Want breaking news?
Join the investigation:
TO: Interested Reporters
FROM: Graeme Zielinski, Democratic Party of Wisconsin Communications Director, with Bob Jambois, Former District Attorney of Kenosha County
At last night's televised debate, Scott Walker again faced fair and serious questions about his role in the ongoing John Doe corruption probe and again dodged questions in a way that raised more questions than answers.
Twelve individuals, many of them current and former top aides to Walker, have been granted immunity in a prosecution that has netted one conviction and one guilty plea of among six charged with 15 felonies. Walker has only evaded questions about the merit of the complaints.
Earlier this week, Walker again said that he can't talk about his potential criminality because of Doe prosecutors.
DEBATE STATEMENT: "We haven't been the target of this." (1:49)
FACT: The only way that Scott Walker can know for certain — and offer proof to the public for certain — that he is NOT the target of the John Doe prosecution is if he has been granted formal "transactional immunity," or he has been granted a letter from prosecutors or a letter granting informal immunity.
Several members of his administration, including his own spokesman Cullen Werwie, have been granted use immunity under Wis. Stat. 972.08 and 972.085, in exchange for their truthful testimony. Practically, it is unheard of for those granted use immunity to be a target. In any case, use immunity is a public matter and to date, there have been no public hearings on Walker use immunity.
QUESTIONS FOR THE PRESS: Given that Scott Walker has said with certainty, and made frequent representations to the public that he IS NOT TARGETED BY THE CORRUPTION PROBE, does this mean that he has been granted "transactional immunity?"
Has Scott Walker been granted a letter by prosecutors telling him he is NOT a target?
Or, more likely, is Scott Walker merely telling the public things he cannot know and is he hiding behind confusion about Doe secrecy? Or, DOES Scott Walker know and is he lying?
STATEMENT: Walker this past week said again that he had been instructed by prosecutors to not comment on his role in the Doe prosecution. "When I talk about a topic like this it is like fighting a fight with both hands tied behind my back. Because there are a lot of things that I would love to say but I don't want to violate the terms of being able to cooperate with him and his team." (1:50)
FACT: Unless he has testified before a John Doe judge or is part of a broad secrecy order, there are no secrecy requirements binding Scott Walker from answering any question about his role in the corruption probe. Even IF he has testified, Scott Walker is only bound from talking about his testimony.
QUESTIONS FOR THE PRESS: Has Scott Walker been ordered by the John Doe judge to comply with a secrecy order under Wis. Stat. 968. 26?
If not, why is he making representations to the press that are not truthful?
Has Scott Walker testified before the John Doe judge?
If so, when did he testify?
And, is it the claim of Scott Walker that prosecutors have, without any legal authority, forbid him from clarifying Walker's own role in a corruption probe? Is Walker then suggesting misconduct on behalf of prosecutors?