here's the quotation from the September 12, 2014 article by Bice in the Milwaukee J-S.

"Samuel Leib, an attorney representing Chisholm in a federal lawsuit over the John Doe investigations, said Thursday that Lutz had left a message threatening to kill Chisholm and his family in the past year. He did not provide audio of the voice mail."

Here's a link to the article itself.

mccullough said...

Garage,

Sorry. I didn't see your comment before I linked the article.

Next time I will not adjust my Fantasy Football line-up while reading the comments.

FedkaTheConvict said...

@ 8:55a.m. Garage Mahal says: "Earth to Cult: The investigation didn't start in Chisholm's office. It started at the GAB, which was chaired by a Republican at the time, who Walker then sacked because he authorized the investigation. "

Then he links to a Journal Sentinel article that clearly says "Milwaukee County prosecutors launched the probe in the fall 2012 into possible illegal coordination between Walker's campaign and conservative nonprofits during the recall races.

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm asked for help from Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, who declined. Officials with the accountability board then agreed last summer to get involved, playing a role in getting prosecutors in four other counties to join the John Doe."

Doesn't "Fall 2012" precede "last summer"(2013? I looks like Garage Mahal didn't even read the article he was attempt to use to buttress his argument.

Michael K said...

The farther I got in the comments, the faster I scrolled.

"The first thing you need to do to get out of a cult is to realize you're in a cult."

Good advice garage.

Original Mike said...

"I looks like Garage Mahal didn't even read the article he was attempt to use to buttress his argument."

garage is infamous for not reading his own links. Or, it's possible he lacks the ability to understand them.

Michael The Magnificent said...

At one time, Lutz was a very effective detective, one of the best on the MPD.

I doubt he'd be feeding questions to Mr. Taylor that he didn't already have the answers (and proof) to. If we hear anything from Chisholm or his lawyer, it'll be more lawyerly-crafted non-denial denials.

I'm betting on the sound of crickets.

Mark said...

Well the WI Club for Growth guy O'Keefe just compared the raids to rape, the AP reports.

And that was during a softball interview with McKenna on the radio yesterday.

Not exactly the way to make your cause look good. Whether or not the Doe dried up his funding, he just made himself more toxic.

Meade said...

No he didn't.

How is having your home raided in predawn hours, your spouse and children's sleep disturbed, your private files, phones, computers all taken from you NOT like rape?

Meade said...

"Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse (or other forms of sexual penetration) initiated against one or more individuals without the consent of those individuals. The act may be carried out by physical force, coercion, abuse of authority or against a person who is incapable of valid consent, such as one who is unconscious, incapacitated, or below the legal age of consent.The term rape is sometimes used interchangeably with the term sexual assault."

- one or more individuals. check.
- force, coercion, abuse of authority. check.
- without consent. check.

Meade said...

I'd say toxic is more like those who continue to defend Chisholm's political witch hunt police-state tactics. Also known as Wisconsin Democrats.

Mark said...

How would Eric O'Keefe know what it felt like when it never happened to him?

Any police action would be rape by your definition. Even the apprehension of proven felons as they are using force and lack consent.

Please, double down on the rape comparison. The media always reports this stuff so fairly, the women's groups are always so forgiving - what could go wrong?

Meade said...

I don't need to double down. Any fair-minded person can understand the violations and the comparisons to rape.

What do you mean by "the women's groups"...? Is that meant to be sarcastic? "The women's groups" are — what, not "forgiving"? The "media" are unfair reporters? You sound depressed.

Here, let's let Eric O'Keefe speak for himself, shall we?

Michael The Magnificent said...

The day John Doe rushed through the door

Mark said...

As happens every so often, I agree with Scott Walker on something.

"Eric O'Keefe, who has no ties to the campaign, deserves nothing less than outright condemnation for his egregiously offensive remarks," said Walker's campaign spokeswoman Alleigh Marre.

Apparently Meade disagrees and thinks that his egregiously offensive remarks deserve defending.

Not the hill I'd choose to die on.

Meade said...

"Eric O'Keefe, who has no ties to the campaign,"

Well said.

Bob Ellison said...

madisonfella said

I always assumed that he calls him "Corky" in homage to the down syndrome kid from Life Goes On

Really? If what you say is true then Curious RecDragoBirkel is even more of an asshole than I first thought.


Whence comes this quote?

To what do you refer?

That quote doesn't appear on this thread.

Someone is shovelling bullshit, and I think madisonfella is that someone.

By the way, madisonfella, I have two relatives with Down Syndrome.

Bob Ellison said...

There's this thing called Google.