I see Chad Haber has taken my advice. No, not my advice that he stop scheming and take care of his family. According to his wife Annette Bosworth's paid spokesman, Haber has announced his intent to run for South Dakota Attorney General.
Of course, running against Attorney General Marty Jackley, the man he and his wife claim has been persecuting her for years, is impossible. Let us turn quickly to SDCL 12-7-1 to see what the law says (the ability to do which is a reasonable primary expectation of someone running for Attorney General):
Any candidate for nonjudicial public office, except as provided in § 12-7-7, who is not nominated by a primary election may be nominated by filing with the secretary of state or county auditor as prescribed by § 12-6-4, not prior to January first at 8:00 a.m. and not later than the last Tuesday of April at 5:00 p.m. prior to the election, a certificate of nomination which shall be executed as provided in chapter 12-6... [South Dakota Codified Law 12-7-1].
If Chad wanted to run for Attorney General this year as an Independent, he needed to file by April 29. If he wanted to run as a Republican, he needed to go to convention with Marty Jackley and submit his name for nomination three weekends ago. If he wanted to run as a Democrat, he'd have needed to change his registration and submit his name at the Dem convention two weekend ago. Chad did none of those things—perhaps he was too busy planning his post-primary vacation to Alaska (from which he has finally returned, perhaps to tell Lee Stranahan to stop hanging around his wife).
Haber is taking my advice and running for office to obtain automatic immunity from criminal prosecution. As AG Jackley made clear in May, if your name is on a ballot, he won't arrest or prosecute you, for fear of interfering with the electoral process. AG Jackley kept his word, refraining from filing felony charges and an arrest warrant against Chad's wife Annette a full thirteen hours after her defeat in the GOP Senate primary. Recognizing AG Jackley's precedent, Haber apparently wants to get his name on the next AG ballot for which his name will be eligible, the 2018 ballot. He won't get to run against Jackley, but as long as he's a candidate, he'll be immune from any sort of prosecution.
Why Chad would desire such immunity is a mystery locked in Chad's murky, magnetized brain. But once he reads the law and realizes he can't run this year, it will be fun to hear the man behind Annette's fake Senate campaign finally step forward and speak for himself.
Wouldn't one maybe want to actually be an attorney before announcing a run for AG in the first place?
These two idiots have three children whose lives they are ruining. When will they stop?
Law degree not required, Rocky, at least not as far as I've been able to discern. Cops would make good AGs with their investigative skills, and they don't have letters after their names.
Haha!! This just gets crazier each day. Pornahan and now Chad running for AG! Seriously, you can not make this shit up!
Could he announce to run in 2018, and have "Jackley immunity" for four years? I think a more folks might be running of office.
Okay, my assumption has shown my lack. I fully admit to jumping to undereducated conclusions. See, I can admit when I'm wrong, Lee. I'm just glad I got to do it before you got here to crucify me for it. Has anyone started on the Bosworth book yet? There's got to be a decent non-fiction author somewhere monitoring all this. Trouble is, how would you know when to finish. multiple volumes?
RRacoon, it does seem to be an unending saga. Any potential author would have to be willing to hang around with folks I'd rather not spend time with.
Which party's nomination does Haber seek, Lee?
What? Being a paid spokesman for Annette Bosworth brings a person discredit? Well, who would have thunk it? Thank you, Lee, for that admission.
You have also said "Annette's innocent!" several times, too. That doesn't make it true.
For the record, Annette Bosworth's Senate campaign paid Lee Stranahan $5,000. Stranahan informed me that he had an outstanding invoice to the campaign for another $20,000.
Now, back to the issue: by what twist of party rules and law does Haber plan to get on the ballot?
The law lacks clarity only for idiots like Chad Haber.
The law is also clear that, now that Chad Haber has declared himself a candidate for public office, he is a public figure, meaning that the standards for libel against him just went a lot higher.
Donald, that would be my plan!
David Montgomery notes that a Haber candidacy (maybe we should call it the second Haber candidacy, since the Bosworth show was all Chad's doing) may not be entirely impossible. If Haber can get the Libertarians to convene and nominate him, he could get on the ballot. (The SD Libertarians didn't plan to hold a 2014 convention; they appear to meet only during Presidential election years.) If Haber could get a handful of Bosworth supporters to take over the defunct Americans Elect Party, convene and nominate him, he's in. The Democrats might have a way to nominate him as well, but no Democratic leader will be stupid enough to destroy our party making Chad Haber one of its candidates
He is only wasting his time.
No, the focus in this story should be how Chad is going to get on the ballot. Then the focus should be what qualifications he brings to the job, based on a thorough review of his work history, education, and experience with the law.
(I could say, "Lee, stop lying about what the focus here should be," but hyperbolizing our differences of opinion gets really tedious. Just answer the questions, candidate Haber. And why aren't we hearing from the candidate himself? He wants the spotlight; time to step out and speak to the world!)
If you look at the duties of the AG in the SDCL, it appears that the only way s/he could perform all those duties is if s/he practiced law without a license.
I suppose you could argue that the AG just sends the AAGs in to do the courtroom work or to write the legal opinions or offer legal advice to the state, but that seems problematic both professionally and ethically because the AG is supposed to be supervising the assistants.
I'm sure Mr. Stranahan has precedent for an AG in SD who wasn't an attorney?
Mr. Stratahan, you may have believed what they told you, but it doesn't make it true. Chad had been planning on having Annette run for Senate over three years ago. even when he first broached the subject to me around March 2013, it was obvious it was all his idea, at least that is what he thought. I have also known since I was in Mrs. Kribel's 8th grade civics class that a person does not need to be an attorney to run for an elected position of attorney general. I am pretty sure, a person does not have to be an attorney to run for a judge's seat, either. It is interesting reading the piece on Jackley and the Aberdeen case. Sounds like so many of the things they say the AG was doing to them. As I have stated here, there was a time I blindly accepted all of their claims of persecution, too, but I have come to believe that everything they were accused of by the AG was 100-percent true, and it was never a case of a personal vendetta against them. I am really surprised Haber has the huevos to finally get out of the shadows and put his own name and face to something. Im suspect he knows this AG ploy will go nowhere, and his name will no longer be at the forefront.
SDTeacher, I really needed a good chortle this evening and your last line did it up proud. Many thanks.
Lee, only if that's legal precedent. Anything else can have a regular run-of-the-mill precedent. So, do you have a precedent (or if you prefer a prior example) of a SD AG who did not have a legal degree or was not admitted to the bar in the 19th century when degrees were not as common?
Chad Haber now plans to exploit the Mette children to get his jollies. Not quite as sick as Richard Mette's rape and porn, but a close second. There's a real issue for us to talk about.
Interesting point, Cory, about getting an AG candidate yet on the Democrat ticket. The state convention is adjourned, and I believe Robert's Rules of Order accepts that all the business of nominations is done unless a vacancy occurs, and that can be done by the state central committee. As with nominating petitions, once the filing deadline is passed, the vacancy disappears. The parties do have until the second or third Tuesday of August to fill vacancies if candidates drop out. There is also a state deadline for candidate names to be finalized so ballots can be printed.
I wonder if the state convention can be legally reconvened to nominate candidates for statewide offices, i.e., for Democrats Attorney General, Auditor and Commission of School & Public Lands, and when the last date is that candidates can be filed for the 2014 ballot. Or, does the state central committee have the capacity to fill positions where nobody was nominated in the state convention?
As far as running as an independent, it's a fantasy if that's what Haber has in mind. Your idea of S.D. Libertarians may be a good fit for Haber's boing-boing tinfoil hat ideology. If the Libertarians wanted to make hay out of this, they should nominate only the AG candidate and leave the rest of the field alone ... and then go to war with the Rounds machine. Also, Chad must be filed as a party nominee by a state party that currently exists in South Dakota, not one he invented out of thin air for the purpose of filing.
And if Lee Stranahan invoiced $25,000, I wouldn't blame Annette for not paying him. They were completely nutty as were her word salad press conferences. It would be a major embarrassment for any paid consultant to take credit for that rubbish.
When's the first press conference? Will there be guns, bibles and Krylon?
The new blogging season went by quick. Reruns already,Stranahan?
Lee, you were WAY late to the party. You seem to take what you've been told as fact. Upon notice of running for the senate, Bosworth's own sister questioned Chad's wishes from five years earlier.
I see this announcement as a way to air a grievance or negative opinion about Jackley, rather than focusing on any pertinent information about Haber.
If Stranahan had a "morel" compass,he would have the key to the mint and some people might actually like him.Then Sibby would show up and explain why neo-fascist,commie morel hunters are out of touch with biblical tales of slaughtering first born Egyptian morels or something. Then they could argue religion and morals over morels.
dammit, mike, don't lure Sibby over here! I'm enjoying having one thread where I don't have to deal with religious nutcases!
The fact that Lee believes Chad Haber has a moral compass is hilarious!
I want all sorts of focus on the Mette case and other ills of South Dakota's foster care system. That's why I've discussed it long before Chad got interested in it to save his own skin:
—March 28, 2014: https://madvilletimes.com/2014/03/rape-in-south-dakota-foster-care-our-fault/
—March 2, 2014: https://madvilletimes.com/2014/03/schwab-blows-whistle-on-foster-care-abuse-and-state-abuse-of-power/
—January 15, 2014: https://madvilletimes.com/2014/01/taliaferro-schwab-case-shows-the-ugly-politics-of-south-dakota-foster-care/
—June 11, 2012: https://madvilletimes.com/2012/06/south-dakota-retaliates-against-investigations-of-native-foster-care-abuse/
—November 3, 2011: https://madvilletimes.com/2011/11/south-dakota-responds-to-npr-investigation-of-native-american-foster-care-practices/
But I do not want a judge or jury to focus on this particular issue during those hours in the courtroom when they are hearing the evidence of the crimes Chad Haber's wife committed, because the Mette/foster care issue is irrelevant to those crimes. Chad Haber wants us to focus on the Mette case because he thinks it will keep us from talking about his wife's crimes. Unfortunately for Chad, we are capable of multitasking.
As I wrote on June 29, we need a real candidate to challenge Marty Jackley's corruption... and when I say challenge, I mean "expose and stop," not "outdo".
Mr. Stranahan, if I told you it, the whole deal, from Dr. Bos running for Senate to Chad throwing himself off this particular deep end was my idea years ago and I have been carefully nurturing the entire drama to its imminent conclusion, if I told you that would it surprise you?
I bet you I know more than you.
Perhaps it's just a fundraising scheme. All those Bosworth followers on Facebook should be worth something,
I still stand by my original hope ever since the "food stamp facebook post" that this is an elaborate performance art piece. Not much call for that sort of thing in these parts, though. Should have moved to New York first.
Performance art isn't going to go over well in prison. Too bad she blew the insanity defense.
Stratahan, I really do feel sorry for anyone who thinks Chad Haber has a "moral compass." If you truly believe what you are writing, you are, as Bugs Bunny would say, a maroon.
ip beat madville by a day:
I can't wait for a debate!! Seriously, bosworths story has more twist and turns than a soap opera!
Oh...here's a list of all 50 AG's and the LAW SCHOOLS they attended.
Cory, I wouldn't give Pornahan, Haber and Bos free time on your blog anymore. They need to go away. Everybody in SD by now has heard Haber and Bos are shady and can't be trusted.
Here's an old post bashing Jacklow for being a catholic SDGOP tool:
It is your blog, Mr. kurtz. You may do as you please. Even the real media is beginning to notice you pull all the strings. I only feed the sausages.
Herb sold the ranch, grud: he'll be here if you want to say hi.
I would have to disagree with you about Cory ignoring the Bosworth/Haber stories for two reasons.
The first is that citizens need to be aware of these two and their scams and grifter lifestyles.
The second is because they are Republicans.
I think Chad has a Jack Sparrow compass.
New, breaking news from Lee Stranahan!!! Now, including 30% more..... Stuff! Chad is running for AG! C'mon... you read the blogs and you read the news out there. Are you really so disconnected from reality that you cannot see that this is a sham? Move along sir, move along.
Roger, Bosworth/Haber are opportunists, not republicans. They will switch hats if they think a buck can be made. Perfect example, base connect. Run as a super conservative, get $$$... But, as Duane Sand in ND found out - Base Connect isnt all that it was cracked up to be.
EVERY single one of the Attorneys General in the U.S. have law degrees. Chad hasn't even had so much as a job in 20 yrs. (according to Annette) I am purposely not counting running scams (fake raffles etc) as a job. But Lee says that Marty Jackley is the least qualified person in SD to be AG. Yeah, you'd have to be bat shit crazy to believe Chad Haber would be a good choice.
I will wear your "Cory Cultist" badge with honor. You may believe we have lost our minds, but you sir, have no soul. You are just another snake-oil salesman in the Bosworth/Haber Traveling Medicine Show. As soon as Annette is sentenced, you will become as irrelevant as she and her husband.
Not a positive or favorable word about what characteristics Chad has that would make him a good AG, if he decides to campaign for that office. Not even from one of his supporters.
Lee: Regarding your "Cory Coolaid" comment -- "Drinking the Kool-Aid" is a figure of speech commonly used to refer to a person or group holding an unquestioned belief, argument, or philosophy without critical examination. That's evidently how you want to portray people who read this blog. This blog is a place where people have an opportunity to express their opinions, make arguments, espouse various philosophies, etc. But regular readers of this blog know that Cory critically examines the topics he writes about here; indeed, his examination of Bosworth's petitions go beyond the mere expression of opinion and reveal the cold, hard facts -- Bosworth broke the law. It's those same facts that Marty Jackley had to consider as state officials conducted their own investigation of Bosworth's petitions and made the same factual conclusion: evidence exists that indicates she broke the law. Chad and Annette are the ones that have been operating a KoolAid stand for the past year, and sadly, many, many people evidently took a drink (donated to her campaign, bought into the couple's land raffle schemes, wasted their votes in June by voting for her ... the list goes on) and they certainly weren't refreshed by swallowing what Haber/Bosworth have been selling. Sadly, Lee, you've become their new pitchman at their KoolAid stand, and you strangely appear to be angry that we won't swallow what you've been trying to sell for the past month or so, including the brand new flavor you rolled out yesterday -- the Haber candidacy. Do you really believe we South Dakotans are that stupid?
DMoerke: perhaps? Ha! Chad's fake run for AG is entirely about fundraising. He saw Annette's fake candidacy draw $1.7 million (reported so far). Now with her loss, her public instability, and her felony arrest, her moneymaking capacity has evaporated. Chad will execute the same spectacular flame-out with his own instability and political ineptness, but he has four months where he can now milk those out-state Base Connect donors for all they're worth with the "I'm defending my wife's honor and fighting corruption!" narrative.
Plus, being a candidate might keep Marty Jackley from filing any charges against Chad for another four months.
I can't wait for Chad's first press conference. I can't wait for reporters to ask him questions about 100X and the Dearing loan. Find that legal loophole, Chad. Get on the ballot. Meet the press.
So, Lee, your defense of the illegalities found in Bosworth's petitions is they were "targeted like nobody else's?" Good luck with that. What exactly is your role with Bosworth/Haber, anyway" Why are you here? KoolAid salesman?
Marty must be shaking in his shoes right now.
Lee, I do not know if you forgot that or not, or if it will come later. All I know is that you, nor other supporters of Chad, have not mentioned a positive or favorable word on Chad's behalf on this thread.
If I recall correctly, you did not mention a positive or favorable word on Annette's behalf on the thread about her.
You seem to complain about Cory's, and others', negative comments about Chad and Annette, but you do the exact same thing, just different people.
Isn't that something like the pot calling the kettle black?
Is Bosworth innocent? Don't make me laugh. Could she be acquitted? Anything is possible with the right jury. She basically needs to convince one juror that she is being targeted because of her christian beliefs and she is home free.
I'm not going to say anything.
I'm not going to say anything.
Ah hell, lifes to short to set on the sidelines. Lee you have made mention that this political blog is something less then your cup of tea. You feel that Cory, and through extention of this blog many of us are over the top when it comes to the whole Bosworth Haber cluster freak, frack, frock.lets face it the only word that fits, I cant use.
You try to marginalize, the scope and importance of the blog by calling Cory a liar, and yet.
Here's a question Lee. If you find the comments on this blog distastful, if you really think that what has been said about the Habors here is insignificant, why are you standing on the mainstreet of Madville handing out bullshit? The fact is, you need Madville dont ya?
I could write poetry about the three stooges that are Annette, Chad, and now Lee but I just dont have the time.
I'm just not going to say anything.
Blindman,a word of caution on groundhogs. They multiply fast and if you see one it is too late. They are destructive diggers and they climb trees. But,compared to some,they are almost likable pests.
Lee -- Your comparison to the troubles you had at the DailyKos reaches into thin air at this site. No one has recommended that you be censored/booted from this forum. Not going to lie but sometimes I wish you were. That's not how things are done here.
Sorry you are not impressed with what you read here. My heart breaks that we are not meeting your standards. Certainly snark from me, but most of the other folks on here offer substantial analysis of the current issues that Cory puts forth every day. And the give and take of ideas between author and commenters is second to none and produces very fine dialogue. Dialogue that brings results.
The problem I have, and what brings the snark out in me, is witnessing trolls like you coming on here and blowing smoke out yer ass to cover-up accomplishments that this site has produced. Jealousy may play a part of this, I don’t know.
Repeated attempts to try and shove bullshit down our throats doesn’t work. But feel free to keep trying. Cory is fair that way.
Look for your ‘Cory Cultist’ t-shirt soon at Café Press!
Cory, if indeed Chad's fake run for AG is entirely about fundraising, does that mean Steve Hildebrand has a chance of being paid the $23,000 he said they owe him? That was back in the day when Annette hung out with Sioux Falls liberals and seemed to have moderate and liberal views. Maybe the people who bought chances to their bogus land lotteries can get their money back, too. Money raised from a statehouse election can go to those purposes, but unless that money is hard money, it cannot be used to bail out the debts from Bosworth's bogus Senate campaign. The FEC frowns upon that as does the U.S. Justice Department.
Maybe what it takes to clean up the corruption in Pierre is someone who thinks like a con artist. You know, two wrongs making a right.
Mike, I named him Lee.
ROTFLMAO,Blindman. Best laugh of the week.
96, I suspect there's no chance that Chad's AG money goes to repay Hildebrand. Is there any way that a court could seize assets from a political campaign to pay the candidate's or the candidate's wife's personal debts? Those are solidly separated funds, right?
And can a statewide campaign make a contribution to a federal campaign, and vice versa?
Lee: "You know that South Dakota is one of the most corrupt states in the country, right?"
Rocky, based on my consistent reporting, including...
—January 20, 2014: Minnesotans See South Dakota as Black Hole of Politics and Corruption
—June 8, 2012: South Dakota Ranks 45th in Campaign Finance Integrity
—May 23, 2012: Isolated Capital Cities Breed Government Corruption—Welcome to Pierre!
—March 19, 2012: South Dakota Ranks Second in Risk for State Government Corruption
Team Bosworth Haber will also say the sky is blue. That doesn't mean the sky is not blue; it just means they think thet can make money by saying it.
I like how you back up your statements with actual research.
As this article from six months ago points out, "Well, depending on how you define corruption"
Lee, you will look back on this day a year from now with the knowledge that you gave your all. I'll buy you a guitar and you can learn this little tune.
Now, because I'm in a Shakespeare kind of mood. You are Juliet to Chads Romeo.
"My sweet, so do I. But I would kill you by petting you too much. Good night, good night. Parting is such sweet sorrow that I’ll say good night until tonight becomes tomorrow."
Out damn spot.
Don't forget she still owes employees money as well. and guess who is still representing her in those cases? none other than Joel Arends. I guess she doesn't think hes that bad is she is still using him.
Jackley may have been involved in the Mette case as part of his duties as attorney for state agencies, but he is not among the principles for the mishandling of this case and the criminal trial which was dismissed for the lack of any evidence aside from accusations proven false. The affair was never examined by the State Bar Association, largely because the S.D. bar does not have a provision to monitor ethical practices, as most other states do. The DCI also needs to be examined for the competence and ethics in question. This case arose from a resentment of a county official who had a serious conflict of interest and resulted in a vicious campaign to take revenge on those who discovered that conflict. Although there is a change of regime in the Brown County State's Attorney office, it still has in place criminal justice procedures and personnel who practice the ploys that lead to wrongful convictions. That is what needs to be examined regarding the Mette case.
Rocky, I define corruption with the dictionary that includes next to "corruption" pictures of Chad and Annette.
David, imagine with me a more rational world where the Democrats would have found a reasonable, qualified candidate to challenge Marty Jackley. Suppose that Democratic candidate brought up the Schwab–Taliaferro and Mette cases. Are you saying that A.G. Jackley would have been able to avoid getting tarred with that issue by pointing out that the responsibility for wrongdoing lies mostly or entirely at lower levels? In a normal, sane A.G. election battle, are Schwab–Taliaferro and Mette non-issues?
Just FYI David, the state bar absolutely has a disciplinary committee which is overseen by the state supreme court. Attorneys are regularly called to account for ethical violations (although some would argue not nearly rigorously enough). For more information, see- http://www.sdbar.org/Ethics/ethics.shtm
I was surprised, at how long it took me to find that information. I was under the mistaken impression that it was very simple for the public to find. State bar needs to put it front and center on their website imho.
My understanding is that someone has to file a complaint with the disciplinary committee before any action is taken and the provision is directed at attorney-client matters. It seems to exclude complaints from people who have observed miscarriages in the process of jurisprudence, nor does it contain provisions for the bar association to monitor and initiate actions. And yes, as with many government websites, you have to do a lot of searching and linking to get information.
By statute, the supreme court, the disciplinary board, "an individual" or the attorney general may initiate an investigation of misconduct. That being said, I don't have numbers on how often they initiate an investigation sua sponte (don't believe that information is published), so what they can do and what they actually do may be entirely different things.
As far as discipline goes, the board is not limited to attorney-client disputes. They review any case where there is an allegation that the attorney has violated the law or the rules of professional conduct. This can and has included everything from courtroom incivility to the commission of felonies. The board has been found to have the authority to investigate and proceed on allegations against state prosecutors.
The substantive actions involved in the Taliaferrio-Schwab-Mette case all took place in the Brown County State's Attorney office. Jackley's involvement is as the attorney who advises, and defends if necessary, the Dept. of Children and Family Services. In that, he can claim any advice he provided is a matter of doing his job. His culpability in this is in the case brought against Taliaferro and Schwab, and is involved in approving that it be prosecuted by the State's Attorney from Beadle County and in his supervisory oversight of the DCI. It would seem that he had oversight responsibilities in reviewing the evidence of that case, but if there were questions, it seems like they would most appropriately be raised by the appointed prosecutor. Jackley was involved, but I don't know exactly what his responsibilities are. Clearly, the primary responsibility for the false charges and the deceptions arising from interviews were done at the county level. If Jackley has culpability, it is in not pursuing the matters that the judge mentioned in dismissing the case. I do not know what kind of panel would conduct such an examination, but I assume it would be in conjunction with the bar association, which in South Dakota is to lawyers what the NRA us to open-carry nuts.
My point is that focusing on Jackley in the Mette matter is taking the primary responsibility for the malicious actions against Taliaferro and Schwab from those who initiated the whole mess.
My nt question is, who initiates such examinations? It is like the open government provisions. They look as if they give the public access to information on the affairs of government, until one asks for it, and finds another layer of statutes that provide loopholes through which access is denied. To whom does a citizen file a complaint to initiate a review of a legal process? I have been involved in investigating a wrongful conviction allegation and have been provided only redacted records of the evidence on the basis of privileged confidentiality, and do not get a response to inquiries about what procedure to go through to file a complaint and who it should be submitted to. The organization I work with is out-of-state and it keeps pointing out that things in South Dakota don't work like they do in other states.
If you've got a wrongful conviction situation and you're trying to get the conviction overturned, recourse would be in the appellate court and through habeas corpus proceedings, not through the state bar.
If you believe you've got a wrongful conviction because an attorney violated the law or the rules of professional ethics, then you could file a complaint with the state bar in addition to your direct and collateral appeals of the conviction. You have to know, however, that you won't get relief for the wrongful conviction through the state bar, e.g. your person won't get a new trial or have their conviction overturned by the state bar- they don't have that authority. The bar would investigate your claim and if they found it meritorious, they would initiate a disciplinary proceeding against the attorney. If they find that the attorney committed professional misconduct, they can recommend anything from a private reprimand to disbarment. They send their recommendation to the supreme court, which makes the final determination. Short story- a professional misconduct complaint results in professional ramifications for the attorney, but does not bring the claimant any money or other relief from their legal situation.
Another possibility if you think a state prosecutor has violated the person's constitutional rights would be a 1983 claim, though that may be foreclosed by immunity issues.
With regard to SD being different from other states, I guess I can't really say because I've only observed our process. I would agree that it is rather secretive. I think the bar's justification is that the attorney's primary assets are their license and their reputation, so the bar is not going to allow every disgruntled client or convict to take away someone's livelihood on a bare allegation. Whether that is a sufficient response probably depends on your perspective. I can certainly see both sides.
Cory, quite lying. Haven't heard that for a few a hours and kind of missed it, well not really.
Cory and Madville readers need not explain themselves to you. After having sometime today, I read through most of the South Dakota political blogs and not only found Madville superior to them all, but the posted comments here are of more substance and thought provoking. This site is not littered with the Republican and tea party memes such as "you're a dumb liberal", "God, Guns, Gordon" or such other one line political comments that would be best served on a bumper sticker.
As I go along reading your comments and questions directed at me, I also noticed that you pretty much called Steve Hildebrand a liar too. The simple answer is, being that this by its own admission a liberal blog, who would I believe, Lee or Steve?
I hold with my comments about Bosworth/Haber living a grifter lifestyle, what would you call people living out of a camping trailer while holding fraudulent raffles, not paying employees, and concocting schemes to run for political office to enhance their own bank accounts?
About that EB-5 ad you said you produced and didn't run, why wasn't it run? Most political pundits, both Democrats and Republicans, agreed that the Bosworth campaign had adequate financing available. Most found it surprising that Bosworth was spending so little money on an ad campaign. Was there a conspiracy among the state Republicans to keep that ad off the air? Was someone paid?
You also state that you expect the GOED scandal to come up in the Attorney General's race, what race? Neither Chad or you have explained exactly how you are going to get him on the ticket. Can we expect that Chad will be on the ballot simply because he is Annette's husband?
Doesn't Haber already have a g in his name,somewhere? Always grifting,another grifter,all grift, A. Grifter?
Thanks for the information.
The attempts to obtain a full record of evidence used in the case in question are in preparation for an appeal.
However, the circumstance would also qualify for what you term a 1983 claim which is an option I was unaware of until you mentioned it.
The case also involves a puzzling approach taken by the defense attorney. Evidence which involved an interview by a witness was refuted by the witness both to the prosecuting attorney and the defense attorney. The information supplied to the police was reported to other individuals within hours of the interview of the police, and it refutes what the police claim was told to them. The defense attorney did not challenge the evidence at the preliminary hearing. The defendant wished to go to a full trial but the defense attorney cited a cost that was far beyond the client's ability to pay and said a trial would put the witnesses and alleged victim under unnecessary stress. He advised the defendant to take a plea bargain, which did on the basis that he could not afford a full trial.
A report was immediately supplied to a wrongful conviction organization which replied with an analysis of much of the case conformed to the
patterns for wrongful convictions that came out the analysis of the cases of the convictions in Illinois, including 13 death row cases, that were overturned.
This is a case that is of comparatively small magnitude but seems to involve so many of the factors that lead to wrongful convictions that the organization thinks it should be pursued.
The "Chanette" carnival has turned into a full-fledged 3 ring circus with Mr. Stranahan. On one hand it is very entertaining. On the other hand it's depressing how they are making a mockery of the process. All the while using the publicity to line their dirty pockets and leaving everyone associated with them stranded in their wake.
This is the deal guys. lee, I do believe the Mette case is horrifying. You know what? Sadly, those types of cases take place all over the country all of the time. Although I don't like Jackley, welcome to legal politics, anywhere. U say Jackley is not qualified. Um, yes he is, A law degree and former US atty. chad is not qualified. What are you doing online all of the time? Aren't u w Chad and Annette, working or whatever? What about the tons if money she owes for commercials and everyone? I don't like Marty but would vote for him obviously over Chad. This is a freak show! If you don't like what Cory or us liberals say, don't get on here.
Cory is simply letting light shine into the dark recesses of the crazy.
everyone is free here of make a fool of themselves. a little different than the repubs who manipulate the message, hide global warming, spin, obstruct, mega-fund deniers and co-opt science. pat on back.
"Lot more coming"... "tip of the iceberg"—typical teases of the flim-flam man, trying to get you to keep buying tickets for the next show. If Chad had a real story to tell, he'd tell it.
Flipper, what you call a mockery of the process, I'm calling a cancer on South Dakota politics. Chad Haber is a tumor, consuming resources at the expense of its host, promoting its own growth while degrading the health of the body politic.
Chad is the cancer. I am the chemotherapy.
As a REAL journalist, I learned long ago not to promise things that weren't written. Those things often would not materialize and if I promised them the week before. I'd sound like an idiot. Maybe Lee was going to write more, but he needed to take a Snickers break to get his blood sugars in line
Yes, a tell all book is in the works...top secret for now...stay tuned
Cory, is the Constitution Party an option? I was approach to run for AG within the Constitution Party last week. For the record I did not consider that an option for me.
Is it just me, or are we all spending a HUGE amount of time on something that has not, and will not, have any real impact on anything in South Dakota, politics, government, or otherwise? I contend that if we all stop giving the Haber/Bosworth machine the attention it so desperately craves, the story goes away, and the characters with it. They're not interested in real activism; if they were, this would be far less of a circus.
Also, as far as being an attorney not being a requirement to run for the AG's office, That's not really so. Yes, I could not find the a specific code section that states this outright, but this is a matter of inference. SDCL 16-16-19 states that having a license to practice law in the State of SD allows you to represent clients in any court in the state and be compensated for your work. True, anyone can represent someone in court, as long as they're not taking money for it. But since the AG gets paid by the State of SD to represent the government departments and its agents in court, an AG really has to be an attorney.
I have reviewed the documents Stranahan cited and more many times. Tt he most telling document is the trial transcript and the judge's citation as the Brown County State's Attorneys Office, the performance of Mark Black, and the resentments between CASA and DSS as troubling and the obvious motive for the charges presented for which no evidence was provided to support them.
AG Jackley is not mentioned or implicated in any way in the documents. As chief law enforcement overseer for the state, he seems to have only fulfilled his executive functions in this case. The only statement that relates to his involvement in the substance of the case is his order to make it a top priority, unless a murder intervenes. The case is so horrendous that the order can be to his credit.
Jackley is clearly protecting the state in the NBP/EB=5 matter, but the insinuations about him in the Mette case and the reasons for the dismissal of the Schwab-Talliaferro case divert attention from the fact that all perfidious matters in this case orlginated and were carried out in Brown County and no subsequent investigation or disciplinary action was taken in regard to those responsible.
The diversion of attention from the active perpetrators does not help Schwab and Taliaferro obtain recourse for the large sum of money they paid for their successful defense or the damages they suffered.
Problem with shining light on Haber/Bosworth is they seem to be light sensitive,truth sensitive,responsibility sensitive,reality sensitive,etc.
I don't see this as a viable money making scheme for those two. While you can fleece so many out of state sheep over a us senate seat, I can't see those same sheep really giving a rat's ass over our ag's race. He will probably have to put his wife's face on the effort. Imagine that, him using his wife. I can already hear pleas of "donate to end violence against women an children" or maybe we'll see "forty days of prayer to end corruption"
When he likely fails to make the ballot, watch for them to accuse gant of being one of the grand conspirators along with jackley, rounds, their own attorney, the med board, powers, people they stiffed...who am I forgetting? Cory, I'd add you to the list, but you would never be in collusion with the medical board:)
She should cop a plea to one charge, and she would probably just get probation, and possibly keep her med license. Then she should try and get a salaried job somewhere not in South Dakota so she can feed her kids and her lazy, delusional husband.
Lee, I know you fancy yourself a journalist. Maybe you once were. Now you are a carnival barker.
New poll out shows 54% of pollees,including 4 in 10 rethuglicans want Sarah Palin to shut her pie hole. Can Sibby or Stranahan be next?
Jen, both of your points are well taken. In particular, even if statute does not require a law degree, the basic job requirement of representing South Dakota in court seems to demand such training.
That said, if the voters of South Dakota were to choose a non-lawyer to represent them in court, could any court turn them down and refuse to hear arguments from that non-lawyer?
Mike, thanks for showing your bigoted hatred toward granting free speech to those you disagree with. The totalitarian New Age Theocracy is just around the corner, if 54% think like you and the destruction of America's Constitutional Republic is made official.
Steve, as I understand it, Constitution Party is not an option. They held their convention, nominated Lori Stacey for SOS and Wayne Schmidt for PUC. I don't think statute allows a party to have a redo convention. The only party option is the Libertarians. You should give them a call.
Remember, according to Montgomery's piece yesterday, the Libs have until tomorrow afternoon to alert SOS Gant that they intend to hold a convention in the coming weeks. But if they do that, basically Samuel Saunders and Bob Newland could get together at the Kadoka bar and say, "Let's run Sibby for AG!", send the paperwork to Gant by August 12, and you're on the ballot.
Sibby give thanks that you aren't burnt at the stake for being a lunatic.
This says under no circumstances can you represent someone in court w/o passing that states bar exam.
Mike, you're correct; but it's mostly a matter of semantics. Although no judge would allow a person to represent another in court, knowing they are not competent/qualified and they aren't holding themselves out to be so (although an accused can represent themselves), they could, in theory. It's only when they hold themselves out to be competent/qualified is where it crosses the legal line. That scenario is as likely as an electorate actually electing an attorney general who is not an attorney. Why would elect someone to a job they could not do?
You're right, Cory. If they did elect a non-lawyer AG, he'd have to farm out all court appearances to the assistant AGs, as he could not legally appear in court. Getting compensation for your services is the essence of holding yourself out there as a professional, and he'd be screwed. I refer to the point in my first paragraph.
Ah, and there's a key point I was overlooking. Any fool can represent himself in court. But the AG represents the state, all 840,000+ of us. So yes, I will concede the point that we don't need legal requirements to enforce the obvious requirement of the job description: must be able to represent the people of South Dakota in court. Employers can make exceptions to their job descriptions in extraordinary circumstances... but I have yet to see the extraordinary circumstance that justifies replacing a competent lawyer with a layman who would be unable to carry out vital duties of the attorney general.
Palin can talk all that she wants to, but that does not mean everyone has to listen to her, or read anything about her, or by her.
I'm guessing the first grounds for appeal is for incompetent representation which would preclude non-attorneys from representing someone in court. Be a waste of the court's time. OTOH,I find it remarkable that some clients have appealed because their court appointed attorneys slept through the trial and have been denied a new trial. I guess you could be competent when sleeping. Kinda glad I stay uneducated and farmed.
Hey, Lee; thanks for giving Cory credit for NOT blocking your comments on this blog! That opened the door for THIS piece of feedback: when I offered questions and concerns on Annette Bosworth's Senate Facebook page, I was blocked almost immediately. Your comment indicates this is something you frown upon. Maybe share that opinion with Chad Haber so others can offer objective inquiries of him during his run for AG. For instance, maybe he could address questions and concerns about the time the family spent in Utah. You see, I vote for individuals not only based on their qualifications, but also based on their character as a human being. It's my opinion that the concerns and questions raised during Annette's Senate campaign about her character (not paying employees, land raffle scams, etc) are not only relevant, but should also be expected in that situation. That being said, Chad Haber should expect the same by choosing to thrust himself into the public eye.
By the way, I am a woman and I am a Christian and I support women in politics if they possess the skills, the ability, and the character to fulfill that role. Neither Annette nor Chad have so far displayed these qualities, in my humble opinion.
Ah, the conditionality of the exploiter's values. When certain values benefit him, awesome! When they indict his patron... awkward silence.
Three days in to the Haber candidacy, and still no public statement from the candidate himself. Without Chad Haber coming to the microphone and the cameras, can we even believe this candidacy is real?
Comments are closed.