This is a first for a sitting Wisconsin Governor…
Gov. Scott Walker announced Friday that he has set up a legal defense fund to help pay expenses incurred as a result of the John Doe investigation of activities during his time as county executive.
Walker’s campaign released a statement from the first-term Republican saying he would use the defense fund to pay his two criminal defense lawyers “to review documents and assist me in cooperating” with the secret probe.
While Walker’s campaign has tried to spin the formation of a legal defense fund as noting more than a means of paying lawyers to review documents and assist Walker in cooperating with Milwaukee County’s ongoing John Doe investigation, Wisconsin State Statutes don’t allow the creation of a legal defense fund unless, “a state government official who is being investigated for or charged with a violation of campaign finance laws or prohibited election practices.”
So in other words, while Gov. Walker and his campaign want to spin the formation of a legal defense fund as no big deal, it’s a very big deal. Never before in the history of our state has a sitting governor needed to form a legal defense fund to pay for attorneys while former aides and associates find themselves indicted for felony criminal charges.
The money quote from the AP article:
Of course Scott Walker wouldn’t admit he was being directly investigated, because then he’d have to admit there’s a chance he actually did something illegal.
Try to suss out what kind of non-denial denial this represents:
“We reiterate that Gov. Walker has been told that he is not a target of this investigation”
I wonder if saying it into a tape recorder and playing it back counts.
Donors are going to start dropping him like a turd from a tall stallion.
The story has alraedy gone national.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/09/scott-walker-legal-defense-fund_n_1335784.html
Another first for Governor Scott Walker. Well done, Scooter!
@Zach W
I’m not responding to this posting, I wanted to respond to the post “something I’ve noticed” but the comments were closed. So I to track you elsewhere, I hear you and you are right, it seemed to get dirty pretty quick. This is your blog and you do have the control here, but as a conservative I do find it fun to poke at the left sometimes. If your honest, you do too. But seriously, what I was hoping you might do is start an area where conservatives could discuss some of the core issues the left supports, like health care and other social issues. My reasoning is, I have always wondered why the right & left have such differing views. I thought couldn’t hurt to ask, so give it some thought.
Way OT for this thread, my apologies, this should also go to the hypocrisy from conservatives thread.
Angry, a wonderful Saturday to you, too.
Insinuate that someone needs to agree with your assessment of things or he is not being honest, then tell him he should do you a favor. Sanctimonious much? Guess what, you can start your own blog. Just think of it, you have the perfect blog title, just use your alias, AA. Your one or two readers would be thrilled to talk amongst themselves, and you would not need to be confronted with truth or reason.
Of course, this is not for Walker himself. It is merely a magnanimous gesture to financially support the loyalty of those around him, (who have yet to resign or be fired by Walker) who have been granted various levels of criminal immunity for their, “non-criminal,” behavior. Nothing to see here, Let’s move on people.
Oh wait, I better post this in the hypocrisy thread, too.
@non,
Your missing my point, I really do want to understand why our views differ and have a debate free of name calling and the like. Are you a moderator here? If so, why wouldn’t you want to try and understand my thought process, like I’m trying to understand yours? I’m really not joking about this, I want to understand why and then discuss our views, after all isn’t this what we should have been doing all along instead of yelling at each other. Just a thought.
The benevolent and ever-civil Angry Andy, his feelings regarding benevolence, brotherhood and civility so very clearly reflected in his choice of screen name, said the following just above:
[To Nonquixote]: “. . .I really do want to understand why our views differ and have a debate free of name calling and the like.”
Hey, Angry Andy, what do you say we “go to the video tape”, and see if that’s true or if you’re just full of sh*t, huh?
[The following was my first “experience” with Angry Andy, so when I read his truly disingenuous comments here, I couldn’t help but laugh]
http://www.bloggingblue.com/2012/03/05/this-death-courtesy-wisconsins-castle-doctrine
Angry Andy says:
March 5, 2012 at 9:24 pm
“Unlike many of you candy ass Libs, I know what it means to protect and serve.”
So, I guess that the answer is, “full of shit”, huh, Andy?
The benevolent and ever-civil Angry Andy, his feelings regarding benevolence, brotherhood and civility so very clearly reflected in his choice of screen name, said the following just above:
[To Nonquixote]: “. . .I really do want to understand why our views differ and have a debate free of name calling and the like.”
Hey, Angry Andy, what do you say we “go to the video tape”, and see if that’s true or if you’re just full of sh*t, huh?
[The following was my first “experience” with Angry Andy, so when I read his truly disingenuous comments here, I couldn’t help but laugh]
http://www.bloggingblue.com/2012/03/05/this-death-courtesy-wisconsins-castle-doctrine
Angry Andy says:
March 5, 2012 at 9:24 pm
“Unlike many of you candy ass Libs, I know what it means to protect and serve.”
So, I guess that the answer is, “full of sh*t”, huh, Andy?
If the Legal Defense Fund (LDF) can only be used to defend against violations of election law then Walker would appear to be in a bit of trouble if he faces any charges related to pay-to-play real estate deals, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence. conspiracy etc. It would seem that the only way he could legally raise donations to fight those charges would be to resign, but then who would want to donate to someone who isn’t in a position to reciprocate at a later date with poltical favors? I suppose there is no shortage of stinking-rich neo-cons who might be willing to toss some money in the hat as a gesture of solidarity for the fallen warrior, but that would be a little too much like charity.
It’s interesting to note that the transfer of any campaign funds to the LDF must have the approval of the donor and any money from lobbyists or someone who employs lobbyists (Koch Brothers) can’t be used. Ouch
Another question I haven’t found the answer to: What is the mechanism for enforcement of these laws, the G.A.B.? Doesn’t Walker have the power to set that hapless agency’s rules? Attorney General Van Hollen? It is to laugh. Will the Dane County D.A. have to step into the breach? I can hear the howls of Charlie Sykes’ outrage already.
Would it be possible for his high-powered attorneys to just brazen-it-out by defying the law, knowing that whatever is thrown at him isn’t worse than what he faces in Milwaukee? Besides, he has the Supreme Court in the bag and they might just throw the laws out. Impeachment? I don’t think so.
Well we are living in interesting times.
In a JSOnline article: “We reiterate that Gov. Walker has been told that he is not a target of this investigation,” Matthews said.
Not that you’d expect his representation to be forthcoming, but maybe he’s not the ultimate target of the investigation. Maybe this goes higher considering the Vos-Priebus connection (college roomates). Maybe the taint goes all the way up the RNC chain.
It wouldn’t surpise me a bit.
—–
http://www.kenoshanews.com/home/reince_priebus_from_tremper_high_school_to_the_national_stage_85311808.html
“…From high school, Priebus moved on to the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, where he became student body president, a member of the College Republicans and a friend and roommate of future state Rep. Robin Vos, R-Rochester….”
Or Matthews is flat out lying, (my vote). The Assit D.A. had no comment when informed of her statement.
@Punkyb- Mathews flat out lying? Say is isn’t so! ;-P
Rebecca Kemble stepped up to the plate and confronted Kevin Kennedy over the fund’s creation.
He weaseled, but she confirmed the GAB does have a process for enforcing the statutes on this and that the Walker camp has to report to them.
Ah yes. He’s walking his statements back already. What a weasel.
Walker: Campaign attorneys have said I am not target of John Doe probe
“Gov. Scott Walker said Tuesday that prosecutors haven’t told him directly he is not the target of the ongoing John Doe investigation into his close associates and former aides.
“I haven’t been told that directly. Others have been told that — attorneys who work for the campaign,” Walker said.
The governor took questions from reporters Tuesday after announcing plans to grow Wisconsin’s dairy industry at the Alliant Energy Center.
When asked who told his attorneys that he’s not a subject of the nearly 2-year-old investigation, he said, “that’s what they passed on to me, I didn’t ask them specifically.”
Read more: http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/walker-campaign-attorneys-have-said-i-am-not-target-of/article_2c5f0e5c-6d41-11e1-9262-0019bb2963f4.html#ixzz1p2LbMW7h
Today OneWisconsinNow’s email blast asks many questions:
What has changed in the investigation that Gov. Walker now needs personal representation paid for by a legal defense fund instead of his campaign paying for lawyers to “assist” the investigation? Gov. Walker claims that he has hired new criminal defense lawyers for the purpose of cooperating with the Milwaukee County District Attorney. However, for a year, the campaign itself was paying an attorney to “cooperate” with the DA by providing needed emails, etc.
Why has Gov. Walker retained a criminal defense lawyer from Chicago who specializes in federal investigations if this is a state case run by the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office?
Is Gov. Walker a target for possible prosecution in the ongoing criminal investigation of his wrongdoing in his administration and campaign?
Will Gov. Walker voluntarily reveal the identities of the campaign contributors who have consented to transfer their donation to the campaign to the legal defense fund as they occur? Reporting requirements and deadlines could allow him to conceal this information from the public until April 2013!
Who will be asked to transfer their contributions from the campaign to the Governor’s legal defense fund? Do they have any business before the state?
Why has the Governor’s campaign not released any records of the alleged contacts between his campaign and the Government Accountability Board?
How can the Governor’s contention that his legal defense fund is operating consistent with the advice of the Government Accountability Board be independently verified if there is no documentation of what the GAB’s advice is?
That last one’s key. Something’s funky at the GAB.
Agreed. Either Walker’s campaign isn’t being truthful (no shock there) or the GAB is being intentionally evasive.
I think the GAB may have been caught off guard here, offering informal advice to the Walker camp on how to go about setting up a fund without realizing that the Friday news dump was in the works.
There has to be some form of affidavit a campaign files to prove that it’s in legal jeopardy and meet the statutory requirement for starting that fund. But all indications are the GAB hasn’t received it.