Thursday, April 12, 2012

Does Van Hollen Want To Be Governor?

Last night, I wrote about the panic setting in amongst the Walker supporters.  The extremists are desperate enough to attack the integrity of the Walkergate investigation and of the fine people that work in the Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office.

They even went so far as to say that Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen should step in and take over the investigation for no reason than other than they don't know how to deal with the fact that things don't look good for Scott Walker.

Van Hollen chose not to get involved and issued a quick response saying as much.

But the reasons for Van Hollen's refusal weren't clear, as I pointed out:
According to Van Hollen, he states he doesn't have the authority to take a case away from an elected county district attorney.  But that is pretty much what he did with the trial of Rory Kuenzi, a guy from Waupaca County who was suspected of killing another young man in a drunk driving hit and run.

DA Chisolm reports that Van Hollen's department had originally been involved with the Walkergate investigation and helped with the conviction of railroad tycoon William Gardner.  Chisolm states that the state pulled out when the investigation started going after Walker's people because Van Hollen represents Walker and did not want to be in embroiled in a conflict of interest.

Lisa Kaiser, of the Shepherd Express, comes up with a number of valid points including being afraid of what will be discovered during the investigation in general and of angering the Republican machine.  Kaiser also points out that the case regarding Brian Pierick, who is facing child enticement charges, could be a major embarrassment for Van Hollen.  It was Van Hollen's agency that OKed the hiring of Pierick to work with kids.
But there is one reason that I failed to look at.

Is it possible that Van Hollen wants to be governor himself?  So much so that he would let Walker be fed to the wolves without raising a finger to stop it?

Think about it.

Van Hollen, per Chisolm, had at one time been involved with the John Doe, and had a chance to see a lot of the evidence they have uncovered up to that time.  While he might not be current on all of findings of the Walkergate investigation, he has enough skills as a lawyer and is savvy enough as a politician to know that Walker is in deep trouble.

So Van Hollen claims that he can't get involved and watches Walker go down in cuffs.  Along with the dirty politics and low popularity levels of people like the Fitzie boys, the recalls, the overreaching and all the other malfeasance that has been happening, the Republican Party will be in shambles and politically crippled for a long time.

That is, unless a law and order, dyed in the wool Republican like Van Hollen and offers to lead the Republicans out of their downward spiral.

And word has it that Van Hollen is salivating at the thought of being governor.

Not that Van Hollen would have much popularity either, given his own poor track record with the gun law fiasco, defending the illegal gerrymandering and the despicable secrecy, taking part in the war on health care reform and the war on workers.

I do have to admit feeling schadenfreude at the thought of these dishonorable reprobate Republicans turning on each other as they prepare to fall apart completely.


  1. In following the Doyle pathway to the WI governor's mansion. He just needs a sweater vest.

  2. Why do you keep showing him in the King Tut outfit? Is that an inside joke?

  3. He used to be the head of the Masonic Lodge in Wisconsin. His politicizing of this position is one reason why I am no longer an active Mason. The Masonic Lodge, before people start attacking it, is a fraternity that helps a ton in local communities.

  4. Somebody smarter than me could draw out an "Al Haig" analogy here.

  5. Oh, I'm sorry, I thought the picture had been photo shopped or was some ceremonial Attorney General outfit. Thank-you, I didn't know they wore that outfit, although it is quite an old order, so it makes sense that they would have to wear something special. Kind of like the Knights of Columbus with their plumed hats or the Shriners with their hats. Thanks for the explanation, I didn't mean to be rude to the Masons.

    1. I didn't mean to be rude to the AG either,
      another reason he might not want to get involved is he just wants to survive the whole deal and stay in as AG. He seems to like the job, when I have seen him interviewed. But what the heck do I know?