July 16, 2015

"The Wisconsin Supreme Court is expected on Thursday to make public a decision on whether a criminal investigation into coordination between conservative groups and Gov. Scott Walker’s 2012 campaign may continue." UPDATE: Court ends the investgation.

The NYT reports.
The investigation, which has been stalled by court decisions for more than a year, began in 2012 after Mr. Walker survived a recall election brought by voters who opposed limits he made to collective bargaining rights and union power when he became governor in 2011. At its root, the investigation looked at whether Mr. Walker’s advisers directed interactions with at least a dozen outside conservative groups, including the Wisconsin Club for Growth, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, and Citizens for a Strong America, and whether that violated disclosure rules and donation limits....

The State Supreme Court had been asked to look at three legal suits tied to the case, including efforts to end the inquiry by those under investigation as well as a push by the special prosecutor to renew it....
ADDED: This paragraph seems miswritten:
The state’s highest court is widely seen as being split between a larger conservative bloc and liberal one as well as having an increasingly polarized, antagonistic climate between the blocs. Shirley S. Abrahamson, the longtime, liberal-leaning chief justice, filed a federal lawsuit this spring after voters approved a Republican-led constitutional amendment changing the way the chief was picked — in essence, assuring that a member of the conservative bloc, Patience Roggensack, would be picked to replace her.
The constitutional amendment didn't assure that Patience Roggensack would be chosen. The NYT doesn't mention what the constitutional change was. We went from designating the most senior justice as chief to choosing the chief by a vote of the justices. That meant the so-called conservatives controlled the outcome if they voted as a bloc, but a majority of justices, making their individual choices, could have decided to vote for Abrahamson, perhaps out of concern for the seeming disrespect of taking her position away in the middle of her term or because she was experienced and doing a fine job. We Wisconsinites who voted to amend the constitution did not feel assured of the outcome, especially that Roggensack, specially, would be chosen.

UPDATE: "Wisconsin Supreme Court ends John Doe probe into Scott Walker's campaign."
The ruling means the likely end of the investigation, which has been stalled for 18 months after a lower court judge determined no laws were violated even if Walker's campaign and the groups had worked together as prosecutors believe.

It could also prompt the escalation of other litigation over the probe....

Writing for the majority, Justice Michael Gableman found a key section of Wisconsin's campaign finance law is "unconstitutionally overbroad and vague" and that the activities prosecutors had investigated were not illegal.

"To be clear, this conclusion ends the John Doe investigation because the special prosecutor's legal theory is unsupported in either reason or law," Gableman wrote. "Consequently, the investigation is closed. Consistent with our decision and the order entered by Reserve Judge (Gregory) Peterson, we order that the special prosecutor and the district attorneys involved in this investigation must cease all activities related to the investigation, return all property seized in the investigation from any individual or organization, and permanently destroy all copies of information and other materials obtained through the investigation. All unnamed movants are relieved of any duty to cooperate further with the investigation."
AND: Here's the full text of the opinion.

MORE: The court — citing freedom of speech rights in the U.S. and Wisconsin constitutions — rejects the interpretation of the Wisconsin statute that was the basis of the special prosecutor's :
In Two Unnamed Petitioners, we hold that the definition of that the definition of "political purposes" in Wis. Stat. § 11.01(16) is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 3 of the Wisconsin Constitution because its language "'is so sweeping that its sanctions may be applied to constitutionally protected conduct which the state is not permitted to regulate.'"  State v. Janssen, 219 Wis. 2d 362, 374, 580 N.W.2d 260 (1998) (quoting Bachowski v. Salamone, 139 Wis. 2d 397, 411, 407 N.W.2d 533 (1987)).  However, a readily available limiting construction exists that we will apply and that will prevent the chilling of otherwise protected speech; namely, "political purposes" is limited to express advocacy and its functional equivalent as those terms are defined in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976), and Fed. Election Comm'n v. Wis. Right to Life, Inc., 551 U.S. 449 (2007) (WRTL II).  With this limiting construction in place, Chapter 11 does not proscribe any of the alleged conduct of any of the Unnamed Movants.  The special prosecutor has not alleged any express advocacy, and issue advocacy, whether coordinated or not, is "beyond the reach of [Ch. 11]."  Wis. Right to Life, Inc. v. Barland, 751 F.3d 804, 815 (7th Cir. 2014) (Barland II).  Accordingly, we invalidate the special prosecutor's theory of the case, and we grant the relief requested by the Unnamed Movants.
AND: "The breadth of the documents gathered pursuant to subpoenas and seized pursuant to search warrants is amazing.  Millions of documents, both in digital and paper copy, were subpoenaed and/or seized.  Deputies seized business papers, computer equipment, phones, and other devices, while their targets were restrained under police supervision and denied the ability to contact their attorneys.  The special prosecutor obtained virtually every document possessed by the Unnamed Movants relating to every aspect of their lives, both personal and professional, over a five-year span (from 2009 to 2013).  Such documents were subpoenaed and/or seized without regard to content or relevance to the alleged violations of Ch. 11.  As part of this dragnet, the special prosecutor also had seized wholly irrelevant information, such as retirement income statements, personal financial account information, personal letters, and family photos."

MORE: "The special prosecutor alleges that the Unnamed Movants engaged in illegally coordinated issue advocacy.  However, the basis for his theory has evolved over the course of the various legal challenges to his investigation, and he appears unable to decide just how the Unnamed Movants have broken the law."
Today, the special prosecutor alleges two theories of illegal coordination: (1) that the coordination between the Unnamed Movants is so extensive that the supposedly independent groups became subcommittees for the candidate's campaign under Wis. Stat. § 11.10(4); and (2) that the coordinated issue advocacy amounts to an in-kind contribution under Wis. Admin. Code § GAB 1.20.  The special prosecutor's theories, if adopted as law, would require an individual to surrender his political rights to the government and retain campaign finance attorneys before discussing salient political issues.  See Citizens United, 558 U.S. at 324.  We find no support for the special prosecutor's theories in Wis. Stat. Ch. 11.  Chapter 11's definition of "political purposes," which underlies Wisconsin's campaign finance law, is both overbroad and vague and thus unconstitutionally chills speech because people "'of common intelligence must necessarily guess at [the law's] meaning and differ as to its application.'"  Id. (quoting Connally, 269 U.S. at 391)....

The special prosecutor argues that coordinated issue advocacy is prohibited under this provision because the statute itself only requires cooperation between a candidate's committee and another committee and that the statute does not require that such cooperation be limited to express advocacy.

The first flaw in the special prosecutor's theory is that it is left to the whim of each regulatory bureaucrat and/or prosecutor to subjectively determine how much coordination is "too much."  Indeed, the special prosecutor, because he relies on vague and overbroad statutes, will be the only one to know how much coordination is "too much."  This cannot be; such an interpretation of § 11.10(4) is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague under the First Amendment. 
There's a second flaw that the court finds "more obvious":
Wisconsin Stat. § 11.10(4) refers to a "committee" that coordinates with a candidate's committee and in order to be a "committee," an entity must "make[] or accept[] contributions or make[] disbursements."   In order to come within the purview of regulated acts both "contributions" and "disbursements" must be "made for political purposes."  Wis. Stat. §§ 11.01(6)(a)1; 11.01(7)(a)1.  Applying the necessary limiting construction to the phrase "for political purposes," we conclude that in order to meet the statutory definition of "committee," a committee must engage in express advocacy and its functional equivalent.  This conclusion is fatal to the special prosecutor's subcommittee theory because he does not allege that the Unnamed Movants engaged in express advocacy.  Put simply, because the Unnamed Movants did not engage in express advocacy, they could not be considered a "committee" subject to Chapter 11's regulation. 
AND: From the conclusion:
It is utterly clear that the special prosecutor has employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing.   In other words, the special prosecutor was the instigator of a "perfect storm" of wrongs that was visited upon the innocent Unnamed Movants and those who dared to associate with them.  It is fortunate, indeed, for every other citizen of this great State who is interested in the protection of fundamental liberties that the special prosecutor chose as his targets innocent citizens who had both the will and the means to fight the unlimited resources of an unjust prosecution.  Further, these brave individuals played a crucial role in presenting this court with an opportunity to re-endorse its commitment to upholding the fundamental right of each and every citizen to engage in lawful political activity and to do so free from the fear of the tyrannical retribution of arbitrary or capricious governmental prosecution. 

84 comments:

WisRich said...

It's over. The John Doe investigation was illegal and is ordered to destroy all records.

Will Collier said...

The Times spends most of the article hedging about how the WI Supreme Court is "conservative" and thus can't be trusted.

Funny, they rarely if ever mentioned the partisan/ideological makeup of the all-Democrat Florida Supreme Court back in 2001.

Curious George said...

But, but , but it was run by a Republican!

tim in vermont said...

That was a slap down.

Funny, they rarely if ever mentioned the partisan/ideological makeup of the all-Democrat Florida Supreme Court back in 2001.

From "All the news we see it to print" to "All the news that helps the Democrats."

To be fair, look at the collection of hateful bigots they have to appeal to in New York City.

Curious George said...

UPDATE: Court ends the investgation."

garage mahal and Mark (the dumb one) hurt worse.

Birkel said...

Now the civil rights lawsuits can proceed.

WisRich said...

Here's an excerpt. Quite the smack down.

"Our lengthy discussion of these three cases can be distilled into a few simple, but important, points. It is utterly clear that the special prosecutor has employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing. In other words, the special prosecutor was the instigator of a "perfect storm" of wrongs that was visited upon the innocent Unnamed Movants and those who dared to associate with them. It is fortunate, indeed, for every other citizen of this great State who is interested in the protection of fundamental liberties that the special prosecutor chose as his targets innocent citizens who had both the will and the means to fight the unlimited resources of an unjust prosecution. Further, these brave individuals played a crucial role in presenting this court with an opportunity to re-endorse its commitment to upholding the fundamental right of each and every citizen to engage in lawful political activity and to do so free from the fear of the tyrannical retribution of arbitrary or capricious governmental prosecution. Let one point be clear: our conclusion today ends this unconstitutional John Doe investigation."

Danno said...

Wisconsin court ends probe of presidential hopeful Walker
Associated Press By TODD RICHMOND
19 minutes ago


tim in vermont said...

and to do so free from the fear of the tyrannical retribution of arbitrary or capricious governmental prosecution

I wonder when Ted Stevens gets his Senate Seat back? Oh, that's right. Never.

phantommut said...

The only problem I have with the outcome is that destruction of all evidence might hinder a very public investigation into the secret investigation. (I understand privacy concerns drive the destruction, and in the end I'm confident this is the right decision. Still, I think the public has a right to know how far the "John Doe" investigation went into Stasi-land.)

Mark the Libertarian

PB said...

Tar and feathers in the public square for the special prosecutor would be a good start on justice. Then disbarment. Then sue him for every penny he has or will have.

Then another good tar and feathering.

Michael K said...

I hope the civil suits will follow soon and then the criminal prosecutions which will probably require a new administration that is honest.

Big Mike said...

Chisholm bitch-slapped by Supreme Court; garage mahal devastated.

gerry said...

"Further, these brave individuals played a crucial role in presenting this court with an opportunity to re-endorse its commitment to upholding the fundamental right of each and every citizen to engage in lawful political activity and to do so free from the fear of the tyrannical retribution of arbitrary or capricious governmental prosecution. Let one point be clear: our conclusion today ends this unconstitutional John Doe investigation. Oh -- and Garage Mahal is a fucking fascist."

/sarc off

mccullough said...

The liberal NY Times is disappointed. Only media corporations run by progressive trust fund babies should have free speech rights.

rehajm said...

Meh. Mission Accomplished a while ago. Walker campaign headlines will always look like this..

Candidate Walker Faces Tough Questions Surrounding Camp's Criminal Investigation. Criminal. Investigation.

The heavy lifting is done.

Curious George said...

Time to frog march John Chisholm and Kevin Kennedy...

The Drill SGT said...

phantommut said...
The only problem I have with the outcome is that destruction of all evidence might hinder a very public investigation into the secret investigation. (I understand privacy concerns drive the destruction, and in the end I'm confident this is the right decision. Still, I think the public has a right to know how far the "John Doe" investigation went into Stasi-land.)


I suspect that the Civil suit Litigants have already previously requested preservation of info related to their litigation and will get that reaffirmed. That would allow and require the destruction of material unrelated to pending suits.

CJinPA said...

Note taped to the fridge in the NY Times break room:

"Just a reminder folks, we call conservative justices 'conservative' and we call liberal justices 'liberal-leaning.' -- Management

gk1 said...

I'm not a lawyer but what punitive civil suits can be launched against those scum bags that launched this witch hunt? How likely is it the prosecutor will suffer any substantial punishment for what was clearly an unethical and illegal misuse of power?

Amichel said...

Garage hardest hit.

phantommut said...

I halfway expect every hard drive in Chisholm's office to suffer mysterious crashes, and for the facility housing the backups to burn to the ground.

paminwi said...

You mean the secret router can now be destroyed?
I can hardly wait for the criminal cases to be brought against Chisholm, et al.
Kevin Kennedy has to go and whoever has that authority needs to act as swiftly as possible.

Matt Sablan said...

Is this decision appealable? Because, if so, I imagine it will be appealed, and it'll get slapped down all the way to the Supreme Court, so long as Walker is a potential president.

MaxedOutMama said...

A good day for justice in Wisconsin, but I think further inquiry/consequences must exist for some of those involved in the prosecution.

Anonymous said...

Plaintiffs gave over $8million to the Republican Judges and yet the Republican Judges still refused to recuse themselves. Not one comment about that from our "neutral" blogger.

Meanwhile the biggest reaction from the Althouse-followers is a massive celebration of how "butt hurt" their political opponents are feeling right now, a common theme on this blog. Because some people are only happy when other people are not, which is a sad way to live your life.

Matt Sablan said...

On the whole: There wasn't much doubt this would be the outcome. It was obvious from the start that this was an unethical witch hunt. But, maybe now that they have healthcare, they won't be so superstitious.

Bobber Fleck said...

A court gets it right. A lying Democrat operative receives a major rebuke.

It will be a pleasure watching the Democrats and media spin this one.

paminwi said...

As if this time the article on the John Doe decision is #6 on the list of "headlines" under a weather story, a story about increases in fees for sidewalk cafés, some new brewery "octopi" coming into town and others on the Wi State Journal mobile website.

Gee, I wonder why!

damikesc said...

Is there a breakdown of the vote? Was it unanimous?

Is this decision appealable? Because, if so, I imagine it will be appealed, and it'll get slapped down all the way to the Supreme Court, so long as Walker is a potential president.

Don't see how it could be as a District Court ALREADY tried to kill it off but was told it's a State Court issue. If they tried to appeal, they'd get nowhere fast.

Plaintiffs gave over $8million to the Republican Judges and yet the Republican Judges still refused to recuse themselves.

And the prosecutors gave to the Dem judges and they didn't recuse themselves. Funny, huh?

Did the justices funded by unions recuse themselves in the Act 10 decision?

Meanwhile the biggest reaction from the Althouse-followers is a massive celebration of how "butt hurt" their political opponents are feeling right now, a common theme on this blog. Because some people are only happy when other people are not, which is a sad way to live your life.

Given that Progs already showed they don't give a damn about rights (see garage's comments about this case), that a fascist like him is hurting is lovely.

Amichel said...

Madisonfella;

Right now, I'm playing a the world's tiniest violin for you.

Birkel said...

madisonfella,

Abuses by prosecutors are a problem for everybody. Attempts to suppress the exercise of civil rights by anybody operating under color of state authority are a problem for everybody.

You are a shill and ineffective, at that.

Gahrie said...

Because some people are only happy when other people are not,

Tell that to the Little Sisters of the Poor, the pizza shop in Indiana and the bakers in Oregon.

MaxedOutMama said...

The breadth of the documents gathered pursuant to subpoenas and seized pursuant to search warrants is amazing. Millions of documents, both in digital and paper copy, were subpoenaed and/or seized. Deputies seized business papers, computer equipment, phones, and other devices, while their targets were restrained under police supervision and denied the ability to contact their attorneys. The special prosecutor obtained virtually every document possessed by the Unnamed Movants relating to every aspect of their lives, both personal and professional, over a five-year span (from 2009 to 2013). Such documents were subpoenaed and/or seized without regard to content or relevance to the alleged violations of Ch. 11. As part of this dragnet, the special prosecutor also had seized wholly irrelevant information, such as retirement income statements, personal financial account information, personal letters, and family photos.

Amazing, indeed. This seems to violate the Fourth Amendment separately???

SGT Ted said...

Proving once again that Democrats hate actual free speech and will seek to undermine the democratic process and violate peoples 1st Amendment rights using "campaign finance" laws as the pretense.

The Democrats really have morphed into totalitarians. The anti-Walker folk here that support this investigation are proof of that.

clint said...

So will there be any consequences for the judges or prosecutors involved?

Hyperbolic language in an opinion is nice.

Consequences let us hope this might not happen again for a while.

Matt Sablan said...

"As part of this dragnet, the special prosecutor also had seized wholly irrelevant information, such as retirement income statements, personal financial account information, personal letters, and family photos."

-- I think if this is true, there better not be a wholesale destruction of the documents. They need to be returned, and then have an independent organization purge the digital documents systematically. And the cost for this should come out of the special prosecutor's hide/budget.

Wilbur said...

I came into this late in the day, so to speak. What was the hullabaloo about "secret routers" which seemed to permeate every comment section about this subject? It was never elucidated.

SGT Ted said...

Meanwhile the biggest reaction from the Althouse-followers is a massive celebration of how "butt hurt" their political opponents are feeling right now...

I always celebrate when supporters of fascist tactics are sad when their wishes are thwarted and civil rights upheld.

rehajm said...

Because some people are only happy when other people are not, which is a sad way to live your life.

Relishing injustice righted is life well lived.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Matthew Sablan said...

Is this decision appealable?

The prosecution's theory of the law was found to be unconstitutional by the Wisconsin Supreme Court under both the Wisconsin constitution and the US constitution. I don't know if the finding relative to the US constitution can be appealed in federal court, but with regards to the Wisconsin constitution the Wisconsin Supreme Court just had the final say, so the ruling will stand.

Matt Sablan said...

Wilbur: My understanding is that an early investigation alleged that Walker had hidden routers throughout the Capitol to conduct illegal coordination with outside parties. In short, that the reason no one could find the damning evidence against Walker is because he created secret routers impervious to detection.

I think. I honestly don't really know whether they were a REAL concern or a parody concern.

Michael K said...

The routers were hidden in garage's mind where there was a lot of empty space to use.

Matt Sablan said...

"It is utterly clear that the special prosecutor has employed theories of law that do not exist in order to investigate citizens who were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing." -- quoted at Hot Air from the decision.

That's... harsh.

Michael K said...

"Because some people are only happy when other people are not, which is a sad way to live your life."

Tell us how happy you were when Ted Stevens was convicted, madisonfella.

Matt Sablan said...

"It is fortunate, indeed, for every other citizen of this great State who is interested in the protection of fundamental liberties that the special prosecutor chose as his targets innocent citizens who had both the will and the means to fight the unlimited resources of an unjust prosecution."

-- No uncertain terms here. All this means is that the NEXT abuse of power may be targeted at someone a bit poorer, or a bit dumber who they can effectively abuse without being caught.

tim in vermont said...

is a massive celebration of how "butt hurt" their political opponents are feeling right now, a common theme on this blog.

You would think so if you only read Rhythm and Balls' post.

Known Unknown said...

Thanks to this, I now have a new band name: Unnamed Movants.

Original Mike said...

Garage needs to be put on suicide watch.

tim in vermont said...

Give Madisonfella some credit, at least she came on here so we could laugh at her.

Paco Wové said...

I'm happy whenever the fundamental rights of citizens to live, unmolested by the state, in a free society are upheld, m.f. Aren't you?

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Original Mike said...

Garage needs to be put on suicide watch.

I'll bring the popcorn!

President-Mom-Jeans said...

but but but SECRET ROUTERS!

I hope that fat fuck Bitchtits commits suicide by fried cheese overdose today.

Oh, and MadisonInga, let me take this opportunity to once again advise you to go fuck yourself.

great Unknown said...

Plaintiffs gave over $8million to the Republican Judges and yet the Republican Judges still refused to recuse themselves.

As mentioned, in the Union case, plaintiffs donated millions to the liberal side of the Court, who did not recuse themselves.

The problem here is that if donation recipients have to recuse themselves because of pro-donor bias, then those who did not receive donations should have to recuse themselves because of anti-donor bias ("Why didn't they give me money?")

And thus, all court rulings must be made by judges from outside the state, who are not connected to the political system at all. But...who will choose those judges?

gerry said...

Because some people are only happy when other people are not, which is a sad way to live your life.

That's not true. We are happy because the enemies of liberty who want to use government to silence political speech - like Garage Mahal - were defeated. It is only fair to use the same tactics - marginalization and alienation - that Progressives use against conservatives, against Progressives. Leave us alone, don't harass us, and whatever motivation it takes to achieve that, WE WILL USE AGAINST YOU, kind against kind.

PUNCH BACK TWICE AS HARD so Progressives will leave our liberties alone!

Bob Boyd said...

"Because some people are only happy when other people are not, which is a sad way to live your life."

There's nothing sad about a schad....
enboner.

MikeR said...

Liberals, here is your chance to denounce absolute evil. Or not. "Have you no sense of decency?"

Rick said...

Are DAs in Wisconsin elected or appointed? Does immunity cover even inventing laws you claim to be broken and using that as a basis to initiate gang style police raids?

Essentially I'm trying to determine the chances Chisholm will be (a) fired, and / or (b) sent to jail (both of which should be 100%).

Ron Winkleheimer said...

"My understanding is that an early investigation alleged that Walker had hidden routers throughout the Capitol to conduct illegal coordination with outside parties. In short, that the reason no one could find the damning evidence against Walker is because he created secret routers impervious to detection."

Apparently Walker and his cronies have super-sekret super powers.

Did they also speculate that Walker and his cronies were shape-shifting alien reptoids too?

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Anyway, since Walker is a conservative, it is self-evident that he, and anyone who supports him, is evil. And
as everyone knows, cause Hillary told us, there is a vast right-wing conspiracy.

It's true! Evil right-wing people talk to each other. All. The. Time. They like discuss ideas and debate and stuff. That's how you know their evil. Cause they don't have anybody to tell them what to think.

So the vast right-wing conspiracy of evil wins another one and gets to keep on exercising their so-called "rights" which are just the institutionalizing of racism, misogyny, and hetero-normatism.

It makes me feelz bad.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Liberals, here is your chance to denounce absolute evil.

Heh, good one.

Marc said...

Now that the happy conclusion has been achieved, I'll admit that nor was I (cf Matthew S. and Michael K.) ever quite sure about those secret routers, not having paid any attention until later in the tragedy. There's a good book in all of this, for someone. Not G....

Michael said...

Oh, well. The comedy has to come to an end. My very favorite part was at the beginning when Garage asserted that Walker had secret servers, servers!, in his office.

good times.

khesanh0802 said...

I hope that there are ways that the plaintiffs can sue the pants off the "special prosecutor " and those that instigated this travesty. Someone should pay dearly for this overreach.

Rick said...

Original Mike said...
Garage needs to be put on suicide watch.


He's never made a sincere comment in his life, it was all to piss off other commenters.

That's what trolls do.

Kyzer SoSay said...

I've got a secret router. It's password protected and everything. It used to be not-so-secret, but then I caught my neighbor stealing my WiFi, so I made it secret.

. . . yeah, I never really understood what those were supposed to be for either. How would secret routers help with illegal coordination? Doesn't anyone bother to meet in diners to discuss "criminal activity" anymore?

Ron Winkleheimer said...

To anyone who knows anything about computer networks and IT the idea of "secret routers" makes as much sense as shape-shifting reptoid alien overlords.

Heartless Aztec said...

One word - Amen.

richard mcenroe said...

So they're ordered to destroy the records. They've already,beyond a shadow of a doubt, circulated the defendants' confidential information to the four winds.

Christopher B said...

Like I said on the later thread, and rehajm said earlier here, the damage is done. Every story on Walker will now include oblique but ominous-sounding references to this 'investigation' and it's termination by the 'conservatives' on the WI Supreme Court.

ken in tx said...

If immunity precludes lawsuits, there can be recall petitions, disbarment actions, and harassing investigations by the state AG and the Legislature. Turnabout is fair play.

Goldenpause said...

I assume that ethics complaints to the Wisconsin Bar will be forthcoming if they have not already been made. I also assume that the Wisconsin Supreme Court has the last say on lawyer discipline in Wisconsin. If I were one of the prosecutors I would be looking for what a career after law looks would look like

Todd said...

Ron Winkleheimer said... [hush]​[hide comment]
To anyone who knows anything about computer networks and IT the idea of "secret routers" makes as much sense as shape-shifting reptoid alien overlords.

7/16/15, 11:44 AM


Shhhhh! They don't like people drawing attention to them!

buwaya said...

In part, this confirms that the legal process is indeed political.
Anything that affects politics or public policy is a political question, and the legal system decides on these things not through any objective, disinterested application of principles, but as an exercise of power. The whole ritual of the process is just that, a ritual.
If the balance of power requires a certain result then the lawyers and judges will find a rationalization for it.

There is a fantasy that codified rights exist, which the law is bound to respect. This is wrong in practice, a delusion.

I don't mean to say that this particular outcome is wrong, I approve of the outcome. It is just that this welcome result is no more or less the exercise of power than an unwelcome result.

deepelemblues said...

richard mcenroe said...
So they're ordered to destroy the records. They've already,beyond a shadow of a doubt, circulated the defendants' confidential information to the four winds.

7/16/15, 1:06 PM


Until needed as oppo research for harassment targets by liberal activists in future elections. Then the four winds will magically reverse direction.

Leora said...

I'd really like to know if there was a minority dissent to this opinion and if so what they said in defense of this outrage.

Unknown said...

Its time for a Criminal civil rights probe into the prosecutor's behavior and with disbarment as a remedy for any lawyer participating on behalf the prosecutor's "assault" team.

Birkel said...

There were two dissenting opinions, both were ridiculous.

jeff said...

All this because Coleen Chisholm told John no blowjob till Walker's charged. It's alway about the blowjobs.

damikesc said...

There were two dissenting opinions, both were ridiculous.

I'll assume Bradley and Abrahamson.

Bobber Fleck said...

Being a non-lawyer, I unsuccessfully attempted to read the dissenting opinions. Can someone provide a Cliffs Notes version? Abrahamson and Crooks appear to have partially concurred and partially dissented.

Birkel said...

Mr. Fleck,
Abrahamson wants the statute in question to be read in as broad a manner as possible to include all coordination between candidates and outside groups. She objects to the majority opinion that the statute should be constructed to mean what it says.

Bobber Fleck said...

My thanks to Birkel.

Big Mike said...

@Ron Winkleheimer, given the state of government IT knowledge as verbally expressed by Democrats and demonstrated by the massive failure of the original Obamacare exchange and the cascading failures of state exchanges (not to mention the OPM data hacks) I am going to assume that garage and whichever shadowy group feeds him his taking points, are pretty far behind the power curve on modern technology and conflated WiFi routers with "secret" routers, because, you know, they don't have wires.