Dems are saying that Sutton should hang tough through the investigation
The Argus Leader is reporting this afternoon that Democratic State Senator Dan Sutton, who has been accused of sexual misconduct with a legislative page, is being advised by the South Dakota Democratic Party to not resign, and to hang in there and face the charges:
State Sen. Dan Sutton, who is the subject of an investigation involving a legislative page, should not step down until a criminal investigation is completed, the spokesman for the South Dakota Democratic Party said today.Read it all here.
“We think the investigation should play itself out,” Donald Carr said.
Senate Minority Leader Garry Moore, D-Yankton, has called for the legislative Executive Committee to investigate the accusation.
At the same time, Attorney General Larry Long has confirmed that a criminal investigation is under way, although he declined to talk about the matter.
The father of the former page has accused Sutton, a Flandreau Democrat, of misconduct during the last legislative session, according to state Sen. Garry Moore.
Sutton did not return messages left at his work and home.
As of this morning, Sutton’s campaign Web site remained up and running on the Internet. He faces Republican challenger John Toates of Flandreau in the Nov. 7 election.
Comments
No official charges have been filed. There is an ongoing investigation and it seems the party is saying wait until the investigation is over before taking drastic action. It should take more then accusations to drive someone out of any job. The appropriate thing to do is let the investigation run its course. That is all the dems are saying.
Sutton was sent notice of the allegations. That coinstitutes the charges being filed.
Either he resigns, or they have to call a special session to hear it.
Lee Schoenbeck may be correct in demanding a resignation on this. Frankly, Sutton should have removed himself from the ballot a long time ago. Not even filed papers.
Unfortunately, in a situation like this, in the public's eyes, it's guilty until proven innocent.
As far as it being a "rules violation," I don't think we have any evidence that a rule was broken yet. Maybe the rule was broken, maybe it wasn't.
Frankly, I hope they call a special session. It will show how the GOP is willing to politicize a bad situation.
Seriously? Can you imagine the media circus? People are sick of this stuff. The politicos among us will love it because of the political drama, but the public at large is just plain sick and tired of this kind of stuff.
It could be dealt with in a much more civilized manner. It probably should have been dealt with already by DCI and the AG. Eight months and no charges and no closed investigation? That's pretty amazing length of time for an allegation like this.
Someone has dropped the ball here.
No matter what the result of this, let's just hope justice prevails for everyone.
I didn't see Stephi and the Dems saying that Mark Foley should have stayed in Congress until the completion of the current investigation.
The FBI has conducted over 40 interviews with pages and not one of them has reported sexual contact on the part of Foley.
Yet, she got on Keloland the other night screaming and yelling that Hastert and Foley need to go and don't investigate anything blah, blah, blah!!!
Where is Queen Stephi and the Democrats now?
Who is protecting our pages now.
I hope this thing breaks nationally so we can expose the Democrats for the hypocrites they are on this issue.
Ask this question of yourself tonight? Who is looking out for the pages in the South Dakota legislature.
Foley is about covering things up and that is why Hasert et al are running for cover. Foley admitted his guilt, resigned and sought treatment.
Sutton has proclaimed his innocence and that darn due process is getting in the way.
Now, Rounds, Schoenbeck, Thune and the defenders of Freedom certainly cannot oppose the unalienable right of innocent until proven guilty, heck it might even be a God-given right and then I know Jumpshot Jesus (aka Sen. Thune)
and the rest of the GOP would have to support Sutton having his day in court (or in front of the Leg Ex Comm).
Give it a rest until the factfinders have done their job.
There is no evidence in the public domain in the Sutton case.
Let's see here, legislative page alleges that legislator has acted inappropriately. What is the response in this he-said-he-said situation?
Firings, resignations, who knew what when?
How about the reaction from the South Dakota Deomcratic Party?
They asked Thune and Deitrich to return campaign money given to him by Foley. Mind you that was before the FBI investigation which has yet to prove that sexual contact occurred. Find the hypocricy of the SDDP here: http://www.sddp.org/index.asp?Type=B_PR&SEC={FD915CBA-5D5D-4D06-A068-24B0C352B22A}&DE={5E57DA60-F449-4867-BC55-C0068AFF5719}
I am calling on all Democrats in South Dakota who have received campaign contributions from Dan Sutton to immediately return them.
I will wait with baited breath and a heavy heart for the South Dakota Democratic Party to issue a press release consistent with stated values.
But wait SDDP has issued a statement and Don Carr said:“We think the investigation should play itself out,”
Funny I didn't see Herseth saying that the Congressional investigation should play itself out. Where are the honest Democrats when it comes to the life and future of a then-underage page?
No, it's Dan Sutton and jn this case it's worse.
The Foley situation:
Foley sent salacious and sexualy provactive im's to under-age male pages. Mind you not one of the 40 people interviewed by the FBI has alleged sexual contact.
The Sutton situation:
One male page has come out alleging sexual contact.
So, Foley's was sending IM's to underage male pages with no one stepping forward and Sutton was groping a male underage page at the time according to the page.
What's worse sending IM's or groping a boy in his bed?
Even more instructive is the way Democrats treat legislators who have sex with male underage pages. Democrat Gerry Studs was only censured by a Democratically controlled Congress and then elected chairman of a Congressional committee by his fellow Demorcats after having sex with a male underage page. We see how Democrats deal with sicko stuff. They reward it and protect it. When its a Republican they sick the attack dogs on him and cry cover up.
go read the South Dakota Constitution. A violation of state senate rules is to be dealt with however the legislative branch wants to. In this case by having a special session to hear the issues or by the member quitting.
What the State senate will do is determine whether it has to punish someone for violating its rule which it is clearly constitutionaly authorized to do.
Just like when Congress votes to expel a member. It doesn't need the Judicial branch to give it the ok. There is such a thing as seperation of powers and legislative power to deal with its members.
Where were you about the media circus during the foley thing?
Anons, unless you were in the room, you don't know. Let the process work, please.
C'mon Pat, you built some credibility the past week with how you handled this issue.
Your "hang tough" original post tonight erodes that credibility.
The Dems said the process should run it's course. At least there is an investigation into this one. That's more than the public got on Republican PUC Commissioner Bob Sahr's alleged incident.
Be fair, fight the temptation to slide right as you move to become a respected, mainstream source of balanced information.
You are confusing facts and situations in an attempt to deflect the bad behavior of the Republican Party. Mark Foley resigned his seat in the face of mounting evidence of misconduct. There is considerable evidence that the GOP covered this evidence up for years in an attempt to protect themselves and not the pages. I believe that the Congresswoman asked that Hassert resign his speakership (not his House seat) because of the evidence that his office did not act on information regarding Foley when it was brought to them. In contrast, the state Democrats have reacted quickly and appropriately to the situation. The difference here is that there are only allegations and an open investigation with no charges. Are you suggesting that any elected official that is investigated or has been alleged to have conducted wrongdoing should resign and anyone he gave money to should give it back? If so, wait for a tidal wave of open offices across the country.
Isn't it funny that as long as the alleged culprit is a Democrat, he should just hang in there (as in the Stubbs case). If the alleged culprit is a Republican, the Dems scream for his immediate resignation. Isn't hypocrisy wonderful?!
Since evidently many people knew about it for months and yet Sutton is still on our ballot, there is something wrong here though.
Democrats reward legislators who have sexual contact with underage pages. Republicans throw legislators out who even think about sexual contact with underage pages.
That's the difference.