So much for the dogs of war. Sutton leaves the Capitol, possibly never to return?

In newspapers across the state this AM, Bob Mercer is reporting that Senator Dan Sutton has left the building (the Capitol building, that is). Possibly never to return.
Senator Dan Sutton left the State Capitol with his wife, Mary Beth, and headed home to Flandreau Thursday evening.

He didn't plan to return today. The mystery is whether he ever will.

"We're just going to go back and look at all of our options," Mary Beth Sutton said.

Asked whether resignation was a possibility, she replied, "He hasn't ruled anything out right now."
Read this breaking story it in the dead tree editions of the Pierre, Spearfish, Watertown, Mitchell or Aberdeen Newspaper.

This is major, and alludes to what I've been predicting all along. Excepting the bluster and bravado of his attorneys, it seems the handwriting is on the wall, and just remains to be signed or not.

If that's the case, it would be extremely unfortunate that he's put the legislature through this circus, protesting his innocence, but maneuvering left and right in every attempt to delay the matter. He resigned once, labeling is a political matter by opponents and sullying the names of the legislators who were doing no more than their duty.

But once that was off of the table, the charges didn't evaporate. They didn't go away, and the Senate has been pressing ahead to get to the bottom of this matter.

In fact, if you read the article, it sounds as if resignation may not absolve the Senate of getting to the heart of the matter. Senator Ed Olson talks as if the proceedings may happen with or without him in an attempt to bring finality to the investigation.

Maybe - just maybe - those who were doing their jobs in the first place may have been right to do so all along?


Anonymous said…
I smell a resignation right around the corner...

Why the wait, Danny boy?

While this would not be a suprise, it does look like another desperate attempt to avoid the real issue, and begs the question of just exactly when this guy is going to prove his innocence and tell the REAL story, as his lawyers and supporters have been stating is all he wants to do.

I say the hearings need to go forward, resignation or not. At this point we all have an awful lot invested in the issue. Why stop now?

I assume he's been subpoenaed - or he can be - so get him back to Pierre and let the games begin...or rather, let them continue.
Anonymous said…
Good for Dan. He fought hard and staged every possible defense. The passage of the rules was 27-6 - it would have been 28 if Apa hadn't been absent. That's well over 2/3 - Sutton can see the writing on the wall. Why put himself and his family through the agony? It's best now - for everyone - if he steps aside.

So here's the real question:
1 - Is Russ Olson a shoo-in to be appointed to Sutton's seat?
2 - Who will replace Russ Olson in the House?

Obviously, only Rounds knows these answers for sure, but who is available? Who would make sense?

Keep in mind - With Olson as a GOP senator, the Dems will likely run Rep. Dave Gassman against him, which will be one of the bing races of 2008. That means that Rounds' appointed house member will be the only incumbent running for the House from that district.
Anonymous said…
PP-- You are really a jerk sometimes. Is there something wrong with going home and gathering your thoughts before going through the worst experience of your life???
Anonymous said…
It is just a headline, it pulls the readers in.
That is all. Just like the msm does, or well tries to do.
Anonymous said…
If Sutton is innocent, he would have earned respect for braving the media and actually showing up in the Senate this year.

However, all his legal maneuvering in this situation has done nothing to make him look innocent.

Also, I cannot imagine that the page would be able to continue this long with a lie, knowing he will be facing testimony under oath. And I can't believe that his parents would be fooled this long by a lie.

At this point I doubt anyone will ever know what happened. But if Sutton resigns, at least it will be sort of over. If he is innocent, this is sad. If he's not, he should have dropped out at the beginning of all this and saved most of his reputation.
Crazy Dawg said…
Turn out the lights, the party's over.

Now what about Roger Hunt? He actually violated laws.
Anonymous said…

Just to set the record straight. The Courts have not decided yet if Rep. Hunt broke the law.
Anonymous said…
Re Mercer story -where is the link ? ?
Anonymous said…
It is the AG and SoS's position that Hunt violated the law, but that will ultimately be up to the Supreme Court to decide.
Anonymous said…
Anon 9:40,
The courts have not determined if Sutton has broken the law. In fact, Long's failure to prosecute the case may be an indicator that he did not.
Anonymous said…
The Senate does not have to prove that Sutton broke the law - the burden of proof is lower, and they can find conduct to be "inappropriate" even if not "criminal"
Douglas said…
Now if the South Dakota legislature can just find a way to investigate the Duke lacrosse team, they won't have to do anything of consequence for the whole session.
Anonymous said…
People keep saying, if Sutton hasn't been convicted of a crime, why should he leave or be forced to resign.

Hopefully now they are seeing that Dan has delayed and played his cards, and has realized the unfortunate truth for him.

He's going to step down and walk away, and without any charges for now and possibly forever.
PP said…
Anon 8:30 - I'm not making the statement that he might not return. It's mercer's story, and Sutton's wife isn't disavowing it.

And I'd love to link to it directly, but Mercer's stories are not on-line.
Anonymous said…
Anonymous said…
Well he's sure gone out of his way to prove his innocence. Oh wait...
Anonymous said…
Olson or Shoenbeck, what the heck is the difference. They only live for untrue, name calling, media grapping attention getting, name bashing, untrue big ego buddy story telling lies. Just for starts put a breath analizer at the chamber doors of the Senant and see if everyone could pass it and be seated. This would have helped like when one of our great past Senators who showed up more than a little full last year on the Senate floor and his buddies (Olsen and Schoenbeck) egnored it and just told him to sit down and shut up. They both know who it was and so do most of the others! I would not want them to perger themselves by keeping this behind closed doors. So I thought I would remind EO of this for next week. Any more Vodka anyone, ED ? Remember your oath. PP I will give you proof and have much more coming next week. Should be fun,
mike mehlhaff jr. said…
Time to stop using dead tree edition, and go to this far more clever name for a printed document:
Anonymous said…

Ummm...what does being intoxicated on the senate floor have to do with groping a page who is sharing your bed in a hotel room?

Don't get me wrong: I wouldn't be happy about the former. But aren't you kind of comparing apples and oranges?

If what you're saying is that Sutton's new tactic is going down the road of "Oh yea? Well, you know what HE did?", then he's going to look even weaker than he already does.
Anonymous said…
If there are substantive allegations filed lets take a look at R's or D who show up drunk to session. There are public intox statutes.

However, the more pressing issue is about Dan Sutton not yet to be named drunks.

If Dan is innocent and a fighter as some claim, and his attorney seem to think so, why o why is Danny boy running home?

More importantly why didn't he cast a vote of opposition to the inquiry? Or better yet vote for it so he can put these "unsubstantiated charges to rest?"

By next week Dan Sutton will be gone, Russ Olson will be a Senator, thereby increasing the R majority by one vote in the upper chamber and another Republican will be seated in the house. And while that house member may only be for one term, he will be there nonetheless for one term. There may be some milquetoast R's that district would support.
Anonymous said…
If they are going to investigate Dan for his alleged behaviors during session, then why shouldn't they investigate all reports of misconduct on behalf of our legislators? I think showing up to work drunk would be an issue. I know I couldn't show up to work drunk and not get fired.

I dont think Dan will resign, nor do I think he should. This is his chance (if it is fair) for him to fight this allegation. He will walk away okay from this deal.

My thoughts and prayers are with Dan and his family through this difficult time. For those of us who know Dan, we know that "groping" someone is outside of his character and just plain false. So, put on your boxing gloves and look forward to many punches to come becuase this fight is going to be more like UFC fighting than boxing and its going to get nasty.
Anonymous said…
Lets get ready to rumble!
Anonymous said…
I don't get it... You said the story is in the Aberdeen and Pierre and Watertown papers, all of those papers have Web sites where they post their stories.. And yet.... I can find NO Bob Mercer story on any of these Web sites..

What gives ?

Kindly link to the story or I shall unleash the fires of hell to rain down on you !
Anonymous said…
Possibly the man is innocent. It would be a shame for some of you if he is. Would you participate in a witch hunt?

The tragedy is the aledged victim might not see justice according to rule of law and Sutton might now become a victim.

Mob rule never remembers that an indivudual is innocent until he is proven guilty.
Anonymous said…
Mercer's stuff is not posted on the web - part of his contract with the newspapers that run his column.
Anonymous said…
You can buy a one day pass at watertown public opinion for 2 of 3 bucks and have all access to any of the Mercer articles. I do it all the time ....the articles are well worth the money. When you get to the Watertown Public Opinion site just click on search and type in Dan that point you can put in your credit or debit card number and wazoo....there's the Mercer articles...worth the money in my opinion!!
anneme said…
the guy is innocent till proven guilty and if you really examine everything that is known about he actual case he appears to be innocent but yet everyone feels the need to attack him for defending himself....
Anonymous said…
This is the one and only time I am going to comment on the Dan Sutton discussion. If this had been a female page there would be no discussion. As there has been no discussion since the beginning of time when male legislators groped females of any and all ages.
Anonymous said…
I CANT WAIT for all of you dumb asses to eat crow....Sutton IS INNOCENT!!! And UFC underestimates what's going to happen in Pierre next week....I hope EVERYONE that has spouted their venom through this entire deal is ready for what is coming to them!!!!!
Anonymous said…

All right Duffy, we know that's you! You can't fool us!
Anonymous said…
Money said: Sutton is not running from this allegation as you can see. If you would have read what Rounds just said at noon is that these kind of allegations never get to this point ouote: These issues are and were dealt with QUIETLY Rounds said. Hey WHAT Happens in Pierre (Capital) stays in Pierre (Capital). Now is that calling the kettle black or what. If Sutton would have resigned right away Rounds is saying that these allegations would have gone away and nothing would of happened to Sutton, just like in the past. So what kind of BS is this showing our great SD citizens. Great leadership admitting crimes like this did happen behind closed doors and NOTHING happened. Wow all you politicians can leave Oath (for what is it worth)at the door of the Capital next week. Rounds does go to a well known church doesn't he? Might take a little etra time for him in the confessional next time. Great Faces Great Places now that gives it new meaning. Fly Fly Away my little children
Anonymous said…
Come on 2:11. Let's face it: the only people who know what REALLY happened in that bed are the two people who were in it (and it feels absurd to even be typing that sentence).

I think he's guilty. You obviously don't, and I can respect that. But the bottom line is none of us knows for sure.
Anonymous said…
I am 2:11 and I am NOT Duffy. Although I think he is quite humorous, so I'll chose to take it as a compliment...thank you...It IS going to be a RUMBLE and Sutton will be fine when it's said and mark my words!!
Anonymous said…
oops I didn't mean chose I meant choose...sorry
Anonymous said…
I hope 2:11 is Duffy. That would be awesome! He is one of the few people that actually know what is going to happen next week and from all that's been said thus should be worth watching.

So, stay tuned and be ready for UFC before there were any rules, when it was too graphic to show on television aka Cage Wrestling.

This is going to be great! Probably better than any other comedy or drama on television right now and best of all it's reality television at its finest.
Anonymous said…
I've been told the saying "What happens in Pierre stays in Pierre." So where are all our reporters who want to report these things? Are they all working for the Argus and concentrating on Rounds only?

Good grief, we elect these guys to go to work for us, not party and whatever else knowing that it will never be known back home. Sounds to me more like a middle-age "spring break" to me. Somebody get out to Pierre this time and report what is actually going on. Anyone up to the job?
Anonymous said…
2:32 They Can't, Rounds said behind closed doors. Do you think he ever talks to the S Court judges.
Anonymous said…
So let's get this straight: the Sutton supporters think that he's going to come out on top by pointing out what everybody else is doing wrong (which by the way, I believe). That seems pretty weak and cowardly to me. Isn't the purpose of next week's hearing to get to the bottom of the page-groping mess? If there are other wrong-doings to be looked at, so be it, but is that really the time?
Anonymous said…
Defintion of Groping:

Touching another person in an aggressively sexual way.

Seriously, can anyone actually see Dan being "aggressive" in a sexual way. I can't!

Does anyone know what the ACTUAL allegation of groping is? I mean, what exactly is Austin accusing Dan of? Does anyone know? Because if it is what I heard through the rumor mill, it is absurdly ridiculous.
Anonymous said…
Nobody said Sutton was going to point out what anyone else is doing wrong. Just because people on this blog say that, it doesn't mean that Sutton plans on doing anything of the such. BUT, I also agree that if poor Mr. Sutton is going to be slaughtered over an alleged "rumor" "allegation", maybe if some of this said behavior is actually taking place...which I'm VERY SURE it is. Those legislators need to be accountable for their own behavior also!! NOT JUST DAN and DEMOCRAT representative and senators!!!! But ALL elected people in Pierre...including ROUNDS and his "behind closed doors" mentality. Oh....I wonder if he could charter me a flight out to Pierre on state aircraft next week so I can watch this lynch mob take place first hand. I think that would be a grandeur way to spend tax dollars!!! I'll get together with 2:16 and we can both fly fly away...good bang for tax payers buck!!
Anonymous said…
Okay, I have a serious question. If Austin and Dan were in a hotel room alone, why is the senate's lawyer calling witnesses? What exactly did the witnesses witness? If they actually saw the alleged groping occur, then there would have been legal charges brought by now. So, how can you have witnesses for a "groping accusation" when no one else besides Dan and Austin would have been present at the time of the alleged groping?

Also, if Dan and Austin were the only two people in the room, how is anyone going to "prove" anything? We can all pick our sides, but seriously, how can the senate actually resolve an accusation of groping when there weren't any third party witnesses? To me, this is all ludicrous. If there isn’t a video recording of the alleged incident, witnesses to the alleged incident (besides Dan & Austin), or any real tangible “proof” of the alleged incident, then how in the heck can the Senate really “do” anything? How can they justify overturning the people’s vote without any “real” proof?
Anonymous said…
Good point 3:31!
Anonymous said…
Groping bottoms, drinking on the senate floor, hiding things "behind closed doors" hitting on young women, (or men) can South Dakota get any wierder...soon they'll be calling us ArkansaDakota. Hopefully the legislators can manage to keep up with their oral hygiene. (Smile....make us proud...Eddie)
Anonymous said…
I bet Eddie's oral hygiene is pretty good with all the mouth-wash the guy probably needs to try to cover up the smell of alcohol.

At least all of Eddie's ridiculous comments re: this Sutton thing is finally clear to me...HE WAS DRUNK!
Anonymous said…
You know people there are facts tht are not public. Though I have only been told this and I believe that it might have been in the media????
Just remember saying once again by lots of people this is different than the AG's case.
Anonymous said…
3:31: I think there are lingering questions about whether or not Sutton should have been more forthcoming with Senate leaders about the investigation. Early on I heard in one of the television news reports that Senators are required to report any criminal investigations of which they are the center. Also, it's my understanding that he might have violated rules by having a page stay with him in his hotel room.

Now let me say right up front that I'm not positive about what I've just written, which is why I wrote it. So don't nail me to the wall if I'm wrong, just correct me.

And anon 3:18: WERE YOU THERE?
Anonymous said…

No, I wasn't there and I didnt say I was. What I said is "Seriously, can anyone actually see Dan being "aggressive" in a sexual way. I can't!"
Anonymous said…
When I said that a reporter should go to Pierre and report on any shenanigans, I didn't mean go talk to Rounds. I meant to hang out with the legislators and lobbyists and interns in Pierre and see what goes on. If it is truly "spring break" for many of them, then do a story on it. Let's see if the people who elected them appreciate these goings on and re-elect them. It's time that "what happens in Pierre" gets reported to those of us who hired these people to work for us in Pierre.
Anonymous said…
What exactly is this hearing "investigating?"

If the Senate is "investigating" whether or not this alleged groping occurred, then how in the heck can this be proven or refuted? If there isn’t a “smoking gun” such as a third party witness or video recording to collaborate one side or the other, then how can the Senate make a determination of whether or not this alleged groping occurred? This “investigation” makes no sense to me. It would come down to a “he-said/he-said” argument, which is precisely why there aren’t any criminal charges.

If the Senate is “investigating” whether or not a page stayed in the Senator’s motel room, with the page’s parent’s permission, then this is null and void because Mr. Sutton is admitting to that indeed occurred. Is there a written policy against this? And, if so, then how many other legislators have been in violation of this policy?

I guess I would just like to know EXACTLY what this committee is investigating and how they plan on investigating an “alleged groping” because I just don’t see how it is possible. It just appears to me, that they want to attempt to ruin a man’s reputation.
Anonymous said…
If I were Senator Sutton, I would be buying all the time I could too!If there is an open "criminal investigation" couldn't what is going on in Pierre effect that investigation also? That is precisely why this needs to be in a court where it belongs. If they are trying to decide if Austin stayed with Dan, I think we all know the answer to that per the media, if the legislature wants to reprimand him for that, fine, or if they are investigating whether or not Senator Sutton was not forthcoming with the information of being ivestigated in a timely manner..that has also been answered...reprimand him for that also. Where I have a problem is WHY in the WORLD the legislature thinks they have a right to act as the judge and jury on a case that the DCI HAS NOT yet brought charges against-- It is still an OPEN investigation people, which may I point out AGAIN has brought forth no criminal charges! What is happening here is plain WRONG!!! If I was Sutton I wouldn't want to speak either...anyway I look at it (and probably the way he looks at it) It's a scary scenario!! Just ponder what you would do for a moment if you still had a open investigation hanging over YOUR head and then had to go out and do this next week...I don't know what I would do if it were me...He is being very strong through all of this!!
Anonymous said…
I agree with your statement that Dan is being very strong through all of this. We all have crosses to bear in life. I guess Dan's is just larger than the rest of ours have been. However, I know he has a lot of faith, family, and friends to help him through this difficult time. I will keep him and his family in my prayers. In addition, I am praying for fairness through this investigative process. Keep hanging in there Dan. There are a lot of people who support you!
Anonymous said…
I wonder how many of you bloggers are involved in this thing, in some way or another. I suspect most of you.
Anonymous said…
Annon 4:14
Haven't you read the news or any reports????????

They are looking into actions not becoming of a State Senator with a page (high school student) "ethics". Breaking Senate rules.

The legal matter is in the hands of the Attorney General.
Anonymous said…
5:27 -

I bet you're right.

Everyone else -

This situation has turned into a horrible situation for both parties involved, for the city of flandreau and for friends of both parties. It has done zero good for this to drag on.

Guilty or Innocent? Only two people know. But it's just unfortunate that it had to come to this.

I will be very happy when next week is done with. VERY happy!

Reading some of these comments makes me upset that many of you are getting way to excited for this hearing. Many people will be hurt because of this, not just the two involved.
Anonymous said…
5:01 -

First off, DCI doesn't bring charges. Secondly, this should be an exciting time for you as now Sutton gets to tell his side of the story and save his reputation as much as he can. He should have nothing to be scared of, especially if the page has been living a lie this whole time right?

And the reason they can do this even though there are not yet criminal charges is because it happened on the Senate's watch and while they were in session. The Senate has what they call 'rules' and when they are broken, they like to find out what happened and how bad it was. And, in this case, they think it is bad enough for possible expulsion. Whether criminal charges get brought or not doesn't matter, if a business has a sexual harassment case within the office, do they wait for charges to be filed to discipline their coworkers? No, it's in their business, they control the disciplining.

And finally, what would I do if I had a pending investigation over my head and had to deal with this as well? I am pretty sure I'd come out and proclaim my innocence (which he hasn't done yet personally?) and have no worries about a Senate investigation and hearing. All he has to do at this point is go and tell what happened, is that hard? How bad could it be to come and listen to an 18 year-old page tell a fictional story in front of your friends and coworkers? Or wait........maybe this is all true and he can't come and tell the truth? Hmmm....this is exciting
Anonymous said…
I found the following on another blog site and thought it was pretty good, so I thought I would share.

"When Will Hunt Face A Judge?

Is ass patting a high crime in South Dakota while money laundering and election fraud are just fine?

Dan Sutton has been run out of Pierre on a rail by his fellow legislators over a "groping"incident last year. Epp at SD Watch confirmed that Sutton has left Pierre and might resign. He also mentions that the misconduct toward pages and interns in Pierre continues today. Epp mentions something about this:
"My source, who is very familiar with Pierre’s inner workings and what goes on during the session, says the fraternity-like atmosphere of some legislators toward pages and interns of the opposite sex is as rampant as ever.
So much for Dan being a wake-up call for more professional behavior from some of our playboy/horn-dog legislators in Pierre."

Our guess is that this is some of the male legislators, who think it is a state perk to be able to misbehave with female staff who are there in a service or subordinate role. If they were to try that kind of behavior in most corporate cultures they would not only be unemployed but facing a LAWSUIT.

Maybe lawmakers need to be bound by the state employees conduct policy while the legislature is in session, including while they are in Pierre during those weeks but not in the capitol building.
On the other hand if we did that last year we would have to fire a large portion of the legislature.

posted by Coat Hangers At Dawn @ 11:12 AM "
Anonymous said…
Sounds like the GOP Witch Hunt was successful. They could have done this quicker by drowning Sutton. If he died, he would have been judged innocent.
Anonymous said…
I would not say this is a witch hunt on either side. The accusers family notified the Senate and the House Leaders and they had to act upon the notifcation.

It was Sutton's duty to alert the leaders of possible legal action against him. Did he?

I really don't think that the Dems nor the Reps are enjoying this at all! I am sure both parties wish this matter was not happening.

So are we to get angry at them for doing their jobs as elected officials? Or should we know they doing their duty as prescribed by rules?

This matter is ugly no matter what side of the isle you sit on.

At least we will have new rules and guidlines set in place for the pages and interns.

Harm has already been done all the way around to many people.
Anonymous said…
I have never been an elected official for the state but, I do know that the legislative body for the most part get along and they leave most their differences or try to on the House and Senate floors or in committee.
Yes, they get angry with each other during debates and etc but many of them put that aside at the end of the day and make tomorrow count as new.
Anonymous said…
11:50 Two words. Monica Lewinski.

Maybe a requirement of all elected officials is that they be required to become eunichs.

Is there a double standard going on here?

If Sutton had made a pass (or worse) at an 18 year old female page (and if he were Republican, of course), he could probably get a free pass from the good old boyz by going into a handwringing, gut wrenching crying jag on the Senate floor a la Jimmy Swaggart.

Let's put it this way. If Dan throws in the towell, we'll all know why.

Now, what's the name of that old 60's tune again? Oh, yeah. "Harper Valley PTA."

And no, I'm not gay. Sorry fellas.
Anonymous said…
I for one hope he shows up in Pierre next week.

Every day he spends there is one less day he's here in Flandreau.
Anonymous said…
12:12 I think not on many accounts.

Not all legislators are male. Two women have been known to show anti social behavior as well. Look at what has been happening with female teachers accross America lately.

I do not think it is fair to lump sum all legislators this way.

How can you say there is a double standard when the person who brought forward the charges was the pages family. Thus if this or something like it has happened in the past it should have came to the light of day.

Remember it was Clinton who lied out right about his behavior and how he wanted to imterp what sexual contact was to him. This was not correct and at the same time Miss L. was not in High School and I believe she was over 21 years of age. Clinton was wrong from the get go and she should have known better.

Your also talking about more than two different programs all together.

Any an d all sexual contact with pages and interns is WRONG and I feel safe to assume that all would agree with this comment.
Douglas said…
"Remember it was Clinton who lied out right about his behavior and how he wanted to imterp what sexual contact was to him"

Not sure I remember that. It seems to me that a court defined sexual contact in a way that allowed Clinton to respond honestly in a way which did however mislead.

I am not however defending what Clinton did. It was inappropriate no matter where it happened, but despite that may not have violated any laws.

What the Republicans in Congress did to paralyze government was also inappropriate. It was not a matter that rose to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors".

I have no idea what was or was not done in a motel room in Pierre. It does seem that it was not a matter that required any Senate or House attention whatsoever however. It may have suggested that the rules for behavior needed to be changed after the "fact" however.

Republicans gotta keep their priorities straight however.
Never mind that putting South First in Witch Hunts doesn't do much to improve the other ratings that put SD near the bottom of good scales and near the top of bad scales.
Anonymous said…
Both both the Dem and the Rep side of the House & Senate took action on the letter send by the pages family. They addressed the issue, so how come everyone is jumping on the Repulicans?
Like I said I believe that both sides wish this matter never happened and i am not talking about being able to seep it under the rug.
Anonymous said…
sweeping it under the rug! I need a new keyboard and also need to check before sending!
Anonymous said…
He could still be innocent, but prefers to avoid the embarrassment of a hearing where allegations, or truthful statements about consenting adults would come out.
Anonymous said…
I don't anybody who has anything whatsoever to do with this incident/case. Just from what I have read here and elsewhere, people are rushing to judgement. (I am not a Dem by the way. Far from it.) I just think people should wait until some sort of civil or criminal investigation/charge is made. I think that until there are charges and a conviction, people should not be judged. And this goes for Congress too. Dems are quick to rush to judgement before anything is proven.
Anonymous said…
You know what would be REALLY funny? If Sutton got kicked out and then Rounds appointed Dennis (or Austin) Wiese to that spot!!!
Also, when you think about the seating arrangement, Sutton is the last Dem and Greenfield the first GOP. So if Sutton goes, a GOP takes his spot and the seating arrangement,with a party on each side, isn't messed up. Not a coincidence!!
walt said…
2:09, 2 or 3 bucks for a one day pass to the watertown pubic oppinion??
You do it all the time?? That must be how that drive-by rag stays in business.

It's fitting you can find mercer's musings at the pubic oppinion. It's where truth is debatable. All drive-by oppinion. No fact. Hardly worth any money.

Popular posts from this blog

That didn't take long

State to UFWS: It's over