Skip to main content

View Diary: Scott Walker Responds to Latest John Doe Revelations (78 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Open-records is pretty broad in Wisconsin (0+ / 0-)

    Calendars, for example, are public documents...

    A meeting between the administration and the GAB and it is not revealed through an open records request?  Hmmmm.  Did it really happen if it was on no one's calendar?

    Note the cleverly-worded multiple hearsay in the Walker release...  Matthews said that "the campaign" (note, no human identified) "consulted" with the GAB.

    Then Matthews claims that the governor "relied" on advice from his attorneys (more hearsay) who "met" with the GAB.

    Hmmm, if the Government Accountability BOARD had a meeting, it had to be on their calendar.  Perhaps Matthews means that the governor means that his lawyers meant that they had met with a REPRESENTATIVE of the GAB.

    But he(1) claims that he(2) claims that they(3-???) claim that they really, really DID have a "meeting," not just advice or consultation.

    "Meetings" of the GAB are required disclosures under the open meetings act (unless they are "emergency" meetings like, say Repugnant anti-union midnight bills).

    Like all Repugnants, they are trying very hard to play semantics games.

    I will stand by my NO for obvious reasons.

    "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty (Mittens, Ricky, Gingrich, Limbaugh, pick your favorite) said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."

    by Eman on Wed Mar 28, 2012 at 05:45:13 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site