Speeding Analogy Doesn’t Fly

The Capital Times and Wisconsin State Journal compare Brian Blanchard’s failure to charge Assembly Democrats for campaigning on state time to the kind of selective prosecution that occurs on the freeway; ---some drivers are pulled over and ticketed for speeding while others are allowed to keep on trucking.

While it’s true that some selective prosecution is inevitable, either because prosecutors lack evidence of a crime or law enforcement officials lack the resources necessary to investigate potential wrongdoing, these facts don’t apply in the case of the Caucus investigation.

To use the speeding analogy ---radar caught all four political caucuses going over the speed limit. They were all pulled over and every one of their vehicles was thoroughly searched. All of this was done at state taxpayers’ expense.

The evidence available to us so far suggests that Shirley Krug was not only speeding, she was driving under the influence of alcohol with open intoxicants in the car. Yet rather than issuing a ticket or placing her under arrest, Blanchard gave Krug a ride home and never spoke of the incident again.

Documents made public for the first time last week, prove that what Krug did is worse than what Scott Jensen is charged with doing. Not only did Krug use state employees and resources for political campaigns, she operated an independent expenditure committee that funneled over $300,000 to the campaigns of four fellow Democrats. This is exactly what Chuck Chvala pleaded guilty to in the top count of his plea agreement.

Next week Chvala will go to jail and Shirley Krug has a new taxpayer funded job with the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District.

The Capital Times editorial praised Brian Blanchard for being responsive and not letting partisanship interfere with his duties. The editorial concluded:

Indeed, if in his desperation to point the finger of blame at others Jensen does turn up evidence of Democratic misdeeds that can be prosecuted, we are quite certain that Blanchard will take the appropriate action - just as he did when he charged Jensen with abusing the public trust.

Jensen’s point is that Blanchard discovered this evidence years ago, and rather than acting on it, he has gone to great lengths to conceal it from the public. Friday Blanchard asked the Judge to seal all future motions in the Jensen case so that more of his secret evidence would not be made public.

The news media should really be asking Blanchard why he isn’t eager to prove his impartiality by releasing all the evidence and testimony he gathered during the course of his investigation. Wisconsin taxpayers have right to know that their money was not used to target certain individuals while turning a blind eye to the clearly illegal actions of others.