A steaming hot dish of crow for lefty bloggers

After months of going all woohoo! on the idea of a John Doe investigation for Scott Walker, it turns out Walker initiated the complaint and is actually the victim.

I’ll toss in a little Southern accent here and proclaim DAY-umn!

There appears to be absolutely nothing to pin on Walker. And thus one might find it amusing that the lefty bloggers are remarkably, profoundly, quiet on this matter. They are whining about Gableman. They are sandbagging Santorum.

Wait. Capper (Chris Liebenthal) is proclaiming Walkergate just today. I guess it doesn’t do to be wrong on your own blog. Might as well get it to print. He writes in the Shepard Express:

But what is known indicates that this is a very large investigation, which has expanded to include many people and many possible problems for Walker and his attempt to remain in office.


The big question on many people’s mind is whether Scott Walker is the John Doe being investigated. Again, this can’t be answered with absolute certainty.

It is known that the investigation has involved Walker’s staff at the highest levels of his administrations as county executive and as governor as well as his campaign staff, which are often the same people.

Given these facts, it is still impossible to say that Walker will be indicted. But it can be said that even if Walker is not indicted, the slow but steady drip of information about the John Doe investigation is a big problem for him and his attempt to win the support of Wisconsin voters during a high-stakes recall campaign.

And now it’s all quiet. Nothing on the recall. Nothing on the results of the investigation they enjoyed discussing over the last few months.

Let’s all enjoy the silence while we can. 🙂

(Update – It didn’t stay quiet for long. I was seriously schooled regarding the typo that elevated Chris to Christ. 😉 Why don’t you guys tell me stuff like that? I’m rotten at proofing my own work.)


  1. There seems to be more integrity in the Walker administration than anyone on the left would like to admit. I know Tom Nardelli as a little league coach and my former alderman. He’s no nonsense and upfront about things.

    as a side note my anti-spam word today was “occupy” how funny.

  2. Walker is the victim?! Good Lord. Nice spin.

    Though completely NOT what I was expecting, this DOES provide another example of Walker showing very poor judge of character in placing those close to him.

  3. Talk about spin there. You go, jimspice. You go.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Page 19 and 20 of the indictment against Tim Russell show that money from Heritage Guard Preservation Society was used to fund the purchase of the scott4gov domains from GoDaddy.

  5. And your point is?

  6. Cindy, I can not believe you would think there is nothing wrong with purchasing campaign resources with stolen charitable contributions. Or is the hubris on your side that strong. You’re the only conservative blogger out there with even an iota of a chance of admitting this looks bad. If you don’t, I’m just going to assume conservatives believe hiring criminals is the preferable mode of operation.

  7. The story is not about purchasing campaign resources with stolen contributions. The story is that Walker was not involved and called for the investigation. Yet those who want to convict him before they have any facts are now exposed for who they really are. That hubris is appalling.

    I will judge Walker on this when the investigation is over and the verdicts have been read.

  8. jimspice, I can not believe you would think that the actions of one can be assigned to Scott Walker so easily. There are a number of lines which must be drawn if your assertions are to be proven. Draw those lines factually and then I’ll respond. If not, then as usual, your wishful thinking does not make it so.

    Was Tim Russell known to be a criminal when Walker hired him?

    At this point it looks like a renegade staff person – who Walker cut loose long before any charges – did a lot of rotten things. That’s all you can prove.

  9. jimspice
    Please provide a link showing that Russell was a convicted criminal when Walker hired him.

    And tell me, did you vote for Bill Clinton ? Simple yes or no.

  10. Jon Corzine raised tens of thousands of dollars for President Obama while his company was “misplacing” $1.2 billion of cash. Of course, open-minded liberals have no problems with that.

  11. BrkfldDad says:

    KPOM – love the comment, how true.

    What a kick to see Capper get above the fold-like treatment by the Shepherd Express. But, wasn’t he the first County employee actually charged with conducting non-County business on County time? That whole article sure is the pot calling the kettle black.

  12. The Lorax says:

    Nah, KPOM, us liberals hate Corzine. It’s the party guys who like him.

  13. Is there any evidence that Walker committed a crime?


    Is he responsible for putting the fox in charge of the hen house?


    For the latter, he should be held politically accountable.

  14. Pike
    Good. Apparently you can provide a link or info that shows Walker had knowledge of what Russell’s future actions would be.

  15. Lorax
    Is Obama a party guy or a liberal ?

  16. Northern Pike: You wish. Then we’d have to hold every politician politically accountable and that wouldn’t work for you, would it.

  17. Cindy: Wrong. Politicians are accountable for the people they apppoint.

    Let’s assume that one of Obama’s former Senate aides had been charged with stealing money from a charitable organization that assists veterans. You don’t think Fox News and Charlie Sykes would be all over that?

    There is no evidence that Walker is corrupt. However, he did put a person on the public payroll who is corrupt. Furthermore, he put that person in charge of a charity that had been run with no fundraising irregularities the previous three years. Does it fulfill the left’s wildest fantasies? No, but it still reflects negatively on Walker’s administrative skills. It’s no different than a college football coach who recruits players who get in trouble with the law. Maybe the coach doesn’t get fired, but it still reflects badly on his program.

    To call Walker a “victim” is absurd. More conservative victimization culture.

  18. I’d agree with Northernpike, and add one other facet that hasn’t been raised. Isn’t it ironic that Russell is gay, which makes for two major appointments Walker has given to gays (the other being Milwaukee County parks director Sue Black, who is generally agreed to be doing a good job.)
    On one hand, I guess this shows Walker to be a smidgen more liberal than Mark Neumann. On the other hand, I wonder what Julaine Appling and Wisconsin Family Action think.

  19. Pike
    I’m trying to follow your logic. If I understand you it would be okay for a politician to have a “corrupt friend”, as long as he didn’t put him on the “public payroll”, right ?

  20. Northern Pike: I am glad you acknowledge “there is no evidence that Walker is corrupt.” But I also argue Walker was accountable. He led authorities to the wrongdoing; they just took a year and a half to get it done. To have it your way and assign Walker culpability means Obama is responsible for Holder and Fast and Furious. I’m game if you really want to go there, but it won’t change the outcome for either of us.

    Put your hopes and dreams back into the recall basket. It’ll get you through the next two weeks or so.

    Oh, dear goodness, Bill Kurtz. Apparently Carthage College pays you to be obnoxious. Party on, dude.

  21. Neither side has enough information in this ongoing investigation to claim either vindication or impending doom for Gov. Walker. What seems clear about the investigation:

    1. It is producing some results.

    2. It has a life of its own now (and it doesn’t really matter what or who precipitated it at this point, does it?)

    3. Requesting an investigation, if that is what happened and it matches what is going on now, does not automatically absolve anyone of any adverse findings, including the requestor.

    We can’t say that the jury is still out. It hasn’t even been called in.

  22. Now this is becoming amusing. The guy Walker asked to be investigated bought tickets for a cruise, and somewhere I read Walker hasn’t even been questioned, but you are convinced Walker will still be implicated.

  23. Couldn’t disagree more, Jim. There is zero information available after months of investigation linking Walker to anything. And yes, the “requestor” (we all know you mean Walker) is not automatically absolved but history and common sense would point to this person, if involved, not requesting an investigation. The results you refer to concern someone the Governor, for reasons we do not know, no longer has in his working circle. I’m not sure what “having a life of it’s own” means in the context of this discussion.

    But if you read some of the above comments there are those who apparently want to make the governor responsible to an impossible standard because they have axes to grind in other arenas, just as you do, by reading your blog.

  24. Thanks for reading my blog! 🙂

  25. It was fun. Especially the part about your Paris trip over the holidays. We have the love of free flights in good seats in common. 🙂

  26. It would seem that this investigation is far fromver. This isn’t the first result (Remember Bill Gardner?) and there’s plenty of reason to think it won;t be the last.

  27. Randy says, “There is zero information available after months of investigation linking Walker to anything,” but Walker is the thread that brings together Gardner and Russell.

    I’m content to wait until Chisholm says he’s finished to see who or what might be steaming. Cindy, your post is a celebration of a big fourth inning. Nothing more.

    Banacek told us, “The chicken that clucks loudest winds up at the steamfitter’s picnic.” I’d be leary of crowing too loudly just yet.

  28. Grumps
    I am speaking in the present tense to those who are making a link that doesn’t exist—yet. It could change tomorrow. But I will defend ground already covered.

  29. Grumps
    Could you provide a link where “Gardner and Russell were ‘brought together’ by Walker”.


  30. Grumps, just because you really want it badly, doesn’t make it so. Don’t you think it would take an awful lot after so many months of investigation and a couple of arrests to put Scott Walker on the list of most wanted?

  31. For all Cindy’s bluster about how there isn’t anything to pin on Walker, it’s important to remember that the John Doe investigation in Milwaukee County isn’t over – DA John Chisholm said as much when he announced the charges against Russell.

    This isn’t the end of things, and whether or not there’s something to “pin” on Scott Walker remains to be seen.

  32. You guys are really getting funny about this thing, aren’t you?

  33. Yeah, facts are a funny thing when they don’t suit the point you’re trying to make.

  34. What facts did you use in your assessment Zach? That Chisolm “said as much?” That it “remains to be seen?”

    I argue that Dems in this state are laughable regarding this subject, and you go and provide immediate proof.

  35. “in an evenhanded manner.”

    I argue that you’re laughable regarding that statement.

  36. Zach, don’t get nasty. Just admit you haven’t any facts to implicate Walker.

  37. Once again when pressed for facts to back up a statement or assertion, a liberal gets personal. Cindy, I am learning that asking questions is a waste of time.

  38. Randy 30–Walker is the thread that connects the two. He didn’t, necessarily, put the two in touch with one another but he is the common vector.

    Let’s ask this since we know Russell had his fingers on more piles of money than just the zoo/vets piece; Is it conceivable that, if Russell had his fingers in the till, that he only stole from one source?

  39. Huh? I thought this argument was all about how to blame Walker?

  40. Randy in Richmond says:

    My answer to your question Grumps is yes, based on what we know now. But it really doesn’t matter– if Walker is not involved.

    Who is the thread that connects these three ?

    Tony Rezco, Robert Titcomb, and Bill Ayers ? (And there are others, many others)




    Here’s some more–find the common thread:

    Johnny Chung, Webster and Susan Hubbell, and
    Jorge Cabrera.




    These are real, not based on what ifs, or what might, or maybe down the road.

  41. I think I get it. If a Republican governor turns in a former operative, he’s guilty by vector, association, or any way you can connect him to an allegation. Then convict him before there’s a trial.

    If it’s a democrat anything, he was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    Care to refute grumpy?

  42. “Politicians are accountable for the people they apppoint. ” Well, Republican politicians are… Shall we discuss Tom Barrett’s staffer under indictment? Nah.

  43. Of course you should, Fred! You can be such a tease.

  44. BrkfldDad says:

    Or you could bring up Joseph Cantu, who served as an assistant to Barrett and an intern to Doyle. Shame on both of them for hiring him.

  45. Fred, as a helpful reading tip, you can usually look at the post at the top of the page to see what the topic is. That way you don’t just jump in the middle hollering, “Doyle Sukz,” or some such irrelevant nonsense.