Annette Bosworth admits she misspoke yesterday... about something that she really should have done before submitting her illegitimate nominating petition. In her appearance on KELO-AM radio yesterday, the fake GOP Senate candidate told host Greg Belfrage that she had recognized mistakes on her petitions and asked her lawyer if she should recirculate them. She said (to the extent that she said anything clearly) that her lawyer said no, her petitions would get by just fine. Now (under orders, I suspect, from a very upset Joel Arends, her attorney), Bosworth recants:
Bosworth Clarification of KELO Radio Interview
(Sioux Falls, South Dakota) – Statement by Dr. Annette Bosworth regarding yesterday's radio interview with KELO Radio's Greg Belfrage. "Yesterday while appearing on the Greg Belfrage show, I incorrectly and inarfully [sic] suggested that I was advised by legal counsel prior to submitting my petitions to the South Dakota Secretary of State's office. This was an incorrect suggestion on my part, as I did not direct or ask my legal counsel to review the petitions or process before they were submitted. Any suggestion that counsel reviewed the petitions, the process or offered advice beforehand is incorrect and I regret suggesting otherwise" [Annette Bosworth for U.S. Senate, press release, 2014.04.18].
Inarfully... that means failing to bark properly?
Not recanted from Bosworth's Thursday KELO-AM interview:
- Bosworth's apparent contention that my being a "self-proclaimed communist, atheist blogger who lives out of state" has any bearing on the facts of her petition violations.
- Bosworth's statement that her fundraising is a miracle worked by God Almighty.
- Bosworth's statement that her invalid signatures aren't "dead Indians under the ground."
- Bosworth's accusation that I have paid people to say negative things under oath about her.
- Bosworth's attack on the character and credibility of Ethan Crisp, the campaign staffer whom she used and still hasn't paid.
- Bosworth's absurd allegation that the mysterious and nameless "entrenched powers" tried to stop her raffles.
- Bosworth's false accusation that people on her team weren't "faithful," let stress get t them, got greedy, and stole raffle money and papers from her.
- Bosworth's declaration that Steve Hickey and I and other citizens have no right to raise legal questions about her campaign without first forming a personal relationship with her.
- Bosworth's implication, repeated from her Tuesday train-wreck video, that I am really some big-money political mastermind trying to shut her down. (Let me just say that I didn't even get a refund from the IRS this year, while Bosworth is reporting $900,000 in campaign contributions.)
Of all the misstatements and outright lies Bosworth told on the radio yesterday, her misstatement about the advice she got from Joel Arends is the least of her errors. And this admission only strengthens the case that she is wholly responsible for willfully submitting a petition that she herself recognized had problems that could invalidate it.
Related: Greg Belfrage graciously invited me onto his program for the first time this morning. We talked briefly about Bosworth's irrelevant (his word) attacks on my character, then focused on the questions of fact and law surrounding Bosworth's illegitimate petition. The podcast is now available on KELO.com.
And yes, even on the radio, I did wave my arms a lot. Enjoy!
I think the bigger story about the release is that her lawyer wants nothing to do with defending the petition. The lawyers must have a feeling that she is in some legal trouble and don't want to risk going down with her and possibly get disbarred for improper advice or illegal actions.
No matter how much Joel Arends tries to distance himself from Bosworth's fraud and perjury, remember it was him that made the press releases attacking Cory and claiming she did everything legal. Also remember, that as Cory pointed out, Joel Arends notarized many of the petitions she and Chad perjured themselves on! His notarizing them was his complicit advisement for her to submit them.
I guess he is getting a little nervous that this is coming back fully on him.
Wasn't there a comment from a previous SDGOP chairman or executive director that the SDGOP would not allow such abuse of the electoral process during the John Thune - Todd Schleckaway notary scandal? Where is Craig Lawrence on all of this? Joel Arends is running to be a SDGOP delegate and tried to be the Lincoln County Chairman before.
Craig Lawrence is doing his best to defend Rounds and Daugaard's crony-capitalism and deficit spending ways, but wont take a stand on this black mark on the SDGOP?
Good job on the interview Bud. I am going to start waving my arms when I talk... You know just to see if it makes me more articulate. :-)
Barry -- try it! When I teach speech, I show students what happens when I don't use hand gestures to release nervous energy. I lock my hands behind my back, get all tight, and lose track of what I'm saying. Use the Force, let it flow through you! :-)
MJL and DD both sense the legal CYA implicit in a press release that even Bob Mercer deems weird.
Arfully: noun may be used as verb, derived from Greek remaining fullofcrapes or crazy.
Student, I think you're thinking of the French, who are full of crêpes.
Being a "wordy"... I had to consult with my Websters... Why am I not surprised that "inarfully" isn't even a word?
Mark the date. I fully agree with DD and his first two paragraphs. I think I'll call it a day!
Great and articulate speaking today Cory! You stuck to truth and facts which always (well, should) wins.
Good job!
Even "inartfuly" suggests she did not lie convincingly enough.
http://www.verbalenergy.com/artful.html
Listened to podcast. Well done. Thought you kept focused on the issues at hand without straying into irrelevancies.
Not bad for an atheistic communist liberal tool of Satan. [GRIN]
How do you accidentally misspeak that specifically? I guess arfully :)
She was downright arful yesterday and her mea culpa today is just as arful. Just because doctors are taught to write incoherently,doesn't mean their verbiage should be incoherent. She is starting to coin her own words ala Snowgrift Snookie from Alas.....er I mean Arizona.
I have to take a minute to argue the 7th bullet. I happen to be very close to one of those 'faithful' employees. An employee so faithful she took time off work to be with the doctor during her hearing before the medical board, as well as making sure that when people were offering incorrect information about said hearing, her actions, or the outcome, offered the accurate information in favor of the doctor. As a matter of fact this 'faithful' (I use quotes because the doctor does) employee continues to offer this correct information despite being verbally abused and berated by Mr. Haber while you, Dr. Bosworth, stood by and said nothing. So, Dr. Bosworth, if you're reading this, tread lightly. You're not only lying, you're lying about a close personal friend and colleague who's character should never be questioned by someone like you.
Good interview today, Cory!
Obviously Arends wrote the recantation statement for Bosworth or himself.
Belfrage stated in one his Daily Dose blogs that he was surprised that Bosworth's advisors let her go on the air, that was my sentiment earlier.
It was also my opinion that be talking to Belfrage she would likely open the door to potential litigation from scams or petitions, really bad legal advice from Arends.
The good news is that more people are now aware of her criminal behavior, some people told me they had no idea she was such an idiot.
Cory's interview with Belfrage was fantastic. Short and sweet and to the point.
Hopefully the Bosworth, Hickey, and Cory interviews will rattle some cages in Pierre. Bosworth will probably stay on the ballot, but maybe, just maybe, the legislature will review the petition and challenge process and correct problems.
Cory,
I am glad you mentioned the "dead Indians under the ground" comment during her interview on Thursday. Even for such an incoherent word salad that her radio segment was, I was taken aback when that dropped out of her mouth. It reminded me of Sarah Palin's "blood libel" moment after the Gabby Giffords shooting. Unfortunately, she may have some darker and even less savory corners of her brain under all of that narcissism and delusional thought.
By the way, great job today, Cory!
Thank you, friends. I am happy to serve the public in this fashion.
Mr. H I have not listened to your interview. I was not able to get up early enough to get to a computer to listen to it live so I will have to hear the pod.
I am sure it is good, communist arm waving or not. Keep up the atheist spawn of Satan work as even some of us real conservatives cheer for that sort of thing.
But don't count the pretty young doctor out just yet. I bet you she's smarter than we think.
grudz,
Grifters often think they hold the whole card.
My heartburn is not with Bosworth. She apparently thinks she is whom she pretends to be and apparently is unable or unwilling to see the reality of what she is. My heartburn is the State Medical Licensing Board still allows her to to run around with a doctoring license. The Board should recall her license for her absence of basic human competency which apparently clouds the rest of her decision making and judgment.
Mr. C, it's usually obvious who is holding a whole card.
It's the people who think they know what the hole card is where you have to start itching up your britches and squinting a bit from your good eye.
Grudz, you might as well take a break and enjoy some time on a sunny beach before the walls close in.
Whoopi Goldberg isn't really a Jew, Mrs. S, and while you and she embrace all this smoking and eating of weed some of us do not.
Dr. Boz needs to blame all of this on her husband, apologize, get out of the race, divorce him, and try to resuscitate her practice (not necessarily in that order). I do believe she can be a good doctor, when she is concentrating on that work.
Easy, Dave. I don't think we're positioned to comment on the sustainability of anyone's marriage here.
Mr. Baumeister has some good points. I think the young lady has been led astray by a lot of entrenched powers from here and there.
I know, but it might be the only way she can get out of any of this!
John, can the Board up and revoke a license on its own, or must it have a complaint?
Of course, Grudz, some of us would think issues of child sex slavery in this state might trump your dislike for weed. I guess you can't see the blood at your feet standing on that pillar.
Mrs. S, what do one or two random instances of child sex slavery that occurred outside of Mr. Rhoden's oversight in the legislatures have to do with the pretty young Dr. Bos's honest mistake to correctly certify her petitions and then throw her lawyer under the train?
The board can revoke without complaints
The exploitation of unauthorized aliens is an unqualified evil.
Harry Reid is in bed with the Communists, funneling EB-5 money to his son.
That reminds me of somebody else.
Cory you wrote paraphrasing that she said, "that her lawyer said no, her petitions would get by just fine."
Okay, so leave out the lawyer part, did someone in State Government tell her petitions would be just fine, cuz we don't bother to review the petitions anyway, (which they apparently don't)?
Also I agree with disgusted, Arends is implicit by his notarizing the petitions that are being submitted by Dr Bosworth and that the signatures were signed on dates when she was out of the country and he knew that she was.
grudz are you smoking some of Whoopi's weed, with your comments at 17:53 and 19:01?
Mr. Stricherz, it is the young Mrs. S. who is all weeded out and insaner than most with her jealousy of Dr. Bos.
I, sir, am pretty much in control of myself and am not suffering from post-partum insanity or anything else.
Bosworth's comment about "dead Indians under the ground" has been nagging me the past few days, I'm really not sure what it meant.
It does have a sinister connotation to it suggesting that dead Indians sign petitions and vote.
If it was just an off hand comment, it was thoughtless and like most of actions and comments irresponsible.
Or, does her comment real an underlying opinion of Indians. I'm perplexed.
Ooh now I am insane and jealous. Lol.
Lay off the booze, Grudz.
Everybody knows that dead people can't sign petitions or vote. She's a medical doctor and knows that too. I was unclear about that comment too. I think that maybe people misheard what she was trying to say.
Maybe dead Hutterites vote too. Lol.
I wonder what connection we can find between human trafficking, disappeared EB-5 money, and dead people voting. Hmm.
The duty of a notary public is to certify that the person whose signature is being notarized is that person. There is no duty to even look at the text preceding the signature being notarized.
Perhaps it could be argued that someone in the position Mr. Arends is in could be held to a higher standard. I'd be interested to hear any previous legal opinion or ruling on that topic.
I also think it is a stretch to hold that because one petition is invalid, all petitions verified by the same people are invalid. I'd also like to see the substantiation for that position.
I agree that both of these ideas make sense. I just wonder about the precedents.
Cory, I hope you didn't injure your wrists throwing your hands, with your index finger pointed out, into the air every time you were making a point. I know that it helps to make the point, but it was painful to watch, or rather listen to and imagine.
And follow me now..
Of the three double-billed travel vouchers of Benda's the Feds requested info on from the state, one was for a Vegas event... an event we know Mike Rounds attended because there is a video of him being interviewed at it on Youtube.
She probably could not remember "the cemetery voters"...or cemetery petition signers.
She seems too inept to be a candidate for anything and her malapropisms, etc are not at all charming.
The really sad thing about this is that conservatives enamored with ideological mythology will support somebody like this because she echoes their biases and nonsense whether or not honest or competent.
Kind of like how Clinton echoes the biases and nonsense of the libbies, eh, Mr. Wiken? Eh?
The debate has been declared completed.
grudznick wins.
grudznick wins.
That was simply outstanding Cory. You were direct, precise, articulate, passionate and factual. I'm proud of you and hope you feel the same about yourself.
I'm very curious to learn how Jackley and Gant will react to this. Now they are facing much more than a liberal blogger. The Republican hoi polloi are joining in. Hmmm?
BTW, it was so nice of you to refer to us as your friends. I feel the same, including folks like Grudz, Bree, etc. Agreement with all Madizens is not required and occasional frustration with the Madizen sister/brotherhood is not a deal breaker.
grudz,
I'm calling in Newland to give us another diagnosis of you, I think you have the same thing as Bosworth.
Better to wave your arms than a pair of stanky shoes.
I spoke with a certain lead anchor of one of the major local tv networks in the black hills and I asked him where the local media was on the story and he told me he was well aware of the Bosworth story and that it was 'others' preventing him from running the story.
Okay, I want to wade in with a couple of comments on comments - because it's fun!
Nope, Whoopi, one of my all-time favorites, has never been Jewish. Willie Nelson, another one of my all-time favorites, is much better known for his ingestion of the sweet seed. I enjoyed it too. Last time was about 1980. Sometimes this winter I thought it might help my dark mood to puff on a well loaded bong again.
Grudz and Bree, what are you going on about?! It is funny. I always enjoy reading your comments. Well, almost always.
Why couldn't Bosworth's first statement be true? This is really the way the Republicans work, after all. The laws for petitioning are enforced only on those the Republican machine doesn't like. If they slipped in a few petitions that were outright fraudulent, well, that's just the Republican way.
Arends probably knew. Gant probably knew. Jackley probably knew. None of them are going to admit it, no one is going to investigate and the Republican fraud machine just keeps running.
I join the rest here in congratulating you on an excellent interview. I debated back in the day for Lincoln High School. If I were a judge, I would say you made your case and there is no dispute. Bosworth is a fraud. I agree with Donald. I doubt the GOP establishment here will actually make an example of her. I am also on the same page as Deb. The friends remark was very sweet of you. I am thankful every single day for the light you shine on South Dakota.
@Jon: I have heard the same thing! The word is also they have to refrain from any highlights of the Rounds EB5 federal investigation and scandals.
So since our state refuses to go after Bosworth would the FEDS be a able to charge her with federal election fraud?
GOP runs the primary: ethical lapses are par for the course.
SDBlue: Go Lincoln Debate! Was Kim Maass your coach? I would fear what Maass would do to these candidates if she were judging them.
Jon, I'd like to get those anchors on the record. Tell them to call me.
Yeah, I believe Bosworth's first statements and discount her "clarification." The petitioning fraud Bosworth engaged in is just business as usual in Republican circles. It's not that big of a deal to them to not personally witness the signing, though for the rest of us, that would be considered fraud.
I'm sure she, as a novice in Republican politics, got a little spooked about this, asked Arends a few questions (he didn't need to review the petitions) and he just told her to sign the circulator line. To Republicans, who are never, ever asked to be accountable, this would be business as usual.
Bosworth should have listened a bit more to Jesus than to the Republican apparatchiks. But, since she is a Republican, she won't be put in the slammer, fined or kicked off the ballot. When you are an R in South Dakota, you can simply violate the law at will. Praise Jesus, and the Republican Party.
Friends, neighbors, fellow patriots—whatever we are here in the comment section, we are something. And I mean every word I say. This whole story would not have happened if folks here in the comment section (as well as friends of the blog who speak to me via other quieter channels) had not raised concerns, provided evidence, and supported the research that went into the petition challenge. This community effort shows that when I say "We" on this blog, I'm not using the editorial We or the royal We.
Can we raise any of these concerns again with Jackley's office? If Gant didn't address all the complaints listed in CH's petition can this be brought forward again for complete satisfaction of the complaint?
Lanny, the state does not conduct thorough reviews of petitions. Under the current system, with paper petition sheets coming to one office from hundreds of candidates with less than three weeks between deadline and ballot printing, I'm not sure such a review is feasible. Consider that it took my team, which may have been larger than the Secretary of State's team, one week to review just one statewide petition, and there were other petitions (Nelson, Pressler, Rounds) with even more signatures.
That's why the circulator's oath is so important. We say to petitioners, "You want us to trust your petition? You need to do bear some of the responsibility. As a circulator, you need to swear on penalty of perjury that you witnessed each signature happen, that you saw each signature come from the hand of a real and distinct living breathing voter." You meet that burden of proof, and the state says, "O.K., we trust you. If you've got the numbers, we'll put you (or the person for whom you circulate) on the ballot."
If I walk into Secretary Gant's office with 1,221 signatures to place me on a ballot, but I can't personally vouch for the fact that those signatures were made by 1,221 different South Dakota Democrats rather than just a couple schemers writing in names (or a cheap computer program and a quality printer), the Secretary says, "No way." I can't shift that burden of proof to the state. It's unfair and impractical.
If a circulator breaks his or her oath, that circulator's work is invalid.
Now if we want the Secretary of State to more deeply review every petition, maybe we can find a technofix. Could we create a secure online petition process? Could we create a smartphone app that would allow circulators to capture a photo or fingerprint or voiceprint of the voter that would instantly link to the voter registration database, verify that voter's eligibility to sign, and mark that voter as already signed and not able to sign another petition for that race?
We could come up with some wild technology to make this process better. Or we could just take the circulator's oath seriously and say that if your break it, you're paying a fine and your petition (not just the one sheet with the error, but every sheet your circulated) is being thrown out.
Cory I think that the very fact that the Bosworth people are convinced that there is no way that you could have challenged the petitions without outside big money, is a testament to the fact that the people who follow this blog are something.
Still and all,Arends had to know that they could not have witnessed signatures in Sioux Falls from the Phillipines. He would be risking his license as an attorney for committing or allowing a client to commit perjury. His only saving grace would be knowing,in advance,that his buddies in political office wouldn't investigate any of this. Do wingnuts really imagine all of us are as clueless as they appear to be? Everyone here and in the state should be royally insulted.
I took debate for a year at Lincoln High. Cory, your comment about what Ms. Maass would do to these candidates made me smile :-)!
Perhaps Dr. and Chad should check out this attorney. He is located in PA and this ad isn't a parody. He actually aired it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KfACTAOPa0
Oh heck, I forgot we are in politically corrupt SD. As a GOP candidate, little will be done.
@ Mike Et al, I am a Republican and I do NOT condone this corruption. Whether Democrat or Republican, we have a duty to oppose such an affront to the people's right to a free and honest election. You are right that there is corruption with in the SD GOP and it is unacceptable. Daugaard and Jackley going after their political opponents who dared out them for voting to cut veterans' education benefits because they didn't put an obscure misdemeanor violation of failing to put a website disclaimer on a robocall? But, ignoring Bosworth and Arends felony violations of SD's perjury statutes?
I will NOT be voting for Daugaard or Jackley and I will do my best to tell every friend and family member to do the same. I don't vote for the letter "R!" I vote for Republicans, these two have shown they are politicians of the worst kind.
Hey, did you hear the funny Grudz story?
Neither did I. Nothing funny behind that curtain.
Disgusted Dakotan or Bree S Is there a niche within the state Republican Party that are basically known as Dinner Party Republicans that are attracted to power and prestige socially with no real conservative beliefs yet they act as enablers for those that abuse power?
The fact that our state is crawling with despicable operatives pulling every dirty trick to try and shove a dirt bag politician like Rounds down our throat should tell us that some people are empty shells.
Well said Bree.
Thanks Disgusted. I am a RINO, but I am on board with your comments completely. While I find that Stace Nelson is probably the farthest from my ideology of any of the candidates, he refreshingly is the most honest in my opinion. And he has no problem standing up to the falsifiers in his own party, which is what I hope to see in Washington. He has already shown that he does not want our Country to go to war without justification of huge proportions. I am afraid that some others of either partty, we might send, would have a tendency to do whatever the party leaders suggest and that is not what our Democracy requires of them.
Cory, you wrote, "Lanny, the state does not conduct thorough reviews of petitions. Under the current system, with paper petition sheets coming to one office from hundreds of candidates with less than three weeks between deadline and ballot printing,"
All the more reason to push the deadlines further ahead (or is it back?). With the 1500 State employees that were hired during Rounds terms as Governor, at least some of them must be in Pierre. I would think that the SOS could borrow employees from other departments if there were a longer period to review the petitions, and since the legislative session would be over with that later start, those State employees would not have to be tending to things for the legislature.
@Lynn G., The Beal's are low level ones. You then have the whole crony-establishment crowd that benefit from no-bid contracts, Future Fund grants, GOED assistance, etc. They are not limited government Republicans and would be Democrats if the Democrats had such a political machine in place.
Cory, Carl Swanson was my debate coach at LHS. (told ya it was back in the day...lol)
Cory, you are absolutely right. The circulator is the key to making sure that citizen participation in the petitioning process is done legally. That doesn't mean that every line on a petition it has to be perfect. Sometimes people sign their names in a way different from the way they are registered to vote, or they mix up the information provided on the lines. Those "mistakes" should not disqualify signatures, and in no way constitute fraud, as long as the information is provided. But not witnessing the signatures of petition signers ought to disqualify all signatures on the petition, as well as lead to the prosecution of the circulator.
I suspect requiring fewer names on each copy of the petitions and sticking with 8.5x11 might also reduce errors of omission or commission. Put more complete instructions on rear and keep everything important on one side.
(Carl Swanson: another deity in the pantheon of South Dakota speech!)
Douglas, we've got 8.5x11 sheets now. Fewer lines per page would mean more pages and more cost to get a copy of completed petitions from Gant. Would fewer lines per page really cut down errors?
Cory, I have seen how petitions are actually circulated. They get spread around meeting by the petition circulator. They want to fill the pages if possible, so they may attend another meeting or walk on the streets perhaps. It may get more signatures, but it also makes more errors possible.
AS for printing them, the amount of paper might be a thicker pile, but might not use more paper unless you are copying both front and back simultaneously.
I will see if I can round up a blank petition and look at one again. They did not appear to me to be well-designed if memory serves me.
Wiken: "I have seen how petitions are actually circulated. They get spread around meeting by the petition circulator."
If you see petitions circulated this way, it is illegal. A circulator can probably handle two or three clipboards at a time to "personally witness" the signing, provided the people sign in the circulator's immediate vicinity. You can't just hand the petition around a meeting with the circulator nowhere near the signer. The circulator doing that is committing fraud if he or she signs the circulator oath.
Rounds is the favorite of the Fox News set and of those who don't pay attention or connect the dots: he will trounce the other earth haters in the primary unless USA Johnson trips the dominoes.
Donald Pay, I was not specific enough. Your legal version is what I have seen. But, I am certain this also can lead to abuse. Shorter petitions with fewer signatures also mean fewer valid signatures could be tossed out as invalid.
Yeah Carl Swanson was a great Debate coach at LHS. I was class of 78.