Release: Noem Campaign Goes Negative in Final Days

Noem Campaign Goes Negative in Final Days

PIERRE, SD: The terms of the Kaiser settlement were negotiated by the Governor’s Office of Risk Management. The Attorney General had no authority over the process, settlement, or final result. The Office of Risk Management has sole authority and control over settlements involving state government litigation – not the Attorney General.

“Attorney General Jackley had no authority over the Kaiser settlement and claims that he delayed the settlement are baseless,” said Jackley for Governor campaign manager Jason Glodt. “Marty Jackley has been a tireless advocate for victims and South Dakota will see through any attempt to detract from his character in the final days of this campaign.”

“This is nothing more than a desperate political stunt orchestrated by the Noem campaign 11 days before the election,” Glodt said. “Congresswoman Noem’s DC funded campaign has been rapidly falling in the polls and is going into attack mode. Noem admitted making a negative campaign commercial featuring the plaintiff  to attack Marty Jackley and we expect other unfounded charges to be made by Noem in the coming days. Now we know why Noem refused to sign the Clean Campaign Pledge.”

23 Replies to “Release: Noem Campaign Goes Negative in Final Days”

    1. Anonymous

      Marty will win if he stays positive. Dont listen to the strategists who will want to release retalitory attacks. Stay above the fray.

      Reply
  1. Troy Jones

    Sheesh. Anyone with any experience with settlements and judgments know this part is an insurance matter and the plaintiffs (Kaiser) and defendant (DCI) become spectators. Noem takes a weak jab and Jackley reacts like it is a sucker punch below the belt.

    That said, we will know who is losing when someone takes a real swing. And, I will know who will one when the first one says something that exhibits real leadership.

    Reply
    1. KM

      We all make mistakes;) I think your biggest mistake is not noticing the glimpses of leadership exhibited by both candidates. However, I agree, who’s going to be the first to prove they have the strongest leadership skills? When I took that survey/poll a few months back, a question was asked about Jackley’s pro-life stance. Something about a case he refused? Could that be the punch that knocks him out? Possibly.

      Show Time!

      Reply
  2. Anon

    I am not involved in either campaign. I have been undecided and genuinely like both candidates.

    But Jackley is politicking as much as anyone on this. He spin machine is making it sound like he had nothing to do this. The fact remains it was his office and his actions that resulted in the taxpayers paying out $1.5 million to HIS former employee. Then he asked for a non disparagement agreement. Are you kidding me? Of course this should be brought up and it’s been Kaiser and her attorneys as much as anyone. But Jackley won’t attack her.

    Reply
  3. The Swamp

    The biggest thing missing from this article is the NDA the attorney generals office wants her to sign to say nothing negative about Marty Jackley…. she has not signed it therefore no money has been paid. Marty is holding the purse and is discusting! I’m sure they were hoping to push this to after the primary.
    Vote for kristi and not corruption!

    Reply
    1. Art

      Marty has no authority over the purse – that is the Governors Office of Risk Management. Noem is deceiving people.

      Reply
  4. Anonymous

    It’s not dirty campaigning to point out one of Jackley’s many mistakes. Just be thankful she hasn’t touched gear up or EB5 yet.

    Reply
    1. Anonymous

      What’s there to touch? Jackley’s hands are tied by what our laws allow. We can’t even pass laws after the fact that would concentrate on the ethics and conflicts of interest that continually allows this sort of thing to happen. We all want justice, and that’s started by the legislature growing a spine and demanding accountability.

      Reply
  5. Anon

    Jackley goes negative, while trying to make it look like Noem is going negative over something she’s got nothing to do with. Jason’s press release is exactly what someone who knows they are trouble would do.
    Noem came up with innovative ideas during the debate tonight, while Jackley blamed DC over and over, or repeated in a different way exactly what Noem said. Jackley loses tonight.

    Reply
  6. SD Conservative

    Can you check out if it is true she won’t sign the NDA and therefore Jackley won’t pay out the money. This is normal AG extortion so I think it’s worth a look into it. It’s definitely not dirty campaigning if Jackley is trying to cover up more of Pierre’s dirty laundry. This is the exact reason he should not be governor if he and his office is extorting money from someone who was discriminated against his office. If this is all true and it seems to be then this is exactly what the public needs to know how establishment Republicans who run this state act.

    Reply
        1. Anonymous

          The State was ordered to pay. Jackley was not a party to the lawsuit. The Governor’s office had final say on whether this was settled in the beginning or after the trial. If you have an issue with how long it took to pay, you need to bring that up with Tony V.

          Reply
  7. Abeal49@yahoo.com

    “Washington Washington Washington.”
    But he’s not the one going negative?
    He’s blaming Noem for everything that came out of Washington during the Obama administration, she’s blaming him for a matter which he had direct oversight over.

    This is getting old

    Reply
  8. Red

    Laura said in her press conference today that one of the many reasons DCI said they couldn’t pay was because Marty was in DC. Another reason was that DCI did not have the money. All they had was excuses until a judge forced them to pay up.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.