Wisconsin John Doe Probes Seek If and by Whom Crimes Are Commited

The John Doe probe shows Scott Walker is at the center of a criminal scheme to funnel $10s of millions into the recall elections of 2011-12, so are GOP operatives,  R.J. Johnson and Deborah Jordahl.

This does not make them guilty of crimes, John Does are not mini-trials.

This does not make them "targets." John Does are not grand juries and do not designate targets as federal grand juries do (and as some other states' counties do).

It makes them subjects in an investigation that has Wisconsin Republicans and their paymasters across the country scared as rabbits.

This week John Doe special prosecutor Francis Schmitz' attorney, Randall Crocker released a statement: "While these (released) documents outlined the prosecutor's legal theory, they did not establish the existence of a crime; rather, they were arguments in support of further investigation to determine if criminal charges against any person or entity are warranted. Mr. Schmitz has made no conclusions as to whether there is sufficient evidence to charge anyone with a crime. It is wrong for any person to point to this sentence in a legal argument as a finding by the special prosecutor that Governor Walker has engaged in a criminal scheme. It is not such a finding." (Stein, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel)

At the least the released documents demonstrate that the accumulated evidence exceeds the reasonable suspicion standard for the John Doe probe to proceed. Most jurists (the non-Federalist Society kind) would see the evidence exceeds a higher standard, probable cause, for further investigation.

As for the public relations lines, Prosecutor: Scott Walker is not a target, as the Wisconsin State Journal's hard copy edition blares this morning. No kidding.

Neither are Bambi, Guy Fawkes or Mickey Mantle.

You become are "target" when you are charged with a crime, and the investigation is not completed, halted and awaiting a ruling from the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit before it can proceed.

The State Journal headline this morning, Prosecutor: Scott Walker not a target, is intentionally misleading, likely written by a pro-Walker copy editor or other staffer with pro-Walker leanings.

The John Doe investigation is not completed; stopped by the ethically challenged Judge Rudolph Randa with a bizarre opinion that should become the subject of ridicule from the panel of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Randa's opinion doesn't end the John Doe probe, as White Wisconsin asserts. White Wisconsin apparently forgot about the federal appellate court circuit, deliberating the appeal.

As for when someone should be charged under a John Doe probe, and by what standard of evidence: Probable cause or guilt beyond on a reasonable doubt, If you can get a straight answer on background from a knowledgeable jurist, good luck.

No one appears to know.

In the meantime, treat words from Scott Walker and his mouthpieces with a heavy does of salt: Scott Walker has no credibility and a well-documented history of lying to the people of Wisconsin.

This we know beyond a reasonable doubt.

Wisconsin Democrats, Don't Let This One Slip Away

Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Mike Tate, Scott Walker's
Most Important Ally Besides the Koch Brothers.
Image: Wisconsin Public Television

Update: Someone got to Mike Tate and in the colorful lexicon of politics suggested he is not proceeding correctly. See Democrats go after Walker on John Doe allegations (Craver, The Capital Times), green-lighting the release of a video and press release two days after Tate told Wisconsin reporters that blasting Scott Walker's criminal corruption and Walker's failure on jobs is too complicated for Tate to communicate clearly.

If Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair, Mike Tate, Were Coach of the Packers, He Would Find a Way to Screw-up a Game against a Junior-High School Team That Doesn't Have the Plays Down Yet. He Should Resign and Here's Why

What's the Matter with Kansas? (Thomas Frank, Holt Paperbacks, 2005), Thomas Frank famously asked, eyeing the authoritarian and statist political leanings of working-class Kansans who vote with elitist, big-moneyed interests and religious extremists.

Prairie populism is gone from Kansas, and 700 miles to the northeast in Wisconsin, the Badger state is headed the same way under the direction of the bureaucratic groupthink and grab-a-paycheck electoral strategy encouraged by Mike Tate, Chair of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, supposed opposition party to Scott Walker, the Republican Party of Wisconsin and the Koch brothers.

Facing Scott Walker and an enemy so rich in political targets, a given opposition political party could metaphorically grab a pistol, close its eyes, fire and hit dead-center, Tate and the Dems keep missing the mark.

Mike Tate and the presumptive Democratic nominee for governor, Mary Burke, have made a strategic calculation to ignore the dirtiest and most spectacular political scandal in state history: John Doe II, right as the story was beginning to penetrate the casual voter in central and northern Wisconsin.

It would distract from jobs and the economy, Mike Tate explains.

"We had volunteers that knocked on over 3,000 doors this past weekend to talk about Mary Burke and Democratic candidates," said Tate. "What we heard at the doors wasn't whether the governor was at the center of criminal scheme. What we heard was that they wanted Wisconsin to get back to work" (Halstad, WPR).

No shit, you better focus on jobs and corruption and the environment and public schools.

Tate and the Democratic Party communications team are as effective as a 1970s television receiving signals through its rabbit-ear antennae.

This does contrast with the Democratic Party of Wisconsin's web site of course where a fund-raising page presently reads, "Wisconsinites are tired of Scott Walker’s legal troubles, controversial proposals and absence from the Governor’s office as he ramps up his Presidential run," but put that aside.

This is the massive Republican implosion, with more to come, that Wisconsin's non-Scott Walker candidate needs.

Tate decided to do "a conference call with reporters" this week and let it be known that the most effective way to hype Walker's terrible record on jobs is to minimize Scott Walker's criminal corruption (Stein, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel).

Where does the Democratic Party of Wisconsin draw up this strategy?

John Doe coverage is filtered through the Gannett Co. and local broadcast media; most people don't read the news often anyway, but Scott Walker being at the center of a nationwide criminal scandal is a sexy story with legs that reinforces what most people already believe about Scott Walker: He's a crook.

Watergate was awful, but it was also a spectacular news story that took down a president, and brought in a new age of crusading journalism. [If anyone wants a quick history, I recommend Jimmy Breslin's How the Good Guys Finally Won: Notes from an Impeachment Summer.]

A candidate today has to sell the story (one would hope with the help of a political party), expand the narrative of criminal corruption to jobs, water, erosion of public education and giving away and destroying what took generations of Wisconsin families to build.

A couple of questions for Mike Tate?

Do you think Scott Walker's corruption and extremism have caused a net loss of jobs? (Hint, think rejection of $800,000,000 (that's $800 million, lots of zeroes) in federal funds to build labor-intensive railroad infrastructure.)

Do you think the message that 'Scott Walker is not for you, Walker sold out family-supporting jobs to special interests and out-of-state billionaires' has political appeal? (Hint, think single-mother families, rejection of $4.4 billion in federal Medicaid money through 2020 (Bauer, AP), and the underemployed.)

In the 2011-12 recall elections, Scott Walker benefited from the air-dominance of TV spots resulting from the temporary no-contribution-limit-for-recalled-candidates election rule allowing no caps on individual donations, resulting in Scott Walker receiving numerous six-figure individual contributions mostly from out-of-state interests.

Scot Ross, Executive Director of One Wisconsin Now, said in August 2012, "Scott Walker bought the (June 2012 Recall) election with a waterfall of money no other candidate could legally raise."

Turns out Walker did not legally raise the money; he purposely and with malice of forethought broke Wisconsin election laws to win and screw the people of Wisconsin.

"Walker and his allies were able to stay on television non-stop across Wisconsin from late October 2011 until Election Day in June (2012) nearly 225 straight days," notes Ross.

To no one's surprise it turns out the numerous "issue advocacy" groups working for the election of Scott Walker were coordinating with Scott Walker, in apparent violation of Wisconsin campaign finance law, explaining why Walker and other big-moneyed interests do not want law enforcement looking anywhere near Walker's communications to Karl Rove and other Republican operators and big-money donors.

So, John Doe investigators have come upon a nationwide criminal scheme of corruption and a network of dark money centering on Scott Walker and the Republican Party of Wisconsin.

The new and innovative response of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin and its chair, Mike Tate: Look away, nothing to see here.

Several excellent candidates and officeholders have won here in Wisconsin, mostly by ignoring Mike Tate and running progressive campaigns accurately painting a compelling picture of out-of-touch Republicans selling out the Wisconsin people.

As for Mike Tate, I do have constructive suggestions: How about you take your undisclosed salary and contribute it to the political citizens groups, Protect Wood County and Its Neighbors, Green Bay Progressive and Citizens Concerned about the Proposed Penokee Hills Mine. (Facebook, open site)

Then resign gracefully.

Scott Walker Alleges Corruption of Five Wisconsin DAs, Takes John Doe to New Level

Scott Walker Runs to Fox and Friends
Host, Steve Doocy for PR Help
Last Week after Documents Reveal
DAs Believe Walker Is Part
of Criminal Schtheeme

Updated - Neo Confederates follows Walker's lead. From James Varney, New Orleans Times-Picayune (NOLA.com): "Unscrupulous Democratic operatives there (in Wisconsin) are doing everything they can to bury a successful GOP executive.
What is particularly scary about Wisconsin, and what should give Americans of all stripes pause, is that the operatives there are prosecutors. Under a 'John Doe' banner - a distinctly Bolshevik sort of tool that should be illegal in the United States - prosecutors have launched a witch-hunt against Walker and some of his conservative supporters."

See also Scott Walker Says the Dark Money Probe Is 'Over,' but He's Wrong (Fischer, PRWatch).

See also Scott Walker's Non-Denial Denial of John Doe Criminality
---
Scott Walker's explanation made in response to the blockbuster report of allegations of a wide-ranging criminal scheme made by five Wisconsin district attorneys is that these five law enforcement Constitutional Officers (and special prosecutor Francis Schmitz) are corrupted by the political motivations of "big-government special interests;" and are corrupt allies who deny the John Doe probe they are conducting is "over;" "is a case that has been resolved;" and that "there is no argument" on the legal disposition of the John Doe litigation.

That the five Wisconsin District Attorneys continue to litigate on appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is attributed by Walker as an attempt to impugn the reputation of Walker by the five district attorneys, to "trash" Walker to use the word of a Fox and Friends host with whom Scott Walker enthusiastically agreed.

It's a good thing for Walker, the appellate justices do not consider news reports in ruling on the merits of John Doe litigation, instead rightfully consigning themselves to the arguments in legal briefs and oral arguments.

The five district attorneys (plus special prosecutor Francis Schmitz) are:

• Milwaukee County DA John T.Chisholm
• Dane County DA Ismael R. Ozanne
• Iowa County DA Larry E. Nelson
• Dodge County DA Kurt F. Klomberg
• Columbia County DA Jane E. Kohlwey

Fox and Friends Host, Steve Doocy [video is linked at left] put it to Walker: "It looks like they're just trying to trash you."

Unsealed Court Order and Exhibits from John Doe Probe

Walker agreed with Fox's Doocy, saying in response, "I think there's no doubt. This is one of those where the media jumps on this; some on the left spin this; you get our detractors out there trying to claim there's something more than there is. ... This is a prime example of what happens when you take on the big-government special interests. They're looking for ways to come at us. They'll continue to do it. They did it, you know, two years ago in the recall election. They're going to do it again now; we got another tough election this Fall. And so, they're going to come at it with just about everything out there."

As noted here yesterday, this alternative reality of the legal situation is too much for the editorial page of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel which blasted Walker in substance and blistering tone not seen yet in commentary in the daily newspaper that has broken most of the reporting on the John Doe investigation.

Reads the editorial in part:

It's over, Gov. Scott Walker is arguing: The John Doe case looking into whether his campaign illegally coordinated with supposedly independent groups is done. Kaput. Finished.

Well, sorry, governor, but that simply isn't true.

Yes, the investigation into the conduct of the campaign and outside groups during the 2012 recalls was halted by federal Judge Rudolph Randa in May when the judge ruled that the secret investigation violated the free speech rights of its targets. Randa's decision is now before a federal appeals court, and just like the recent federal court decision ending Wisconsin's ban on same-sex marriage, this case will continue until all appeals are exhausted.

That could be a while, which means that this story is far from over. Nor should it be.

We think Randa should have not shut down a duly commissioned state investigation into the campaigns. The prosecutors, with affinities for both parties, were simply doing their jobs: State law limits what outside groups such as the Wisconsin Club for Growth can do. Such groups are supposed to remain independent of campaigns; they cannot strategize with candidates.

Randa's decision was stunning for its overreach. He ordered the investigation shut down and found that only "express advocacy" — that is, explicitly urging people to vote for or against a candidate — was subject to state limits and control.

But coordination between campaigns and outside groups has long been illegal in Wisconsin for good reason. It's in the state statutes and was upheld by the Wisconsin Court of Appeals in a 1999 decision involving a state Supreme Court race. State election regulators later reaffirmed that a campaign cannot coordinate with an outside group, and on that basis, John Doe investigators proceeded to look into how the recall elections were conducted.

Walker's characterization of the ethics and motivation of the five District Attorneys is as ludicrous as Walker's reading of the legal disposition of the now several cases involving the investigation of Scott Walker and possible other parties at the center of the criminal scheme to funnel money into the recall races of 2011-12.

Walker also includes the media of course as in cahoots with the five District Attorneys: "Still, many in the media proceed as though the opinion of the partisan prosecutors is new information and ignore the truths I have stated .... It is not. It is old news that has already been discounted by two judges. No charges. No case," said Walker.

Walker's accusations demonstrate the callow and reckless disregard Walker has for the truth and those he defames.

Walker's message of corrupt district attorneys is dutifully picked up by the righwing press used as a lead-in for pieces about different topics, "Wisconsin doesn't have just a problem with rogue prosecutors (see the Milwaukee County DA's John Doe probe of Governor Scott Walker's allies). It also appears to have a rogue education department." (Finley, Wall Street Journal)

If the five district attorneys are engaging in partisan character assassination of Scott Walker [an unlikely possibility considering that two of the five DAs are Republicans and the fact that all have shown themselves to be ethical jurists in good standing with the State Bar of Wisconsin], Scott Walker should make a public and formal declaration of prosecutorial misconduct and proceed on this basis. Name the names and tell all of the facts.

Of course, any non-Republican can see that Walker is engaging in desperate spin and formally questioning the conduct (which would be an unjust and defamatory exercise) of the District Attorneys would likely result in making public more hard evidence and documentation of the affairs of Scott Walker while serving as Milwaukee County Executive and Governor.

This is the last thing Scott Walker wants.

Scott Walker Runs into Arms of Fox, Hoping District Attorneys Will Just Leave

Update: Striking editorial, pedagogic in tone from the GOP-leaning editorial page of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, chides Scott Walker for his spinning and fact-free legal analysis.

Erudite and subtly jabbing Walker, the title of the editorial is "Walker should be careful what he wishes for."

Reads the Sunday editorial in part:

It's over, Gov. Scott Walker is arguing: The John Doe case looking into whether his campaign illegally coordinated with supposedly independent groups is done. Kaput. Finished.

Well, sorry, governor, but that simply isn't true.

Yes, the investigation into the conduct of the campaign and outside groups during the 2012 recalls was halted by federal Judge Rudolph Randa in May when the judge ruled that the secret investigation violated the free speech rights of its targets. Randa's decision is now before a federal appeals court, and just like the recent federal court decision ending Wisconsin's ban on same-sex marriage, this case will continue until all appeals are exhausted.

That could be a while, which means that this story is far from over. Nor should it be.

We think Randa should have not shut down a duly commissioned state investigation into the campaigns. The prosecutors, with affinities for both parties, were simply doing their jobs: State law limits what outside groups such as the Wisconsin Club for Growth can do. Such groups are supposed to remain independent of campaigns; they cannot strategize with candidates.

Randa's decision was stunning for its overreach. He ordered the investigation shut down and found that only "express advocacy" — that is, explicitly urging people to vote for or against a candidate — was subject to state limits and control.

But coordination between campaigns and outside groups has long been illegal in Wisconsin for good reason. It's in the state statutes and was upheld by the Wisconsin Court of Appeals in a 1999 decision involving a state Supreme Court race. State election regulators later reaffirmed that a campaign cannot coordinate with an outside group, and on that basis, John Doe investigators proceeded to look into how the recall elections were conducted.
---
There Can Be No Whitewash in Wisconsin. People Have to Got Know Whether or Not Their Governor Is a Crook

In October 2013 a story broke that the John Doe probe had "(spread) to five Wisconsin counties," and evidence was leading investigators to look into possible violations of state law during the 2011-12 Recall races.

The investigation was revealed to be led by Francis Schmitz, a well-known Republican jurist who was on George W. Bush's shortlist for nomination to the US Atty of the Eastern District of Wisconsin in 2001. (Bice, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, October 21, 2013)

Scott Walker had a response to the piece that he communicated before going back into hiding: "We expected that with a new Democrat candidate for governor in the race that there would be stories like this along the way," said Walker on the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel's October story on the John Doe investigation. (Murray. WPR)

So, the Republican-led investigation is simply a concocted story to help the expected Democratic nominee for governor (primary election is in August 2014), and stories breaking about the John Doe investigation are not true, is this what Walker was saying?

Walker wouldn't say, preferring innuendo to candor.

But Walker's quick comment-and-hide strategy made it plain Walker knew this probe was coming and where the investigation was heading.

When the blockbuster story broke on Thursday, June 19 that bipartisan Wisconsin prosecutors allege in documents that Scott Walker "was at the center of an effort to illegally coordinate fundraising among conservative groups to help his campaign and those of Republican state senators fend off recall elections during 2011 and '12," (Patrick Marley, Daniel Bice and Dave Umhoefer in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel) Walker's first response was to run to Fox and Friends, and not to face the people of Wisconsin in a no-hold-barred, question-and-answer session addressing allegations of criminality of a Wisconsin governor that have no precedent in Wisconsin history.

Walker speaking in a more rapid cadence than employed in his usual evasions did not repeat the  language made public that Walker was at the center of a "criminal scheme," but pretended that the accusations from the John Doe probe did not exist and that the matter had already been "resolved."

This would come as news to the five prosecutors, the special prosecutor and the attorneys working to appeal an adverse decision in appellate court.

Walker implies these five district attorneys and the special prosecutor are just pawns of big-government special interests.

Said Walker on Fox and Friends to Co-host Steve Doocy:

"This is one of those where the media jumps on this; some on the left spin this; you get our detractors out there trying to claim there's something more than there is. ... This is a prime example of what happens when you take on the big-government special interests. They're looking for ways to come at us. They'll continue to do it. They did it, you know, two years ago in the recall election. They're going to do it again now; we got another tough election this Fall. And so, they're going to come at it with just about everything out there."

Scott Walker is alleged to have been at the center of an effort to illegally coordinate fundraising among 12 rightwing groups to help his campaign and those of Republican state senators fend off recall elections, in violation of campaign laws intended to insulate special interests and campaigns for public office.

This sounds pretty big to me.

Why doesn't Scott Walker come before a town hall-type meeting, say at Camp Randall, take questions until the audience is exhausted and clear the air?

I'm betting Walker won't.

Following is video of an excellent segment at Politics Nation, and a piece by United Wisconsin, Failing to Prosecute Illegal Coordination in John Doe Case Threatens Legitimacy of State Campaign Finance Law.

From United Wisconsin:

MADISON, WI – Based on evidence provided in Exhibit C of the John Doe documents unsealed Thursday, failing to prosecute illegal campaign coordination exposes a grave threat to the public’s trust Wisconsin elections by undermining state campaign finance safeguards in place to prevent corruption.

“The unsealed John Doe documents reveal a clear case of the corruption of Wisconsin elections at the hands of Scott Walker’s campaign and outside conservatives groups. The failure to bring charges in Walker’s “criminal scheme” puts in jeopardy Wisconsin campaign finance laws which were put in place to ensure the integrity of the electoral process,” said United Wisconsin Executive Director Lisa Subeck.

Prosecutors laid out the case that Gov. Scott Walker was at the center of a “criminal scheme” to coordinate illegal campaign fundraising among his campaign and conservative groups to fund the running of phony “issue advocacy” campaigns clearly designed for the direct political benefit of Walker’s campaign and Republican legislators facing recall elections in 2011-12.

Despite what appears to be clear evidence of illegal coordination, a recent stay issued by Federal Judge Rudolf Randa halting further investigation leaves Wisconsin campaign finance laws governing disclosure of campaign spending unenforceable and stripped of legitimacy.

According Francis D. Schmitz, special prosecutor in the John Doe investigation “Movants argue that “coordination” of political activities that do not arguably express advocacy cannot be a crime under Wisconsin law. These arguments fail to recognize or misinterpret Wisconsin statutes, administrative rules, and G.A.B. formal opinions. Movants have also ignored controlling Wisconsin case law. Indeed, in their submissions, movants – FOSW, Citizens for a Strong America, Inc. (CFSA) Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, Inc. (WMC) and Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce-Issues Mobilization Council (WMC-IMC) and Wisconsin Club for Growth (WiCFG) appear to have tacitly admitted to violating Wisconsin law.”

“Failing to prosecute what is clearly a violation of state campaign finance law leaves our elections more vulnerable than ever to this type of alleged illegal coordination and erodes any sense in eyes of voters that Wisconsin elections are truly fair,” Subeck said.
 #
United Wisconsin is an independent, grassroots organization dedicated to advancing progressive values, strengthening democracy, and ensuring every Wisconsinite has a voice. For more information, visit our website at www.unitedwisconsin.com.

Two Governors Face Scandals, Only One Governor Faces the People

Scott Walker avoids questions as DAs
say Walker is at center of massive
criminal scheme to illegally funnel
$ 10s of millions

Update II: Chris Christie Says He'll Campaign for Scott Walker at the Appropriate Time (Arco, NJ.com)

This would be before Scott Walker is formally charged with a crime.

Notes John Amato at Crooks and Liars:

Gov. Chris Christie says Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is "a good man" and voiced support for his fellow Republican, who faces allegations he took part in a nationwide criminal scheme to coordinate fundraising with conservative groups.

Christie defended Scott Walker this evening after greeting patrons of a New Hampshire restaurant during a campaign stop for a Republican gubernatorial hopeful. Christie dismissed the allegations against Walker, a potential GOP presidential candidate, as nothing more than attacks from enemies.
"Listen, we all understand that the more you try to bring change to your individual state, and that change starts to sweep the country, the more you’re going to be attacked by your opponents," said Christie, a potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate.

'That’s just something you’re going to have to deal with in this job," he said. "But I’ve already communicated with Scott today, he’s doing well. I completely support him and I look forward to going to Wisconsin and campaigning for him at the appropriate time."
---
The thesis advanced by Walker and Christie remains: Walker secretly planned to destroy the right to collectively bargain and gut environmental protections of water (uncontroversial), so the five John Doe District Attorneys (two of whom are Republicans) and the Republican special investigator are retaliating and attacking Walker, alleging a contrived "criminal scheme," because Walker-initiated "change (has started) to sweep the country."

Interesting theory out of two guys from whom most people will no longer buy bridges.

Love to see this Wisconsin-DAs-are-corrupted-by-big-government line voiced by Walker in front of a citizens' town hall meeting.

Update: Whether Scott Walker decides to turn around and face the people of Wisconsin, something qualitatively different is happening after this latest release of John Doe documents—the story is penetrating local broadcast and print (old) media. See WDIO-TV (serving Duluth, Superior and northern Wisconsin) Prosecutors: Gov. Walker Part of 'Criminal Scheme,' and National media pounce on release of John Doe II documents (Joyce, The Capital Times).

One thing to bear in mind after Judge Frank Easterbrook of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit shreds Judge Randa's opinion, John Doe II is a law enforcement investigation conducted by Constitutional Officers (under the Wisconsin Constitution) acting under the specific authority of Wisconsin's John Doe statute that Walker and others desperately are trying to stop. Now, we know why.

Wisconsin John Does are conducted under the statute that is a reformist initiative, written to ensure an orderly and fair investigation.

As attorney Marcus J. Berghan writes: "As the investigation in Milwaukee County has shown, the John Doe proceeding may lead to criminal charges. Those charges need not be directly related to the complaint that started the proceeding. When complete, the judge will determine whether probable cause exists to charge any additional individuals with a crime."
---
Governors Scott Walker of Wisconsin and Chris Christie of New Jersey face legal-political crises as reports broke yesterday revealing escalating criminal investigations placing both pols near or at the center of criminal conspiracies.

"Indictments against four Christie cronies are near certain, sources say," reads an exclusive in Esquire (Scott Raab and Lisa Brennan). Christie has held over 100 town hall listening sessions and open call-in radio appearances, apparently taking all questions and offering his unvarnished view.

This accessibility would be a shocking departure for Scott Walker's in-the-bubble communication strategy.

"Prosecutors in Wisconsin assert that Gov. Scott Walker was part of an elaborate effort to illegally coordinate fund-raising and spending between his campaign and conservative groups during efforts to recall him and several state senators two years ago, according to court filings unsealed Thursday." (Davey, Confessore, New York Times)

Walker issues quick one-answer, unresponsive lines to non-GOP press, refusing to hold even one town hall-style listening session.

The gravity of the charges, constituting the reasonable suspicion predicating the John Doe investigation, are pooh-poohed by Walker who says the bipartisan investigation is partisan, and the heavily criticized U.S. District Judge, Rudolph Randa (who temporarily halted the John Doe probe in a results-oriented, contrived order and opinion), is "independent."

The $ tens of millions raised and apparently illegally coordinated is on a massive scale.

"Beginning in March 2011, there were 'open and express discussions' of the need to coordinate the activities of entities like Americans for Prosperity, Wisconsin Club for Growth, the Republican Party of Wisconsin, the Republican State Leadership Committee and the Republican Governors Association, special prosecutor Francis Schmitz wrote. Conference calls were held between the Walker campaign, the governors association and the business lobbying group Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, he wrote."

The scope of the criminal scheme under investigation 'is expansive,' Schmitz wrote. 'It includes criminal violations of multiple elections laws, including violations of Filing a False Campaign Report or Statement and Conspiracy to File a False Campaign Report or Statement.' (Patrick Marley, Daniel Bice and Bill Glauber, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel) [See also Lisa Kaiser, Milwaukee Shepherd-Express, and Philip Bump, Washington Post]

David Koch told a reporter that he took credit for the fact the Republicans maintained control of the Wisconsin legislature in the Senate recall elections held in August 2011. Koch has given $ millions to the group, Americans for Prosperity and openly acknowledges his support for Americans for Prosperity and its activities in Wisconsin. It remains to be seen whether Koch was involved in Walker's scheme to funnel money.

"The accusation of any wrongdoing written in the complaint by the office of a partisan Democrat District Attorney by me or by my campaign is categorically false," said Walker. So why avoid the people of Wisconsin?

Walker's statement, though short, is full of errors.

Actually, there are five district attorneys, and two of them are Republicans. [One would hope this fact would follow reporting of Walker's statement, but this has not been the case.] And there has been no allegation of partisanship made by the presiding judge overseeing the five prosecutors.

As for the investigators' statements being categorically false, how about Walker holds a long question-and answer session, if Walker is truly innocent?

Even as Scott Walker refuses to face the Wisconsin people and offer an explanation for his role in the conspiracy, Walker's true constituents work to shut down the probe.

For an excellent summary of events, see The Chris Hayes show segment below:

John Doe Prosecutors: Scott Walker at Center of 'Criminal Scheme'

Scott Walker email to Karl Rove made public as John Doe probe reveals Walker at center of illegal coordination

A record tens and tens of millions of dollars were spent in a gubernatorial race in 2011-12.

But this was in Wisconsin, a middling state with a population of only 5.7 million people.

Now, in what is already being widely portrayed as a tipping point in the corruption of Scott Walker being laid plain, the bipartisan Wisconsin prosecutors allege in documents just released that Scott Walker "was at the center of an effort to illegally coordinate fundraising among conservative groups to help his campaign and those of Republican state senators fend off recall elections during 2011 and '12, according to documents unsealed Thursday," report Patrick Marley, Daniel Bice and Dave Umhoefer in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel.

Write Marley, Bice and Umhoefer:

In the documents, prosecutors lay out what they call an extensive 'criminal scheme' to bypass state election laws by Walker, his campaign and two top Republican political operatives — R.J. Johnson and Deborah Jordahl.

The governor and his close confidants helped raise money and control spending through 12 conservative groups during the recall elections, according to the prosecutors' filings.

The documents include an excerpt from an email in which Walker tells Karl Rove, former top adviser to President George W. Bush, that Johnson would lead the coordination campaign. Johnson is also Walker's longtime campaign strategist and the chief adviser to Wisconsin Club for Growth, a conservative group active in the recall elections.

'Bottom-line: R.J. helps keep in place a team that is wildly successful in Wisconsin. We are running 9 recall elections and it will be like 9 congressional markets in every market in the state (and Twin Cities),' Walker wrote to Rove on May 4, 2011. ...

Federal Appeals Judge Frank Easterbrook unsealed the court documents Thursday as he reviews a lawsuit attempting to permanently halt the secret investigation into the so-called John Doe probe into the recall elections.

Scott Walker was enchanted with speaking to Karl Rove early in Walker's term in 2011 during the period when Wisconsin Act 10 was rushed through the legislature in violation of Wisconsin's open meeting statute, it has been widely alleged.

Evidently, Walker felt a little too enchanted as he has again been demonstrated bragging about his proximity to money and directing how the money is spent.

Scott Walker Runs from Plea Deal Question, Releases Unresponsive Statement

Scott Walker again refused to engage the story alleging that his attorney is involved in plea deal talks with Wisconsin John Doe officials.

"Neither Governor Walker nor his campaign committee are parties to the federal lawsuit. This means they have no legal standing to reach a settlement or deal in their lawsuit," Walker's statement reads in full.

This statement has nothing to do with the possible plea negotiations with state investigators conducting the John Doe probe looking into possible illegal collusion between Scott Walker's campaign and rightwing groups that poured $tens of millions into the 2011-12 Recall races.

Walker is referring to Eric O'Keefe's Wisconsin Club for Growth federal action now before the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz.

Walker refuses further comment on the plea deal story.

Rudolph Randa Hit on the Chris Hayes Show

Judge Rudolph Randa drawing flak

Update: "He never should have allowed himself to be involved in that case (Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz) ," said Monroe Freedman, a Hofstra Law School professor and judicial ethics expert, of Randa. (Elbow, The Capital Times)

In a segment on the judge who ended Scott Walker's probe (for now) and tried to destroy all evidence, MSNBC's Chris Hayes referenced U.S. District Judge Rudolph Randa's all-expenses-paid trips to legal seminars, "funded by the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, and other ideological and corporate interests," as previously reported by PRWatch. 

Randa's outrageous ruling stopping a criminal investigation is drawing new attention as $tens of millions of rightwing money has apparently rendered some of the judiciary incompetent or corrupt.

"You can't lobby a judge, but you can wine and dine them," said Nicholas Confessore, correspondent for the New York Times.

Undercutting Scott Walker's Criminal Plea Bargaining

Update: Jason Stein, Patrick Marley and Bill Glauber report, "A legal civil war broke out Wednesday among targets of a John Doe probe, as a conservative group sought Wednesday to block prosecutors from having settlement talks with Gov. Scott Walker's campaign. In a letter sent Wednesday, the Washington, D.C., attorney representing the Wisconsin Club for Growth and one of its directors questioned whether a special prosecutor in the case is negotiating with the GOP governor's campaign to seek concessions that the Club might oppose."

The AP has a source confirming discord among Scott Walker and "other parties caught up in" the John Doe investigation.

This likely means the parties who have been subpoenaed.

The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday in its opinion page: "We've [the Wall Street Journal] learned that Steven Biskupic, who represents Friends of Scott Walker, has been negotiating with Wisconsin special prosecutor Francis Schmitz to settle the state's investigation. The understandable concern among the direct targets of the John Doe is that Mr. Biskupic will cut a deal that would exonerate Mr. Walker while wresting concessions from some of Mr. Walker's allies."

Actually, there are not "targets" in Wisconsin John Doe probes unless criminal charges are brought. John Doe probes are not grand jury proceedings.

The Wall Street Journal editorial sounds like a stern warning to Walker not to forget as the title of the piece reads, "Scott Walker's Friends."

So, who issued the warning? David Koch for his work on behalf of recalled Wisconsin state senators and Scott Walker in 2012? Apparently not.

It's a guessing game.

Biskupic—the former U.S. attorney for the eastern district of Wisconsin (2001-08)—has launched some corrupt schemes before in service to the Republican Party and fouled them up, and he certainly has some fellow Republicans concerned now.

In February, Brendan Fischer reported, "Newly-unsealed court documents and media leaks add to a growing body of evidence that Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's campaign is at the center of a wide-ranging secret probe into campaign finance violations during the state's contentious 2011 and 2012 recall elections."

One possible explanation for why Republican sources are leaking to the media is their concern that Biskupic doesn't believe the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit will sustain Judge Randa's decision and his May 8 finding of frivolousness, so Biskupic is simply trying to get the best deal possible for Walker.

As One Wisconsin Now opines: "If Gov. Walker was confident his campaign hadn't engaged in wrong-doing, he wouldn't be trying to cut a deal. It's not a coincidence that as the court is considering making thousands of secret documents public, Gov. Walker is suddenly negotiating. Gov. Walker has approached this unseemly affair the same way he governs and campaigns, which is to say he doesn't believe the rules apply to him."

The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is composed of 14 judges, including two Republican-appointed judges—Frank Easterbrook and Richard Posner who are generally regarded as geniuses utterly unconcerned with smashing the toes of litigants, if warranted.

Ten judges were appointed by Republican presidents, four by Democratic presidents.

The general perception of the Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit as leaning to the right may be far-off.

And the consensus opinion of Judge Rudolph Randa as having fallen off the deep end may be spot-on.

If Biskupic is giving Walker advice like this, seeking a plea bargain, Walker might wish to listen and so should Walker's friends, unless they see themselves as beyond the law or are deluded about what the law and specific judicial doctrine are as it applies to campaign finance.

Whatever is going on in Wisconsin Republican land, its John Doe probe is a partisan witch hunt line is about as credible as Scott Walker claiming to be an open, transparent and accessible governor.

Report: Scott Walker Campaign in Plea Deal Negotiations

Update: From PRWatch: "The news of settlement talks further undermines their description of the probe as a baseless investigation. It seems hard to believe that Walker would be negotiating settlement if his high-priced lawyers thought this investigation was going nowhere."

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel is reporting the following: "Gov. Scott Walker's campaign may be negotiating with prosecutors as part of a secret investigation into the 2012 recall campaigns involving him and other candidates, according to an anonymously sourced opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal."

The Wall Street Journal [paid site] editorial is condemnatory of Scott Walker's alleged legal maneuvers.

Write Jason Stein, Patrick Marley and Bill Glauber, quoting the Wall Street Jounral: "We've [the Wall Street Journal] learned that Steven Biskupic, who represents Friends of Scott Walker, has been negotiating with Wisconsin special prosecutor Francis Schmitz to settle the state's investigation. The understandable concern among the direct targets of the John Doe is that Mr. Biskupic will cut a deal that would exonerate Mr. Walker while wresting concessions from some of Mr. Walker's allies."

It's not clear since Judge Rudolph Randa halted the John Doe probe in early May in Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz, how and why attorney Biskupic may be negotiating a plea deal for Scott Walker's 2012 Recall campaign.

The Wall Street Journal speculates that "Mr. Walker is facing a rough re-election fight this year, and perhaps he and his lawyers want to remove any chance of a September or October legal surprise."

Concludes the Wall Street Journal editorial: "On Tuesday a very clipped Mr. Biskupic told us that he was "'not going to comment on anything related to any John Doe in Wisconsin because doing so would be a violation of court orders.' But after he hung up with us he warned other friends of Scott Walker about our call. Sounds like Mr. Walker has to decide whose side he's on—his own, or the larger principles he claims to represent."

Stay tuned.

Judge Rudolph Randa Is Perhaps the Most Corrupt U.S. District Judge

A bombshell report broke today on Judge Rudolph Randa—whose writing contrived and heavily criticized orders halting the Wisconsin John Doe probe investigating dark money and possible illegal collusion with the Scott Walker Recall campaign—regularly attended all-expenses-paid junkets, "funded by the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, and other ideological and corporate interests."

Brendan Fischer broke the story at PRWatch today.

Randa has a history of nakedly corrupt judicial policymaking.

Randa presided over the infamous prosecution of Georgia Thompson in 2007 by former U.S. Attorney Stephen Biskupic (2001-2008).

And Randa also refused to recuse himself from a case, decided by a federal bankruptcy judge—the child molestation scandal-bankruptcy proceedings by creditors of the Milwaukee Archdiocese (Goodstein, NYT) with whom Randa was associated.

Randa reversed the decision of a federal bankruptcy judge in July 2013 after the Milwaukee Archdiocese transferred $57 Million to a cemetery fund to avoid paying the rape and sexual assault victims of Catholic priests.

Journal-Sentinel Piece on John Doe Statute as "Witch Hunt" Is Odd

Update: See After Railing Against John Doe Secrecy, WI Club for Growth Fights to Keep Docs Secret

The best work on the Scott Walker-John Doe probes without question is the reporting by the staff of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel.

We know about Scott Walker's stonewalling of his aides' embezzling from veterans' funds, and Scott Walker's many lies on this embezzling because of Dan Bice (Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel; May 31, 2012).

We know that John Doe I grew from John Doe II (Bice, MJS; Oct. 21, 2013).

Jason Stein, Patrick Marley and Daniel Bice's piece of explanatory journalism today is not on a par as the staff's prior work, and arguably constitutes Republican propaganda—everyday operations in GOP-land, but in this election year a crashing project.

This is what happens when good journalists insert foolish talking points from the Republican Party into a news piece, towards what end is not clear.

Republicans will make up talking points and contradict themselves within hours, and not get called out in the news columns.

Today's headline reads: "Courts to decide whether John Doe a useful tool or unfair witch hunt."

It's a good bet neither of these two questions will be addressed or answered by the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. And it is unlikely any Court will rule on the constitutionality of Wisconsin's John Doe statute.

Witch Hunts Need Witches

To conduct a witch hunt, one needs to understand that there are by definition no witches.

[Note: With sincere apologies to the Wiccan religious embrace of life; no disrespect is intended to these positive and life-affirming people.]

Let's consider John Doe I, there are plenty of "witches."

Prosecutors secured multiple criminal convictions against six of Scott Walker's appointees, top staff, and a campaign contributor.

There are no claims of innocence, save Kelly M. Rindfleisch who is appealing her conviction of misconduct in public office.

Would any Republican claim Rindfleisch is innocent?

We know from multiple emails released by Rindfleisch that Scott Walker and his staff ran an illegal political operation out of the Milwaukee County Executive's office, an operation that began as far back as 2002 when Bob Kiefert set up a secret Internet system—an effort coordinated by then-deputy chief of staff Tim Russell (who embezzled over $10,000 from a veterans' fund) and Kiefert was given the nod by then Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker. [See also Scott Walker Knew about 'Secret' Email System at Milwaukee County; Kiefert, Green Bay Progressive; February 19, 2014).

Seizure by Police

Seizure and serving of subpoenas are intrusive and invasive, which is precisely why we have the Fourth Amendment, and the ACLU. R.J. Johnson should remember this the next time he blasts the ACLU.

In any event, the Journal-Sentinel's appreciation for civil liberties is to be applauded. However, today's piece sensationalizes police work.

If the police acted improperly in seizure of property and serving subpoenas, they should be held accountable. But how does this call into question the John Doe statute or the prosecutors conducting a witch hunt?

Attacking Prosecutors

The "national trend ... attacking prosecutors" while being a "target" mentioned may be relevant to the routine "Brady violations" in which prosecutors illegally withhold exculpatory or other evidence favorable to the defense in a criminal trial.

See‘Epidemic of Brady violations’ decried in Judge Kozinski's opinion, the many wrongful convictions, and the important opinion by Judge Richard Posner (with Wisconsin's Judge Diane Sykes dissenting) of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in which Judge Posner hits absolute immunity for prosecutors, and refuses "to bless a breathtaking injustice" of an innocent man. This innocent man was imprisoned for 17 years, and was the victim of an Illinois prosecutor "coercing a man’s false testimony that led to his conviction and sentence to death row." This repulsive prosecutor was defended by Justice Sykes' opinion.

But Wisconsin John Doe probes determine if and by whom a crime has been committed, and if a case were to forward. There are no targets, as in grand juries, until and if someone is charged.

In this specific John Doe probe, the investigation itself is being attacked, not the prosecution as there is not a prosecution.

The probe has not determined if and by whom a crime has been committed.

The district attorneys are Constitutional officers whom Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen refuses to defend by intervening in Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz, et al while the case is under appeal.

This is because the Scott Walker campaign and the Wisconsin Club for Growth's R.J. Johnson and other groups apparently illegally coordinated their campaigns during the 2012 Recall elections, and these are factions to whom Van Hollen owes his allegiance.

If this is false, why are Republican spending $ millions trying to stop this investigation?

John Doe Judges

As for Wisconsin's Republican attorney general, J.B. Van Hollen is quoted as saying, he wants judges to no longer preside over filing charges by district attorneys.

Van Hollen may or may not be aware that a presiding judge is a protection against a district attorney who might violate citizens' rights.

Again, witch hunt?

Witch Hunt

By insinuating that Wisconsin's John Doe statute is a witch hunt and calling into question the operation of this John Doe probe, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel piece contrives a controversy where none exists, if facts are the foundation of this analysis.

Just because a bunch of Republicans yell "witch," this does not mean witches' casting spells are real or that Scott Walker is a straight shooter who holds 100s of no-holds-barred listening sessions with the Wisconsin people.

These things don't happen.

Wisconsin DAs Call out Judge Ruldoph Randa: Open John Doe Records

Update III: Wisconsin Public Radio has updated their story, and confirmed that the story is inaccurate with a link to Judge Randa's proposed order: "CORRECTION: "Wisconsin Public Radio reported this morning that Judge Rudolph Randa had issued a ruling in the John Doe lawsuit ordering nearly all documents in the case to be released to the public. It was a proposed order, not a final order, and has not been signed by Judge Randa.We regret the error."

Update II: Wisconsin John Doe attorneys have filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit to reauthorize their authority over the John Doe investigation, and are seeking an order preventing U.S. District Judge Ruldoph Randa from taking further action on this law enforcement investigation while it proceeds, Patrick Marley reports.

Update: Wisconsin Public Radio report is inaccurate; and is retracted . Judge Ruldoph Randa ordered the release of more than 100 documents, reports Wisconsin Public Radio. Randa orders that four documents stay sealed because the Wisconsin Club for Growth says their secrecy is needed to secure their First Amendment rights. See update above.

Judge Ruldoph Randa likely is not aware how ridiculous his rulings shutting down the John Doe investigation are.

No one has been charged; no one has gone on trial; the Wisconsin John Doe statute calls for determining these two questions.

But Randa decided it is for him as a federal judge to decide a First Amendment objection during an ongoing state law enforcement investigation.

Worth noting is that no one is targeted before he or she is charged in Wisconsin John Doe probes, despite what readers are told by GOP flacks.

Rightwingers including Judge Randa have complained about the secrecy codicils allowed under Wisconsin's John Doe statute, in Randa's order to shut down a law enforcement investigation.

In Randa's opinion, Randa writes, "the first John Doe developed into a long-running investigation of all things Walker-related," (p.4) a foolish reference to the apparent orderly, bipartisan probe overseen by a presiding judge.

Randa displays his naked bias often in his opinion Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz, et al (Case No.  14-C-139), filed May 5, making several references about the "secret" nature of the John Doe probe subpoenas, though secrecy in John Doe probes is typical

In the face of rightwing accusations of "police-state" (George Will) targeting of the Scott Walker campaign and rightwingers, prosecutors yesterday made a motion to open the records, per the John Doe statute.

"Subject to s. 971.23, [Discovery and Inspection] if the proceeding is secret, the record of the proceeding and the testimony taken shall not be open to inspection by anyone except the district attorney unless it is used by the prosecution at the preliminary hearing or the trial of the accused and then only to the extent that it is so used," reads the John Doe statute.

The presiding judge has the discretion to ultimately determine if the record is to be made public.

Previously, the Wisconsin Club for Growth had made a call for discovery.

Report Dan Bice and Patrick Marley:

In a surprise move, prosecutors said Wednesday they support opening hundreds of pages of documents from a John Doe probe into fundraising and spending by Gov. Scott Walker's campaign and its conservative allies during recent recall elections. ...

State Reserve Judge Gregory Peterson, who is supervising the probe, filed a one-page response saying he neither supported nor opposed the effort to unseal the documents the journalism groups are seeking.

Randa who has injected himself into the case in a heavily criticized decision and order, is now the deciding authority on if and what records will be released.

Randa's authority may be short-lived, however, as an appeal filed by the five Wisconsin district attorneys, the presiding John Doe judge, and the special prosecutor, a self-identified Republican, Francis Schmitz is still to be decided.

If Randa is to reclaim a shred of credibility, he should order full transparency of the John Doe records, per the District Attorneys' discretion in keeping with state law.

Unless Randa is prepared to declare the Wisconsin John Doe statute unconstitutional on whatever contrived grounds he can imagine [ludicrous but this is Randa], the people of Wisconsin and the litigants will be served by transparency in this case in which Randa should never have made his sweeping decision he ordered on May 5, and his finding of frivolousness by the district attorneys two days later.

Attorneys Samuel Leib, who is representing Milwaukee DA John Chisholm, said: "(Randa's) decision threatens the constitutional authority of every district attorney and the attorney general of the state of Wisconsin." (Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel)

Yes, the constitutional authority is endangered and one wonder why Wisconsin's governor and attorney general are not intervening on the basis of these concerns.

Sure, Scott Walker's campaign is likely implicated in illegal coordination in violation of Wisconsin campaign finance law, but Walker did take an oath to defend the U.S. and Wisconsin constitutions, and so did J.B. Van Hollen.

Rudolph Randa's Reversals by Appellate Court Draw Attention

John Doe probe halted by Judge Rudolph
Randa is an investigation that grew out
of embezzlement from military veterans'
funds by Scott Walker appointees.
From left to right: Tim Russell, Scott Walker
and Brian Pierick, Four other Walker associates
were convicted in a Wisconsin John Doe probe

Updated - As Wisconsin awaits the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit on Judge Rudolph Randa's order to halt the law enforcement investigation known as John Doe II, attention is being focused on Randa's many other rulings reversed on appeal.

Randa's two orders last week to halt the probe of possible collusion by Scott Walker's campaign and out-of-state independent expenditure groups have attorneys mystified, though attorneys are prevented from questioning the ethics of Randa by rules of the State Bar of Wisconsin.

Randa's decision in Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz, et al (Case No.  14-C-139) is contrived to reach a desired result.

Federal Election Commission (FEC) Vice Chair, Ann Ravel says Randa "has cut and pasted a lot of decisions, a lot of language from various decisions, in a way that is actually not applicable. And if it were to be carried out to its full meaning, there would be very few campaign [finance] laws that would continue to be able to be enforced"

Now, Randa's past ruling are drawing attention as a window into the ethics of Randa by journalists.

This weekend's pieces (Bice, Stein and Dietrich, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel) includes this passage:

For instance, in 2007, Randa referred repeatedly to a drug dealer's Mexican heritage, saying 'you people' and 'those people,' during sentencing. The judge also discounted the defendant's claim of being a good family man, saying 'even Adolf Hitler was admired by his family. Adolf Hitler loved his dog. Yet he killed 6 million Jews.'

Randa has a reputation as an imperious judge, reminding some of the late U.S. District Judge John Shabazz in this respect whose open contempt for litigants and his own self reverence were infamous.

But Randa takes his self-regard down to the vainglorious, ordering the physical structure of the courtroom architecture altered in a bizarre move transforming the appearance of his bench into something resembling a throne.

Report Bice, Stein and Dietrich: Known for his "authoritarian" manner in court, about a decade ago, "Randa spent $1.85 million in taxpayer dollars to upgrade his courtroom, chambers and library, even adding a 400-pound, hand-carved wooden U.S. District Court seal to the wall and moving the six courtroom chandeliers so they aligned with his bench, not the windows."

But it is Randa's frequent reversals more than his manner that has jurists alarmed.

Randa presided over the infamous prosecution of Georgia Thompson in 2007 by former U.S. Attorney Stephen Biskupic (2001-2008), [Biskupic's wife works as a judicial assistant on Randa's staff and Biskupic now represents Scott Walker's campaign in his law firm begun with his former assistant from the U.S. Attorney's office], that in a spectacular action was reversed by a bipartisan panel on appeal immediately after oral arguments with the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit, Frank Easterbrook, ordering Thompson freed, and ordering her acquittal.

Randa insisted Thompson remain jailed during the appellate process though the conviction was condemned across the nation.

More examples abound, and it would take a large undertaking to examine all the victims under Randa's judgeship.

One case involves Randa refusing to recuse himself in the child molestation scandal-bankruptcy proceedings by creditors of the Milwaukee Archdiocese (Goodstein, NYT) with whom Randa was associated.

Randa reversed the decision of a federal bankruptcy judge in July 2013 after the Milwaukee Archdiocese transferred $57 Million to a cemetery fund to avoid paying the rape and sexual assault victims of Catholic priests.

"In his ruling, Judge Randa decided that forcing the archdiocese to tap its cemetery fund would violate the First Amendment’s free exercise of religion clause and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a law passed by Congress in 1993, " reports Goodstein. (emphasis mine)

That decision has not yet been appealed. 

See also ThinkProgress (Millhiser) for more information on Randa.

If anyone had any doubt that George Will is just another propagandist for the GOP, this doubt can properly dispensed with reading Will's take in which he writes, "U.S. District Judge Rudolph T. Randa, revolted by the police-state arrogance of some elected prosecutors, has stopped a partisan abuse of law enforcement that was masquerading as political hygiene."

Will as usual ignores inconvenient facts, including the fact that two district attorneys are Republicans, the special investigator is Republican, and the vote by the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board to investigate was unanimous.

"Former judges on the state Government Accountability Board voted unanimously last year to authorize the investigation of fundraising and spending by Gov. Scott Walker's campaign and his allies during the recent recall elections, according to a Tuesday court filing," report Patrick Marley and Daniel Bice (April 15, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel).

Moreover, John Doe probes in Wisconsin are overseen by a judge and the John Doe probe is an investigation; John Doe probes do not mete out the trial and conviction and sentence as Will would have readers believe in his deceitful prose.

Doesn't George Will research his columns?

Perils of Shutting Down Law Enforcement Probe May Await Scott Walker

Update: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel slams Judge Rudoph Randa's decisions and order on John Doe II in a blistering editorial. "Jeremy Levinson, a Democratic campaign finance attorney in Milwaukee, told the Journal Sentinel that Randa is ignoring years of settled law and opened the door to undisclosed involvement (of huge money injections);" and that the Randa imperils the "constitutional authority of every district attorney and the attorney general of the state of Wisconsin."

Our state would become a lawless entity, where big-moneyed interests are free to break the law with no power of the people or law enforcement to stop them from destroying the state of Wisconsin as a representative democracy, if Randa's order were to stand.
---
The aggressive legal strategy of Scott Walker and the GOP Money heavies fighting off the law enforcement investigation known as John Doe II may result in unintended consequences.

The dynamic dates back to the old days when it was taken for granted by criminal enterprises that you never kill an investigative reporter because the result is more light is shone on what the journalist was covering.

Dominique Paul Noth posits the same principle applying to the John Doe II investigation of Scott Walker's campaign, and all the massive money funneled into the 2012 Wisconsin Recall elections and possible illegal coordination and breaking of campaign corruption laws.

Writes Noth: "It could very well be that the high-priced lawyers for the Wisconsin  Club for Growth were just sucked in to major tactical error by the US 7th District Court of Appeals, which encouraged an oops ruling reversal  by US District Judge Rudolph T. Randa that now allows a broader investigation to proceed."

Noth points out this is speculation, and jurists mostly cannot speak on the record, but are more than chatty in trusted legal circles. And the type of light Noth alludes to is new legal investigation that could be launched by procedure and reasonable suspicion of criminality in Wisconsin.

There is another truism is politics that applies to Scott Walker and his financial backers: When politicians tell you it's not about the money, it's about the money.

FEC Commissioner: Judge Randa's Order a Troubling Cut-and-Paste Job

Updated - Talking Points Memo's Eric Lach has an interview up with Federal Election Commission (FEC) Vice Chair, Ann Ravel, reacting to Judge Rudolph Randa's ruling this week shutting down the John Doe probe looking into possible illegal coordination between Scott Walker's campaign and rightwing groups in the 2012 recall elections.

Ms. Ravel slams Randa's ruling, adding to the growing perception that a federal judge is working directly for the benefit of one political faction in his jurisdiction, the Republican Party.

Ravel's comments are the first by a jurist speaking to the merits of Randa's decision and order.

Here's a excerpt, the whole interview is worth reading.

Says Ravel:

"[Randa's ruling] is significant nonetheless, because it goes so far beyond what the Supreme Court has ruled in Citizens United and McCutcheon. And the language in the decision is very broad and troubling."

I think essentially what he's saying isn't the law. He has cut and pasted a lot of decisions, a lot of language from various decisions, in a way that is actually not applicable. And if it were to be carried out to its full meaning, there would be very few campaign [finance] laws that would continue to be able to be enforced." (emphasis added)

Corrupt prosecutors too often employ overly creative constructions and aggregations of elements of criminal statute and case law to arrive at a predetermined conclusion in their objective to secure criminal convictions, irrespective of justice.

In Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz, et al (Case No.  14-C-139), the artist creating a legal montage is Judge Rudolph Randa, and citizens are left staring mutely at his contrivance, now doubting whether judicial impartiality and justice still exist in Wisconsin.

GOP Wants to See John Doe Docs, Let's Make Them All Public

Updated - Dan Bice reports the GOP attorneys want to engage in massive discovery of the John Doe investigation.

The presiding judge of the John Doe probe is at liberty to disclose documents to the public as well.

Reports Bice:

"While deposing witnesses and gathering evidence, Rivkin said Thursday that his team of attorneys will be looking at whether the prosecutors involved in the five-county investigation engaged in any partisan activity or consulted with political figures."

Rivkin is of course posturing for Scott Walker.

The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has not even ruled as of this moment on Randa's ridiculous certification of the bipartisan district attorneys' appellate arguments as "frivolous."

Rivkin is blowing smoke, but he should be careful what he pretends to wish for.

If the presiding judge views releasing the John Doe documents in the public interest, consonant with the rights of those questioned he may make public the John Doe findings and documents.

Does Scott Walker really want this public?

The Journal-Sentinel headline reads attorney Rivkin wants the John Doe documents under a microscope. Hell, why not on the big screen, if there is nothing to hide?

Update: Judge Rudolph Randa Declares District Attorneys' Argument Frivolous

Update V: The Steven Biskupic-Rudolph Randa conflict-of-interest story is knocked down. "Steven Biskupic, a former U.S. attorney who is representing a party in the secretive John Doe probe, indicated Thursday in an email to the State Journal that there was no conflict of interest for Judge Rudolph Randa, whose judicial assistant is Cary Biskupic, Steven Biskupic's wife. (DeFour, Wisconsin State Journal)

Update IV: From Greg Neumann (WKOW, Madison): "@Burke4WI says she does not think Judge Randa should have the final say on the John Doe investigation into GOP recall campaigns and groups." Better than nothing.

Update III: Mary Burke, Scott Walker's presumptive Democratic Party opponent, has nothing to say about this naked display of corruption in the judiciary. Nothing.

Update II: Here's Brendan Fischer's take from PRWatch: "Judge Randa's May 6 decision halting the investigation is extraordinary. It involves a federal court injecting its own interpretation of state law into a high-profile criminal probe of political operatives of the party that appointed him to the bench, while state court proceedings are ongoing. It deploys a strained reading of U.S. Supreme Court precedent and the facts of the case, portraying the investigation -- led by a bipartisan group of District Attorneys and a Special Prosecutor who voted for Walker, and approved unanimously by the bipartisan group of retired judges on Wisconsin's Government Accountability Board -- as politically-motivated retaliation against Republicans. ....

Update: Naked corruption by Judge Rudolph Randa (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin)

Randa just dove into the depths of corruption, and certified the law enforcement attorneys' arguments "frivolous," a necessary step for his halting the John Doe probe into Scott Walker's possible campaign and illegal coordination, among other fact-finding done by the criminal probe.

For a finding of frivolousness, a judge must certify arguments to be utterly meritless, and most likely made in bad faith.

Here's a lay definition of frivolous: A legal move in a lawsuit clearly intended merely to harass, delay or embarrass the opposition. Frivolous acts can include ... an appeal which contains not a single arguable basis (by any stretch of the imagination) for the appeal. (Law.com)

I would be surprised if Randa's decision lasts a day. In any event the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Judicial Misconduct Compliant Form is here.

Randa's decision will almost certainly be appealed, and overturned
---
Judge Rudolph Randa's "decision and order," mandating the destruction of evidence gathered in the Wisconsin criminal investigation known as John Doe II reads like a political op-ed column from the Wall Street Journal, in service to the Republican party of Wisconsin, as much as a precisely crafted judicial opinion.

Randa's bizarre order (PDF link from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel) was stayed within hours by a three-judge panel for the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (May 7 order).

The appellate panel's language is measured of course, but reading between the lines, it is the legal equivalent of excoriation, and a complete reversal of Randa's decision.

On Monday, May 5, the Wisconsin district attorneys and other John Doe authorities filed an Emergency Motion for Stay Pending Appeal and Memorandum in Support of Motion.

Randa ignored the filing, and rushed out his decision and order the next day, May 6.

Wisconsin jurists cannot state on the record that Randa's actions are corrupt, reckless, and in disregard to settled legal procedure, but what Randa did was precisely for a corrupt purpose in support of the GOP and in opposition to the rule of law.

Chief Judge Diane P. Wood, William J. Bauer, and Frank H. Easterbrook write in their May 7 order:

Apostol v. Gallion, 870 F.2d 1335 (7th cir. 1989), once a litigant files a notice of appeal, a district court (like Randa's) may not take further action in the suit unless it certifies that the appeal is frivolous. The district court failed to follow that rule when, despite the notice of appeal by several defendants, it entered a preliminary injunction. This court accordingly stays the injunction, and all further proceedings in the court, until [Judge Randa] has ruled definitively on the question posed by Apostol. (emphasis added)

Why didn't Randa know this?

And why did Randa rush out his decision and order, a maneuver that lasted mere hours before being reversed in the appellate panel's order?

Randa's decision is replete with editorializing, minimizing the crimes of Scott Walker appointees and aides who embezzled from military veterans funds and committed misconduct in public office as "minor offenses."

Randa even refers to Walker's Act 10 Bill as "reforms," ["...Wisconsin Club for Growth (WCFG) argued that the reforms of the Budget Repair Bill were fair ..."] (p. 3) and presents as fact that "left-leaning organizations" (p. 3) are in political opposition.

Randa goes on and on, attributing the political motives of Eric O'Keefe (of the Wisconsin Club for Growth) and R. J. Johnson (a respected Wisconsin GOP politico) as benign and in the public interest.

Writes Randa: "The initial focus of the first (John Doe) proceeding was the embezzlement of $11,242.24 that Milwaukee County had collected for the local Order of the Purple Heart while Walker was serving as Milwaukee County Executive.  From there, the first John Doe developed into a long-running investigation of all things Walker-related." (p. 4)

"All things Walker-related?" Does this really strike anyone as anything but editorializing, and biased against and hostile to the John Doe investigation?

Randa's background of the case including his editorializing is not addressed on the appellate panel's order; it is not blasted by Wisconsin jurists (who ethically cannot criticize the ethics of a fellow jurist), so if falls to lay citizens and journalists to tease out what happened.

In none of the reporting from Wisconsin media outlets have we seen the facts of Randa's inappropriate and inaccurate editorializing reported on and condemned.

What happened this week is that a corrupt federal judge, a former member of the rightwing Federalist Society, fronted and shilled for the Republicans and other right wingers, and only the integrity of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit saved the rule of law in Wisconsin.

Nowhere does Randa even cite the Wisconsin John Doe statute that serves the Wisconsin people as a law enforcement tool.

One can read a scholarly and unbiased judicial opinion and find the arguments of both sides of the litigants' presented, analyzed, and refuted or sustained. Not so Randa's.

Randa's opinion makes a laughingstock of his tenure on the bench, already tarnished by the ludicrous Georgia Thompson prosecution and his unethical ruling on the Milwaukee Archdiocese bankruptcy proceedings settling the mass child rape and molestation cases.

In this case, Walker's attorney, Steven Biskupic, is married to Cary Biskupic who is a Judicial Assistant for Randa. No appearance of impartiality there, in Randa's view who should have recused himself from this case.

One thing Randa did get right is this: "According to the prosecutors, R.J. Johnson controlled WCFG and used it as a 'hub' to coordinate fundraising and issue advocacy involving FOSW (Friends of Scott Walker) and other 501(c)(4) organizations such as Citizens for a Strong America, Wisconsin Right to Life, and United Sportsmen of Wisconsin." (p. 8)

There is certainly reasonable suspicion for a John Doe probe, as the five Republican and Democratic district attorneys agree.

Randa did a service in demonstrating that Wisconsin Republicans (including Randa) today feel they are above the law.

Walker hopes that the criminal investigation will "move on," but not for Walker's benefit Walker says, but for the people of the state.

Right. I wonder if Scott Walker has any comment about Randa's characterization of stealing from veterans as a "minor offense" since Walker appointed the embezzlers who had no veterans' advocacy experience and no non-profit experience.

Walker also says the John Doe investigations are distractions. Yes, criminal investigations usually are distractions from those who have engaged in criminal activities.

It is incumbent on those Wisconsin citizens in the legal profession to borrow the courage of appellate attorney and author, Sidney Powell—who blows the whistle on massive corruption in the U.S. DoJ and federal judiciary in her new book, Licensed to Lie ...—and call for impartiality in the judiciary and the rule of law in Wisconsin.