No, no – I think some critique of Judge Randa is in order.
But at the risk of oversimplifying, two different things happened: Peterson shut down the probe by ruling that what the prosecutors said Walker did was not actually a crime. Randa ALSO shut down the investigation by ruling that the investigation chilled Walker’s First Amendment rights and therefore Walker could sue the prosecutors.
The appeals court looking at Randa’s decision said: the investigation did NOT chill any First Amendment rights to the extent that prosecutors could be sued. Prosecutors are immune unless their actions violate “clearly established” rights. Even if it turned out that Walker’s First Amendment rights allowed him to coordinate with the organizations, that’s a new point of law, never before defined, and certainly not “clearly established.”
There’s no “this investigation.”
One investigation resulted in criminal convictions. The second, different investigation is the subject of the Randa and Peterson rulings.
Well you can combine or split, but they are called John Doe I and John Doe II. John Doe I secured criminal convictions of aides close to the Governor. It is SOP to take it further to see how high on the ladder this stuff goes.
As for what’s happening: here’s a decent timeline:
If I understand it properly, Peterson refused to issue additional subpenas in Jan 2014, but left the door open for another judge to. Or he left some door open: I’m not sure. Randa ,my designated villain, ordered the investigation closed, evidence returned, copies destroyed etc in April 2014. That more aggressive decision has been overturned.
So if I understand things correctly, the prosecutors will have to come up with something good if they want to get their subpenas.
Speaking generally, I’m not unhappy. Political corruption and a bought and paid for executive branch is not an inevitable aspect of governance, nor are attempts to curb it pointless. Politics was a lot cleaner in the 1970s-1990s than it was during the 1940s - 1950s for example. There were less dealings with paper bags of money. So efforts to squelch future prosecutorial inquiry in favor of anonymous money should be denounced. Randa go home!
While specific and factual information available to the public is noticeably lacking, the political rhetoric from the likes of MSNBC/DNC and dailykos-types continues. Walker was not convicted of any wrong doing in John Doe I. That means Walker is not guilty of any of the claims of John Doe I.
The fact that the Democrat prosecutor created a John Doe II does suggest that this is a purely political prosecutorial over-reach. It appears to me that the Democrat prosecutor is trying to make it illegal for Republicans to talk to Republicans. That’s not going to pass Constitutional muster but it will keep the courts busy and give MSNBC’s Ed Schultz something to whine about.
//Old Rolleyes//
No, the fact that it was overturned by a Republican judge suggests that he is covering up for his cronies. //sarcasm//
Seriously doorhinge, your post borders on paranoia, or maybe projection.
Bricker: "What do you believe is the link between John Doe I and John Doe II? "
I’m not sure how to answer this. Both were pursued by the same investigative team. John Doe I nabbed 5 associates of the Governor. It’s possible that Walker has plausible deniability. But it’s also possible that he’s as guilty as sin. That’s why we have investigations. Like I said, I’m not too unhappy with the Peterson decision, given what I know (which I stress is very little). He essentially told the team that they are going to have to come up with something better if they want to have further subpoenas issued.
You have to be pretty gullible and messed in the head if you think that 5 aides of the Governor can be convicted for corruption, but that the Governor himself shouldn’t be investigated under such circumstances. The John Doe II investigation strikes me as SOP.
I am surprised I didn’t come across a solid piece of investigative journalism on the topic. I probably didn’t search hard enough for it though.
Obviously, the link is the Governor. Of course, its possible all of this stuff just sort of happens around hm by people associated with him, but he himself is innocent. He is sort of like a carrier, a Thypoid Mary who is never directly infected but everyone around her is poxed.
That’s certainly possible. Can’t say it isn’t possible. Gotta admit, its at least possible.
John Doe I concerned events in the county exec office in 2010. It began when Walker’s CoS discovered money missing from a veterans charity.
Two of the convictions came from that. Whether you consider that political corruption or plain old theft is up to you.
Two more convictions were for doing campaign work on county time. Not for Walker, for Lt Gov candidate Brett Davis.
The fifth was a donor who violated campaign finance laws.
They apparently found nothing to link Walker to these actions, otherwise we would have heard about it by now.
John Doe II is about allegedly illegal coordination between Walker’s campaign staff and outside groups during the recalls in '11 and '12.
This is where Judge Peterson, who is overseeing JDII, said they have no evidence of any crime, and what they are investigating is not illegal.
Chisolm claims he started JDII based on evidence found in JDI.
Considering that the two investigations are completely different in terms of time frame, government body involved, and alleged crimes, I am curious as to what that link was. I, too, have some doubts about his motives.
And, don’t worry about Judge Randa. This will be decided in the state courts.
//insert random term here// I’m all in favor of investigations, but the fact that John Doe II hasn’t resulted in a single indictment yet suggests that Chisolm is struggling to prove that his witchhunt (aka John Doe II) might not be worth the paper it’s written on, after all the legal wrangling is done. //insert another random term here//
Since you are highly dubious about the contention that this is a bogus investigation given the 5 convictions secured earlier, it sounds to me like you’re attempting to “project” those convictions on to Walker. Without any proof. Which is the same thing the Democrats, and unions, have been trying to do, unsuccessfully, for several years.
I’m also surprised that there doesn’t seem to be any solid pieces of investigative journalism on this topic. A few of the legal documents have been released and several judges have ruled on specific issues, but the rest of the horseshit seems to be more political spin than fact.
doorhinge: There is a great distinction between a bogus investigation and an investigation that turns nothing up. Just as there is a great distinction between the Peterson and Randa decisions.
Reginald Hobbes: I see a pretty clear link between an aide who breaks campaign finance laws and alleged illegal coordination with Club of Growth front groups. An aide who did the former might very well be aware of the latter. So you look into it.
Sometimes there is smoke without fire. Sometimes there is both, but the fire can’t be proven. And sometimes there is a barely hidden inferno. That’s why we have investigations. And judicial oversight.
Well the Milwaukee Wisconsin Journal Sentinel penned some fairly fact based material. But is was lacking in depth and context, more a wire story than a feature article.
I’m not clear what you are saying here. If you see a clear link, why is it not possible to demonstrate that link, either to a judge or to the public? And how do you know there is a link to illegal coordination by Walker when there is no credible evidence of illegal coordination?
Indeed we do. And the judge overseeing this investigation quashed the subpoenas because the investigators had no credible evidence of wrongdoing by Walker.
The second investigation appears to be bogus, given that they had no evidence of wrongdoing in the first place.
Perhaps I wasn’t clear. But “Pretty clear link” I mean “Mind bogglingly obvious basis for further investigation.”
Let’s take a look at a couple of Walker’s criminal associates that were sent to prison or convicted. From the Milwaukee Wisconsin Journal Sentinel: [INDENT]Kelly Rindfleisch, who worked for Walker in the county executive’s office in 2010, was sentenced Nov. 19 to six months in jail for campaign fundraising at the courthouse using a secret email system installed there.
Darlene Wink, Walker’s constituent services coordinator at the county, pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors for doing campaign work while on the county clock.
In 2011, Gardner, president and chief executive officer of Wisconsin & Southern Railroad Co., was sentenced to two years of probation for violating state campaign finance laws. He pleaded guilty to exceeding campaign contribution limits in support of Walker and laundering additional campaign contributions through employees and associates. [/INDENT] You have to be pretty deep in the tank to believe that further investigation of the Governor is inappropriate under such circumstances. That doesn’t mean the Governor is guilty; that doesn’t mean anything will be discovered. It means the Governor is being investigated by a prosecutor with a solid track record of uncovering public corruption.
Not only am I in favor of investigations, I’m also in favor of investigations of investigations. It appears that John Doe II is currently under going several legal challenges (sorta like an investigation) to determine if prosecutors can even proceed with John Doe II. There’s a possibility that Chisolm won’t be able to issue any subpoenas under John Doe II.
It’s my understanding that subpoenas stopped flowing in Jan 2014. Which I noted upthread is ok with me. And to be clear, by “Further investigation”, I meant, “Initiating John Doe II”. Whether the investigation should have continued beyond Jan 2014 is something that I’m agnostic about.
There’s another aspect. Once an investigation of a high level politician begins, it can be difficult to put on the brakes. If you’re an ambitious prosecutor, you might fear appearing either as an incompetent or as a crony. And OBTW yes, cronyism can cross party lines in certain states (eg NJ). So judicial oversight is a good thing. It’s part of the process.
Look, the evidence is under wraps, so I’m trying to be a little circumspect; I’m trying not to draw conclusions that go beyond the evidence. I’m just a reporter for the SDMB. Salt of the earth: that’s me.
Walker was investigated, in JD I. No charges filed.
As a general principle, I am not against further investigation.
Am I gullible, messed in the head, and deep in the tank if I’m skeptical of the basis for the second investigation?
That the first one somehow turned up evidence of future crimes?
I don’t know: I haven’t read your argument. All I’ve seen is a gullible presentation of a right wing website article complete with anonymous sources and a studied refusal to interview parties on more than one side of the case. Plus a dose of hysteria: they refer to “pre-dawn paramilitary style raids”.
Paramilitary? Really? I mean you can make such empty assertions, provided you have an incredibly credulous readership.
Modern conservatives gave up on critical thinking a long time ago. I blame the education system.
