Yet Walker claims he has been told (by whom no one knows) that he is not part of the investigation. And we know that no one from his formal campaign team has been charged.
So why the fund?
To get some answers, Tom Barrett went to the Government Accountability Board to find out what they told Walker. And there they ran into a snag (emphasis mine):
State law allows Walker to create a criminal defense fund only if he is under investigation, his campaign is under investigation or agents of his campaign are under investigation, said Kevin Kennedy, director of the state Government Accountability Board.So, Barrett wrote a letter to the only person who could answer his questions, Scott Walker. The letter in its entirety:
Walker has said he created the fund after consulting with the accountability board, which oversees state elections and ethics laws. Kennedy said Tuesday he could not comment on whether any advice was given because of secrecy provisions in state law.
Such advice can be disclosed only with the consent of the person or campaign who sought the advice, Kennedy said.
May 15, 2012Walker did not respond to Barrett's letter, but Ciara Matthews, Walker's spokeswoman, asked reporters if they would like blue cheese or ranch dressing with their hot wings.
Gov. Walker
Campaign Office Location Undisclosed
Gov. Walker:
For several weeks, the general public has asked you to identify the legal authority and justification for the creation of your legal defense fund surrounding the investigation, arrest and/or indictment of six of your associates in the ongoing John Doe probe into your time as Milwaukee County Executive.
The question has generated increased interest in the wake of news that you recently transferred $60,000 from your campaign account to your legal defense fund. And Wisconsin statute says clearly that creation of such a fund is allowable only for those officials who are being investigated for or charged with a violation of campaign finance laws or prohibited election practices.
Thus far you have declined to address the issue for the people of Wisconsin. Yet late Monday afternoon, the Government Accountability Board asserted that state law prevents the public disclosure of information regarding the advisory opinion that allowed the creation of a legal defense – unless the person who requested that advisory opinion gives his or her explicit consent.
This means that the decision to disclose information about the creation of your legal defense fund rests squarely with you. The people of Wisconsin deserve to know the truth about your involvement in this investigation, and the compelling public interest for this information to be released is paramount. Without full disclosure, the people of Wisconsin will continue to wonder if their governor is breaking the law.
At various points throughout this investigation, you have dismissed calls for full disclosure of why and how you were granted permission to create a legal defense fund as political stunts and distractions. Yet there is no better way to finally put these questions to rest than to share with the public all information regarding the advisory opinion you received from GAB that allowed you to create your legal defense fund.
In the interests of transparency and openness, the people of Wisconsin urge you to release this information immediately.
Thank you
Tom Barrett
My question is: Why am I always hearing Tim Russell's name when people talk about the legal uncooperative fund? I'm sure if Walker doesn't want to answer this one either, the Walkergate prosecutors will.
Posts
Matthews sounds real mature.
ReplyDeletePromises, promises. If Barrett and/or the DPW have anything, even rumors, it's time to get them out there. The DPW is not convincing anyone (I should say independents) that Walker is a scumbag, and the GOP faithful are laughing at us.
ReplyDeleteDon't concern yourself about the GOP's false laughter of bravado. They know deep down that their Beloved Leader is in a heap of trouble.
DeleteBesides, we already know that Walker is involved in the scandal. Just be patient, my friend.
Yeah, I know they're worried (my connections, who laughed when I talked about this last year, aren't laughing now.) But that's the cognoscenti. The people who vote have to know who and what Walker is for Walkergate to matter where it counts - in the voting booth. I'm keeping the faith.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I've seen and heard up north and other places outstate, they are more aware than what you might believe. Once you get past that red blob of delusion known as Waukesha, Washington and Dodge Counties, they know more than people think.
DeleteLink to when Walker said that he is not being investigated?
ReplyDeleteAll that I have seen from him (Hooters Mathews said otherwise, but she is an idjit) is saying that he has not been told that he is being investigated.
That is quite different.
You may have to say it out loud or diagram the sentences to see the difference (seriously), but the difference is there, and it's important.
That's good to know, capp. I'm working GOTV with the 'low information' voters in the City of Milwaukee. Hard to see past getting those 108,738 or so folks to be voters, not victims. As for the folks in my neck o' the woods, they care about property taxes, RTW and vouchers so they can send their kids to the John Birch indoctrination camps, otherwise known as the Brookfield Christian Academy, Christian Heritage School and the grandaddy of them all, the Brookfield Academy. Those folks could care less if Walker's a scumbag - as long as he gets the job done.
ReplyDeleteStay strong. Three more weeks to go and then we reclaim our state!
DeleteI feel Walker thinks he is above the law. He has been lying to congress and the people of Wisconsin. If this was the average American, they would already be apprehended. Why is Walker getting away with dodging these issues. Why is he above the law? Why can't the D.A. move forward? We need justice to be served!
ReplyDeleteOK, that's funny!:
ReplyDeleteWalker did not respond to Barrett's letter, but Ciara Matthews, Walker's spokeswoman, asked reporters if they would like blue cheese or ranch dressing with their hot wings.
I'm kind of waiting for somebody to bring up the likelihood that Walker is looking at a minimum of six Conspiracy to commit Misconduct in Public Office charges.
ReplyDeleteA quick look at the statutes, a review of who was mentioned in the complaints, a review of Wink's plea deal, and a review of who has been given immunity make it clear that these charges are being considered. They also, to a lesser degree, indicate that there may be conspiracy charges related to real estate (but this is less concrete, as no charges have been filed on that front).
http://www.vanwagnerwood.com/cm/custom/Conspiracy.asp
http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/939/II/31
It's been discussed pretty thoroughly on a previous thread:
http://cognidissidence.blogspot.com/2012/05/walkergate-winkei-connection.html