State Rep. Scott Odenbach recuses himself from Impeachment vote next week

As impeachment talk heats up in the matter of Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg, one House member is going to take a pass on voting, due to conflicts over providing the Attorney General counsel in the matter:

Representative Scott Odenbach had assisted Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg in an initial statement on the accident, and considers himself to have an attorney-client relationship with the Attorney General, and deems it a conflict to vote in judgement on whether impeachment is warranted during the April 12 gathering of the State House.

45 thoughts on “State Rep. Scott Odenbach recuses himself from Impeachment vote next week”

  1. This is a good move.

    We had a city councilman a few years ago get promoted after making city council.

    His firm was billing the city upwards of 50k/mo.

    He never recused himself from the Bill List votes.

    The Mayor’s husband’s company is making over 100k/yr from the city I estimated (I read the contract and did my best).

    She recused herself from the vote, but I assume she’s not making him return the checks like Trump.

    So I’m glad to see Mr. Odenbach recuse himself from this vote.

    Most of the folks I polled in our area believe the AG should not be impeached, and that there was enough mystery surrounding the case (along with motivations of certain unnamed people) to justify voting him back-in.

    The big test of how “America First” South Dakota is will be the Whalen/Thune contest.

    1. Unreal. He already voted not to form a committee. he has finally realized that he is on the wrong side of the issue. Voters all want JR gone. He knows defending him is political suicide and he manufactured a reason to not show up.

      1. Says who, everyone I talked to supports the AG and thinks he has been working hard. Most think Noem and Price has meddled in the investigation since day one.

        Interesting considering Price is reported to have recked two government vehicles on person time in his career. Was he even held accountable?

  2. In other words, Mr. Odenbach gets the easy way out. As they say in the legislatures, he is “taking a walk” instead of standing up to his “no” vote.

    I suspect we will see a bunch more “conflicts” arise.

  3. The Governor needs 36 yes votes. This is the best way to thumb their nose at her. Odenbach’s absence still counts as a NO.

    The Governor has been pushing this, we all know why, the Attorney General is investigating her on many fronts and won’t back down.

    Anyone actually believe she is not involved in the robocalls or the billboards? yeah me either.

    Don’t let her get away with it. Hold her accontable.

    1. Noem had be meddling in this since day one, makes you wonder what she is hiding?

      1. We already know what she’s hiding. What is important is that AG isn’t let off scot free just to hurt Gov. They’re separate issues.

        1. I don’t see them as separate issues at all when Noem gets to name his replacement and end her scandals immediately.

          1. Sure but that’s just a “benefit” to Noem. Should have no bearing on the fact that AG should be impeached for killing someone and lying about it. Any inappropriate action by Noem can be handled separately (like that would ever happen).

            1. She has handled it all wrong from the beginning. She should never have been involved and neither should SDHP. DCI called ND, contrary to lies that Craig Price had repeatedly told the public…. The BCI even said so.

              But Still not impeachable. Read the constitution it doesn’t fit as the committee said 6-2

  4. I too have been talking to people and no one thinks this is impeachable, but everyone is questioning the Governors actions.

    I understand Scott’s decision, as was said it still gets registered as a no vote anyway.

    Did you see the pictures of the briefing? Goodwin, Mortenson and Radical Democrat Nick Nemec…. Sounds right

  5. I tend to agree with Odenbach this is a joke and if i was a member id think of a reason to protest and not go to this farce also.

    The “evidence” they keep pushing does not add up to me.

    They say he was distracted…how so…we don’t know but he had to have been…..if a cop said that on the witness stand they would be laughed out of the courtroom.

    Then it was revealed that Boever would have been there less than a second…think about that.

    This is not impeachable conduct, read report 71, read the committee report and the addendum. Just a sad commentary on the Governor breaking all the rules and trying to stir up public opinion.

    1. Why don’t you trust the cops? How do you drive out of your lane and kill somebody without knowing what you did? AG knows exactly how he was distracted but he’s a liar and a terrible driver to boot.

      1. because their conclusions defy Newton’s laws of motion and physics…for a clearly political purpose.

        1. How do you drive out of your lane and kill somebody without knowing what you did?

          1. Because you are on the road as the evidence actually shows…even the prosecutor said he didn’t believe their conclusion.

            How do you hit someone near the grass on the right side as Noem’s cops say but everything is on the road or at the fog line? To the left as your car is going forward at 67/68 mph. You don’t. Unless you make things for the narrative you are pushing.

            Get past the headlines and do some research.

            1. Agreed, the investigators stated that the AG driving off the road was just one of the potential outcomes, they didn’t even have really any facts that I read or saw supporting it. The only thing they had was paint chips that were found at least 24 hrs later. To think those paint chips didn’t blow all over is just crazy.

              Meanwhile, you have overwhelming evidence the AG was most likely in the road.
              -A bolt from the car in the middle of the road
              -Glass from the headlight in the road
              -Multiple witnesses that saw Joe stumbling on the road walking
              etc.

    2. 90% of voters want Ravnsborg gone. Scott felt some strong winds blowing today when he held that finger in the air.

      Yeah. I think I’ll skip the biggest vote of the year.

      1. And I would say 90% of voter want Ravnsborg to stay. Everyone I have talked to talk about how great of a job he is doing. They don’t buy into the smear campaign. And they really don’t want Marty back.

        1. Saying I’m the attorney general to get out of a speeding ticket is impeachable and an abuse of power.

          Driving a state car to guard dusty is an abuse of power.

          The guy killed someone.

          Hanging out with accused child molesters is insane.

          He is a moron and I think a bad person. He has no business being in that office.

          1. And you are either a Noem person or Marry Fitzgerald, both of whom have personal issues with AG because he is holding Noem accountable to her abuse of power. And Marry is still upset how bad the AG beat her husband in the AG race.

  6. Not a bad idea…more should just not show a d be counted as no votes on these sham proceedings. It is clearly not impeachable.

  7. Legislators don’t get to abstain from voting. That’s why they walk out the back or go sit in the bathroom when they don’t want to vote. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen anyone recuse themselves in this fashion.

    On another note, did y’all see the pull over videos on Kelo? Two things I found interesting — 1) JR is always quick to tell the officer that he’s the Attorney General, and 2) Why was he driving his state car to guard duty in Nebraska?

    I’ve always had little respect for those office holders who try to throw their title around in cases where it either shouldn’t be used or doesn’t need to be used.

    1. He probably said he was AG to explain why the vehicle wasn’t registered to him.

      1. This is essentially Odenbach using the toilet instead of being on the floor.

        Who else did that once?

  8. Scott you are a great guy, but I don’t think you had a conflict. You voted before on this matter.

    Lots of stuff being thrown out at the last minute shows the Governor’s desperation. Don’t their actions violate the cease and desist order from the House?

      1. Why didn’t he recuse himself before? This saga has gone on longer than a Kevin Costner epic.

  9. The second part of this incident is what he did was deemed as misdemeanor according to prosecutors The do nothing legislature should have taken action to update the law and make such actions when a death is involved a major crime and not just a misdemeanor.

    1. Yet the death was ruled an accident and the AG was found not at fault, hence no charges. There is nothing impeachable for having two misdemeanors. If that were the case then I bet over half of the legislature should be impeached from their misdemeanors.

      1. They couldn’t bring more serious charges because SD’s laws didn’t fit the crime. If it happened in, say, MN for example and he was charged with a felony would you then say he should be impeached? Regardless of the law he went outside his lane and killed a man as a result. He should have resigned, nobody trusts him anymore.

        1. You clearly don’t understand that there was no evidence to support any additional charges against the AG, hence there would not have been more charges if there were different laws. The prosecutors ruled that the AG did not commit and crime. It was never proven he was outside the lane either, only hypothesized as one theory.

          Yes, an individual was killed, in a horrible accident. But no crime was committed, sometimes an accident is just an accident. Additionally, you have to wonder about all the evidence that points to Joe being in the road stumbling from being overmedicated. He does bear some of the blame.

    2. It is a good point that no further legislation was brought—because at worst…it was an accident.

      I can’t get past that the facts and all this extraneous stuff doesn’t fit into the framework of the Constitution. It simple is not an impeachable offense.

      Read report 71 and the committee’s report. Any legislator who votes for impeachment should be thrown out of office for abuse of power—just because you don’t like the guy doesn’t make it impeachable.

  10. Anyone else notice the 5th guy targeted on the billboards and not a member of the committee—Scott Odenbach—how did they know to target him unless they had access to the file……hmmmmmm

  11. Noem has taken out Odenbach with her continued release of information.

    Who else will she target?

    Jason investigates her and so she is throwing the entire kitchen sink at him,

  12. We need Marty Jackley more than ever to restore integrity to the AG’s office.

    Marty needs to clean house when he walks in.

      1. Umm… cover up might be leaving the scene of a crime after seeing a body come through your car window.

        1. What I love about you haters you’ve always hated this guy and in one instance is the smartest guy & planned this all out and manipulated the system in the next minute is the dumbest guy on the planet could you at least pick?

  13. Another factor to consider is that this is not like a grand jury. There is a higher bar because an immediate suspension would take place, like the committee said.

    President Trump when impeached twice was not suspended immediately.

    Plus what senators want to deal with this matter. Dispose of it in the House and don’t overturn the will of the people.

    1. All reporters should ask Odenbach how he would have voted, if he supports Jackley and if he thinks Ravnsborg should resign.

Comments are closed.