Wednesday, June 25, 2014

Cantanese On Walkergate

David Cantanese of US News, who has been covering the beginnings of the 2016 presidential election has taken note of Scott Walker and Chris Christie and their respective scandal problems.

Cantanese's take on Walker's problems:
Court documents unsealed in the campaign finance investigation into Walker's 2012 recall show prosecutors believe the governor was at the center of a nationwide "criminal scheme" to violate election laws, by improperly coordinating with outside groups and GOP super strategist Karl Rove.

Though no charges have been filed against Walker or any of his staff, emails now show Walker was in direct contact with R.J. Johnson, an adviser who was also closely aligned with the Wisconsin Club For Growth, an outside group that vigorously supported Walker's re-election.

As TIME's Michael Scherer writes, yes, the laws surrounding campaign finance are Byzantine and not thoroughly understood by the general public. But:

Elections, after all, rarely hinge on legal technicalities. They are about voter impressions, and "criminal scheme" is quite a phrase to overcome in a contested primary."
Yet in Wisconsin, where the voters are, neither Mike Tate, head of WISDEMS, nor Mary Burke, the annointed Democratic candidate, felt that it was worth the effort to educate the public on Walker's scandal.



  1. Capper, thanks.

    Whether Mr. Tate should continue as DPW Chair is above my pay grade, but his response on this strongly suggests to me that it should be up for serious review.

    Of course Democratic leaders should avoid any appearance of partisanship in discussing these matters. That's a given. As you put it so well, however, educating the public is their responsibility to constituents.

  2. Criminal scheme is a very damaging tag, for once the press is doing the needed damage.

  3. So you think Burke and Tate should do 24/7 bogus "dumpster-'o-fun" garbage while scott walker and his media assets play the "its a partisan witch hunt" card.

    You just don't get it, do you.

    If this investigation is going to go anywhere, it will take care of scott walker.

    If randa's decision is not overturned and the investigation is hushed-up, then it will not be helpful for the dem party and Mary Burke to make this the center of the campaign.

    Burke's response that she is "disappointed" is a great strategy which allows her to pivot to the failures of this administration.

    Folks like you play right into republican hands -- go ahead -- slam the dems and Burke all you want. You undermined your integrity with the boastful and always-wrong walkergate posts you did all last year.

    Anyone with a brain is grateful that Burke and Tate don't listen to you.

    So how did that "dumpster-o-fun" thing work out fer ya?

    Your "gentle readers" know that you negative attitudes towards our only hope to overcome a gerrymandered republican fascist state is anything-but helpful.

    1. There is a lot of leeway between 24/7 and not even an educational power point presentation. Shoot for a bit less melodrama and a touch of reason if you can, please.

      There are many muddy roads plowed by the governor and his favored state appointees. Scant few of then are being addressed by the Democratic Party on any level. Why?

      Does the Democratic LEADERSHIP think their base is too stupid to understand? For instance, it is not too hard to connect the dots like Koch oil interests>Enbridge pipeline>Cathy Stepp (public comment not desired permitting)>SKW and then loop back to who is behind a big portion of contributions to Walkers criminal defense fund.

  4. There are several well written and concise explanations of the legal situation which Tate/Burke could be relating MORE frequently, without getting into the muck as you put it. Ruth Conniff's piece at the Progressive come to mind first. Relating the FACTS of the investigation, as to the present LEGAL situation, explained so clearly keeps the story front and center and still at a candidate's professional arm's length, so-to-speak.

    Ignoring the situation that Walker faces and NOT bringing it up publicly lets hired megaphones like Sykes, to define the ALLOWABLE limits of the discussion on the subject of Walker's alleged criminality being behind the Doe(s).

    Looking at this topic through a slightly wider lens than yours, who then is really kissing Sykes' ass?

    1. Sorry, this was intended as a reply to 9:22 AM.

    2. exactly...what would charlie sykes think should never ever be part of the equation.

  5. Why not have capper and Jeff do the dirty work if the details and refuting RW lies? Burke and Tate can hint around it with talk of "ethics" and "We're better than that."

    Sort of a "good cop, bad cop" thing. Much like how Walker gets Sykes, Belling and Icki to say the nasty race-baiting stuff he believes, but won't get caught saying in public.

  6. I think the John Doe proceedings have everything to do with the failed governmental performance that Walker's regime has created. They have no respect for government or laws: those things only get in the way of their "freedom" or "liberty," just as the wealthy and corporations want things.
    John Doe and Teapublican failure are two sides of the same coin. Corruption, greed, secrecy, all evading the ideals that made Wisconsin a great place to live and work.
    Wisconsin does deserve better, and voters do vote on impressions. It would be foolish to ignore and grant a pass to Walker's campaign machine, just as it would be foolish to not explain what you stand for.
    Let's hope the DPW can come up with a logical division of labor to carry out these tasks, one that can feed the voting population with the salient information needed to make the impression for voting Democrat.