Gov. Noem Makes Statement on Ravnsborg Investigative File
PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Kristi Noem issued the following statement in response to multiple news agencies requesting that she release the investigative file into the fatal crash involving Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg and the late Mr. Joseph Boever.
“I have seen the entire investigative file, and the public deserves to see it so that they can learn the truth of what happened. The House has the sole constitutional power of impeachment, and they have the responsibility to see this process through in a timely manner.
“Here, you will find the letter that my Secretary of Public Safety sent to House Speaker Spencer Gosch in September, handing the file over to him. The House impeachment resolution states that ‘all members of the House of Representatives shall have nonpublic access to all information gathered by the select committee.’”
###
Clearly this is political…. Even further
She says she won’t meddle, but then she does so again telling them what to do
Clearly trying to intimidate
This is getting old with Noem trying to use her position to influence things in South Dakota. What we have seen from the committee is them trying to get a better understanding of how much Noem is meddling in the investigation. The entire thing is tainted from day one.
She wants transparency for others but not when it comes to her dirty work.
“Meddling?” She’s giving her opinion on a major issue in the legislature. I’m sure the media is asking her, this is just her opinion. And one many South Dakotans share.
Really, an opinion? Was Noem giving an opinion when she held a meeting with lawyers, her daughter, and the government worker that issued appraising licenses? No, Noem was using her position to influence (intimidate) the desired outcome. She has been doing this through the entire timeline of this incident.
Those are two different topics. I support transparency for all public officials.
You made an assumption that because I share the Governors opinion on one issue, I must support her on everything and that’s not true. I think there’s a possibility she misused her position of power in the events you referenced and I’d like to see a transparent investigation into that, just like I’d like to see a transparent investigation into Mr. Boever’s death.
Innocent people don’t hide things.
She’s meddling. That’s all this is, meddling
Considering this issue, that the investigators believe Ravnsborg lied when he said he didn’t know what he hit, one should wonder, really, what difference does it make? By all reports, Boever was killed instantly and would not have benefited from any assistance. There have been cases where prompt treatment would have saved a life, but this is not one of them. Finding the body immediately would only have made a difference in the time the estranged wife would have been notified. Given statements made by neighbors, friends and relatives, none of them seemed to think Boever was going to live much longer anyway, so dramatic expressions of shock, grief, and unimaginable emotional distress don’t impress.
As for Ravnsborg letting it slip “I saw him,” then correcting himself, he might have been referring to the moment the following morning, and there is no way to prove otherwise. The investigators can think he lied, but they can’t prove it. The Governor can think he lied, but she can’t prove it. She wants him tried in the court of public opinion, and that’s unacceptable.
“… really, what difference does it make?”
Congratulations!?!?
In rationalizing Ravnborg’s conduct, you have reached the level of Hillary Clinton.
Really Guy from Guer? All you offer is your opinion while the comment you blast was thought out and well laid out. How about you take more than two seconds and type an intellectual comment supporting your claim. Better yet, why don’t you sit back down and let the big boys and girls talk.
In summary, the first sentence in this “thought out and well laid out” Ravnsborg rationalization: “meh, he was dead anyway. What difference does it make if Ravnsborg ‘found’ Boever at the time of the incident?”
Although you are seemingly quite proud of the balance of your contribution, I really did not need to go beyond that initial sentence in order to draw comparison of your rationalization to Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi testimony.
There was a time when a Republican would have been embarassed to have offered rationalization such as that which you offered and which drew comparison to Hillary Clinton and her cold, cavalier testimony expressing sub-human regard for loss of life. I guess things have changed in some quarters of the Republican Party in South Dakota, a party of which I am a member. A very adult member.
The big boys and big girls are talking.
O Guy, still no rational argument or facts or anything of substance in your posting. All you do is ramble on and try to use Hillary as an attack on the AG.
The fact is that this article is about the meddling of Noem in the investigation.
“Court of public opinion” is pretty important in this case considering he’s an official elected by the public. Politicians gonna politic.