Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Walkergate: Sidebars

On Monday, the news broke that there was a second John Doe investigation underway regarding "a burgeoning, secret investigation into a wide variety of state issues, including possible campaign violations during the recent recall elections."

Precious little information came out about Walkergate V.2.0, except this:
It appears the state-related case opened in February 2012, meaning it was active at the same
time as the one focusing on Walker's county aides.

However, several sources said they became aware of the newer probe only in the past month and that much of the recent activity has taken place in Madison.

Sources familiar with the probe told the Journal Sentinel that it was scrutinizing a wide variety of state-related issues, including the recall races. Sources suggested the probe is looking at a current legislative leader and the governor's contest.

"This is activity that occurred since the 2010 election," said a source.
That leaves more open possibilities than it rules anything out.

On Tuesday, more news came out on the ongoing Walkergate.  That news was either no one knew about it or no one was talking (emphasis mine):
Gov. Scott Walker won't say whether he, his attorneys or any staff members have been contacted in a growing, secret criminal investigation into a variety of state issues.

Pressed three times on the matter, Walker said Monday that he wouldn't be distracted by questions on the John Doe investigation, which he called a "sidebar issue."

"In terms of a lot of the questions regarding that issue, I really don't have a lot to say," Walker said during a visit to Beechwood Sales and Service in New Berlin. "I'm going to stay focused, as I am today, on helping the people of this state create more jobs, create more opportunity and balance the budget, as we have."

Walker added that he didn't want to get "pulled into" a discussion of the John Doe because of its dicey secrecy rules. A John Doe probe allows prosecutors to gather evidence and compel testimony in secret.

"It doesn't make sense to be involved with that," he said.
The article went on to say that Mayor Tom Barrett and State Representative Robin Vos claiming they knew nothing about the investigation. However, when attention was turned to State Senator Scott Fitzgerald, the tune changed again (once more, emphasis mine):
Also refusing to answer questions about the secret investigation was Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald.

Fitzgerald, who typically handles reporters’ questions head-on, declined several times on Monday to say whether he knew anything about a John Doe investigation or had appeared before it.

“I can’t comment on it,” said the Juneau Republican.
While the non-comments from Walker and Fitzgerald might not seem a lot, especially as they are presented in the article, they actually speak volumes.

We learned from the original Walkergate investigation that if this had nothing to do with them, they would be free to talk their fool heads off.  The only time a person is not allowed to speak about a John Doe investigation is if they are the subject of the investigation or if they are involved as a witness.

The fact that they are saying they can't comment about it or are concerned about "dicey secrecy rules" would indicate that they could very well be involved in it.

As I pondered on the little we do know about the investigation and consulted with a few wise souls, there are a few areas that come into mind which might prove to be part of the investigation (or at least should be).

Walkergate West

One of these would fit perfectly into what Dan Bice wrote.  It occurred in Madison after the election and had to do with Walker.  In fact, when I originally wrote about it, I dubbed it Walkergate West:
In regards to Walkergate West, I wrote:
However, Graeme Zielinski, the Communication Director for the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, said that they have heard from lobbyists who work with both parties that they found it odd that instead of going through normal channels, they were being directed to contact Keith Gilkes, Walker's then Chief of Staff, using his email address from his consultancy group.

Zielinski also stated that there is reason to believe, just like what Walker did in Milwaukee County, his top advisors in the Department of Administration and cabinet members were privy to this.

That would go a long way to why he hasn't purged Cullen Werwie or Brett Davis from his administration.

This would also make sense given Walker's propensity to do politicking in office (see the phony David Koch phone call) and all the pay for play action that was going on, with tax giveaways, political appointees like Brian Deschane, sweetheart contracts and other sordid affairs like the attempted mining bill.
Scott Wittkopf, using an interview by Dan Bice and some of his own research, was able to flesh this out a little bit:
The most obvious connection to Walker staffers in Milwaukee County and current Walker staff in Madison is obvious – the possibility that campaigning is being conducted on the taxpayer dime. Recent emails from high level Walker staff regarding the mining bill drafting process may confirm that this type of activity is occurring, and thus confirm Bice’s “unconfirmed rumors.”

An email from then – Walker Chief of Staff Keith Gilkes pgs 11-12 of the document*) on January 30, 2011 from his Champion Group email to his new government email account references campaign fundraising to a lobbyist for Gogebic Taconite.

The email is follow-up on contact information for Marc Holtzman, a well-known GOP and conservative supporter and politician from Colorado, as well as Larry Wolk. Wolk is head of “Correctional Healthcare Companies,” heavily involved in nationwide privatization of state correctional facilities’ healthcare systems.

The email from Wolk to lobbyist Rogowski, then forwarded to Gilkes, refers to “Scott and Keith” (Walker and Gilkes, respectively), and states:
“Hopefully he will be interested in helping and/or contributing to Scott’s campaign…let me know if you hear anything more from Milwaukee County and anything else we can do to help.”
I have no doubt that what Wittkopf wrote is true. Just as I have no doubt that this is just the very tippy top of the iceberg. 
As I pointed out, this would fit in with the modus operandi that we saw from Team Walker when Walker was still county executive. And even though Walker knew he and his crew were under investigation, Walker is asocial enough to think he wasn't doing anything wrong and so there was no need for him to actually follow the law.

What is really ironic about this is that the court hearing regarding the tragedy at O'Donnell Park is underway this week.  The trial includes the emails that Walker's campaign head, Gilkes, shared with Walker's county staff, including Kelly Rindfleisch, who is also having her appeal heard.

Holy tangled webs, Batman!  That alone has got to be playing hell with Walker's ulcers.

All Contributions-cfis-xlsm

The next item of interest would bring in Fitzgerald.

From the transcripts brought up by Kelly Rindfleisch's trial was this wee tiny blurb:

Click on image to embiggen
As I wrote at the time:
Ladies and gentlemen, may I introduce you to one of the smoking guns.

Judi Rhodes, aka Judi Rhodes-Engels, is someone else we know.  She is the Harley Davidson-riding GOP operative that specializes in raising funds for State Senator Scott Fitzgerald.  Rhodes sent a spreadsheet named "All Contributions-cfis-xlsm" to Rindfleisch, on what would be normally considered a work day during normal work hours. 

This means not only was Walker having county staff running his campaign and doing fundraising on county time, and not only were the same staff coordinating things with the Davis campaign, but also was coordinating with WISGOP staff, under the leadership of State Senator Scott Fitzgerald.  How was this arrangement approved and by whom?


Does anyone, honestly believe that Scott Walker, Brett Davis, Scott Fitzgerald and maybe even Reince Priebus, didn't know about any of this nor gave their blessings to it?
this would show collusion between Walker's campaign, Walker's county staff, Fitzgerald's campaign and WISGOP, which is most definitely a big no-no.

Caucus Scandal circa 2011

Sticking with the Fitzgerald, Judith Rhodes Engels and collusion theme, I would turn the gentle reader's attention to some of the discoveries to come from the gerrymandering scandal.

In this scenario, we find that staffers for Fitzgerald and his brother, former State Representative Jeff Fitzgerald and a staffer from Congressman Paul Ryan were sharing emails on their private emails regarding the gerrymandering.

Also included in these emails was Rhodes-Engels, Fitzgerald's fundraiser.

So we have legislative aides doing state business using private emails.  Were they trying to avoid open records requests?  Add to that, there was at least one  political operative involved in state business.

What could possibly go wrong?

Just this:
Look at the first line of this missive:
To keep all of us in the loop at the staff level, I want to share with you the feedback I received from Congressman Ryan regarding the conversation he had this morning with the Speaker and the Majority Leader.
Well, that clarifies that they are doing this as staffers. But it also highlights the fact that they are doing so on private emails and with a political operative, Rhodes-Engels, in their midst.

Keep in mind that Rhodes-Engels has been discussed here before. She was first introduced when she pretended to be just a normal Milwaukee County-residing, Harley-riding woman who supported Scott Walker and went along for his campaign motorcycle ride. Her name also came up in Walkergate in that she shared Scott Fitzgerald's campaign donor database with Kelly Rindfleisch so that Rindfleisch could help raise funds for Walker and Brett Davis, Walker's choice for Lieutenant Governor. 

I have also become aware of the fact that she has often been witnessed to be in Scott Fitzgerald's office in the Capitol, which is a distinct no-no.

Now we find her involved with the gerrymandering scheme.

Was she involved in order to glean information to be used in fundraising for the inevitable court fights? Was she there to give insight on the possible political ramifications? Or is she simply a Jill-of-all-trades and used interchangeably between legislative and political business?
Oh, and Rhodes-Engels was involved in the first caucus scandal, so she really, really ought to have known better.

Koch-a Collusion

While pulling up the information for the above sections, it did remind me of one other well-known incident of obvious collusion....the time that Walker was talking to "David Koch."  Specifically, this part of that conversation:
WALKER: The other thing is more long term and that is after this, um, you know, the coming days and weeks and months ahead, particularly in some of these more swing areas, a lot of these guys are gonna need, they don’t necessarily need ads for them but they ‘re going to need a message out reinforcing why this was a good thing to do for the economy a good thing to do for the state so the extent that message is out over and over again, that’s obviously, that’s obviously a good thing.
Now, obviously, that was not the real David Koch. Not being a lawyer, I have no idea if this would be a prosecutable offense.

But think about this. While that David Koch was a fake, do you think that Walker has never had a similar conversation with the real one?

Also, let us not forget in addition to the Kochs, there are the groups like the Bradley Foundation (whose chair is Michael Grebe, Walker's campaign chair), the Sam Adams Alliance and all of their front groups like MacIver Institute, Wisconsin Reporter and Media Trackers.

Does anyone seriously believe that there was no cooperation, coercion and collusion between these groups, the campaigns of Walker and the other Republicans who were being recalled?


There are just a few of the top things that might or might no be part of the new Walkergate investigation.  With all of the corruption we've seen in this state in the past three years, this is by no means the end of all the possibilities.  But it is a place to start.

I have a feeling that the next few weeks and months are going to be interesting.


  1. One wonders if the lawsuit to get the emails from the secret server back to Milwaukee County may have served as catalyst for leaking Doe 2.0. Explaining why they were still sealed would have blown the cover.

  2. Is this why the 1st John Doe was stopped??? Maybe the FBI had to much on ole Scooter that they were waiting for much more to hang the GOP of This great state of Wisconsin!!!!!

  3. I don't know why you promote the myth that this is John Doe II which implies something new or distinct and separate from the Milwaukee County probe.

    There is absolutely no evidence/info to suggest this -- dan bice is not on-the-level and is just another journal communcations hack that plays the role of a "watchdog" -- he certainly is NOT!

    Since I know you have always considered yourself the "go to" guy here (or at least Simpson proclaims that), you are sincerely interested and want to inform the public.

    Here's what we know -- I won't provide links as your posts document almost all stated here:

    1. It was the FBI that broke down doors and seized computers, not Milwaukee County and/or state folks. This was NOT done because, as the media tried to deceive you, outside expertise was needed. This was done because the feds have had some interest in this case for quite some time now (years).

    2. dan bice was catapulting some powerful propaganda when he proclaimed the probe "dead as a doornail". No wonder he is willing to position himself as the go-to guy now.

    3. The current investigation is NOT new and it is connected to the Milwaukee County investigation that was "closed" -- what we don't know is why it was "closed" when the prosecutions PowerPoint in another conviction clearly outlined there were more crimes higher up.

    4. It is newsworthy that a former U.S. Attorney with ties to the republicans is not involved with a walker-investigation.

    5. We know its about walker, if not, he wouldn't be making claims that it is all about "politics".

    6. There are credible reports that, despite public proclaimations and right-wing media echo-chamber reports to the contrary, walker's legal defense fund was actually NEVER closed.

    7. Walker still has his legal team active -- we know what that means -- stonewalling and delaying.

    8. The recall can be demonstrated to be stolen -- but I will not post that here -- wisconsin's media echo-chamber is complicite with walker's assent to power, including providing cover for obviously stolen/fradulent election results in the Badger State over the past several years (Van Hollen, in 2006 and his opponent that year got, in total, more votes assigned to them than the total number of ballots cast! This is IMPOSSIBLE, but this is also the norm in walkersha.

    1. Anonymous at 6:59 AM wrote:
      "Van Hollen, in 2006 and his opponent that year got, in total, more votes assigned to them than the total number of ballots cast!"

      Check votes in that election:

      Doyle/Green Gubernatorial race had 2,161,700 total votes

      Van Hollen/Falk Attorney General race 2,124,467 total votes

      Therefore your claim does not stand up to scrutiny.

      Why should we believe the rest of your claims?

      I certainly see Scott Walker as the Wisconsin version of Rod Blagojevich. But I also know how disinformation can cause a great deal of confusion and misdirection.

    2. Anonymous October 23, 2013 at 8:29--

      Please read the comments section of the article linked below. in particular the comments of Anonymous October 21, 2013 at 10:47 AM.

    3. I am Anonymous at 8:29

      CJ, the comments by Anonymous at 10:47 on 10/21/13 made me scratch my head. I dug into Richard Charnin’s posts and data, but could not make heads or tails out of it. It looks like the information was presented in a way to make it next to impossible to evaluate, and thus you have to take his word for what it means.

      As for Anonymous at 6:59, disinformation will contain truth and distortions. We simply do not know which is which, which makes disinformation so dangerous. I was struck at how Anon 6:59 was so thoroughly knowledgeable about John Doe details, for example Bice reporting in October 2012 a source claiming John Doe was “dead as a doornail.” Anon 6:59 reminds me of the right wing disinformation artists active during the Watergate/Starr investigations. This all makes me think Republicans are worried where the Federal John Doe investigation is heading.

      I have been reading That information is far more plausible with strong sourcing. I especially enjoyed Larry Zin’s deposition where he was asked for details to justify his voter machine company gouging Wisconsin municipalities when they need to fulfill open record requests for actual vote tallies.

    4. I have been following the and read the deposition too. Somtimes it's very easy to tell when an operative posts, other times, not. I think the bigger story on FreeWI is the reliability of electronic voting machines and tallying. Walker is the big fish in WI, but I suspect this goes really deep and wide. Van Hollen is really gone south to protect Vukimir's records from the public. And the story has pretty much been scrubbed from the press.

    5. You two are NUTS -- Dennis Kerns (free Wisconsin) writes about Richard Charnin -- actually was talking about writing a book with him.

      The two have spent hours talking through Charnin's analysis -- Richard is a "math guy" and Kern has a different perspective.

      The work well together -- but you 2 would rather flame one at the expense of the other!

    6. I am Anon @ 8:29 AM, 9:44 AM and 12:46 PM. I don’t think I’m nuts. I know I wasn’t lying.

      I may have been wrong about Anon @ 6:59 AM and Richard Charnin. But I just don’t know. The evidence is too complex. I have not been able to dig as deep as is necessary to discern the truth.

      Early this morning I looked at GAB’s 2006 general election voter tallies and saw a contradiction with Anon @ 6:59 AM’s claim. What I was not aware this morning was the discrepancy posted by Waukesha County. So I jumped to conclusions I should not have. For that I apologize.

      There is a lot of speculation about what John Doe 2 is about. There are too many apparent crimes that have not been punished and probably not even investigated. Information about John Doe 2 is vague, opening up a hornets nest for speculation.

      We know Republicans will attack with disinformation if they feel this battle has to be fought in the court of public opinion. They want to obfuscate and discredit credible news outlets by fooling them with false information that they then publish.

      With that in mind, please everyone making a claim. Please link to supporting evidence. This is not a minor detail. We need to know what you know. Then we can decide how valid the claim is.

  4. Some interesting reading here too:

  5. Anon 8:29 is a liar -- here's a mainstream media report and you can use the "tubes" and the "google" to source it back to others.

    Republican J.B. Van Hollen and Democrat Kathleen Falk were listed as having 17,000 more votes than the number of ballots cast – and the Democrats said the error might have cost Falk the election.

    Capper has done some good work here and is obviously enthusiastic about pursuing this story -- my point above (yes, I am the anon that 8:29 challenges with bold-face lies) is that it may be helpful to NOT fall into the media narrative that this is "John Doe" II.

    What we do know, and capper has blogged about this as-much-or-more-so than anyone, is that NONE of the current investigation is new.

    1. I am Anon @ 8:29. When Anon @ 11:02 called me a “liar,” I smiled because I knew I posted verifiable data.

      The claim by Anon @ 6:59 traces back to this Daily Kos post:

      The source for the claim is:
      This says Waukesha County had 156,804 ballots cast in the November 2006 General Election.

      Now let’s go to
      On page 96, it says Waukesha County vote totals were 177,424, a discrepancy with the Waukesha County document of 20,620 votes.

      The April 2011 Daily Kos post then says Waukesha County posted an update at
      But today that link does not have 2006 results.

      So all this may mean that neither myself nor Anon @ 6:59 are liars.

      It does mean counting votes in Wisconsin, especially Waukesha County, is F-ed Up.

    2. I'd like to suggest that this blog begin a "sidebar post" on this very narrow but important topic. If these guys are ever perpwalked wouldn't it be a good thing to have had the basic facts all laid out here in advance? a I am familiar with it, and haven't commented recently on it yet. Lets have it out in in a constructive fashion in an appropriate place.

  6. Now that journal communications and lee enterprises (state journal for those that don't know) are proclaiming that emails for Rindfliesch's appeal (and other evidence) needs to be made public, it is reasonable to question their motives.

    Kelly's initial defense was that she had lifetime immunity to commit crimes in politics -- evidenlty for perpetuity.

    Releasing evidence that is likely being used by the ongoing John Doe (note: I didn't call it II) would then be used by walker (and repug) lawyers as contaminating the investigation or ability to find a jury -- in walker's Wisconsin and the dysfuctional state Supreme Court -- this likely would fly.

    Are the major propaganda outlets in Wisconsin honkin' from behind to be helpful?

    I don't know -- but no one should trust anyone that is associated with lee enterprises and journal communications -- especially when they claim to be "journalists".

    CJ -- Free Wiscosnin undertands Richard Charnin's work (and has blogged about it -- he has directly collaborated with Richard Charnin to make sure he understands the analysis).

    So it is more than curious that you are a "Free Wisconsin" fan but do not know that HE ENTIRELY SUPPORTS RICHARD CHARNIN'S ANALYSIS

    1. I didn't say I was a fan. That is your assumption. I said I follow the blog. I read news/blogs from both sides. For me it's the best way to get a better handle on what is being reported. Everyone uses some type of filter or slant. Reading across the spectrum helps me fill in the blanks.

    2. Anon, you said: "“So it is more than curious that you are a "Free Wisconsin" fan but do not know that HE ENTIRELY SUPPORTS RICHARD CHARNIN'S ANALYSIS”

      I am not sure I understand what you are trying to say or it's intent. I am obviously missing something in the written word. Could you please clarify your statement for me? Thanks.

    3. Not your monkey -- you disrespect Richard and correctly identify a good Wisconsin blogger that supports and collaborates Charnin

    4. Anon October 23, 2013 at 6:42 PM- Thanks for the non-clarity. I will not further your thread. Good day.

    5. Thanks for gettin' out of here and letting the folks with brains exchange real ideas without whiners and complainers that did not read the original post and are not able to use "the google".

  7. Great summary, Capper. The GTAC connections make Honadel's "out of nowhere" resignation all the more suspicious. I doubt that United Sportsmen weren't the only group some budget initiative was steered to.

    Keep an eye out for other interesting resignations from Walker staff and other GOPs in coming weeks. Could be a good tipoff

    1. I agree Jake. I would also look closely at the WEDC for so many reasons.

  8. And the repugs delaying changes in local control over environmental legislation is interersting too.

    If the ONGOING John Doe investigation (no, it is not new nor a second version as anon(s) point out) are looking at the sleezy process that was the mining bill, the now isn't the time for repugs to complete that pay-to-play!

    But this is all speculation -- saw Suder yesterday in Madison -- he slinked away, very odd -- usually he is all "pro-walker" and even in-your-face about it.

    Believe-it-or-not, Suder directly told me in fall 2012 when there was much speculation here about a "shoe dropping" in the walker criminal cabal:


    Might be the only honest thing he has said for years.

    1. And, we know that if Suder is going to prison (not jail), then that means that Robin Vos will be going there as well.

  9. 1) JD1 did close. It was overseen by Retired Appeals Court Judge Neal Nettesheim. It was managed Milwaukee District Attorney John Chisholm, w/ prosecutions led by ADA Bruce Landgraf. The closure order was signed on 21FEB2013.

    2) The closure order specifically states that the original John Doe (JD1) was initiated on 05MAY2010. It also states that the SCOPE of JD1 was enlarged as more evidence was collected (JD1 was started to investigate Wink's illegal use of county property, then enlarged to look into illegal campaign contributions, then embezzlement, and child enticement).

    3) JD2 is being overseen by Circuit Judge Barbara A. Kluka. It was initiated by ADA Bruce Landgraf (the prosecutor from JD1). Prosecutions are being led by special prosecutor Francis Schmitz (note - not a DA/ADA).

    4) JD2 is following up on a number of leads turned up by JD1. NOTE - previous leads found during JD1 resulted in JD1's scope expanding (see #2). For some reason, these leads were so different that, instead of expanding JD1's scope again, they started JD2 AND assigned a SPECIAL PROSECUTOR (not an elected DA or an employee thereof), not to mention picked a different judge.

    Q) What kind of leads would result in the creation of a new JD instead of expanding JD1? My thoughts:

    A1) JD1 exposed crimes outside of Milwaukee County, thus encouraging a separate investigation for out of county crimes. The only reason this strikes me as odd is because Pierick was busted for his crimes in Waukesha (I think) and there was the UNKNOWN guy who Landgraf asked Waukesha to prosecute (they said his crimes were just mistakes and he didn't mean any harm). So, prior experience shows that JD1's leads outside of Milwaukee County didn't require a different investigation.

    A2) JD1 uncovered a real nest of political crime reaching up to the senate leader and governor. DA Chisholm understands that any further prosecution of such leads by an elected democrat DA from Milwaukee, under the guise of JD1 (which has been criticized as being political and has focused on political appointees/staff), would potentially appear political and risk the appearance of conflict of interest. Thus, Chisholm asks Landgraf (not elected) to start a different case with a special prosecutor (who has GOP ties and isn't elected) with a completely different judge. Thus, giving maximum credibility to a politically hot case. This is my hope.

    1. I'd also like to point out:

      1) Nobody has been given immunity under JD2
      2) No reports of FBI involvement/seizure of property
      3) No other all (and it's been going on since FEB2012)

      Q) What hasn't there been any immunity granted in such a wide ranging case and why haven't we heard anything about it?

      A) If this is really related to JD1, perhaps all the immunities and evidence they needed to build the foundation of the case were collected under the auspices of JD1. Perhaps testimony from those immunities is being applied to JD2.

      I don't know if that can be the case, but it would explain the lack of immunities or any other info on JD2 (especially considering how wide ranging it is supposed to be).

    2. Also, on the question regarding why is there now a special prosecutor instead of the DA/ADA doing it?

      "A special prosecutor generally is a lawyer from outside the government appointed by an attorney general or, in the United States, by Congress to investigate a government official for misconduct while in office. A reasoning for such an appointment is that the governmental branch or agency may have political connections to those it might be asked to investigate. Inherently, this creates a conflict of interest and a solution is to have someone from outside the department lead the investigation."

      You catch that?
      " investigate a government official for misconduct while in office..."

    3. Anonymous 6:18


      This was the FEDS, not Milwaukee County -- so someone else IS looking at that (even if it was shared with Milwaukee County which it most-likely WAS NOT).

      The lie that bice and others want you to believe is that Milwaukee County was incapable of doing computer forensic investigations -- ABSOLUTE BS!

      The FBI was there for a reason and it WAS NOT for the Milwaukee County John Doe probe.

      Capper never posts here as anonymous, does he?

      It is odd that he hasn't chimed in this thread.

    4. No, I don't post anonymously.

      But to the issue at hand, these are two separate investigations, with this one stemming off the first one. The reason for the break is obvious. Chisholm was compromised and was not able to continue the investigation without endangering it. It might have to do with the targets, it might have to do with the crimes, or both.

      The Feds were only involved because Attorney General Good Hair didn't want to get involved. He knew this was toxic. Also, Dane Co. Sheriff Deputies were involved on the raid on Archer's house. Another hint as to why they had to split off the secondary investigation.

      While anything that comes from MJS should be regarded with a healthy dose of skepticism, Bice isn't that bad. And I've been able to independently confirm almost all of the things he's reported.

    5. Capper,

      Although I believe you to be correct, can you elaborate on why you believe, " Chisholm was compromised and was not able to continue the investigation without endangering it..."?

      From everything I've read, he was leading a pretty solid investigation with very few leaks. If I had to wager, I'd say the fact that special prosecutors are needed for sitting elected officials and the fact that he was an elected D were his only two downfalls. Thoughts?

    6. AnonymousOctober 24, 2013 at 3:12 PM- My interpretation of why capper thought Chisholm was compromised was mainly because as you said he was an elected offical and was a Democrat. So in order for an investigation to continue, he had to pass the torch.

    7. That's the only thing I can think of as well. The only other intriguing questions are:

      1) Why have these sources decided to mention this now? 1.75 years is a long to go, especially if this is piggybacking on JD1.

      2) Should we understand that any potential charges against Walker from JD1 will not be pursued and any pending charges would be related to his time as governor?

      But really, why now? Why not a few months ago or closer to the election cycle? Bice mentions at least two sources....

    8. Well, it's not like the Republicans were going to brag about it. Furthermore, everyone's attention was on JD1, so it would be easy for JD2 to go unnoticed.

      That said, I did write about a possible federal investigation and the Madison involvement. The prosecutor in JD2 was involved with the feds, although she is not acting as an US Attorney in this matter, apparently.

  10. Anonymous -- 12:27

    Absolutely no one here proclaims the Milwaukee John Doe probe did not close -- but it did not actually END either.

    The scope is wider than Milwaukee -- Capper himself was blogging about a Madison version shortly after the recall.

    The scope is beyond Milwaukee County -- and it could actually be federal -- dan bice does not actually directly idenify this as a state probe.

    dan bice will never address the fact that the FBI broke down a door and seized computers from Cindy Archer -- this means feds were involved.

    And their probes are not leaked to journal communications hacks.

    Special prosecutor would imply GRAND JURY investigation -- that may mean that the investigation even reaches beyond Wisconsin.

    I be the koch brothers are lawyerin' up. In some other states, DOJ (Feds) are conducting investigations.

    But then again, Obama's DOJ knows better than to leak to the local right-wing echo chamber.

    1. The federal side is intriguing. Could this be related to campaign donations across state lines? Or do the feds HAVE to do it because Van Hollen stonewalled on the investigation (or may have been implicated himself).

      Whole lotta questions that need to be answered in the coming months. It's pointing a direction, but it hasn't been specified enough yet.

    2. I think that the feds can get involved when federal grant money or even when federal tax breaks or credits are misused.

      Real estate development or housing activites funded by HUD, purchases of property using federal highway funds, just for two examples.

    3. Funny that you mention that. There were some discrepancies with the HUD funds while Walker was county exec. Sadly, it appears Abele covered those up.

  11. any way we could get all you there anono-mouses to like letter or number yourselves. makes it easier for the reader.
    -Anon. #9#9#9#8



    3. I am not so sure, anon, no one else is stooooooopid enough to post TWICE with the cap lock key on.

      Your posts are easy to pick out...

  12. All of these anons are trying to be ME!

    But I see this as a higher-form of worship -- I am now a COGDIZ SUPREME DIETY and all you others (including capper who is posting as anon here) are WANNA-BES!

  13. capper@ 12:52 AM

    We DO NOT KNOW if there was a break -- most likely -- NOT. The FBI didn't sit on their hands all this time after seizing Cynthia Archer's computer (and breaking down a door to do it).

    And, respectfully, "DAN BICE ISN'T THAT BAD"!?!?!?!?!?!


    Hardly a ringing endorsement -- you are implying that his is BAD to some degree -- the propaganda machine works at very different levels.

    Anyone that claims to be "fair and balance" -- the lie of "objective journalism" is undermining our democracy.

    bice skews the noooooze based on what tips he chooses to pass along and how he presents them.

    Faux journalist-guy james rowan claims that bice did not proclaim the John Doe probe "dead as a doornail" last November -- he certainly DID.

    He choose to put a spotlight on an anonymous source (which skews the nooooze right there) and then repeated it -- in fact it was the entire point of his post.

    You can find chunks of legitimate information across the journal communications propaganda machine -- but that is the problem -- real reporting would be about accuracy and demonstratable truths.

    We should not have to read between the lines to find it.

    And this is why what today gets proclaimed as "objective" and "fair and balanced" is a lie.

    1. ["Faux journalist-guy james rowan claims that bice did not proclaim the John Doe probe "dead as a doornail" last November -- he certainly DID."]

      Please provide the Bice link to verify your statement. Thanks.

    2. NOT YOUR MONKEY -- have you heard of the latest thing on the tubes? It's called THE GOOGLE.


      Sorry, dude, if you didn't, you know, actually read the post before posting whiny comments.


    3. Geeeeeeeeezzzzz
      So many anonymous cowards and even trolls that hide behind 2 letters initials too!

      I am not afraid of using my full name and I am just a grl!

      Here's the link -- it was easy to find with GOOGLE -- no need to cry over it C.J. (though no need to be condenscending about it anon):

      Why can't you anonymous children and 2-letter cowards play nice together?

    4. Thanks for the link Anna Minity. Nice moniker.

      [...""This thing is as dead as a doornail," suggested one official familiar with the Milwaukee County phase of the investigation....]

      I play nice. Just really don't feel like entertaining flamers.

      Thanks again.


  14. I dreamed I saw John Doe last night,
    Alive as you and me
    Says I, "But John you're eight months dead!"
    "I never died," said he.
    "I never died," said he.

  15. capper -- I am sure anons claim that you are anon is not true.

    In fact, I know it isn't true because I AM ANONYMOUS and all others are merely PRETENDERS!

    Its such a wonderful online anonymous life -- but don't fool yourself, kiddies, Obama's NSA knows who you are, is makin' a list, and is checkin' it twice.

    I don't think most of us even want to know what will come down our chimneys if the repugs manage to entirely STEAL our democracy.

    But don't look for anyone at journal communications to tell the truth.

  16. Has anyone else wondered if J B Van Hollen's announcement two weeks ago was prompted by the shit that was about to hit the fan?

    1. Yes....

      Still wondering. Like I said before. I think this thing goes deep and wide.

  17. Capper always has a good take on the John Doe stuff and there are many good perspectives here (strangely, mostly from anonymous posters that don't always play nice togther).

    But there is a bigger story here that the media won't touch -- the Walker recall results are mathematically impossible.

    Intuitively -- it doesn't pass the smell-test that Walker "won" a high-intensity-high turnout election in June 2012 by about 9 points and then Obama came back and beat an opponent with a local boy on the ticket by about 9 percentage points.

    Wisconsin did not swing almost 20 points (republican at top of statewide race, then democrat) in 5 months.

    More here: Criminal Investigation(s) MUST Look At Election Fraud (fully sourced and resourced with linky-goodness!)

    1. Was just over at your blog. A VERY good read.

    2. Voices,
      I take it you don't believe Wisconsin voted for Obama because of all the free stuff he gave us.

  18. Are you THE anonymous?

    How do you ever find time to post all the stuff here and on every other comment board on the tubes?

    But back to your questions -- evidently, it is not all the Obama voters that voted as a quid-pro-quo (they recieved compensation for their votes).

    The ongoing Walker investigations may discover that it is the REPUBLICANS that buy elections (feloniously of course) and it has nothing to do with providing legitimate public services for citizens.

  19. So, if I'm reading things right, there's nothing that's ruled out the Barrett campaign and DPW as being the targets of this new investigation, right? Just making sure

    1. You are reading things absolutely wrong...

      But most likely, this is by choice or design. It is a good thing the probe is secret though because this just enables right-wing squawkers like charlie sykes (himself a "person of interest" in John Doe to muddle the waters and potentially create an opportunity to have justice done overturned on appeal.