It is not a good day for Republican Governors and potential 2016 GOP Presidential nominees Chris Christie and Scott Walker. Both men are making news today, and not in a good way.
Wisconsin’s Walker is at the center of what state prosecutors described as an extensive “criminal scheme” to illegally coordinate his 2012 recall campaign effort with about a dozen “conservative” political action committees, according to documents unsealed today in the Badger State.
And New Jersey’s Christie is, according to another report today, said to be the ultimate target of federal prosecutors in a sprawling conspiracy case that appears to include all manner of improprieties — not only limited to the infamous George Washington Bridge closure, but branching out from it to a number of his top political appointees and cronies who are reportedly said to face “near-certain indictment”…
The WI Walker Conspiracy
In the unsealed Walker 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 Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports today.
“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 paper explains. “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.”
The defense by the 12 so-called “conservative groups”, makes what once might have been regarded as a mockery of campaign laws, by suggesting that their coordination with the Walker campaign was perfectly legal because the work they claim to have done was not “express advocacy” for or against Walker.
“The Wisconsin Club for Growth maintains that prohibition [against coordination] does not apply to them and other conservative groups because they did not run ads explicitly telling people how to vote. Their efforts praised Walker and criticized his Democratic opponent, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, but escaped regulation because they did not use the phrases ‘vote for’ and ‘vote against,’ they argue,” according to the Journal Sentinel.
While the idea seems absurd on its face, that is what much of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent rulings undercutting campaign finance law are built upon. Saying “vote for candidate X!,” meets the bar for certain regulations, while spending millions of dollars on TV and radio ads and other such efforts that say “Candidate X is simply awesome and Candidate Y totally sucks!,” is just “free speech” that can’t be subject to any regulatory laws, they argue.
“I am persuaded the statutes only prohibit coordination by candidates and independent organizations for a political purpose, and political purpose, with one minor exception not relevant here…requires express advocacy,” state Reserve Judge Gregory Peterson said in an order that was part of today’s unsealed documents. “There is no evidence of express advocacy.”
State prosecutors are challenging the court’s ruling in that ongoing case.
UPDATE 6/25/2014: On this week’s BradCast, we discussed how the Scott Walker case described above could have a much bigger effect on the entire country than it seems, much bugger than Scott Walker himself, depending on the way it all goes. Listen to my interview with Brendan Fischer, generous counsel at the Center for Media and Democracy, on that matter right here…
The NJ Christie Conspiracy
Meanwhile, things look even worse for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who is now reported to be the hard target of federal prosecutors, according to “Two sources with intimate knowledge” of U.S. Attorney for New Jersey Paul Fishman’s case in the sprawling George Washington Bridge closure investigation.
According to Esquire’s exclusive today, top Christie cronies, including former NY/NJ Port Authority Board of Commissioners Chair and former NJ state Attorney General David Sampson, former Port Authority Deputy Executive Director Bill Baroni and Port Authority political appointee David Wildstein “all face near-certain indictment and are being pressed to hand up Christie, as is the governor’s former chief counsel, Charlie McKenna.”
The magazine reports that federal charges in the bridge closure case could include “both intentional interference in interstate commerce and — in the cover-up that ensued — obstruction of justice.” But that appears to be just the tip of the Jersey iceberg from which the federal prosecution is now able to choose.
“Don’t underestimate what Wildstein has on Christie,” once source tells Esquire. “And Wildstein and Baroni have both turned on Samson. If Samson doesn’t give Fishman Christie, Samson is toast.”
As to Samson, who is alleged to have directed millions of dollars of state contracts to his former law firm, one of the magazine’s sources says, “They’ve got him cold…He got sloppy, arrogant, and greedy. Samson will want a deal. This way, he’d get one or two years. He’d have a future on the other side. He won’t want to die in jail.”
“But Fishman is really focused on Christie,” says one source. “Ultimately, he believes he’ll get to the governor.”
Both Walker and Christie, particularly the latter, were once believed to be viable candidates for the 2016 Republican nomination for President. Each of them, apparently, still thinks they are.
Given the reported circumstances of the cases against each of them, however, that seems unlikely, even without federal or state charges, given that questions about the conspiracies they are both alleged to have been a part of would almost certainly dog them on the campaign trail — if not in the GOP primary, then certainly as their party’s nominee, where the last thing Republicans need to be doing is playing defense against broad, criminal conspiracies, and all the heavy baggage that come with them.
In Christie’s case, Esquire asserts, “The safest bet that is obvious: there’s no future for Chris Christie in the White House. The Big House is a safer bet, by far.”
Youch.
I can’t wait for Walker to be out of office, the sooner the better. What I have found interesting is that the Conservatives have not yelled “fire” in their crowded movie theater.
When Bush was president there was a rash of indictments against prominent Democrats that got lots of press (like Siegelmann, Alabama’s former gov). Now that a Dem is in office prominent Reps are being indicted. Hmmmmm.
Is this just a lack of/less press for Rep indictments during Rep presidencies, and similar during Dem presidencies or is this a trend?
Brad, don’t forget that Walker used Nathan Sproul’s “shock troops” back during the recall.
Strategic Allied Consulting, the petition fromt group that popped up in various states in ’12 to help out Mitt and other national candidates (by destroying Democratic ballot access by trickery) was at work first in 2011/2012 trying to torpedo Democratic efforts to get the recall on the ballot. The Wisconsin Republican Party paid $500k (at least that’s what they reported) to Strategic Allied… And then you, Brad, later pointed out that Strategic Allied and Rove’s Crossroads and a nest of othet vipers (looking at you, Holzman-Vogel Law) all share a Vriginia address.
Your story: https://bradblog.com/?p=9632
And today’s developments show us that Walker was “coordinating with Rove” beyond a shadow of a doubt. Well sure he was, because Karl was controlling all of the entities and the money.
How’s tricks, Turdblossom? Going to be out of the country like back in the good old days?
I’m ready for the part where Romney ’12 becomes involved.
The name Scott Walker has arisen in relation to a criminal investigation?
What else is new?
One republican insider doubts an indictment for Walker. Time will tell. They both need a taste of justice.
A rather interesting segment of The Reid Report, featuring Scot Ross, the Executive Director of One Wisconsin Now:
as i watched the numbers move at the gab website after both the supreme court election recount and the walker recall….over and over it was peter frailing moving numbers..or at least that is who the site said was logged in
if we had a million bucks it would not be hard to find out whose life style was improving way past their known salary
This is pure slander.
It is an outrage. They should be deported.