A follow-up for Scott Walker (Buffalo Beast)

[dorkulon]

HEY, ALL YOU SERIOUS JOURNALIST TYPES! Want to be useful? Here’s a question Scott Walker really needs to answer about Murphy’s astonishing “Koch’d up” conversation with him:

Who?

Surprisingly, Walker has already been asked repeatedly about his admission that “we thought about that” when Murphy suggest planting agents provocateurs among the Wisconsin protesters. Even more surprisingly, Walker has essentially fessed up to considering the idea, and dropping it because it was strategically a loser. While he has made weak statements that it would have been wrong, he made no such protestation to “Koch.” But there’s another aspect here that needs pursuing: In his responses Walker has implicated legislators (presumably Wisconsin Republican legislators) and his own staff in suggesting the wildly illegal tactic. Who are they?

--snip--

http://www.buffalobeast.com/?p=5175

Good question.

[Poboy]

1. recommend

[drm604]

2. Unfortunately, I highly doubt that we'll ever have an answer to that question. n/t

[dorkulon]

3. Maybe not, but I'd like to see it asked, and I'd like to see him refuse to answer.

Why let him off easy?

[drm604]

6. No disagreement from me. n/t

[EC]

4. I'll take a guess

The Fitzgerald brothers and father. It's like the old days when a family ruled whole towns.

[janet118]

5. When Sen. majority leader Fitzgerald was questioned about this

he denied that Walker had discussed sending in provocateurs BUT that they HAD discussed the possibility of the "outside" unions sending in "thugs." Cute. All Republicans are crooks and liars. Ask all you want. The only time they will tell the truth is when they are talking to their puppet masters. Too bad about that trip to "Cali," Walker. When this is all over, you can go to hell.