Walker campaign sends $100,000 to John Doe legal fund

Gov. Scott Walker's campaign has transferred another $100,000 to the defense fund used to pay his pricey criminal defense lawyers in the lengthy John Doe investigation into activities during Walker's time as county executive.

Newly filed campaign reports show Walker's campaign transferred $70,000 to the Scott Walker Trust on May 3 and another $30,000 on May 17.

That bring the total the first-term governor has put in the defense fund to $160,000 in the past six weeks.

State law requires that the campaign get prior approval from donors before shifting their money to a legal-defense fund. Walker's campaign has declined to identify the contributors who OK'd the transfers.

Click to expand...

danarhea said:

Click to expand...

danarhea said:

And here is the key to knowing what's up with Walker in Wisconsin. According to Wisconsin law, a governor, or any other public servant in the state of Wisconsin, may have a legal defense fund if and ONLY if.

1) He has been charged with a crime.

OR

2) He is under investigation for a crime.

Any other use of a legal defense fund, such as the one Walker has set up for himself, would be a felony. So Walker can state all he wants that he is not under investigation for criminal activity. The mere existence of his defense fund says that he is lying, but if by chance he is telling the truth, then he has committed a serious crime nonetheless. Either way, he loses.

As I have said earlier, I still predict Walker to win in his recall election, but I am now certain that Walker's career could very well end in a prison cell, just like Blago's career ended in Illinois.

Article is here.

Click to expand...

Kal'Stang said:

Oh look! A blog! I wonder if I write a blog if it will get parroted around as the Truth and Gospel?

Click to expand...

danarhea said:

I see, so you deny that Walker hired felons, despite the fact that 2 that he hired have been convicted, several more are awaiting trial, and that more than a dozen have been granted immunity in exchange for their grand jury testimony? It's all in the public record, but because a blog mentioned it, then according to you, it must not exist. :rofl

Click to expand...

Kal'Stang said:

Felons need jobs to. As such...Good for Walker!

Click to expand...

danarhea said:

Now we know where you stand. You ARE for crooks in government. In fact one of those charged is accused of stealing from a fund for families of soldiers killed in war. Another is charged with attempting to molest a child. Nice to know you support that. :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

Kal'Stang said:

Not where I stand at all. I don't know how to make my post any simpler than what I did in post #3 so that you can understand that though.

BTW, if someone has not been convicted of something then they are not felons. And being accused of doing something does not mean that they are convicted of something. IE not felons.

No wonder all you anti-walker posters are so wrong all the time. You can't tell the difference between a felon and a person that is just being accused of something.

Click to expand...

danarhea said:

Actually, there have been 2 convictions in the Walkergate scandal already. Do try to keep up. :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

Kal'Stang said:

And where are those two right now?

Click to expand...

danarhea said:

Both were convicted. One of the got a light sentence in exchange for her testimony at the Grand Jury proceedings.

Click to expand...

Kal'Stang said:

So they are both in prison. So they are not working for Walker. So...what felons exactly does Walker have working for him again? You said that he hired felons...can't exactly hire someone that is in prison. So that must mean that you are talking about someone else. Who are you talking about?

Click to expand...