Today's 'expose'
Extra! Extra! Read all about it!
People lobby the State Elections Board members to try to persuade them to vote their way.
Not surprised?
The Journal Sentinel thought it was worth the top headline on page one today:
Doyle lawyer urged sanctionGiving it that kind of play, of course, suggests that the paper uncovered some wrongdoing.
He lobbied 3 on Elections Board before Green vote
Madison - A lawyer for Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle's campaign repeatedly lobbied three Democratic members of the State Elections Board before they voted with the majority to order Republican gubernatorial candidate Mark Green to divest $467,844 in donations from out-of-state political action committees, records show.
You had to read to the 14th paragraph to find this:
[Doyle's lawyer Michael] Maistelman's contacts with the three board members were legal, said board legal counsel George Dunst. Any member of the public, and officials of the Green campaign, could have contacted board members to argue their position before the vote, Dunst said."Not that there's anything wrong with that," as Jerry Seinfeld would say.
posted by xoff @ 8:17 AM
10 comments
10 Comments:
Mudslugging? Untruth?
Either Orwell would be proud, or gwc shadow's high school English teacher is sobbing uncontrollably.
You kids are missing the larger point – probably by choice. The decision by the SEB was not a routine ruling on a small issue. It was clearly political, partisan and most important – the board retroactively changed the rules.
Legal or not, the communications demonstrate as fact what the rest of all knew. The Democrats on the board wanted to score an orchestrated political victory.
Why this matters most is because the smoking-gun is there for the judge to look at. When the case is laid out and the precedents are reviewed, it will become obvious that this ‘new’ view of PAC money transferred from a federal account had little basis in the law, and was unprecedented.
Legal or not – it was sleazy and the voters in this tight race are not likely to ignore it.
Like it or not – this campaign ploy probably lost your guy an election. Thanks.
No wonder Jim Doyle is under CRIMINAL investigation.
It also looks like the JS has been distancing itself from Doyle ever since the Georgia Thompson CONVICTION.
I also excuse grammatical errors because I have more important issue to deal with on a daily basis. Bob T. if you can't convert a 64B hex char to decimal you're illiterate!
The board reversed itself and 30 years of precedent. This revelation does not so much impact the court case. This revelation will further tarnish and expose Doyle for what he is.
And to True(ly confused) Conservative – it is one thing to play politics, it is another to manipulate a public board and the process for political gain. It would appear that you don’t get it at all.
No matter what personal delusions and rationalizations any of you may wish to involve yourselves with; I guarantee that the demeanor inside the Doyle camp is not a happy one. They got caught. The impact will be felt in November – they know it and I know it.
Xout - The law has been on the books since 1974. Another decision in 2000 affirmed that money could be transferred from federal to state accounts, but that it had to come from PACs registered in Wisconsin. So he did break the law.
Did anyone else notice the severe misquote in the RPW release? It says this:
He issued a series of e-mails outlining how to rig the vote against Mark Green, including one that talks of his contact with the Doyle campaign about their scheme: "I ran this by the powers that be and was given a "green" light on this idea."
Makes it sound like rigging was given the green light. Actual quote from the email:
Carl suggested that the SEB give Green an opportunity to get the out of state PAC's registered so the SEB looks reasonable. I ran this by the powers that be and was given a "green" light on this idea. We were thinking of giving Green one week to get the out of stat PAC's registered in WI. If not, then the money would need to be divested immediately and he could be fined and referred to the DA.
That actually suggests they were trying to avoid the decision by allowing him to register the PACs late. Something that obviously doesn't point to rigging the decision.
One common thread in all the responses above--
absolutely NO ONE is surprised to know that the Doylies were working hard to stage a "coup."
Too bad the lawyer just couldn't tell the JS reporter the truth, eh?
Xoff--start looking for a new assignment...
The only player comes out smelling good is Jacob Burns.
Troy, a well thought out comment. My only one is this: the Republicans on the board voted against the ruling. Was their's a partisan vote, or do they truly claim law on their side?
This lawyer was clumsy ... and it does leave a nasty taste. But it wasn't illegal, and for anyone to claim that the Republican members of the SEB were anything but partisan would be lying.
By the way, it has already been bumped by news that Green may have received donations in excess of the $10,000 minimum. Me thinks the JS is a little fickle.
From the Federal perspective Green closed out his campaign cycle within the federal limits.
Wisconsin law, history and precedent allows that bucket of money to be moved over to his state account.
That is the sum and substance of the matter.
You cannot retroactively apply rules to previous cycles. You cannot cherry pick a group of donors from the cycle and you cannot RETROACTIVELY change the rules.
Like it or not – Doyle is completely screwed on this one.
I am so glad that Doyle chose to make ethics a centerpiece of his campaign and I am glad he spent so much money on it. Ethics is the loose thread on Doyle’s new suit and by the time it is unraveled, he will be exposed… completely. In fact, we this will be a twofer, because we will tie him to Falk and they will both be out.
All I can say is – “Thanks for being yourself Jim.”
Paul,
It was from the PREVIOUS campaign cycle. You would have to go through and determine FIFO or FILO for contributions and even then your case is very thin.
But thanks for wishing otherwise.
Post a Comment
<< Home