Bruce Murphy
Murphy’s Law

Dan Bice’s Role in the John Doe

What did he know, when did he know it, and how has he affected the probe of Scott Walker?

By - Mar 25th, 2014 11:33 am
Dan Bice

Dan Bice

As the reporter who broke most of the stories regarding the John Doe probes of Scott Walker, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel columnist Dan Bice has played a central role in what the public has learned about the investigations and how we view them. Conservative George Mitchell did an op ed for Urban Milwaukee calling Bice’s coverage of the John Doe a “prolonged and reprehensible example of bad journalism,” while liberal blogger Dominique Paul Noth has suggested Bice’s reporting is one of the few reasons left to call the Journal Sentinel a “legitimate” newspaper. I think both conclusions are dead wrong, from wildly different perspectives, but both observers do agree on the importance of Bice’s reporting.

Bice looms large in the federal suit by conservative Eric O’Keefe and the Wisconsin Club for Growth against Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm, four other investigators and the judge overseeing the the John Doe probe. You have to read it carefully to see this because Bice’s name is never mentioned. But Bice’s reporting may be the key to understanding whether the suit is correct in claiming Chisholm and company “decided to use a John Doe proceeding to investigate the Milwaukee County Executive’s Office as a means of influencing the 2010 election in which Scott Walker was a candidate for Governor.”

The suit notes that Walker’s staff was concerned about money missing from a veteran’s fund called Operation Freedom, which had been founded by Walker, and asked the District Attorney to investigate. “Attorneys within the (DA‘s) Office determined that, by opening an investigation into the missing Operation Freedom funds, they could… possibly expand an investigation into Walker’s employees more generally to identify possible violations of law that could be linked directly to Scott Walker.”

The suit says the first John Doe probe started on May 5, 2010, and within nine days of its launching, “the John Doe judge signed a search warrant allowing investigators to search the Milwaukee County computer” of Walker aide Darlene Wink though “Wink’s personal email accounts bore no relation to the purpose of tracing funds from the County to” the veterans fund.

“The same day as the search,” the brief goes on, “Milwaukee County Supervisor John F. Weishan, Jr., sent a criminal complaint to Defendant Chisholm” which “alleged that Darlene Wink was ‘illegally using state resources for political purposes’ by posting articles favorable to Scott Walker.” The implication is that prosecutors went through Wink’s computer, got some dirt they leaked to Weishan, a liberal supervisor and Walker antagonist, and then Weishan demanded the investigation of Wink.

Piggy backing on the information they got from Wink’s emails, the prosecutors then used this information to go after additional staff of the county executive, the suit claims.

The suit, however ignores the reporting by Bice on Darlene Wink. His story on Friday, May 14, 2010, revealed that Wink had posted “about 70 comments on Journal Sentinel blogs and stories since October – most of them praising her boss, touting his gubernatorial bid or ripping his two opponents.” Bice reported that he had interviewed her about this on Thursday May 13, and she resigned from Walker’s administration that same day. His story went online at 8 p.m. on May 13, he notes.

In short, it would appear that Chisholm’s staff reacted as soon as Bice did his story and asked the John Doe judge for a search warrant. They would have wanted to act quickly, as Wink had resigned and might be expected to destroy any emails on the personal laptop she used while working at the county. Weishan, too, requested the investigation of Wink after Bice’s story appeared.

It is an article of faith among O’Keefe and many conservatives that Chisholm abused his prosecutorial discretion to veer from the investigation of the veteran’s fund to a probe of Walker’s staff. This theory is behind the 20 or so stories the conservative Wisconsin reporter has done assailing the John Doe probe and relentlessly defending O’Keefe, who helped launch the newspaper’s founding organization, the Franklin Center for Government & Public Integrity; O’Keefe also created the Sam Adams Alliance, which provided most of the funding for the non-profit newspaper.  (The list of the conservative groups O’Keefe is involved with is long indeed.)

But the legal brief asserting there was a runaway investigation of the veterans fund is full of holes. It ignores Bice’s reporting. It complains that an investigator interviewed Tom Nardelli, Chief of Staff to Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker, regarding the missing (veterans) funds” in April 2009 and yet the John Doe wasn’t launched until a year later. But it appears quite likely the Doe, while it included the investigation of the veterans fund, was launched after a complaint was received regarding an illegal campaign donation to Walker from railroad executive William Gardner. The complaint was received in April 2010 and the Doe probe began on May 5th. Eight days later came the story about Wink and the DA’s investigators were now operating on three fronts.

Is it possible that the DA’s office was actually Bice’s tipster for his story on Wink? (He tells readers he confronted Wink “after receiving a tip,” but doesn’t name the tipster.) There are two problems with that theory. First, Bice says his source wasn’t anyone connected with the DA. “I know who tipped me off,” he says. “That individual contacted me even before the first John Doe was initiated. I know of no connection between my source and the DA’s office.”

The other problem with this theory is that according to the suit, Chisholm’s investigators didn’t get a search warrant to look at Wink’s computer until after Bice’s story ran.

The notion that Chisholm’s office was strategically leaking information to Bice in order to hurt Walker politically is made in the legal suit and has been endlessly proclaimed by conservative radio host Charlie Sykes and other, more official members of the Republican Party. But when I asked Bice, he said this: “I was not given a tip by anyone in the Milwaukee County district attorney’s office for that story (on Darlene Wink) or for any subsequent development in the John Doe probes.”

The suit by O’Keefe also contends that Chisholm operated as a rank partisan targeting only Republicans, but as I’ve previously reported, he has actually prosecuted Democrats, and quite aggressively, as admitted by Sykes.

All that said, there is much that is still murky about the John Doe probe. The suit by O’Keefe makes other allegations that are impossible to evaluate because his lawyer leaves the dates out in many of his accusations while at other times including dates. And much of the legal brief is redacted to preserve whatever secrecy is left regarding the details of the probe. But the suit’s deliberate omission of Bice’s reporting in the probe strongly suggests it presents a problem for O’Keefe and his lawyer, one that might unravel their entire argument against Chisholm.

Categories: Murphy's Law, Politics

10 thoughts on “Murphy’s Law: Dan Bice’s Role in the John Doe”

  1. Jerry says:

    Thanks for the “honest” look at how the Doe probes occurred and without stating the obvious that things were occurring in Walker’s offices that the public was unaware of and at first blush were at the very least inappropriate. Sometimes in politics when the accused attacks the accuser instead of offering evidence of their innocence there certainly appears to be smoke that would warrant a further look to see if there is a fire or at least find out why the smoke is occurring in case there is a fire!

  2. wisconsin Conservative Digest says:

    if you did what Chisholm did to any campaign in the last 30 years you would have found all kinds of co-ordination, inter actions, secret communications and questionable things, yet in the Walker campaign, out side of some really stupid aides working on public time ad some thieves no one did anything to the leaders and Walker.
    Walker is honest, Chisholm is a hack.

  3. Stan says:

    I thought it was pretty common knowledge that Russell’s attorney was leaking info to Bice in order to get the Walker people to help him rather than throw him to the wolves.

  4. stacy moss says:

    “Walker is honest, Chisholm is a hack.”

    It’s that simple?

  5. Oh no…the ‘but all the kids are doing it’ defense!

    btw: at least you could capitalize Wisconsin when signing a diatribe.

  6. Hereiam says:

    @Stan: I’ve had exactly the same impression. A close reading of the statute reveals the only party not bound by the secrecy order of a John Doe probe is the individual being investigated (primarily because they have a 1st amendment right to defend themselves). It makes sense for Russell, and the other defendants, to use the only tools at their disposal (information) to get either protection or someone else to pay their attorneys’ fees.

  7. CJ McD says:

    wisconsin Conservative Digest- If you took time and read through ANY of the emails released from the Kelly Rindfleisch trial, there is evidence that Walker and his staff not only heavily coordinated, but Walker was completely in charge.

    “really stupid aides” and “thieves” labels have been duly noted.

  8. Wis Conservative Digest says:

    Scott co-ordinate what, his campaign? course he would do that, he was candidate. what did you expect that Bice would be in charge? Murphy? He was not cited in any manner and the DA said from beginning that he was not target, so what is your point and who cares? No one but a few leftist haters and racists.

  9. CJ McD says:

    Key point- Illegal coordination while they were on work time, the taxpayers dime.

    John Doe 1 or John Doe 2?


    Seems like you care. Leftist hater or racist?

  10. Steve says:

    The Reinfleish emails establish without doubt that Walker condoned campaign activities going on in his county government office. He knew these activities were illegal — the Caucus Scandal a few years previous sent people, including Sen. Brian Burke, to prison for similar activities. If anything, Chisolm went easy on Walker.

Leave a Reply

You must be an Urban Milwaukee member to leave a comment. Membership, which includes a host of perks, including an ad-free website, tickets to marquee events like Summerfest, the Wisconsin State Fair and the Florentine Opera, a better photo browser and access to members-only, behind-the-scenes tours, starts at $9/month. Learn more.

Join now and cancel anytime.

If you are an existing member, sign-in to leave a comment.

Have questions? Need to report an error? Contact Us