WI Gov. Scott Walker implicated in criminal probe - Page 2

Grizzly Adams · 15th February 2012, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

You usually are not so dishonest. You should apologize.

It was clear to everybody that the cheering is over corruption being exposed, not cheering for corruption.

When someone says "hooray for that nasty little man being implicated in it," that doesn't support your theory in the least.

In fact, all it does is expose the cheering for what it was: one partisan cheering for the possible downfall of another.

crimresearch · 15th February 2012, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by eeyore1954

Why would you think he was asking for something other than let him know when a reputable outlet ran a story "implicating Walker" that is what the thread was about.

Why would I think that he was only asking for what he asked for, instead of proof of some hyperbolic thread title?

Ever heard of 'Keep it simple, st'.... oh, never mind.

eeyore1954 · 15th February 2012, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

You usually are not so dishonest. You should apologize.

It was clear to everybody that the cheering is over corruption being exposed, not cheering for corruption.

To me clearly the cheering was about the possibility of someone Complexity does not like being implicated in something.

eeyore1954 · 15th February 2012, 11:29 AM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

Why would I think that he was only asking for what he asked for, instead of proof of some hyperbolic thread title?

Ever heard of 'Keep it simple, st'.... oh, never mind.

Did he ask for proof that Kelly M. Rindfleisch was charged with four felony counts of misconduct in public office.

Because the request was posted in the hyberbolic thread , the article in the hyperbolic thread implied the same thing as the title and the quote included in the thread implied the same thing.

Quote:

A recall from his position as Wisconsin's governor could ultimately be the least of Gov. Scott Walker's worry, if a criminal complaint quietly moving forward in the Badger State court system continues on its current trajectory. At the moment, Walker seems to be at the bottom of a mountain where an avalanche is just beginning to roll.

.

Do you want anyone to believe that people in this thread are concerned whether "Kelly M. Rindfleisch was charged with four felony counts of misconduct in public office" if Walker is not implicated.

RandFan · 15th February 2012, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by eeyore1954

To me clearly the cheering was about the possibility of someone Complexity does not like being implicated in something.

Which I don't have a problem with. AIU, Walker didn't campaign on ending collective bargaining and he was given concessions to close budget gaps but he striped union rights anyway. I have no proof he is guilty of anything. I'd be damn surprised if he wasn't though. I very much hope he has done something inappropriate and that he suffers the consequences of those actions.. If not I hope he is recalled. I think he's a dishonest piece of ****.

The Central Scrutinizer · 15th February 2012, 11:42 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Which page incriminates Walker?

None

Originally Posted by WildCat

Can you quote the parts that implicate Walker?

No one can, because they aren't there. The part that has the "Brad Blog" (really? That's the best name you could think up?) all worked up, is basically listing all the characters involved (but not indicted, or even accused of anything), so that someone reading the indictment knows who is who.

Reginald Hobbes · 15th February 2012, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

The very language used to describe Scott Walker as a relevant party is,

Quote:

...at all times relevant to this criminal complaint...

Let's read the entire sentence:

Quote:

Mr. Walker, the current Governor of the State of Wisconsin, was at all times relevant to this complaint the County Executive of Milwaukee County.

They were describing the position he held during the time in question.
Mr. Walker, the current Governor of the State of Wisconsin, was, at all times relevant to this complaint, the County Executive of Milwaukee County.

Originally Posted by BenBurch

That the candidate she is alleged to have illegally helped was the preferred candidate of the Walker team. All that needs to be found in discovery is anything that shows Walker was aware of this.

RICO-type conspiracy, as I understand it, does not need real strong declarative orders to show that somebody was working at the behest of somebody else; the Mob is usually careful to never say things plainly. You show awareness and that the person benefited, in this case by getting the preferred candidate elected.

Then there was no benefit here, because Brett Davis did not receive the nomination for Lt Gov.

WildCat · 15th February 2012, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Tu Quoque.

No, it's not. It's an example that being tied to someone engaged in illegal activities doesn't implicate you in their illegal activities.

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Read the document. The writer goes out of his way to tie these activities to Walker.

Are you calling Brad Blog a "document"?

Because nothing in the actual document ties these activities to Walker. And just imagine the Milwauker Journal Sentinel getting scooped by Brad Blog on a public document implicating the Governor of Wisconsin for criminal activity! Somehow, I doubt this is happening.

WildCat · 15th February 2012, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

And the pope has ties to Nazi youth groups!

Holy apples to oranges batman!

Ben Burch claims merely having ties to someone implicates you in their criminal activity. Do you agree with this?

Originally Posted by Biscuit

The very language used to describe Scott Walker as a relevant party is,

Reginald Hobbes already covered that one, you're reading it wrong.

crimresearch · 15th February 2012, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by eeyore1954

Because the request was posted in the hyberbolic thread , the article in the hyperbolic thread implied the same thing as the title and the quote included in the thread implied the same thing.
.

Do you want anyone to believe that people in this thread are concerned whether "Kelly M. Rindfleisch was charged with four felony counts of misconduct in public office" if Walker is not implicated.

In other words, you would have interpreted it in other than a straightforward manner, for reasons that appeal to you.
In other words, you wouldn't have just provided an assortment of links and let people see for themselves if the actual news story supported any particular aspect of pooh-flinging.
In other words, you would have brewed up a big ol' cup of 'willing suspension of skepticism'.

Well, here comes the hard part. Not everyone is like you, not everyone does things like you, and not everyone gives a rat's butt about your opinion on the way things should be done.

WildCat · 15th February 2012, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

In other words, you would have interpreted it in other than a straightforward manner, for reasons that appeal to you.
In other words, you wouldn't have just provided an assortment of links and let people see for themselves if the actual news story supported any particular aspect of pooh-flinging.
In other words, you would have brewed up a big ol' cup of 'willing suspension of skepticism'.

Well, here comes the hard part. Not everyone is like you, not everyone does things like you, and not everyone gives a rat's butt about your opinion on the way things should be done.

I'm pretty sure you're the only person here who is confused as to what I was talking about.

BenBurch · 15th February 2012, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

... The part that has the "Brad Blog" (really? That's the best name you could think up?) all worked up, is basically listing all the characters involved (but not indicted, or even accused of anything), so that someone reading the indictment knows who is who.

Brad Friedman is a friend of mine, and his blog grew from something rather small and focused only on the dangers of electronic voting machines to a very popular news and opinion site. He is a good writer and a good journalist, and a stand-up guy. (He's also good at shameless self-promotion, something I suck at.)

BenBurch · 15th February 2012, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

[/i]
No, it's not. It's an example that being tied to someone engaged in illegal activities doesn't implicate you in their illegal activities.

Are you calling Brad Blog a "document"?

Because nothing in the actual document ties these activities to Walker. And just imagine the Milwauker Journal Sentinel getting scooped by Brad Blog on a public document implicating the Governor of Wisconsin for criminal activity! Somehow, I doubt this is happening.

The PDF is really quite clear. We're going to have to agree to disagree about this, and we will see what transpires.

eeyore1954 · 15th February 2012, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by crimresearch

In other words, you would have interpreted it in other than a straightforward manner, for reasons that appeal to you.
In other words, you wouldn't have just provided an assortment of links and let people see for themselves if the actual news story supported any particular aspect of pooh-flinging.
In other words, you would have brewed up a big ol' cup of 'willing suspension of skepticism'.

Well, here comes the hard part. Not everyone is like you, not everyone does things like you, and not everyone gives a rat's butt about your opinion on the way things should be done.

To me the straightforward manner was "this is a thread about Walker being implicated based upon a claim in something called the brad blog." hence the information requested was about that.

Grizzly Adams · 15th February 2012, 01:40 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

I very much hope he has done something inappropriate

So you're hoping a politician you don't like has been corrupted.

Brainster · 15th February 2012, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Brad Friedman is a friend of mine, and his blog grew from something rather small and focused only on the dangers of electronic voting machines to a very popular news and opinion site. He is a good writer and a good journalist, and a stand-up guy. (He's also good at shameless self-promotion, something I suck at.)

He's a kook. I spent an hour with him on the phone one time when he tried to get me to change some stuff I had written about Sibel Edmonds (another kook). At the time he was still trying to pitch her supposed sensational expose to the national media. None of them bought the story, so he ended up having to write it up for Hustler, as I pointed out above.

BenBurch · 15th February 2012, 01:58 PM

You sell stories where you can. He does believe Edmonds but we all have our nutty ideas. He's no truther, I can tell you that.

Howie Felterbush · 15th February 2012, 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

COUNSEL: Mr. Walker, did you know that the defendant was perpetrating shenanigans?

WALKER: No.

COUNSEL: No further questions, your honor.

JUDGE: Next witness!

Shenanigans are legal in Wisconsin under statute 27 paragraph 3 subsection TragicMonkey.

Hijinks on the other hand, are a felony, and are punishable by death by cheese wheel.

crimresearch · 15th February 2012, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

I'm pretty sure you're the only person here who is confused as to what I was talking about.

You are pretty sure about many things... that are complete fantasies on your part.

crimresearch · 15th February 2012, 02:56 PM

Originally Posted by eeyore1954

To me the straightforward manner was "this is a thread about Walker being implicated based upon a claim in something called the brad blog." hence the information requested was about that.

As I said, you don't get to decide for anyone else.

What you shoulda-coulda-woulda done or thought is only relevant to you.

RandFan · 15th February 2012, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

So you're hoping a politician you don't like has been corrupted.

Yeah.

mhaze · 15th February 2012, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

....COUNSEL: Mr. Walker, did you know that the defendant was perpetrating shenanigans?

WALKER: No.

COUNSEL: No further questions, your honor.

JUDGE: Next witness!

Well this is... Might get to the pinnacle of dullness and utter boredom of the Great Drama of Valerie Plame And Joe Wilson.

AlBell · 15th February 2012, 03:35 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Tu Quoque.

Read the document. The writer goes out of his way to tie these activities to Walker.

And wildcat requested an official document (or at least a news story) that did the same; blogs and anecdotes share the same problem.

Travis · 15th February 2012, 03:48 PM

I don't like Walker at all but I sure hope this investigation doesn't turn out to be partisan as well. So far all that I see is that she worked for him. We'll need documents and testimony linking the two before this gets really serious for him.

BenBurch · 15th February 2012, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by AlBell

And wildcat requested an official document (or at least a news story) that did the same; blogs and anecdotes share the same problem.

The writer of the Criminal Complaint is the writer I am referring to; http://www.bradblog.com/wp-content/u..._Complaint.pdf

WildCat · 15th February 2012, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

The writer of the Criminal Complaint is the writer I am referring to; http://www.bradblog.com/wp-content/u..._Complaint.pdf

And what part of the criminal complaint implicates Walker?

BenBurch · 15th February 2012, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

And what part of the criminal complaint implicates Walker?

And we loop back to the top. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

Not worth arguing about, I'm happy to watch what happens.

theprestige · 15th February 2012, 04:49 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

And we loop back to the top. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

Not worth arguing about, I'm happy to watch what happens.

See, to me the document implicates the people Rindfleisch is shown in the document to have been directly in contact with her: the people that hired her, the people named in the emails excerpted in the complaint, etc.

All of these people stood to benefit from the rise of Scott Walker, having tied their fortunes to his. That she committed felonies to enable the rise of Scott Walker doesn't actually implicate him, unless he's the one that hired her, or he's the one that equipped and encouraged her, or he's the one that worked directly with her in the commission of these felonies. But the document clearly names other people in these roles.

eeyore1954 · 15th February 2012, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Which I don't have a problem with. AIU, Walker didn't campaign on ending collective bargaining and he was given concessions to close budget gaps but he striped union rights anyway. I have no proof he is guilty of anything. I'd be damn surprised if he wasn't though. I very much hope he has done something inappropriate and that he suffers the consequences of those actions.. If not I hope he is recalled. I think he's a dishonest piece of ****.

At least you are honest about your belief that he is a dishonest !!##.

RandFan · 15th February 2012, 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by eeyore1954

At least you are honest about your belief that he is a dishonest !!##.

If the Dems had refused concessions and/or if Walker had campaigned on stripping union rights I'd feel different. I know that the state is facing serious financial problems and it calls for sacrifice. It was the refusal to work at all with the Dems to solve the problem but instead force his will onto everyone else.

BenBurch · 15th February 2012, 05:22 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

If the Dems had refused concessions and/or if Walker had campaigned on stripping union rights I'd feel different. I know that the state is facing serious financial problems and it calls for sacrifice. It was the refusal to work at all with the Dems to solve the problem but instead force his will onto everyone else.

Nobody likes dictators here. If people do not have at least the illusion of having their opinions considered, they resent it mightily, and this can stir to action people who normally never get involved to the point of voting.

applecorped · 15th February 2012, 06:27 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Yeah.

sad

RandFan · 15th February 2012, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by applecorped

sad

It fills me with great joy. This is a guy who cut taxes and blew a $140M hole in the budget on top of everything else.

WildCat · 15th February 2012, 07:01 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

It fills me with great joy. This is a guy who cut taxes and blew a $140M hole in the budget on top of everything else.

I love how bringing the deficit from $3.5 billion to $140 million is "blowing a $140 milllion hole in the budget".

Way to spin it!

eta: and what tax cuts are you talking about? The incentives?

Reginald Hobbes · 15th February 2012, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Read the ~~complaint~~ blog. It clearly ties the accused with Walker.

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Tu Quoque.

Read the ~~document~~ blog. The [blog] writer goes out of his way to tie these activities to Walker.

The document details Rindfleisch's activities for the Davis campaign. The blog author tries very hard to implicate Walker, but so far, there is no evidence.

The only time Walker himself appears in the complaint is when his email re Darlene Wink's resignation is quoted.

Reginald Hobbes · 15th February 2012, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

I love how bringing the deficit from $3.5 billion to $140 million is "blowing a $140 milllion hole in the budget".

Way to spin it!

eta: and what tax cuts are you talking about? The incentives?

From Obama's Master Lock speech today:

Quote:

Third, if you’re an American manufacturer, you should get a bigger tax cut. If you’re a high-tech manufacturer, we should double the tax deduction you get for making products here. And if you want to relocate in a community like this one that’s been hit hard by factories leaving town, you should get help financing a new plant, equipment, or training for new workers.

That sounds a lot like Walker's tax break for companies that relocate to Wisconsin.
Except when Walker does it, it's "tax giveaways to his rich friends".

RandFan · 15th February 2012, 07:31 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

I love how bringing the deficit from $3.5 billion to $140 million is "blowing a $140 milllion hole in the budget".

Way to spin it!

eta: and what tax cuts are you talking about? The incentives?

FactCheck.org says I'm wrong. I'll withdraw it.

RandFan · 15th February 2012, 07:37 PM

delete

Howie Felterbush · 15th February 2012, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

delete

Good move.

RandFan · 15th February 2012, 07:45 PM

Originally Posted by Howie Felterbush

Good move.

15th February 2012, 11:07 AM	#41
Grizzly Adams Muse Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 993	Originally Posted by BenBurch You usually are not so dishonest. You should apologize. It was clear to everybody that the cheering is over corruption being exposed, not cheering for corruption. When someone says "hooray for that nasty little man being implicated in it," that doesn't support your theory in the least. In fact, all it does is expose the cheering for what it was: one partisan cheering for the possible downfall of another.
Grizzly Adams Muse Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 993

15th February 2012, 11:08 AM	#42
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by eeyore1954 Why would you think he was asking for something other than let him know when a reputable outlet ran a story "implicating Walker" that is what the thread was about. Why would I think that he was only asking for what he asked for, instead of proof of some hyperbolic thread title? Ever heard of 'Keep it simple, st'.... oh, never mind.
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

15th February 2012, 11:24 AM	#43
eeyore1954 Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 4,126	Originally Posted by BenBurch You usually are not so dishonest. You should apologize. It was clear to everybody that the cheering is over corruption being exposed, not cheering for corruption. To me clearly the cheering was about the possibility of someone Complexity does not like being implicated in something.
eeyore1954 Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 4,126

15th February 2012, 11:29 AM	#44
eeyore1954 Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 4,126	Originally Posted by crimresearch Why would I think that he was only asking for what he asked for, instead of proof of some hyperbolic thread title? Ever heard of 'Keep it simple, st'.... oh, never mind. Did he ask for proof that Kelly M. Rindfleisch was charged with four felony counts of misconduct in public office. Because the request was posted in the hyberbolic thread , the article in the hyperbolic thread implied the same thing as the title and the quote included in the thread implied the same thing. Quote: A recall from his position as Wisconsin's governor could ultimately be the least of Gov. Scott Walker's worry, if a criminal complaint quietly moving forward in the Badger State court system continues on its current trajectory. At the moment, Walker seems to be at the bottom of a mountain where an avalanche is just beginning to roll. . Do you want anyone to believe that people in this thread are concerned whether "Kelly M. Rindfleisch was charged with four felony counts of misconduct in public office" if Walker is not implicated.
eeyore1954 Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 4,126	Last edited by eeyore1954; 15th February 2012 at 12:16 PM.

15th February 2012, 11:33 AM	#45
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,398	Originally Posted by eeyore1954 To me clearly the cheering was about the possibility of someone Complexity does not like being implicated in something. Which I don't have a problem with. AIU, Walker didn't campaign on ending collective bargaining and he was given concessions to close budget gaps but he striped union rights anyway. I have no proof he is guilty of anything. I'd be damn surprised if he wasn't though. I very much hope he has done something inappropriate and that he suffers the consequences of those actions.. If not I hope he is recalled. I think he's a dishonest piece of ****.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

15th February 2012, 11:42 AM	#46
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,278	Originally Posted by WildCat Which page incriminates Walker? None Originally Posted by WildCat Can you quote the parts that implicate Walker? No one can, because they aren't there. The part that has the "Brad Blog" (really? That's the best name you could think up?) all worked up, is basically listing all the characters involved (but not indicted, or even accused of anything), so that someone reading the indictment knows who is who.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

15th February 2012, 11:50 AM	#47
Reginald Hobbes Thinker Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 160	Originally Posted by Biscuit The very language used to describe Scott Walker as a relevant party is, Quote: ...at all times relevant to this criminal complaint... Let's read the entire sentence: Quote: Mr. Walker, the current Governor of the State of Wisconsin, was at all times relevant to this complaint the County Executive of Milwaukee County. They were describing the position he held during the time in question. Mr. Walker, the current Governor of the State of Wisconsin, was, at all times relevant to this complaint, the County Executive of Milwaukee County. Originally Posted by BenBurch That the candidate she is alleged to have illegally helped was the preferred candidate of the Walker team. All that needs to be found in discovery is anything that shows Walker was aware of this. RICO-type conspiracy, as I understand it, does not need real strong declarative orders to show that somebody was working at the behest of somebody else; the Mob is usually careful to never say things plainly. You show awareness and that the person benefited, in this case by getting the preferred candidate elected. Then there was no benefit here, because Brett Davis did not receive the nomination for Lt Gov.

15th February 2012, 12:05 PM	#48
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,111	Originally Posted by BenBurch Tu Quoque. No, it's not. It's an example that being tied to someone engaged in illegal activities doesn't implicate you in their illegal activities. Originally Posted by BenBurch Read the document. The writer goes out of his way to tie these activities to Walker. Are you calling Brad Blog a "document"? Because nothing in the actual document ties these activities to Walker. And just imagine the Milwauker Journal Sentinel getting scooped by Brad Blog on a public document implicating the Governor of Wisconsin for criminal activity! Somehow, I doubt this is happening.

15th February 2012, 12:08 PM	#49
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,111	Originally Posted by Biscuit And the pope has ties to Nazi youth groups! Holy apples to oranges batman! Ben Burch claims merely having ties to someone implicates you in their criminal activity. Do you agree with this? Originally Posted by Biscuit The very language used to describe Scott Walker as a relevant party is, Reginald Hobbes already covered that one, you're reading it wrong.

15th February 2012, 12:08 PM	#50
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by eeyore1954 Because the request was posted in the hyberbolic thread , the article in the hyperbolic thread implied the same thing as the title and the quote included in the thread implied the same thing. . Do you want anyone to believe that people in this thread are concerned whether "Kelly M. Rindfleisch was charged with four felony counts of misconduct in public office" if Walker is not implicated. In other words, you would have interpreted it in other than a straightforward manner, for reasons that appeal to you. In other words, you wouldn't have just provided an assortment of links and let people see for themselves if the actual news story supported any particular aspect of pooh-flinging. In other words, you would have brewed up a big ol' cup of 'willing suspension of skepticism'. Well, here comes the hard part. Not everyone is like you, not everyone does things like you, and not everyone gives a rat's butt about your opinion on the way things should be done.
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

15th February 2012, 12:11 PM	#51
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,111	Originally Posted by crimresearch In other words, you would have interpreted it in other than a straightforward manner, for reasons that appeal to you. In other words, you wouldn't have just provided an assortment of links and let people see for themselves if the actual news story supported any particular aspect of pooh-flinging. In other words, you would have brewed up a big ol' cup of 'willing suspension of skepticism'. Well, here comes the hard part. Not everyone is like you, not everyone does things like you, and not everyone gives a rat's butt about your opinion on the way things should be done. I'm pretty sure you're the only person here who is confused as to what I was talking about.

15th February 2012, 12:43 PM	#52
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,219	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer ... The part that has the "Brad Blog" (really? That's the best name you could think up?) all worked up, is basically listing all the characters involved (but not indicted, or even accused of anything), so that someone reading the indictment knows who is who. Brad Friedman is a friend of mine, and his blog grew from something rather small and focused only on the dangers of electronic voting machines to a very popular news and opinion site. He is a good writer and a good journalist, and a stand-up guy. (He's also good at shameless self-promotion, something I suck at.)
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

15th February 2012, 12:44 PM	#53
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,219	Originally Posted by WildCat [/i] No, it's not. It's an example that being tied to someone engaged in illegal activities doesn't implicate you in their illegal activities. Are you calling Brad Blog a "document"? Because nothing in the actual document ties these activities to Walker. And just imagine the Milwauker Journal Sentinel getting scooped by Brad Blog on a public document implicating the Governor of Wisconsin for criminal activity! Somehow, I doubt this is happening. The PDF is really quite clear. We're going to have to agree to disagree about this, and we will see what transpires.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

15th February 2012, 12:57 PM	#54
eeyore1954 Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 4,126	Originally Posted by crimresearch In other words, you would have interpreted it in other than a straightforward manner, for reasons that appeal to you. In other words, you wouldn't have just provided an assortment of links and let people see for themselves if the actual news story supported any particular aspect of pooh-flinging. In other words, you would have brewed up a big ol' cup of 'willing suspension of skepticism'. Well, here comes the hard part. Not everyone is like you, not everyone does things like you, and not everyone gives a rat's butt about your opinion on the way things should be done. To me the straightforward manner was "this is a thread about Walker being implicated based upon a claim in something called the brad blog." hence the information requested was about that.
eeyore1954 Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 4,126

15th February 2012, 01:40 PM	#55
Grizzly Adams Muse Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 993	Originally Posted by RandFan I very much hope he has done something inappropriate So you're hoping a politician you don't like has been corrupted.
Grizzly Adams Muse Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 993

15th February 2012, 01:44 PM	#56
Brainster Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 10,444	Originally Posted by BenBurch Brad Friedman is a friend of mine, and his blog grew from something rather small and focused only on the dangers of electronic voting machines to a very popular news and opinion site. He is a good writer and a good journalist, and a stand-up guy. (He's also good at shameless self-promotion, something I suck at.) He's a kook. I spent an hour with him on the phone one time when he tried to get me to change some stuff I had written about Sibel Edmonds (another kook). At the time he was still trying to pitch her supposed sensational expose to the national media. None of them bought the story, so he ended up having to write it up for Hustler, as I pointed out above.
	__________________ My new blog: Recent Reads. 1960s Comic Book Nostalgia Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.

15th February 2012, 01:58 PM	#57
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,219	You sell stories where you can. He does believe Edmonds but we all have our nutty ideas. He's no truther, I can tell you that.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

15th February 2012, 02:08 PM	#58
Howie Felterbush Bow Tie Daddy Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: In the twilight, singing all the old lullabies Posts: 5,333	Originally Posted by theprestige COUNSEL: Mr. Walker, did you know that the defendant was perpetrating shenanigans? WALKER: No. COUNSEL: No further questions, your honor. JUDGE: Next witness! Shenanigans are legal in Wisconsin under statute 27 paragraph 3 subsection TragicMonkey. Hijinks on the other hand, are a felony, and are punishable by death by cheese wheel.
	__________________ "Don't be too offended by the likes of him - I hear he doesn't even own ascots." -JoeyDonuts "I must be more tired than I thought. Howie, you are starting to make sense." -MG1962 "You're a mean old evil cynic. And mean." Halfcentaur

15th February 2012, 02:52 PM	#59
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by WildCat I'm pretty sure you're the only person here who is confused as to what I was talking about. You are pretty sure about many things... that are complete fantasies on your part.
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

15th February 2012, 02:56 PM	#60
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by eeyore1954 To me the straightforward manner was "this is a thread about Walker being implicated based upon a claim in something called the brad blog." hence the information requested was about that. As I said, you don't get to decide for anyone else. What you shoulda-coulda-woulda done or thought is only relevant to you.
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

15th February 2012, 03:12 PM	#61
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,398	Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams So you're hoping a politician you don't like has been corrupted. Yeah.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

15th February 2012, 03:26 PM	#62
mhaze Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Woo*(+-1.10)^20=AGWwoo Posts: 15,396	Originally Posted by theprestige ....COUNSEL: Mr. Walker, did you know that the defendant was perpetrating shenanigans? WALKER: No. COUNSEL: No further questions, your honor. JUDGE: Next witness! Well this is... Might get to the pinnacle of dullness and utter boredom of the Great Drama of Valerie Plame And Joe Wilson.
	__________________ Get your climate widget Climategate - History's Biggest Scam Poptech's List Climate Acronyms

15th February 2012, 03:35 PM	#63
AlBell Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,510	Originally Posted by BenBurch Tu Quoque. Read the document. The writer goes out of his way to tie these activities to Walker. And wildcat requested an official document (or at least a news story) that did the same; blogs and anecdotes share the same problem.
AlBell Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,510	__________________ "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." M. Thatcher, Economics: Share The Wealth. Obamanomics: Share The Pain. Important things in life–beauty, grace, redemption, compassion, loyalty, love–are beyond the reach of reason. Which doesn’t make them any less real.

15th February 2012, 03:48 PM	#64
Travis Misanthrope of the Mountains Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Tuolumne City, CA Posts: 17,960	I don't like Walker at all but I sure hope this investigation doesn't turn out to be partisan as well. So far all that I see is that she worked for him. We'll need documents and testimony linking the two before this gets really serious for him.
	__________________ "Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com Zingiber Officinale The Humor blog of some not crazy guy

15th February 2012, 03:57 PM	#65
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,219	Originally Posted by AlBell And wildcat requested an official document (or at least a news story) that did the same; blogs and anecdotes share the same problem. The writer of the Criminal Complaint is the writer I am referring to; http://www.bradblog.com/wp-content/u..._Complaint.pdf
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

15th February 2012, 04:00 PM	#66
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,111	Originally Posted by BenBurch The writer of the Criminal Complaint is the writer I am referring to; http://www.bradblog.com/wp-content/u..._Complaint.pdf And what part of the criminal complaint implicates Walker?

15th February 2012, 04:03 PM	#67
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,219	Originally Posted by WildCat And what part of the criminal complaint implicates Walker? And we loop back to the top. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Not worth arguing about, I'm happy to watch what happens.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

15th February 2012, 04:49 PM	#68
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,666	Originally Posted by BenBurch And we loop back to the top. Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Not worth arguing about, I'm happy to watch what happens. See, to me the document implicates the people Rindfleisch is shown in the document to have been directly in contact with her: the people that hired her, the people named in the emails excerpted in the complaint, etc. All of these people stood to benefit from the rise of Scott Walker, having tied their fortunes to his. That she committed felonies to enable the rise of Scott Walker doesn't actually implicate him, unless he's the one that hired her, or he's the one that equipped and encouraged her, or he's the one that worked directly with her in the commission of these felonies. But the document clearly names other people in these roles.
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,666

15th February 2012, 04:50 PM	#69
eeyore1954 Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 4,126	Originally Posted by RandFan Which I don't have a problem with. AIU, Walker didn't campaign on ending collective bargaining and he was given concessions to close budget gaps but he striped union rights anyway. I have no proof he is guilty of anything. I'd be damn surprised if he wasn't though. I very much hope he has done something inappropriate and that he suffers the consequences of those actions.. If not I hope he is recalled. I think he's a dishonest piece of ****. At least you are honest about your belief that he is a dishonest !!##.
eeyore1954 Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 4,126

15th February 2012, 05:05 PM	#70
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,398	Originally Posted by eeyore1954 At least you are honest about your belief that he is a dishonest !!##. If the Dems had refused concessions and/or if Walker had campaigned on stripping union rights I'd feel different. I know that the state is facing serious financial problems and it calls for sacrifice. It was the refusal to work at all with the Dems to solve the problem but instead force his will onto everyone else.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

15th February 2012, 05:22 PM	#71
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,219	Originally Posted by RandFan If the Dems had refused concessions and/or if Walker had campaigned on stripping union rights I'd feel different. I know that the state is facing serious financial problems and it calls for sacrifice. It was the refusal to work at all with the Dems to solve the problem but instead force his will onto everyone else. Nobody likes dictators here. If people do not have at least the illusion of having their opinions considered, they resent it mightily, and this can stir to action people who normally never get involved to the point of voting.
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

15th February 2012, 06:27 PM	#72
applecorped Rotten to the Core Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 10,688	Originally Posted by RandFan Yeah. sad
	__________________ All You Need Is Love.

15th February 2012, 06:47 PM	#73
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,398	Originally Posted by applecorped sad It fills me with great joy. This is a guy who cut taxes and blew a $140M hole in the budget on top of everything else.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

15th February 2012, 07:01 PM	#74
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,111	Originally Posted by RandFan It fills me with great joy. This is a guy who cut taxes and blew a $140M hole in the budget on top of everything else. I love how bringing the deficit from $3.5 billion to $140 million is "blowing a $140 milllion hole in the budget". Way to spin it! eta: and what tax cuts are you talking about? The incentives?

15th February 2012, 07:03 PM	#75
Reginald Hobbes Thinker Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 160	Originally Posted by BenBurch Read the ~~complaint~~ blog. It clearly ties the accused with Walker. Originally Posted by BenBurch Tu Quoque. Read the ~~document~~ blog. The [blog] writer goes out of his way to tie these activities to Walker. The document details Rindfleisch's activities for the Davis campaign. The blog author tries very hard to implicate Walker, but so far, there is no evidence. The only time Walker himself appears in the complaint is when his email re Darlene Wink's resignation is quoted.