Well, it's going to be full of something.

Revisiting the topic I had touched on yesterday, Ed Olson is commenting in this AM's edition of the Argus Leader that in his capacity on the executive board, he's requesting that the session be closed:

As chairman of the executive board, Olson said he will request the session be closed to protect the privacy of witnesses.

"There's no way in heck I would ever condone deposing an 18-year-old kid" in public, he said.

The session would be fair to all involved, Olson said.

"My thinking is, it's going to be full of decorum," Olson said.


The Legislature's executive board was scheduled to meet Nov. 27-28. Olson said those are now the proposed dates of the special session, so the executive board meeting might be moved to December.

The executive board's vice chairman, state Rep. Gordon Pederson, R-Wall, said the issue involving Sutton "is something for the Senate itself, the Senate leadership and the Senate body."

"I don't know whether the executive board would really want to get involved in that," Pederson said.
Read it all here. It's going to be full of decorum?

Regardless of Ed's position as head of the executive board, the basic fact is that he does happen to get a say in whether it's open or not. And his say is only one vote, same as anyone else.

And he's going to be fighting the tide on this one. I did a survey of a few legislators on my e-mail list last night, and there was no ambiguity whatsoever.

What did I hear? "There isn't one chance in a million that I would vote to close the Session to the public," "That would be a huge mistake," "Ed is one vote, and he's going to lose this one." Those statement all seem to match the sentiment of Gordon Pederson who noted above that the matter "is something for the Senate itself, the Senate leadership and the Senate body."

No matter what Ed's feelings on it are, there's no way they'll close the session to the public. None whatsoever.


Anonymous said…
Let's hold the special session in Salem. That's a fitting place for the new Salem witch trials.

Here you have a case the attorney general couldn't crack in 8 months of investigating. Must be a very tough case to prove.

In fact, there does not appear to be any evidence at all. Just what one person claims.

So since we're going to spend taxpayer money for a special session to hash over unprovable claims and inuendo for grandstanding purposes, Let's spend a little extra to do it right by moving it to Salem.
Anonymous said…
Sure it’s all about politics, what did you expect?

We're talking about a Democrat! A Democrat! Why would you even think my Republican Party would let this matter be handled behind closed doors when it involves a Democrat!

The Democrats came out full force against Republicans on the National level and I didn't see anything behind closed doors there! Well, I guess what goes around comes around.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, knows that politics is all about WINNING! Why in the world would you think the Republicans would ever let a Democrat wrongdoer hide behind closed doors?

Christians are the Republican base in South Dakota as well as across the United States. How do you think they will feel if Republicans let Satan's actions hide behind closed doors?

Sure it's all about politics, what did you expect?
Douglas said…
Well, it is not quite like secret lies in a closed conference room for a war against Iraq or secret conference committee meetings injecting new legislation into conference bills so that neither most of the majority or minority parties know anything about the changes.

Give the SD GOP a little time. They really need a tragedy like the Shiavo mess to show their true colors. Have faith, they will catch up with their congress critters.

Whatever happened to the SD Cement plant? Lots of secret meetings and secret handshakes.

PP, you need a category for "Smoke and Mirrors". May have to add that to my own blog.
Anonymous said…
Who's the "wrongdoer" VJ? Is it the people making charges they know they can't prove?

In 8 months, the attorney general and his staff of DCI agents couldn't find enough evidence to even bring charges let alone prove anything.

It sounds like Lee Schoenbeck just wants one more chance to put his foot in his mouth on the way out of office.
Anonymous said…
Have of any of you brain surgeons ever asked yourself if that maybe... just maybe... Senator Sutton did something he shouldn't have done? Did he share his bed?
Anonymous said…
I think that I understand this but I am not sure. PP or someone in the senate could you help clear this up for me??

Criminal wrong doing--rape or touching of a minor--has the Attorney General's name written all over it.

Breaking of the Senate Rules--sexual activity with a subordinate-- must be dealt with in the Senate whether the activity is "criminal" or not.

So eight months with the Attorney General is a mote point--right??
PP said…
Mom -

You are absolutely correct. They are two entirely separate processes.

One is criminal in nature.

One is an investigation if a rule was violated.
Anonymous said…
Koistraa will get to caucus with the D's after all.
JP, Stan, and Duane make a final appearance.
Eric and Lee get to preside one last time.

One last creepy curtain-call.
Anonymous said…
What's the senate rule we're talking about? Somebody cite me the rule. Anybody? Anybody?

To have a rule violation, you have to have a rule to violate. Anybody?

Now, even if there were a rule, how can anyone prove "groping" occurred when there's no proof? Somebody explain that too. What's the proof? Anybody? Anybody?

Just a witch hunt! No proof. Move it to Salem.

I'm serious though about wanting to know what rule was violated and what proof there is of a violation. PP is fanning these flames. Maybe he can answer. Or are you just interested in salacious inuendo?
Anonymous said…
Northern Valley Beacon - http://northernbeacon.blogspot.com

Everyone read this article. you have to search Dan Sutton's name to find

When Deep Throat gets confused with lower colon -- that's the name of the story.

Gives some GREAT insight into why Dennis and Dan might be adversaries there is a lot that goes into this & PLEASE stop referring to the 18 year old ADULT as a CHILD...I think if you are going to accuse someone of something horrible you should be willing to stand out and claim those allegations. Otherwise watch out people. Any ADULT can accuse you of something and potentially ruin your life...(with NO CRIMINAL CHARGES that is) just allegations!!! We all should be terrified!!!!
Anonymous said…
He already mentioned in under another post:

1A-4. Sexual harassment prohibited.

All members are responsible for ensuring that the workplace is free from sexual harassment. All members shall avoid any action or conduct which could be viewed as sexual harassment. A member shall report any sexual harassment complaint to the presiding officer of the house to which the member belongs. If the situation is not resolved, the member shall forward the complaint to the Executive Board of the Legislative Research Council.
Anonymous said…
Great 3:50, but where's the proof? Where's the proof? Where's the proof? Where's the proof? Where's the proof? Where's the proof? Where's the proof? Where's the proof? Where's the proof?
PP said…
uh, 7:34. I do believe that's why they are having a special session. To weigh the evidence and to determine if it meets a burden of proof.

It's not like they're going to send it to me and say "here it is." They're going to handle it themselves.
Anonymous said…
I am not at all sure that "proof" is needed here.

Yes, the young man is an adult, over 18. He is also involved in a HIGH SCHOOL project.

For a teacher, for instance, to room with a lone high school student at an away from home event would be grounds for discpline in most school districts.

There IS proof that he took a page unsupervised into his room.
Boy Scouts of America would take that VERY seriously. They require at least two deep leadership so that there is not a question of impropriety.

The question here is actually--was it out of order, improper, sexual harressment--for a Senator to share a one bedroom room with a page--Whether anything happened or not, that in its self might be grounds for discpline.

This is where the Senate must make a determination.

The rules governing the page program must be taken into consideration as well.

This may not hinge on he said--he said at all but on poor judgement on the part of the Senator to allow that kind of "risky" sleeping arrangement.
Anonymous said…

Finally, some of the real facts are coming out. Facts such as Denny Wiese asking for Dan Sutton's political endorsement AFTER alleging that Sutton groped his ADULT son. This FACT is FINALLY out in print. Sutton saved this message on his phone. You see people....the truth will come out and the truth is that Senator Sutton is INNOCENT and DID NOT grope Mr. Wiese's ADULT son!

If Sutton did grope Mr. Wiese's ADULT son, then why would Mr. Wiese want SUTTON's endorsement. Anyone? Anyone? Can anyone answer this question? Please explain this to me, because I DONT GET IT!!!

If you want ammunition for Wiese's allegation ponder the following:

Wiese announced he was running for governor when Sutton was still considering it. Wiese knew he could NOT beat Sutton. The democrats wanted SUTTON to run. Wiese knew he could not beat Sutton and poof an allegation comes out.

This is all around the same time that the Ridgefield deal was going to crap and Denny's name was written all over it. If you want a story, then research this. Perhaps, if Denny discredits Danny then Danny wont be such a STAR WITNESS IN THE RIDGEFIELD CASE.

PP why dont you cover that???

Read the articles from David Newquist. The whole Ridgefield deal is spelled out. I knew that the truth would start spilling out. Unfortunately it may already be too late. So many of you have already crucified this man. This INNOCENT man. A man whose entire life was politics and to serve the public. It is so unfortunate that ALLEGATIONS that are so UNFOUNDED can RUIN a young, promising, politicians life. Dan Sutton is a good man and the media and public have drug his and his families name through the mud.

They have slaughtered his career. A career that up until these allegations was extremely promising. How sad. How sad. Danny had already announced his bid for the 2010 governor's race before this whole deal hit print. My thoughts and prayers are with DANNY and HIS FAMILY through this trying time and hopefully some of the rest of you feel the same way.
Anonymous said…
I don't know two people in the state who think 'Danny' would be a good Governor, or even a good candidate for the Democratic party. And that was before all of the current allegations.

I don't think anyone should be so quick to say he's guilty.. or innocent. It's amazing to me that there's a couple operatives or Sutton family members online that keep demanding proof. I think we'll all hear directly from the page that 'Danny' wanted to share his bed. Not appropriate. Ever.
Anonymous said…
Years ago comedian Roseanne Arnold accused her parents of sexual abuse. I worked at a daily newspaper at the time, and one of my jobs was to write a weekly editorial.

I wrote about the dangers of media publicizing the accusations before it had been proven. After all, I stated, anyone can make accusations.

One reader, who said she was a child sexual abuse victim, wrote a letter to the editor that accused me of all sorts of things. She didn't know that I was especially sensitive to sexual abuse situations due to the fact that my daughter was counseling children who were victims of sexual abuse.

I recently read that Roseanne Arnold now admits that she made up those allegations against her parents because she was angry at them.

Sometimes things are not as they seem to be.
Anonymous said…
What's amazing to me is the people on this blog who think they can take someone's senate seat without any proof of wrongdoing.

The "no proof needed" people are truly un-American, communist, totalitarian types who believe that the party in power can do whatever it likes, is not bound by any sense of honor or integrity, and is free to overturn elections for no other reason than partisan political gain.

These are the same people who want a secret session so that nobody will know the ridiculous things they say, and who cast the votes to expel.

If you Republicans want to set a new standard for conduct, you will all be gone when the Democrats take over the senate and your own conduct doesn't pass muster.
Anonymous said…
The fact that the page was sharing a motel room with Sen. Sutton through an arrangment with his parents, and the fact that Sutton and Dennis Wiese who were collaborators in the beef plant project in Flandreau are, of course, dismissed as irrelevant because such information emphasizes the absence of even the most casual and cursory checking in getting a context for this story. The beef plant project collapsed and Dan Sutton is involved in trying to recover some money--to the tune of $850,000--that people in Flandreau would like to have back. The two men are now adversaries. Of course, that is irrelevant.
This is part of what David Newquist wrote his blog site thought it was interesting!!!!

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: Frederick not in SDGOP Chair Race

A strategic move by Sutton. Good for him, bad for Dems.