WI Gov. Scott Walker implicated in criminal probe

From your link:

"Now, he can wear the ruling as a badge of honor — yet another political battle from which he emerged victorious."



That's good press!;)
 
Some good news for the GOP for once. I think this was the right outcome.

Given his trouncing of the recall (very rare) and given his other victories politically, I think he has a very good chance in the general election. I don't know if he can win the primary though. He's going to have to give enough red meat to get past folks like Trump without alienating independents and minority voters.

I dislike Hillary enough that I'm willing to consider Walker. IMO: He's the best politician in the GOP field. That of course could change once the debates start. Well see.

Congrats to Walker.
 
Sure, why not. Walker vs Sanders in the general election. Knock over the apple cart to see which way they roll.
 
bobtaftfan said:
Another corrupt Democratic witch hunt.

How many of these baseless "investigations" have to be discredited before honest liberals will admit that they are purely politically motivated.

Some background on these phony "investigations":

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...e-i-thought-it-was-home-invasion-david-french

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/04/politicized_persecution_run_am.html
Click to expand...
As hominem poisoning the well. They are not dishonest because they are democrat. They are dishonest because they are human with aspirations.

It's wrong for the Democrats to use investiations for political purposes but it is hardly a partisan tactic.

Take the asinine Benghazi hearings.

There have already been seven investigations, 13 hearings, 50 briefings, and 25,000 pages of documents have been released. But that won't stop Republicans from re-re-re investigating Benghazi as a part of a crass partisan ploy to turn out the far-right base in November.
Click to expand...
Then again, honesty and fairness is in the eye of the beholder for some.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orly_Taitz
Not a tu quoque, just "honesty" that this isn't a partisan problem. A tu quoque is an attempt to deny or avoid the proposition. I accept that there are politically motivated investigations in both parties. However, in the interest of "honesty", the Republican McCarthy made an art form of it and destroyed many lives. There is no monopoly of abuse of power on either side of the political fence.

Get out of the echo chamber
 
RandFan said:
As hominem poisoning the well. They are not dishonest because they are democrat. They are dishonest because they are human with aspirations.

It's wrong for the Democrats to use investiations for political purposes but it is hardly a partisan tactic.

Take the asinine Benghazi hearings.

Then again, honesty and fairness is in the eye of the beholder for some.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orly_Taitz
Not a tu quoque, just "honesty" that this isn't a partisan problem. A tu quoque is an attempt to deny or avoid the proposition. I accept that there are politically motivated investigations in both parties. However, in the interest of "honesty", the Republican McCarthy made an art form of it and destroyed many lives. There is no monopoly of abuse of power on either side of the political fence.

Get out of the echo chamber
Click to expand...

This is a false equivalence. Either you don't understand what happened to conservatives linked to Walker in Wisconsin, or you are being disingenuous. What happened wasn't just a politically motivated investigation. It was politically motivated oppression. It was suppression of dissent. It was punishment without due process.
 
sunmaster14 said:
This is a false equivalence. Either you don't understand what happened to conservatives linked to Walker in Wisconsin, or you are being disingenuous. What happened wasn't just a politically motivated investigation. It was politically motivated oppression. It was suppression of dissent. It was punishment without due process.
Click to expand...
I don't see any difference at all. I think you've summed up the Benghazi hearings perfectly. Benghazi isn't just a poetically motivated investigation. It is in fact politically motivated oppression and the misuse and abuse of power for political purposes without any regard to the truth or the harm it is inflicting.

So either you don't understand the waste of tax payer dollars for an eternal and pointless investigation to harm people for political purposes or you are being disingenuous.

Like I said, fairness and honesty are in the eye of the beholder and special pleading is the tool of the sophist.
 
Last edited:
RandFan said:
As hominem poisoning the well. They are not dishonest because they are democrat. They are dishonest because they are human with aspirations.

It's wrong for the Democrats to use investiations for political purposes but it is hardly a partisan tactic.

Take the asinine Benghazi hearings.

Then again, honesty and fairness is in the eye of the beholder for some.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orly_Taitz
Not a tu quoque, just "honesty" that this isn't a partisan problem. A tu quoque is an attempt to deny or avoid the proposition. I accept that there are politically motivated investigations in both parties. However, in the interest of "honesty", the Republican McCarthy made an art form of it and destroyed many lives. There is no monopoly of abuse of power on either side of the political fence.

Get out of the echo chamber
Click to expand...

It is very rare that we see an unattributed talking point taken directly from the Democratic National Committee's website, coupled with a claim that WE should "get out of the echo chamber."

That is pathetic.

The subject is Walker, take the whining/Democrat talking points about Benghazi to the appropriate thread
 
Q & A about these two John Doe investigations:

http://www.jsonline.com/news/sealed...-be-unsealed-tuesday-b99331782-271713691.html

Q.What is being investigated?

A. Some details of the investigation are not known because the probe is being conducted in secret. But many specifics have come out in recent months because of the litigation over the investigation and through other means. Investigators were looking into whether the Wisconsin Club for Growth and other conservative groups illegally coordinated with the campaigns of Walker and candidates for state Senate during the 2011 and 2012 recalls that were sparked by Walker's limits on collective bargaining for most public workers.

Prosecutors contend they have developed evidence that Walker and his top campaign aides extensively raised large sums from donors for the Wisconsin Club for Growth. Prosecutors say the club received $700,000 during that period from Gogebic Taconite, an iron ore mining firm that secured relaxed environmental regulations as it pursues developing a massive mine in northern Wisconsin. Walker has said he was unaware of that donation.

In one filing, prosecutors spelled out a theory that Walker was part of a "criminal scheme" to subvert campaign laws. But an attorney for one prosecutor later said Walker was not a target of the probe.

Q.What is illegal campaign coordination?

A. Candidates are required to disclose all the donations they receive, and individuals who donate to their campaigns face limits (for statewide offices such as governor, they can give no more than $10,000 each in a normal four-year election cycle). Independent groups — if they're set up in a certain way — can keep their fundraising secret and accept and spend unlimited amounts from individuals, corporations or unions.

Candidates and such independent groups are not generally allowed to closely cooperate with each other on spending. For instance, candidates and those independent groups can't directly share their ad strategy with each other.

Experts differ over what type of coordination is acceptable and how closely candidates can work with certain types of groups. Such questions are at the heart of this investigation and related litigation.
Click to expand...
 
RandFan said:
I don't see any difference at all. I think you've summed up the Benghazi hearings perfectly. Benghazi isn't just a poetically motivated investigation. It is in fact politically motivated oppression and the misuse and abuse of power for political purposes without any regard to the truth or the harm it is inflicting.
Click to expand...

Who's being oppressed by the Benghazi investigation, and how are they being oppressed?

So either you don't understand the waste of tax payer dollars for an eternal and pointless investigation to harm people for political purposes or you are being disingenuous.
Click to expand...

False choice. I am not being disingenuous, and I think it is a perfectly appropriate use of taxpayer dollars. It's not even that much. I think the select committee has cost $6MM so far, which is about the limit of resolution in the Washington budgeting process.

Like I said, fairness and honesty are in the eye of the beholder and special pleading is the tool of the sophist.
Click to expand...

Fairness is, not honesty. I think people here know who is being honest and who isn't.
 
sunmaster14 said:
Who's being oppressed by the Benghazi investigation, and how are they being oppressed?

False choice. I am not being disingenuous, and I think it is a perfectly appropriate use of taxpayer dollars. It's not even that much. I think the select committee has cost $6MM so far, which is about the limit of resolution in the Washington budgeting process.

Fairness is, not honesty. I think people here know who is being honest and who isn't.
Click to expand...
Let me repeat the facts.

There have already been seven investigations, 13 hearings, 50 briefings, and 25,000 pages of documents have been released. But that won't stop Republicans from re-re-re investigating Benghazi as a part of a crass partisan ploy to turn out the far-right base in November.

If it helps you to sleep at night to engage in special pleading then that's fine. Just don't expect others to agree. The hearing are ongoing and will be indefinite unless and untill the GOP loses the majority. **** the facts.
 
Last edited:
RandFan said:
Let me repeat the facts.

There have already been seven investigations, 13 hearings, 50 briefings, and 25,000 pages of documents have been released.
Click to expand...

These numbers are completely meaningless. What are you even comparing them to?

But that won't stop Republicans from re-re-re investigating Benghazi as a part of a crass partisan ploy to turn out the far-right base in November.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's a crass partisan ploy; maybe it's not. But nobody is being oppressed. How many times have armed government agents raided people's private homes in the Benghazi investigation?

If it helps you to sleep at night to engage in special pleading then that's fine. Just don't expect others to agree. The hearing are ongoing and will be indefinite unless and untill the GOP loses the majority. **** the facts.
Click to expand...

I have to admit it is amusing the way you confuse and misuse various logical fallacy labels. It's kind of a meta-fallacy I guess.
 
sunmaster14 said:
These numbers are completely meaningless. What are you even comparing them to?

Maybe it's a crass partisan ploy; maybe it's not. But nobody is being oppressed. How many times have armed government agents raided people's private homes in the Benghazi investigation?

I have to admit it is amusing the way you confuse and misuse various logical fallacy labels. It's kind of a meta-fallacy I guess.
Click to expand...

Ignore him, he is attempting to intentionally derail a thread about Wisconsin Gov. Walker by quoting false talking points about Hillary taken directly off the DNC website.
 
sunmaster14 said:
These numbers are completely meaningless. What are you even comparing them to?

Maybe it's a crass partisan ploy; maybe it's not. But nobody is being oppressed. How many times have armed government agents raided people's private homes in the Benghazi investigation?

I have to admit it is amusing the way you confuse and misuse various logical fallacy labels. It's kind of a meta-fallacy I guess.
Click to expand...
Special pleading. A neutral observer would find such ad hoc rationalization transparently obvious.

As for the numbers, they are an absurdity that are perhaps without precedent. However, even if there were a precedent, they stand as patently absurd on their face. However, the point was salient but now has become OT and just bickering over special pleading to justify one political witch hunt while decrying an other. So I will let you have the last word. Enjoy.

ETA: This is now my go to example of special pleading and confirmation bias and for that I thank you. :)
 
RandFan said:
Special pleading. A neutral observer would find such ad hoc rationalization transparently obvious.
Click to expand...

That is a total non sequitur.

As for the numbers, they are an absurdity that are perhaps without precedent. However, even if there were a precedent, they stand as patently absurd on their face.
Click to expand...

These are unsupported assertions. Seven investigations sounds like a lot, except that you're counting investigations that have focused on different parts of the scandal, and by different entities, many of which had good motivation to do a cursory review and whitewash the whole thing. Why is 13 hearings a lot, or 50 briefings? That doesn't sound like a lot to me at all. As for the 25,000 documents, that sounds like a tiny number given the number of government agencies involved. When the Department of Justice sued IBM for antitrust violations in 1969, the case dragged on for 13 years and discovery amounted to over 1 million documents. And that was before the age of personal computers and email. Since then, document production has exploded.

However, the point was salient but now has become OT and just bickering over special pleading to justify one political witch hunt while decrying an other. So I will let you have the last word. Enjoy.
Click to expand...

You can run, but you can't hide.
 
Speaking of pay-to-play politics, and the GOP's never ending hypocrisy. It appears that there may be some bad things on the horizon for Walker:

Gov. Scott Walker and the GOP-controlled Legislature approved a measure aimed at retroactively shielding paint makers from liability after a billionaire owner of a lead producer contributed $750,000 to a political group that provided crucial support to Walker and Republicans in recall elections, according to a report released Wednesday.

...

Simmons' donations were made before and after Republicans approved two laws helpful to the industry — one in January 2011 and the other in June 2013. The 2013 measure was inserted in a budget bill in the middle of the night despite warnings about its constitutionality.
Click to expand...

Looks like there was some leaked documents that are going to have a huge impact on the politics in Wisconsin. I'm not sure if it's true or not, but that doesn't look good for Walker at all.

ETA: Apparently there were some document leaks.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom