Saturday, February 1, 2014

Walkergate 2: Walker's Still Doing A Whole Lotta Cooperating!

Yesterday was the deadline for politicians to file their campaign finance reports for the second half of 2013. The largest corporate media outlet in the state was excited to announce that the primary corporate candidate, Scott Walker, had raised three times as much money as the secondary corporate candidate, Mary Burke.

That in itself is not surprising.  It's been shown time and time again that the Democrats can't beat the Republicans at their own game.

What was interesting is this little tidbit:
The disclosure of the payment to the Mequon-based Biskupic & Jacobs law firm came a day after information spilled out in court records about a secret John Doe investigation into campaign fundraising and spending surrounding Wisconsin's recent recall elections.

The payments — labeled as "legal fees — compliance/administrative" — were paid to a firm headed by former U.S. Attorneys Steven Biskupic and Michelle Jacobs. The firm received payments monthly from July to November, with the largest one — nearly $74,000 — coming in November.

Asked about the payments, Walker campaign spokesman Jonathan Wetzel said the campaign "relies on Biskupic & Jacobs for a variety of legal services." The two attorneys did not immediately return calls late Friday.
As noted in the article, Walker's campaign is passing it off as them just being "compliant."  But it should be noted that the whole compliance issue was the excuse he used when he established his legal cooperation fund during the initial Walkergate investigation.

I'm sure that $86,000 can buy a whole lot of compliance and cooperation...with the investigators.

But it does give one cause to ponder whether it means whether Walker's campaign was one of the unnamed petitioners that are desperately and vainly trying to stop the parallel Sons of Doe investigation.

I would say it was a safe bet that we have found at least one of the subjects of the investigations, especially considering how Walker has been using his weaselly words when asked about it.  As I have written numerous times before, if he was in the clear of this, he would be able to speak openly about it and even get a letter from the prosecutor that he is not a subject of the investigation.

Sadly, I don't see any of our corporate mainstream media outlets willing to push the issue.  Rather, they just accept him at his word, regardless of the numerous times he has lied to them and to us.

6 comments:

  1. Hopper and Kapanke were recalled!February 1, 2014 at 12:34 PM

    Note that it was also a Friday news dump.

    I also wonder how much data has been deleted from hard drives. I hope Walker and Co were stupid enough to not use solid state drivers (pretty unlikely, they are mostly used for gaming computers), because data deleted from a solid state drive is unrecoverable. Moreover if they did use non-solid state drives that investigators are smart enough to recover the data. I know that impeded the gerrymandering case where aides formatted HDs...

    ReplyDelete
  2. So, Capper......riddle me this:

    Judge Peterson rules that there was not enough evidence to merit subpoenas. It is my understanding that the subpoenas thrown out were for Dane county (an perhaps others). The only person "living" in Dane county that would potentially be under investigation would be Walker. So, it sounds like the investigators had enough information from JD1 to establish JD2. JD2 yielded some more info which was then used to get subpoenas from the first judge (Judge 1). Judge 1 then recurses herself in favor of Judge 2 (Peterson). Peterson then says, "Meh.....you don't have enough evidence to prove a crime was committed...".

    So, I'd take away the following:

    1) Walker is under investigation
    2) JD2 Judge Peterson doesn't think there is enough evidence to continue investigating Walker
    3) Thus, no more subpoenas unless somebody talks openly (doubtful).

    So.....I'd like to justice served, but it looks like that is going to be hard if the investigators can't get the goods.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unless the net closes around Walker's underlings and they wish to avoid a Federal prison term with immunity.
      To-wit: John Dean, and, now, David Wildstein
      If I remember correctly, there were numerous Walker underlings offered immunity for their testimony, including but not limited to Cullen Werwie, Cynthia Archer...
      Of those who testified in JD1 who accepted immunity and who have not (yet) been charged, Walker has kept them close enough to keep and eye on...but not close enough to still be involved in the "inner circle". These people, like John Dean, can be considered ticking time bombs to Walker's defense strategy.

      Delete
    2. It looked like the folks convicted in JD1 would plea out, but they all took jail sentences and felonies instead of testifying against anybody up the chain. I don't see that changing since the stakes are arguably higher here.

      On the other side, per the WSJ article, the judge overseeing JD2 "had quashed subpoenas to Walker’s campaign and three groups" and said " there was no evidence that the organizations “expressly advocated” for the election of Walker or the defeat of his opponent."

      So, we also know that there were 29 groups that were targeted. We can infer that Judge Peterson then deemed 25 cases which may have expressly advocated for Walker and/or against his rival. That would explain why he only quashed four subpoenas instead of them all.

      The real question now is, will the WI-SC shoot down the appeals court ruling before charges are filed?



      Delete
  3. It's unbelievable that investigative reporters ask Walker "Do you or don't you have another Criminal Defense Fund?" and get no answer.

    It's really simple. A reporter should ask the question again and again and again and again, until Walker answers "Yes" or "No".

    So, Gov Walker, do you or don't you have a Criminal Defense Fund? Yes or No? Answer the question Governor. No, I'm not interested in your tax cut. I want a simple yes or no answer to a simple question. You obviously know the simple answer and you've chosen not to answer. So, I'll repeat the question: Do you or don't you have another Criminal Defense Fund? Why are you avoiding answering, Gov Walker? What do you have to hide? Why are you running away, Gov Walker? What are you afraid of, Gov Walker.

    That's how you do it. Unless, of course, you are a wimpy reporter. Unless, of course, you are a note-taker and NOT a reporter.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If its true that Wis. Club for Growth, Americans for Prosperity and the Republican Governors Association are under investigation in John Dough 2, there's a lot more I'd like to know about how money and policy directives are moving in and out of our state. It's time to look at not only the players in these organizations but at their partners and family members. Just like ALEC seems to be a shadow Legislature, there seems to be a shadow political force incompatible with democracy and with our election laws. Scott Walker is not the only one whose spent thousands of dollars on legal fees during the last quarter. Why?

    ReplyDelete