Release – FACT CHECK: Despite Claim, Jackley Didn’t Create Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force

Pat Powers

FACT CHECK: Despite Claim, Jackley Didn’t Create Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force

In Marty Jackley’s first television ad, voters are told the candidate “created the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force.” The Task Force, however, was created under the Janklow administration, nearly a decade prior to Jackley being appointed Attorney General.

“In July 2002, Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) was created under BIT [Bureau of Information and Telecommunications Agency] and then was moved in May 2003 to the Attorney General’s office,” explains the minutes from a June 2004 BIT agency review committee meeting. Jackley was not appointed as Attorney General until 2009.

By 2005, the ICAC was producing results. According to the 2007 South Dakota Legislative Manual, the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force reported performing 2,100 exams on 381 items, viewing 5.6 million image files, and completing 107 reports in 2005 – still, several years prior to Jackley’s tenure as Attorney General.

ICAC received taxpayer support as well. In 2002, the Task Force received a $1 million Internet Child Safety grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, which was to be “used by the Internet Crimes Against Children enforcement unit (ICAC) that Janklow started….” In FY2007, the South Dakota Office of The Attorney General was awarded a $250,000 federal grant in support of the ICAC. In FY2009, the Task Force received additional support from taxpayers, winning a $210,000 grant for the South Dakota Office of The Attorney General to “continue to operate its Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force.”

“Marty Jackley needs to correct the record,” said Justin Brasell, Kristi for Governor Campaign Manager. “Voters deserve to have honest and accurate information. Clarifying the facts on this claim would be a good first step.”

45 thoughts on “Release – FACT CHECK: Despite Claim, Jackley Didn’t Create Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force”

  1. Seriously? Is this what we have to look forward to? If your well of ideas to advance the state is dry we are left with tit for tat on small issues this is going to be a long slog! Pull it back to why we should vote FOR a candidate. Goes for both campaigns!

  2. This came up yesterday at a meeting I attended. A Sioux Falls attorney I know was offended that Jackley would claim he created a task force that had been in existence long before he was AG or was in a significant position of influence. This wasn’t a Noem supporter, but someone who respects facts and the truth who couldn’t understand how a candidate would commit such an obvious mistake.

    1. Algore invented the internet! (ha ha)

      I don’t want to see negativity, but I don’t want to see false claims either.

      1. We expect this from Democrats.

        I really don’t know who I like in this race, but these false claims and previous grandstanding are not helping Jackley. At some point voters (regular voters, not political junkies such as us) are going to have to decide whether to look at the other candidates or just go with Ms. Name Recognition. If a quick Google show’s fake pledges and claims voters may not bother to investigate Mr. Jackley any further.

  3. OK. I’ve been critical of all the pettiness and too often the pettiness has seemed to come direct through surrogate from the Noem campaign. I will admit this was starting to move me to Jackley as my choice.

    But, this has substance because this is a not well known, most effective entity in this state does great work for which we should be most proud.

    Did he create it or not? If he didn’t create it, is there an explanation like he gave it substance. It needs to be clarified.

    2. I am sure the campaign will have a response to this, but basic reading of the record shows that Justin Brasil is more interested in making attack ads than actually understanding what he is saying. AG Jackley does not claim to create ICAC, nor take credit for the idea. His commercial states he created the ICAC Task Force.
      I worked with the guy who was put in charge of ICAC for South Dakota. ICAC was a single person doing tremendous work under Janklow, and then he was transferred to the AGs office. The multi-jurisdiction TASK FORCE was created in 2007 with federal grant money.
      Brasil does not seem to be able to read very well. This is him having a fundamental misunderstanding of the topics upon which he speaks. This is like saying someone who created a multi-county drug task force is taking credit for the first person to have the idea to have a drug detective. Brasil needs to look further into his statements instead of doing a term search and then spouting off. Its embarrassing for him and for Noem.

      1. 2007 is still 2 years before Marty was appointed. Even under this argument, he didn’t create it.

        1. He didn’t do it as AG. He did it as US Attorney. Personal accomplishments are not tied to one job, they are tied to the person.

  4. to be clear, it should read “not-well-known” as the “not” does not go with “most effective” as this IS a “most effective” entity.

  5. I agree, this would look better if it had been pointed out by someone other than the Noem Campaign, but the fact remains the same. The Jackley statement appears to be a bold faced lie and calls into question his true character.

  6. Why doesn’t Jackley talk about all of the congressional staff showing up to campaign events with Kristi?

    That doesn’t seem fair.

    1. Its not well known, but Noem gets to actually have a paid campaign person on her federal staff. DC likes to make rules for themselves that put other people at a disadvantage. An incumbent gets to have the tax payers pay for part of her campaign staff. Its the same with campaign funds. Congress has said that they can take their federal campaign funds and transfer them to a state account, but that a state campaign account cannot transfer that money to a federal campaign. That way they can raise money in DC for a federal campaign and transfer it to a local election, but a local person cannot decide to run against a federal candidate with money they raised for a local campaign. Its no wonder people dont trust DC

    1. McDaniel just announced yesterday that he will not challenge Wicker, and will instead run for the vacant seat caused by Thad Cochran’s resignation for health reasons.

      So if anything Brasell has extra time now.

  8. I’m so sick of the pettiness and half truth. Noem doesn’t have taxpayer paid campaign staff. She’s a Congresswoman. She is representing us whenever she is in public even when campaigning. Its a political position. They have political staff. Constitutent Service can appear political to those who want to spin it that way. It was South Dakota law that allowed her to transfer federal campaign funds to a state account. She followed the law. Sheesh.

    Regarding what the campaign says, I wish I’d get more reasons to vote for her and less on why not to vote for Jackley, especially since most have been petty and non-substantive.

    Back to the issue: The Jackley campaign made a claim in a campaign ad. The Noem campaign refuted that claim. What are the facts? Is there nuance where they are both “right” or neither right? Is it significant or insignificant? Just give us answers.

  9. The negativity has begun!….. Dilly Dilly!…… I mean Billy Billy!….. It’s too bad that you guys don’t have a third choice like you did with Rounds in ’02…….. Oh, I guess there is Lora, however…. 😉

    1. The negativity has begun for who? Not for you. You seem to be very negative towards Christian candidates in the SF mayoral race. What’s up with that? You don’t have faith so you’re required to criticize those who do?

      And your boy Billie isn’t as clean-cut as you’d like. How many Democrats are there to choose from in all the races taking place? I can name three without a search.

      1. Your fear emanates from your posts, assuming anyone reads the constant blathering as you take over every discussion. No one likes to hear about KM more than KM.

        1. And what exactly do you think I’m afraid of? Please, analyze me, I know you want to. What is it that’s so intriguing about me that has compelled you to make comments about me? If you want to engage, I’m here and absolutely willing to have a discussion.

          Assuming anyone reads my comments…well you’re reading them and I’m assuming you’re new to this forum b/c I was very popular with the J-school students;)

          Take over every discussion…you’re trying to silence me, take away my 1A rights, that’s quite telling about what your intentions are.

          1. What was the purpose of the J school study? Domestic Radical Extremism? Alt-Right? The South Dakota Tin Foil Hat Party?

            What does J school stand for?

            1. You’re new to the forum, that’s clear. Use your search engine, it’s not difficult, you made it to SDWC. You want to know about their case study, go back through the posts and read the comment sections. I’m not all that interested in helping someone who hates me and blames me for others not making comments.

              Tread lightly with your accusations about me being alt-right, a radical extremist or part of some made up conspiracy party. You don’t know me, you don’t my circles and making false claims is not such a good idea. I have never made any comments close to what you may be suggesting.

              1. LOL – did you seriously just threaten an anonymous poster on a backwater political blog?

                1. Ike – Threat: an expression of intention to inflict evil, injury, or damage. Where’s the threat…copy and paste it. Did you ever think that I have legal council in my family? No, it didn’t because you don’t care what you say…I do and I’ve never made comments as to what was just suggested about me.

                  You just can’t get enough of me can you. I don’t want to engage with you, thought I made that clear weeks ago. Why are you so obsessed with me.

                  1. You don’t know me, you don’t my circles and making false claims is not such a good idea.

                    Nobody made any ‘false claims’. They were questions – leading questions, sure, but nothing that would amount to a ‘claim’. Then you go and threaten anonymous that if they don’t shut up, bad things could happen. The only ‘circles’ we can associate with you are the ones in your thinking, and the ones you appear to be running in.

                    Anyway, I like you. Stay golden.

                    1. After running through my circles (family/friends), it’s been suggested I clarify b/c you’ve manipulated my statement.

                      It was implied I’m alt-right or a domestic radical extremists – a false claim. They & you don’t know that b/c you don’t know me, & I’ve never made comments indicating I am. Can you find one without making it up?

                      “shut-up or bad things will happen”…you said that, not me. Can you find where I said those words, I can’t. It’s all in your head along with your obsession of me.

                      Stay bronze;)

              2. Wow! Sorry I blew up! I just came on and was following the discussion and asked a couple quenstions. Well it is spring and the snowflakes will melt. 🙂

              3. Wow! KM anonymous sorry I blew up! I just started following the discussions and had a few questions. Luckily it is spring and the snow flakes will melt away. 🙂

      2. Oh, I have faith, in fact I have so much faith, that I would never inject my faith into a political debate to try to win it….In fact, whatever happen to the phrase “It’s God’s will?” As a Christian, I just hate it when candidates use religion in code form – by describing their potential mayoral leadership style as “evangelist(ic)” – but I never hate the candidate or the sinner…..

        And I am not negative, I just see it for what it is and call it out……

  10. When I saw this claim in his first ad, I actually questioned this because I remember ICAC being around before Jackley came around. Turned out that this old brain was actually correct. This one just seems to be an obvious one not to exaggerate.

  11. People are so incredibly biased. Calling out an opponent’s mistake is dedication to the truth, not running a dirty campaign. One should never be afraid of being right. And others should admit when they’re wrong. I’m sure it was some small error by perhaps one of his staff, but if we expect any kind of honesty from our candidates, we must DEMAND it from their campaign. It would’ve looked better if someone other than Kristi’s campaign pointed it out, granted. But the sooner the truth is out, the sooner people stop going on believing a lie. Small or big, I expect 100% honesty from both candidate

  12. I have just listened to the ad. It clearly states “task force”. The Noem campaign says task force. So the question is whether there is a difference between the ICAC and the ICAC task force. Any information I find seems to point to ICAC and ICAC Task Force as the same thing. Is it or isn’t it?

  13. My assessment:

    Jackley ad didn’t give every precise detail but in ads who can? It is not misleading. He was the driving force in expanding the entity to its effective entity it is today.

    Noem’s attempt to split hairs was more misleading as it’s intention was to delegitimize the good work of Jackley as US Attorney and AG.

    I hope both learn a lesson. Both have done good work in their current jobs. I want to hear more about what they will do in the job they are applying for.

  14. Troy Jones, man of integrity, refuses to take a stance in the race while kissing up to both sides.

    1. You are funny.

      1) Since you are anonymous (or think you are), not exactly stance of courage.

      2) Its an open primary. I may have leanings but I haven not made a firm decision. I don’t apologize for it. Still a lot of campaign left.

      3) Kissing up? Hilarious. Most of what I’ve been saying on here has been what is constructive criticism or my assessment as an undecided (which should be their primary focus as they try to win the primary).

Comments are closed.