Category: Uncategorized

Sex Trafficking Operation Results in Arrests

PIERRE, S.D. – Attorney General Marty Jackley, United States Attorney Randolph J. Seiler, Rapid City Police Chief Karl Jegeris, and Pennington County Sheriff Kevin Thom announce that the Division of Criminal Investigation, the South Dakota Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force, and Homeland Security Investigations have conducted investigations into sex trafficking in Rapid City.

“It is important that we protect our children with law enforcement operations that focus on removing sexual predators from our streets. Our operations continue to protect children and send a message that South Dakota is off-limits to anyone seeking to harm our children,” said Jackley.

“Despite the intense publicity and focus on human trafficking these past few years, these undercover operations serve as a somber reminder that some people will throw caution to the wind and succumb to their perverted instincts,” said U.S. Attorney Randy Seiler. “I’m proud of the joint collaboration displayed by law enforcement and our united efforts to bring sex traffickers to justice.”

The investigation resulted in the following felony arrests for sex crimes:

Marshall Brown, 26, Ellsworth AFB, SD, Attempted Enticement of a Minor Using the Internet (18 USC 2422(b)) and Attempted Transfer of Obscene Material to a Minor (18 USC 1470)

Duane Hosek, 61, Rapid City, SD, Attempted Enticement of a Minor Using the Internet (18 USC 2422(b)) and Attempted Transfer of Obscene Material to a Minor (18 USC 1470)

Ryan Kammerer, 26, Box Elder, SD, Attempted Enticement of a Minor Using the Internet (18 USC 2422(b))

Brendan Leiter, 24, Elkhart, IN, Attempted Enticement of a Minor Using the Internet (18 USC 2422(b))

Noah Schottenstein, 27, Rapid City, SD, Attempted Enticement of a Minor Using the Internet (18 USC 2422(b))

Andries Snyman, 42, Isabel, SD, Attempted Enticement of a Minor Using the Internet (18 USC 2422(b))

Cody Two Lance, 33, Rapid City, SD, Attempted Enticement of a Minor Using the Internet (18 USC 2422(b)) and Attempted Transfer of Obscene Material to a Minor (18 USC 1470)

Joel Zupnik, 51, Ft. Collins, CO, Attempted Enticement of a Minor Using the Internet (18 USC 2422(b))
The mandatory minimum penalty upon conviction for Attempted Enticement of a Minor Using the Internet is 10 years in prison, up to life. Hosek, Two Lance, and Brown, could face an additional 10 years in prison if convicted of the Attempted Transfer of Obscene Material to a Minor.

All these individuals are presumed innocent until such time as proven guilty.

The Attorney General’s Office would like to extend its appreciation to the Rapid City Police Department, Pennington County Sheriff’s Office, Sturgis Police Department and Homeland Security Investigations for their efforts and continued cooperation.

Suspended County Commissioner, and former Legislator Alan Aker’s trial for felony charges is proceeding this week in Deadwood, over a matter of a fence. Aker claims he had permission to pull it down, and the homeowner (and law enforcement disagree):

Suspended Meade County Commissioner Alan Aker admitted while on the stand at his jury trial Wednesday that he had personally and purposefully cut 50 feet of hand-hewn log railing from the deck of a customer when the client refused to make a final $2,600 payment for his work.

But in further testimony, Aker said he did not trespass or steal when he took the railing because he had permission to be on the property in question and had not been paid what he was owed by who he described as a difficult customer.

and…

“Mr. Hegg was looking for reasons not to pay,” he said. “He was looking for excuses not to pay me.”

Under cross examination, Aker admitted he had used small claims court before and he spent time explaining the nuances of a mechanical lien, commonly used by contractors to ensure eventual payment.

Read it all here in the Rapid City Journal.

What do you think?  I suspect the mechanics lien might have been the more prudent way to go

And here we go again. It seems that the scenes emerging from Morton County North Dakota resemble something a little more sinister than what many of us would consider a “Spirit Camp” protest, because they’re looking like a North Dakota/South Dakota version of the types of protests we’re seeing in St. Louis, Minneapolis, and other places. In fact, the protests have gotten so out of hand that the company was asked to stop construction, so county governments and the state of North Dakota have been forced to allocate emergency financial resources to bolster local law enforcement.

In a place where protestors hurl both bottles and insults at police officers, lasers are pointed at aircraft, construction equipment is occupied, and horseback charges out of the 19^th century have replaced civil discourse, we have to decide if we’re a country of laws, or a country of mob rule. If we’re still a country of laws, then the protest of the Dakota Access Pipeline should no longer be allowed to continue.

What originally began as a protest regarding the location of a river crossing site for the pipeline project, has morphed into a display of radical environmentalism that threatens the future economic development of our country. This protest is halting the entirely legal, and properly vetted construction of a pipeline system that is part of the oil and gas infrastructure necessary to safely store and transport energy resources produced within the state.

Why are environmental radicals howling about this? It certainly isn’t the first time a pipeline has crossed a river. And it’s not the first time a pipeline is going to go across private land. But the protest of this pipeline project is part of a rising trend of environmental activists who are playing on the public sympathies for the plight of some of the most impoverished people in America to gain national attention for their cause of stopping the development of out energy infrastructure.

As the protest has swelled and conditions deteriorated, rhetoric toward the project has shifted among many of the environmental activists, who originally stood beside the tribe on their claim of water supply safety. Now as the opposition pivots toward an anti-fossil fuel agenda, the influence of groups like EarthJustice becomes apparent.  (You remember that group. I wrote about them earlier.)

As a key group in the radical environmental lobby, EarthJustice – who has sued to block energy projects across North America – is now suing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on behalf of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribes. Why? They claim construction of the pipeline will endanger the water supply in Lake Oahe.

Should I also note that neither EarthJustice, nor the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe decided to participate in the open public hearings held on the pipeline?

The simple fact is, these scare tactics are meant to do just that, scare up opposition to the pipeline, whip up protestors, and make the construction of this project something for people to fear. But when you look below the surface nonsense, it’s clear that this meant to paralyze decision makers as well as taxpayers who will be left holding the bag when the protest is over and the costs are tallied.

The bottom line is that we went through the process, and this project should be allowed to proceed along the route that was approved by the each of the four state’s involved in the approval process.

Pipelines such as Dakota Access and Keystone XL do bring jobs and economic opportunity to thousands from communities along the route, and will provide an invaluable service through the safe and reliable transportation of energy produced in our country.

In the case of this pipeline, they followed the rule of law, and were given the green light to proceed. It’s time to make it so.

Be careful what you wish for, as you just may get it.

As part of Rick Weiland’s offensive Amendment V (as in Vile), the out-of-state liberals who kicked money into South Dakota to pass this measure included a provision in the measure that the top 2 vote recipients in the new jungle-style primary will be the only ones who advance to the general election. Not the top candidate from each party, facing off against each other, as well as independents, as we have now.

So what’s that going to look like across South Dakota?

There are states that currently have such a system, and as much as the liberal Democrats here complain about Republicans, listen to them complain when they’re shut out of most elections as they would be under Weiland’s Amendment V. From the Daily Kos’ Morning Digest:

Morning Digest: Washington’s borked primary system yields all-GOP general election for treasurer

WA Treasurer: On Friday, Washington’s secretary of state certified the results of the state’s Aug. 2 primaries, cementing an atrocious and under-reported outcome in this year’s open treasurer’s race. Thanks to Washington’s top-two primary, a pair of Republicans will advance to the November general election, meaning no voter will be able to cast a ballot for a Democrat—this in a state that hasn’t voted for a Republican for president since the Reagan landslide of 1984.

and…

We’ve seen this same phenomenon before, but this is the first single-party statewide election ever to take place in Washington. That’s just terrible for democracy. California also uses a top-two primary, and there, polls show that many Republican voters simply plan to sit out this year’s Senate race between Democrats Kamala Harris and Loretta Sanchez. But at least we know that California, a very blue state, would likely have elected a Democrat to succeed retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer anyway. Washington, by contrast, almost certainly would have voted in another Democrat as treasurer, so the situation here is particularly perverse.

Supposed “good-government” reformers naïvely believed that eliminating partisan primaries would somehow crank down partisan gridlock by forcing office-seekers to moderate their views in order to win. Not only has that not happened, but voters have repeatedly been denied the opportunity to vote for the party of their choice thanks to debacles like these. It’s long past time for proponents to acknowledge their mistake and advocate for a return to proper primaries—and proper democracy.

Read it here.

Yes, it’s THAT Daily Kos calling for proponents of election systems just like the one Slick Rick Weiland wants to introduce into the state to “acknowledge their mistake and advocate for a return to proper primaries—and proper democracy.”

And take note of the direct repudiation of the propaganda that South Dakota proponents are using as they try to push how the jungle primary “will moderate views” – “Supposed “good-government” reformers naïvely believed that eliminating partisan primaries would somehow crank down partisan gridlock by forcing office-seekers to moderate their views in order to win. Not only has that not happened, but voters have repeatedly been denied the opportunity to vote for the party of their choice thanks to debacles like these.“

Slick Rick Weiland followers, and other mindless liberals, be careful what you wish for. You just may get it.

I was skimming articles today, and came across a notation of Paula Hawks continuing her drumbeat in favor of Obamacare’s expansion in South Dakota. But what I wasn’t expecting was a full throated endorsement of the failing program, as well as proposing pricing changes to keep it afloat on a national level.

Here’s what the Dem’s sacrificial lamb for Congress has to say, as she clearly and definitively underlines her support of Obamacare:

On another health issue, Hawks supports Medicaid expansion. In South Dakota, such a move would impact not only 15,000 Native Americans but also 35,000 non-Natives, she said.

“It would help all of us,” she said. “It would maintain good health. People would go to work, maintain households and not go to the ER.”

In other issues:

• Hawks supports the Affordable Care Act, or “Obamacare,” but would favor “tweaking” the program’s cost. She opposes any effort to privatize the Veterans Affairs health care programs.

Read that here.

Hawks supports the Affordable Care Act, or “Obamacare” is the first time we’re really hearing this as a definitive policy statement, as she’s been pretty quiet about her position on it. In fact, one columnist thought she came off as against it in her  positioning for the electorate, commenting that she’d slammed it. 

I had to go back and look, as while she’d previously been in favor of Obamacare’s expansion at the state level through Medicaid expansion, I didn’t think she’d been very forthright on her position on the much maligned social medicine program at the national level that is currently imploding before our eyes.

In fact, if you look at her issues page, she doesn’t address Obamacare or the “Affordable Care Act” at all, leaving it completely vague, if unaddressed on her campaign website. That’s by design, as Obamacare still is a contentious and unpopular issue in the majority Republican state of South Dakota.

But her statement on August 17th in the Yankton Daily Press left no doubt as to where she stands on the issue. And her comments about “tweaking” Obamacare costs belies the fact that the only way to accomplish this is through increased government intervention; whether it is through forcing companies to assume a greater loss on the product, or putting millions upon millions more in taxpayer dollars into the program.

It’s good that Paula Hawks has finally unmasked herself as the Obamacare loving ultra-liberal that she is. South Dakota voters should be forearmed with that before voting starts in the Congressional race.

Union members aren’t happy that South Dakotans have the option of saying “no thank you, I don’t want to join.”  So, like a record club you can’t escape, they want to chain anyone working for a company to them, and take their money against their will:

With it just opening up last week, I had the opportunity to take the brand new ADI/Great Lakes Aviation flight between Watertown and Denver to catch the big concert I bought tickets for earlier this year; the Go Go’s & Huey Lewis, as well as to see a couple siblings as well as nieces & nephews.

The Watertown Public Opinion had their own fawning review of the flight last week, which returned flight service to Watertown for the first time in 11 months. But once you get past city aldermen who were happy to get flight service returned to the community, what’s the true picture on what you’re getting?  Read on.

Why did they start this flight? After not having flights for several months, the federal government was convinced that they should be brought back. And several million in subsidies didn’t hurt:

I’m hearing from back in South Dakota tonight that while I’m enjoying a great concert from the Go Go’s, District 3 State Senate Candidate Cory Heidelberger decided to spend his evening attacking a 4-H kid and his project.

So what does it mean to mingle the American flag and the Christian cross? What message does such a flag send to Americans who are not Christian?

and…

And Christians, as believers in a faith meant to counter and critique earthly powers, how do you feel about your symbol being merged with the banner of today’s Rome.

Read it here.

Apparently, a 4-H kid’s artistic representation of faith and country has now become a political statement that a Democrat candidate for State Senate feels the need to criticize.

Here’s a good lesson that illustrates that especially when people are in the public eye, some people can’t stop themselves from stupidity.

Senate candidate attacks kids 4-H fair project. Just what a candidate wants to be known for as he runs for office.

I’m taking most of the weekend off, as you may notice I’ve already put up the weekly columns for our Republican Statewide elected officials, so I’m opening up the floor for a topic to discuss.

If you’re a regular reader, you’ve noticed that I’ve been grinding on the Argus for their completely awful recap of the state legislative races. You know, where they’re claiming that only around 8 races are going to be competitive. And that was expanded from 6 after I pointed out that they didn’t know what they were talking about.

So, I’m putting it to you, faithful readers. What’s your opinion on how competitive the State Legislative races will be, and which races are going to be the ones that will be the most hard fought?

Will there be a rumble in Rapid City? A brawl in Big Stone? Which are going to be the most hard fought races? Leave it under comments, or e-mail me. I want to know from the grassroots of the party what races they see as being hard fought, and why.

And when I’m back on the air, we’ll discuss, and I’ll give you the informed rundown of what races are going to be the ones to watch. And why.

The Watertown Public Opinion followed up on the story a short time back about Neal Tapio being Trump’s South Dakota person, and also spoke with him about what he’s going to do in Pierre next January:

and…

As for what he plans to address as a member of the state legislature in Pierre, Tapio wrote that one of his goals will be to oppose the expansion of Medicaid as overseen by the federal government.