Signers Allege Hickey Perjured Circulator’s Oath on 2012 Petition

Bring out the long knives! Armed with the Annette Bosworth felony precedent, petition signers are accusing Rep. Steve Hickey (R-9/Sioux Falls) of committing the same crime in 2012 of failing to witness signatures on petitions that he signed as circulator.

The evidence against Hickey reported by Jonathan Ellis is more nebulous than the evidence that condemned Bosworth. Evidently Hickey’s second 2012 nominating petition (Secretary of State Jason Gant threw out Hickey’s first 2012 petition for citing the “June 2012” primary instead of “June 5, 2012”) included sheets circulated by fellow Republicans Senator Deb Peters and then-Rep. Bob Deelstra. Peters and Deesltra did not comment for Ellis’s story, but someone apparently told Ellis that Hickey signed those sheets as circulator. We don’t know who that someone is, and Ellis hasn’t placed the documents in front of us yet.

Ellis calls into question signatures reportedly gathered on March 20, 2012, after a Hartford City Council meeting. He cites various witnesses:

  1. Council Mark Monahan says he signed a petition sheet circulated by fellow councilman Deelstra and has never met Steve Hickey.
  2. City administrator Teresa Sidel says she has never seen Hickey at a city council meeting.
  3. Former councilor Leah Johnson signed the petition sheet after Deelstra, says she has met Hickey, but says she does not recall signing a petition for Hickey.
  4. Former councilor Eric Bartmann doesn’t recall signing a Hickey petition.
  5. Hartford Area Development Council member Terry Hagen signed Hickey’s petition, recalls meeting Hickey in other contexts, but doesn’t recall signing a petition circulated by Hickey.

If I’m preparing the prosecution, I read #1 as my lead witness. I read #2–5 as follow-ups who could be witnesses. But to make an ironclad case like the one against Bosworth, I need…

  1. Hickey to admit that he was out of the country when his petition was circulated, as Bosworth did multiple times;
  2. Hickey to admit he did not witness the signatures in question multiple times, as Bosworth did multiple times but as Hickey does not in either the Ellis story or his online response to that story;
  3. External evidence to prove that Hickey was not in Hartford or any other locale where his petition signers were on the date they signed the petition, as the DCI chief Bryan Gortmaker was able to produce from Bosworth’s online postings, IP records, and passport information.

The possibility that Rep. Hickey committed petition perjury is all the juicier given that he challenged Bosworth’s petition and her moral character for falsifying her circulator’s oath, among a wealth of other ills. If convicted of perjury, Article 3 Section 4 of the South Dakota Constitution would disqualify Rep. Hickey from the Legislature. He could still circulate petitions for his pending initiated ballot measure to cap interest rates; state law does not exclude perjurers from circulating petitions, only (unsupervised!) sex offenders.

If Hickey committed a crime, then the Attorney General should prosecute. If the Bosworth conviction unearths a rash of corruption in our electoral system, then we will have all the more proof that investigating and convicting Annette Bosworth of her felony perjury was worth the effort.

Update 11:30 CDT: Below are scans of the two petition sheets in question (click each to embiggen!):

The signers quoted in the Ellis story (Monahan, Johnson, Bartmann, and Hagen) appear on the front of the sheet (1A, as labeled above) on which Bob Deelstra was the first signer. Deb Peters is the first signer of the second sheet.

Update 12:12 CDT: KELO-AM’s Greg Belfrage cites his interview with Steve Hickey last year (April 16, 2014, the show that provoked Bosworth’s public self-incrimination) and says Hickey will “have a hard time explaining himself considering his brutal condemnations of Bosworth.”

111 Responses to Signers Allege Hickey Perjured Circulator’s Oath on 2012 Petition

  1. Based partly on Steve’s statement to Pat Powers yesterday, it seems pretty clear to me that the first sheet above was initially circulated (but not signed) by Bob Deelstra and that the same sheet was subsequently circulated (and signed) by Steve.

    If Steve remembers that he intentionally signed his name to a false statement, he should probably confess, publicly and completely, regardless of the consequences. If he continues to tell us it wasn’t intentional, we should probably take him at his word. (I don’t know or especially care whether his intent is relevant to any possible legal proceedings.)

    Intentional or not, he probably ought to apologize for a serious mistake, and I’d advise him to avoid mentioning peripheral matters like Gant’s rejection of his original petition sheets or his wife’s chemotherapy.

  2. Are there any statute of limitations for something like this? Just curious.

  3. Sanford Leader’s reporter appears as the most conspicuous element in what appears to be an organized and well-researched hit to discredit a legislator who’s rattling the cage of the loan sharks in South Dakota, and I include Premier with its predatory history with low-income people as in the category of loan sharks. I doubt the reporter rounded up the information by himself. My guess is he was led to the names and information by an investigator who’s obviously on some Sanford affiliate’s payroll.

    But for a tiny glimpse of how the Sanford political mafia takes care of its own, dig this morsel from the Sanford Leader’s archives: .

    If a reporter really wanted to stir it up, she or he should grab petitions from any of the statewide candidates and ask the following questions:

    “Did you sign this petition on this date?”

    “Where were you when you signed it?”

    “The petition carrier’s name on the petition is ___________ . Did you see this person in the room when you signed the petition?”

    It’s like shooting ducks in a barrel. My guess is a whole more folks over the last 10 or more years will be facing charges than Steve Hickey. So, how did Steve Hickey get singled out by the Sanford Leader’s reporter? For the sake of transparency, maybe the reporter has some ‘splainin’ to do.

  4. Lee Schoenbeck

    I remember Paul Symens doing this in one of our races in the 90’s – I just let it go. We were both going to be on the ballot anyway, and I thought it was for the voters to decide.

    If Rep Hickey did screw up, the best move is to fess up early and apologize. The worst move, accuse everybody and their mother of being a crook. I think we have a sense of where that strategy can get one.

  5. If he did it, then yes he should be prosecuted just as Bosworth was. However, it would be much harder to convict as it may be a case where there is reasonable doubt as to his guilt. Having people say they don’t recall whether he was there or someone suggesting he has never been in a meeting are all based upon memories – and distant ones at that.

    At least with Bosworth there was a clear case of the documentation and dates conflicting with her travel, so it wasn’t in dispute. I would find it hard to believe the AG would try to prosecute this one based upon some fuzzy memories. Something more will need to come out before anyone proceeds.

  6. Donald Pay

    Candidate petitions have long gotten a free pass in South Dakota, and I suspect there are many more cases like this. Bosworth was in class of fraud all by herself, but if people look, they are going to find this sort of sloppiness in petition circulating. It’s illegal, but, as they like to say in Pierre, “That’s the way we do business in South Dakota.”

    Politicians kept saying to me, “It’s too easy to collect initiative signatures. We need to increase the signatures for ballot questions.” Yeah, it’s easy to collect signatures when you’re doing it sloppily, violating the law, and committing fraud, like many of the politicians do. When you do it the right way, it ain’t so easy now is it?

    Meanwhile, we’ve got a completely ridiculous process at the beginning of the initiative process because the fraudulent politicians wanted to close the window a bit to make it harder to collect the required number of signatures. Maybe they ought to increase the number of signatures and close the window on candidate petitions. Or they could just follow the law, like the citizens do. And, maybe, they ought to reform their nonsensical changes to the initiative process.

  7. Deb Geelsdottir

    I wonder if 96 has a point about this being in retaliation for Hickey not toeing the Koch/SD Republicans line? Closer scrutiny of all petitions is a good thing.

  8. I think it’s probably friends of the insaner than most crowd who are pointing out the giant mote in the Reverend’s eye. I bet you that pretty young Ms. Hubbel knows who it is.

  9. lorahubbel

    Grudznick…after you remove the branch from your own eye you are SUPPOSED to help others remove the twig from their eye…look it up. Matthew 7.
    However Cory makes an interesting point about crooked legislators being removed from office. So where is the executive equivalent (Article 4) to the legislative removal from office (Article 3: 4)? If we can get Daugaard disqualified for bribery and perjury I will quit my job and work 8-5 on that!
    So, is it bribery if the governor calls a legislator to his office who he KNOWS is going to vote “No” on HB 1234 (remember that one?) and promises her that she will become either the Chairwoman or co-chair woman for the Education Committee??? PLUS promise that he would donate to her campaign….IF she changes her vote to “yes”? …….just wondering….. (he reneged BTW)

  10. Lee’s point is well taken and it would be a shame if widespread investigations took place to verify if petition carriers violated their oaths. But the damn cat is now out of the bag with the extreme case against Annette Bosworth and now the gullible Sanford Leader reporter carrying out the Sanford mafia’s vendetta against Steve Hickey.

    The press has drawn the line in the sand with their Steve Hickey example. If you’re going to whack one, you now must whack them all, including the candidates who filed and didn’t win election. And you must go back to the last few elections. To be fair. To be honest. To be transparent.

  11. Donald Pay

    I would bet someone is now looking at Peters’ and Deelstra’s petitions.

    And, really, why would Peters and Deelstra circulate Hickey’s petition and then not sign the oath? I think that has been the way this entire criminal political process often works. Some candidates circulate petitions for each other in the district, and then they send the petition back to the candidate who then signs the circulator oath. That’s just a working theory, but I’d bet it happens more than once or twice an election cycle.

  12. Look at that Ms. Peters’ petition and the addresses of all the people on it. It looks like it was a neighborhood picnic.

  13. Statute of Limitations on this would be 7 years.

    As per Ellis’ article there is not a prima facie case.

    Ive said in other posts that it doesnt make sense for candidates to “witness” any of the petitions. Its just opening themselves up to unnecessary complications.

    The reason why they did not fill out the attestment is because they signed the petition. Had they done that their signature would not have counted.

    My guess is this is someone on the right that dug this up, as someone else guessed. The right does not like Hickey. Its just some people who are mad that Annette got caught who are trying to cause a fuss. In their limited minds, they think that if they find enough people who perjured petitions and filed false legal instruments they can say everyone does it, why the double standard, why the corruption. Except it doesnt work that way. In order for the double standard to exist they have to have complaints filed for each instance, with enough similiar circumstances, and the AG’s office doing nothing or failing to investigate. This case is actually pretty unique. From my understanding of other petition snafu’s they are not similar at all. Id also argue there is a timelyness aspect to this too.

    As someone else said, its almost impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Hickey could not have witnessed the signings. They would need something substantial, like a picture of Hickey at an event before during and after when the signatures in question were collected. So all that Hickey has to do is go back on his social media timelines and make sure he wasnt in Singapore and he is fine… LOL

  14. tara volesky

    I believe the Democrat Party is going to separate themselves from this blog site and file a complaint to the Attorney Generals office against Steve Hickey.

  15. This is not a hard case to prove, daleb. All it takes is Bob Deelstra and/or Deb Peters saying, “I circulated the petition to these certain people after the Hartford City Counsel meeting then gave the un-notarized form to Steve Hickey, later finding that he had collected more signatures on the page and notarized it as the circulator.” Some of the signatories already confirmed this. There you have it.

    Interestingly, Steve Hickey isn’t denying it. He’s using misdirection to try to create doubt such a thing is possible. “I’m not sure how to explain that some who signed the two contested sheets say that I was the circulator and others who signed say I was not.” Why yes, Rep. Hickey, you are sure. It appears you took pages that other circulators got names on already then continued circulating them yourself to more signers. No mystery there. You were up against a deadline and under the gun. Maybe Rep. Hickey simply didn’t have enough copies of his petition to start circulating a separate page himself. Maybe it was lack of attention to the details or simple laziness. The reason doesn’t matter.

    Deelstra and Peters can be compelled to testify at a grand jury. If a grand jury is held and the testimony comes out as it appears it may, Steve Hickey will be indicted.

  16. Tara, the Democratic Party has never really attached itself to this website, have they? They’ve linked to my articles occasionally, but that’s it.

  17. 96: O, the skullduggery! The usury-controlled media trying to destroy an enemy proposing reform—does that accusation differ from Team Bosworth’s accusation that the entrenched powers are trying to destroy her for bucking the system? (Hickey hasn’t claimed it, but Bosworth certainly portrayed Sanford/Big Medicine as one of her enemies.) And would such an accusation, even if true, have any bearing on the facts of the Hickey case if brought to trial?

  18. Lee, would fessing up and apologizing have made a difference in the Bosworth case? Had she gone on air with Greg Belfrage on April 17, 2014, and made such a simple, honest, sane statement instead of her raving excuses and misdirections, would AG Jackley have chosen not to press charges? If she had fessed up on April 1, 2014, when I first publicized the accusation of perjury, would the Secretary of State or the circuit court have removed her from the ballot?

  19. Dale, the Secretary of State’s office advised me this year that a circulator can sign his/her own petition. If Bob Deelstra circulated that sheet that had his name in the first signer’s blank, he could still have legally signed the circulator’s oath beneath it.

  20. tara volesky

    Look what happened when they impeached Bill Clinton. Gingrich, Livingston, Hyde?………….I feel bad for Pastor Hickey, but it’s going to happen. And Pastor I don’t discriminate ask Religion, gender, race, and especially party affiliation.

  21. tara volesky

    The letter from Dr. Talley says it all. Lora if you read this please post the letter. Thanks.

  22. R, there’s the thing: for the AG to haul Hickey into court, Deelstra and Peters (both? would one be enough?) need to go under oath and testify to Hickey’s crime. Are they willing to do that? Are political big wheels willing to get involved at that level in what could become a really ugly melee of candidates turning against fellow candidates? Are they willing to make the move from speaking on background to foment rumor to putting their names at the top of the story and taking the heat for being “out to get” Hickey or other so-and-sos?

  23. Cory,

    Do you remember when I had a suggestion that DFP could borrow a Gong button with sound effects from the old Gong Show and the visitors/contributors could vote to gong someone off the blog?

    How about installing “like”, “dislike” and a permanently re-direct to “SibbyLand” or a “Build Your Own Blog Site” buttons? Readers could vote but the permanently redirect results would be ultimately based upon your final approval.

  24. tara volesky

    I believe the complaint against Hickey has been filed. Get ready for another circus. One down, many more to go.

  25. Believe? What complaint? By whom? Show us.

    If a complaint is filed and charges are brought against Hickey, I somehow think it won’t be a circus. Hickey won’t engage in the political theater that Bosworth and Haber fabricated with their pity party, conspiracy theories, and out-state interlopers. A Hickey trial would be a much more straightforward affair, with both sides laying out their arguments and the jury deciding… assuming it even reached the jury stage. Rip open the wound, start charging other candidates, and you won’t find anyone else going down the drama queen road that Bosworth has led us down.

  26. I grok you, Lynn. We need to see less bogus hinting and more substance from Tara.

  27. tara volesky

    Lora will post the letter so everybody can read it. Governor daugaard also received a copy. I really need to learn how to post.

  28. tara volesky

    Cory it will only be a circus if you are the ring master like you were in the Bosworth circus.

  29. Yeah Cory, you really stuffed a lot of people into that Bosworth clown car. You clearly didn’t realize the large capacity of that teeny tiny little car. And the clowns are really funicating hard. We’re all getting much more than our money’s worth.

  30. Cory…yup petition would be valid but his signature would not count towards the total.

  31. And oh, Tara, you must mean this letter from Bosworth exploiter and Florida interloper Peter Waldron:

    Notice that Waldron offers no independent evidence, no argument, just a request for an investigation. And he makes his request to the wrong office, the Secretary of State instead of the Attorney General. If Waldron were from South Dakota, if he were paying attention to South Dakota news, if he read how our petition challenge proceeded, if he had listened to Chris Nelson’s testimony, he’d realize his request for an investigation needs to go straight to the AG and DCI.

  32. happy camper

    Tara is right about the drama because Hickey’s only option would be to resign if this is proved. They can ask everyone who signed and probably clear it up one way or the other. Cory is also in the sticky position of having to keep the same standard on the same issue for everybody. Just be thankful he isn’t a lib!!!

  33. Cory,

    What is grok? Do you mean you gong me off the blog? Lol :)

  34. Heck no, Lynn! Grok = understand, empathize, dig!

  35. happy camper

    Gonna be hard for Hickey (from Cory’s link): On April 16, 2014, Hickey discussed his reasons for filing a lawsuit to oust Bosworth on Greg Belfrage’s KELO-1320 AM radio show. He told Belfrage that he believed in the integrity of the electoral process, and he accused Bosworth of committing fraud.

    “This isn’t any place where there’s any wiggle room,” he said.

  36. tara volesky

    He’s busted, but I will support him just as am supporting Bosworth because I don’t discriminate against a person of faith or party affiliation. Did you get a lawyer Steve?

  37. mike from iowa

    I don’t hardly agree with Hickey,but I don’t wish bad things for him. So mu advice to him would be to sue for peace now that Tara is supporting him. Tara is the anchor drowning folks don’t need.

  38. Lee Schoenbeck

    I have no unique insights form anybody in the know, so here’s my pondering in answer to your question to me. Before the evidence came out at trial, of the fake signatures from the one colony, I would have thought that this was the kind of matter that a simple apology would have resolved. When the strategy went in the other direction, and accused everybody of being liars, etc… and then at some point the matter was investigated and the fraudulent signatures uncovered, well that’s an example of really bad doubling down. A simple and heart-felt apology is underappreciated.

  39. Hey Bill,

    Thank you! :) At first I thought it was a misspelling and then thought it was a Klingon word. I checked Wikipedia after Cory posted the definition. My vocabulary has expanded today. Lol

  40. If anything comes of this I don’t expect Rep. Hickey to become a convicted felon. As Lee Schoenbeck said, there is a right way and a wrong way to address things. Steve Hickey as a smart man not detached from reality (unlike Bosworth) knows this. Perhaps this is God’s way of delivering Rev. Hickey some humility.

  41. Bill Fleming

    It’s a good word for sure, implying the deepest, most profound level of understanding imaginable, and thus, in my opinion, should be used sparingly so as not to be wasted in hyperbole. In other words, don’t say “grok” until it’s the only word left after all the other ones have failed you. ;-)

  42. tara volesky

    Lee, why wouldn’t the attorney general just settle Annette Bosworth’s case? Now poor Pastor Hickey is going to have his life turned upside down. And if you go to the blog site Me and my 1000 girlfriends, they have contacted the US Justice Department not good for SD. The 2 new parties of SD are the Avera and Sanford who run the AG. Dr. Aanning explained it well. Cory I suggest you start shopping around for a Lawyer because you have pissed off a lot of women, and they are coming for you.

  43. Now where is that “Gong” or permanently re-direct to “SibbyLand” or “Build your own blog” button dagnabbit?

  44. Lee, you are no stranger to the signature process.

    Do you think that it hinders or helps democracy?

    Does it favor those with resources and power?

    Should every signature gathered be placed under a microscope?

    Would you risk your law license on every signature that has supported you in the past?

  45. Lora Hubbel

    My idea is underdeveloped…but I’m hoping it could be the simple solution to all of this:
    What if NIETHER Bosworth or Hickey broke the law? What if the petition (drawn up by some low-genetic-pool bureaucrat) is the problem? IMO it does not reflect the law…it reflects what some rule-writer pulled out of his hind-end (biting my tongue) when he was told to draw up the form. I have only seen where the law says the carrier must “VERIFY” the signatures….so why does our low-genetic-pool bureaucrat replace it with the word “WITNESS”? That is a higher bar to clear that just “verify”. Allow me an “out” here…just because I have not seen the word “witness” in SDCL referrign to petition signatures, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist…I haven’t found it yet if it exists.
    ALSO: I’m sure if I sent this petition to the National Notary Association they would laugh at the attempt our petitions try to force the notary into administering an OATH! Some Notaries will not sign our sub-par petitions because they legally CANNOT ADMINISTER AN OATH! They just witness the signature.
    Conclusion: State the obvious…declare the petition to be out of statute….maybe we do not have felonious candidates…maybe we have stupid bureaucrats in the little town of Pierre.

  46. Happy, I don’t want to see any liberals go down in flames for committing this crime, but hey: show me the evidence of the same crime, and I’ll back the same treatment. Party affiliation and ideology are irrelevant to the crime, as made clear in the state’s successful prosecution of Bosworth.

    I support posting all nominating petitions and the voter registration database online to make it easier for citizens to review every petition for possible perjury and fraud.

  47. Lora Hubbel

    forgiv tipos…shuold have re-red it befure I snet ti

  48. Lee reminds us of another level of the evidence against Bosworth not yet broached in the Hickey allegations. The DCI unearthed forgery facilitated by Bosworth’s crime. No one has tied such forgery to Hickey’s alleged perjury. Again, that doesn’t get Hickey off the hook if he didn’t witness the signatures he swore he witnessed, but it’s another important distinction in understanding how much evidence the AG might have to bring before a jury in an effort to secure a guilty verdict.

    Tara, Kathy Scott’s anger is misplaced. Her complaint is equivalent in merit to Chad Haber’s complaint that I broke into his locked desk. I won’t need a lawyer, because there will be no prosecution.

  49. Lora

    Former Secretary of State Chris Nelson looked like a pretty sharp and detail oriented guy to me during his testimony putting procedures in place to help avoid any confusion and make it fairly easy in explaining the process of petition gathering. When I was in their office earlier this spring I was impressed at how consumer oriented their office was. It was pretty straight forward.

    Enough of the excuses!

  50. Lora, the undevelopment of your idea includes one critical omission: Bosworth did break the law. A jury said so. The oath says what the oath says: “I, under oath, state that I circulated the above petition, that each signer personally signed this petition in my presence….” There’s no gaming or arcane rule-writing in that very simple sentence. You’re working too hard to stretch reality into something you would prefer.

  51. Lora Hubbel

    Cory, I may be wrong…but weren’t you an out-of-state interloper living in Oregon (?) at the time you and Hickey filed a complaint against Dr Boz?

  52. Roger Cornelius


    Do you always have a problem with facts?
    As we all know, Cory was living in Spokane, WA not Oregon for a period of time while his wife continued her pastoral education.
    Cory did not change citizenship to any place other than South Dakota, he retained all his rights as citizen of South Dakota and remained a registered voter in the state.
    Now, tell me what that has to do with the criminal actions of Bosworth.
    Given the number of typos and your poor grammar in your posts, South Dakota is fortunate in not electing you to any office.

  53. Lora Hubbel

    Hmmm….so what is this pervading thought that if Annette grovels enough, the old boy’s club in SD will exonerate her? She has to beg for mercy? Does she need to be escorted by a male when she does it? Will the AG’s office bury her waist- high in dirt and have her lashed? Had she offered any oldest-profession services in exchange for mercy would we still be talking about this? The thought that justice is meted out on how well you grovel rather than the law seems a bit..ummm….seems a bit…like South Dakota justice under the current administration. AND how about this for an old boy’s member in the radio media….another Annette crucifier, condemning Annette for not paying her bills…is going bankrupt (Chapter7…which means he doesn’t have to pay anyone back)

  54. tara volesky

    We have more and more Women climbing on board. No more big brother telling us how to behave. This Bosworth movement just keeps getting bigger. Women from other state are starting to chime in. When you are intelligent, a critical thinker and outspoken, on the DFP and SDWC they call it crazy. Enough is enough, and we aren’t going to take it anymore!

  55. Lora Hubbel

    Roger, thank you for reinforcing my conclusion that Cory was not in SD at the time….you will see I did question exactly where he was. You will also that Lee S has about the same amount of typos I have….seems you missed the humor in my disclaimer post…

  56. Roger Cornelius

    What does Cory’s residence at the time of Bosworth’s felonious activities have to do with anything. I did reinforce your conclusion because I already knew where he lived and when he returned to South Dakota.

    You and Tara keep throwing meaningless shit balls, what exactly are hoping to accomplish with nonsense?

  57. Roger Cornelius


    Do laws, as they stand right now, matter?

    Do oaths matter, Lora?

    If they don’t matter, why do we have them?

  58. Roger,

    Notice how those two never answer our questions? All they can do is keep repeating the same broken record non-relevant deflection statements while never accepting responsibility. Just ignore them from now on and let everything play out.

  59. Wow stay classy Tara. I see the old habits of name calling die hard.

    The reason people don’t buy into your nonsense has NOTHING to do with your gender and everything to do with your ideas.

    You continually try to accuse people and this site of being sexist. Claiming there is a “good ole boy establishment” and that this website (and others) call you crazy for simply being an intelligent, outspoken woman, but the facts don’t bear that out.

    First, there are many women who post here on a regular basis and who contribute to the discussion. Deb, Lynn, Jana, Leslie, Jenny, JeniW, and several others come to mind. I don’t recall anyone dismissing their comments simply because they are female nor are they called names. In fact, many times they have incredible insight and contributions and I’m sure I’m not alone when I say I appreciate their presence.

    Second, when someone disagrees with your viewpoint if you have to resort to accusations of sexism you essentially are admitting your idea or opinion cannot withstand a challenge. That doesn’t bode well for your view.

    Third, and I know this will be upsetting to you, but the South Dakota political process doesn’t revolve around you. Sometimes people will disagree with you – perhaps that will even be most of the time. They might not support your views or vote for you. It doesn’t mean they are wrong and perhaps it would behoove you to reevaluate why you don’t seem to be able to build consensus as you may wish.

    Finally, if you are going to accuse people of name calling or accuse them of being sexist, you probably should refrain from calling others “week [sic] men”, or suggest they are the equivalent of a rectum.

    Just sayin’.

  60. I’m wondering if someone is a little sauced up

  61. I don’t want to speak for Lee, Jana. But here’s how I see the petition process as it applies to state legislative races. The number of petition signatures is capped at 50 for legislative candidates, but it may be less than that because it’s based on votes for the party candidate in the last governor race. I think Rep. Hickey needed less than 50 valid Republican District 9 signatures. If a person can’t round up, or find someone to round up, 50 signatures from members of their own party maybe the legislature isn’t for them.

    That said, many candidates let someone else do some or all of the signature gathering for them. Replacement candidates, added by the party after withdrawal of an original candidate or a placeholder, don’t have to get any signatures at all because they replace someone who already turned in a petition. But somebody gathering signatures, either the candidate or someone on behalf of a candidate or party at least shows commitment to the race. There should be at minimum some level of commitment demonstrated – some barrier to entry. The existing signature requirements show commitment and help maintain some order, and not at the expense of democracy. But this new law the legislature just passed does hinder democracy and does favor those with money or power. I think the GOP just passed that to keep the Democratic Party busy with ballot referendums. If they can force the Dems to devote staff and resources to ballot issues every 2 years it takes away the ability of the party to field candidates. The SDRP is playing the SDDP like a fiddle.

  62. Roger Cornelius

    [CAH edit: Tara’s name-calling] implies her frustration and irrational narratives are political naïve or blatantly ignorant.

    As to not supporting strong women, again Tara runs her mouth and doesn’t have a clue.

    I supported Hillary for president in 2008 and actively campaigned for her, just as I will do this election cycle.

    Angie Buhl, Robin Page, Ellee Spawn, Kathy Tyler are among the many women that I actively supported this past election, there are many more. I didn’t support them because they were women, I supported them because they are intelligent rational and strong women that have “real leadership” qualities.
    And no I can’t hold a candle to Lora, nor would I want to. Her own republican party thinks she’s unstable and as irrational as you.

  63. Let’s see, this post was originally about Steve Hickey. Tara and Lora have turned it into name-calling (which I have mostly deleted and will try to continue to delete) and non sequiturs, plus the bonus accusation that I’m a sexist out-state criminal. So let’s wallow in me for a bit:

    Roger explains well my situation. I have always been a South Dakotan. I have always focused my attention, activism, and loyalty on South Dakota. And here I stand, in South Dakota, which can’t be said for the majority of bloggers/consultants/hacks backing Bosworth. I am correct to say Waldron, Scott, et al are interfering in my state’s affairs, which they do not understand as well or care about as much as I and the folks participating in this conversation.

    If I engage in any sexist behavior, I will hear about it from my wife long before Tara, Lora, or anyone they read on line gets wind of it, and said sexist behavior will be corrected immediately. And no one has any legal case against any blog post I have published on Bosworth or Hickey (oh yeah, Hickey—that’s who we were talking about, right? that’s the next guy who we have to decide whether he perjured himself on a nominating petition, right?)

    Now, Tara, Lora, back to the main issue: tell me what I’ve gotten wrong in discussing the prosecutability of the evidence laid before us so far on Hickey’s petitions compared to the evidence that led a jury to convict Bosworth last week?

  64. Deb Geelsdottir

    Whoa! This has really gotten crazy! Misdirection is apparently all the rage.

    In my highly critical estimation, Cory, Roger and most commenters on DFP are not sexist. Yes, there is the problem of cultural male dominance, but that does not mean all males are sexist or chauvinistic. I don’t see any sexism in the Bosworth criminal acts. I see serious mental health problems and cruelty on the part of Haber, but it wasn’t sexism that did Bosworth in. It was her behavior. Her problems, other than mental illness, are wilfully self inflicted.

    Mental illness is not a pass to continue criminal behavior, or exonerate it. The innocent individuals who have been victimized by Chanette are no less victimized because Bos has a serious illness and Haber is immoral.

    I think mental illness should have an effect on sentencing. I believe jail time is appropriate and might even be helpful in breaking through her narcissism to create in her an awareness that she needs to change. It would also protect her from Haber, at least temporarily.

    Whatever happens from here, all efforts need to focus on Bos retaining sole responsibility for her acts, criminal and otherwise. Anything else allows her narcissism to thrive.

  65. happy camper

    It’s sure been lively and entertaining out here, but some of you sure seem to be going easy on Steve Hickey considering he’s a “right winger.” Granted he comes out here and makes nice, and it’s the right thing to do to wait for the dust to settle and see if there’s any real substance here, but it seems incongruous the way many of you talk about Bosworth who was never even elected (or a credible threat) compared to a guy actively out there pushing the right agenda.

  66. Happy,

    The laws should apply to everyone. We will have to wait and see what happens. Unlike Bosworth/Haber and their groupies Rep. Hickey is not trying to deflect, create drama or blame someone else. It appears he is keeping a low profile and going thru whatever the process requires.

  67. tara volesky

    It’s ok for you’re thugs to call us names, but when we do it we are crazy and unstable. No wonder why SD is looked at as a backward state. Lynn, Kathy Scott is going to out some of you. She is filing a complaint with the US Department of Justice. To bad you have her blocked Cory. Jerry is the donut guy. Craig and Lynn you 2 could be next.

  68. tara is that the famous kathy scott of a 1000 friends?

  69. Cory,

    Isn’t it time to permanently ban someone that has repeatedly threatened posters here with slander, libel now outing and lord knows whatever else? The antics are counter productive to good stimulating dialog. There are some very good posters across the political spectrum here that deserve better than this.

  70. tara volesky

    Sorry, Kathy, Lora and I aren’t afraid to hide behind a fake name like some of you bullies on here.

  71. Leslie, bingo. That’s the one.

    I’m sorry you feel bullied by the truth, Tara.

  72. tara volesky

    Lynn, are you afraid of getting revealed. lol. You are talking scared now. Cory knows when somebody attacks me or my friends I am going to give them a douse of their own medicine.

  73. Tara,

    You and your friend with 1000 imaginary friends can do whatever you wish! It’s your reality. It would have little impact on my life. Lol

  74. happy camper

    Even so I’ve never understood the venom directed toward Annette Bosworth. She was never gonna win. All I can think is she represents to Cory and others so much of what you dislike that you also went overboard in an irrational way to destroy her when it just wasn’t necessary. Steve Hickey on the other hand is an actual politician. A fundamentalist Christian that believes in a literal interpretation of the bible. He’s made ignorant statements about gays my sensitive area so I’m less enthralled with him probably, although he has taken a good, strong position against those exploiting lax usury laws. He sent those campaign materials to Democrats acting like he was a real nice guy but I’m just not buying it. You’re being played in my opinion by a guy who realized he could come out here and make pleasant, accommodating statements while his real agenda is very different from your own. And it’s worked cause you like him and are more willing to cut him a break. He’s a politician, a pastor, who knows how to sway an audience. And get votes.

  75. Happy,

    I have had some serious concerns and posted them on the old Madville blog about Rep. Hickey also with some statements he has made in the past as you mentioned but since he has been working with Steve Hildebrand regarding these payday loan joints he voted has backed off. If my memory serves me right he did not support the efforts by Rep. Jim Bolin and a few other predictable players discriminating transgender kids participating in extracurricular activities and that bill allowing businesses to discriminate based on religious beliefs.

    Actually there are a number of issues that I share with Rep. Hickey such as race relations, gambling, and the unfortunate things that happen when the legislature is in session but right now I feel there are greater threats to the LGBT community and those same actors will be making the same attempts next session.

  76. Roger Cornelius

    It is necessary to remember that this purported war on women is a product of the SDGOP and their long history of attempting to and legislating women’s healthcare.
    Dr. Bosworth is a republican, Marty Jackley is a republican, Secretary of State Jason Gant was a republican at the time.
    During the trial of Bosworth, how many those that testified against her were republicans?
    Correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t believe there were any Democrats involved in the trial.
    Dr. Bosworth wanted attention, any kind of attention, during the trial and she got it. From one inane press conference to another, the profanity press conference got national attention. Unfortunately for Bosworth, it was negative attention.
    Remember that at one point she was going to the champion of SDGOP corruption and could not deliver because she was so busy covering her own petition fraud.
    Maybe we have been hard on Bosworth, but she invited so much of it with her political planning and knee jerk responses.

  77. I was formulating a cool, reasoned response to Happy’s charge when I realized I was being lured into what Lora, Tara, and whoever else is behind the Hickey allegations into a false sense of equivalency. On paper, yes, one petition signer is alleging that Hickey committed the same crime as Bosworth.

    As I stated above, the evidence against Hickey is not equivalent to the evidence against Bosworth.

    But let’s zoom out, beyond evidence and jurisprudence. At whom should we be more morally disgusted? Hickey runs a genuine campaign, speaks to his neighbors, lays out his views—some of which we find disgusting but which he holds honestly, on principle, not political convenience—and wins elections. Bosworth apes conservative memes that Base Connect tells her will help her get money from easily duped retirees far removed from South Dakota.

    Hickey uses the political process to advance political views with which we disagree. Bosworth uses the political process to enrich herself.

    If Hickey is playing me, he’s not getting any legal cover from me. Produce the evidence, and the AG and the courts may drop the same legal hammer on Hickey and Bosworth. But in the grandest scheme, the actions and careers of Hickey and Bosworth are not morally equivalent.

    Notice that I can make both of those judgments entirely independent of the actual political views or gender or religion or any other red herring anyone wants to throw into the argument.

  78. Cory,

    Before Annette Bosworth announced her run for the senate many were aware of the schemes she and Chad had been involved with. They were clearly on the red flag radar when they announced what many believed was a fake senate campaign. How can you run a state wide campaign for the US Senate by sitting behind a computer and going to Lincoln Day dinners and not beating the streets like legitimate and serious candidates like Rick Weiland?

    Remember the facebook likes that were purchased for the Bosworth campaign and many were from outside the US like Egypt? You covered every stage of it.

    One cannot even compare the campaigns and history of the Bosworth campaign and Rep. Hickey’s.

  79. Roger Cornelius


    I see huge difference between the Hickey petitions and the Bosworth petitions and her conviction.

    First off, you did not file the complaint against Hickey, you didn’t have to. There were too many eager beavers out there to do that.

    Second, when you and Hickey filed the complaint against Bosworth, it was not well received by the AG or SoS. Essentially you put them in the position of having to respond or face the accusation of party loyalty when they process crimes.
    We haven’t heard yet from the DCI and whether they sent the government black vans and black helicopters to interview witnesses.
    Steve is doing the right thing by remaining silent, unlike Bosworth and her cohorts that falsely promoted her lies and excuses.

  80. There is also a clear difference between the complaints filed. Bosworth’s minion Peter Waldron sent Secretary Krebs a letter asking her to “determine if there were violations” by Hickey. I submitted specific allegations with evidence to Secretary Gant in a sworn and notarized affidavit as required by state law. I took responsibility for my challenge to Bosworth’s petition and hung my cheese out in the wind in a way I haven’t yet heard anyone do on the Hickey allegations. Waldron and other distractors should cowboy up, get to know South Dakota law, and do it right.

  81. happy camper

    So Lynn thinks she gets some benefits from this right wing politician. Cory thinks his alleged crime is not the same and he simply has honest differences. Roger is impressed he’s not doing anything stupid, all of which makes you less motivated to take him down is what I get out of it. But if the evidence shows he’s guilty does he have to go? If he’s honorable shouldn’t he simply resign? His seat could go to someone more moderate even if not a Democrat. If he tries to stay hypocrisy is gonna loom large. My gut tells me that’s where this is headed which will put the Bosworth haters/Hickey likers in an interesting position. You couldn’t make this stuff up!

  82. If the crime is proven, if Hickey knows he’s guilty, then absolutely, resignation would be an honorable step. Every legislator who has cheated on petitions should resign.

    See, Happy? Still perfectly consistent.

  83. Happy,

    “So Lynn thinks she gets some benefits from this right wing politician.”

    I don’t know the details of this or what can happen under the law in this specific case. As I mentioned the law should apply equally to everyone and we will have to wait and see how this plays out. That goes the same for sentencing for Annette Bosworth. What impact will I have on sentencing? None!

    Happy I have not mentioned Rep. Hickey much because I expressed my concerns many times previously on the old Madville Times blog.

    For all we know there could be a few Republicans jockeying behind the scenes one of which lost a seat in that district that could be gunning for his seat now while riding the coattails of the Bosworth groupies. I’d love to see a Democrat in that district and in others but it seems premature.

    Besides I’ve been a little distracted with being in the process of re-locating

  84. Happy,

    You can go over to the old Madville site and look up Steve Hickey and in the comment section you will see that a few of the concerns you expressed above in this thread were covered by me and more.

  85. happy camper

    Smart people with good communications skills: you really have to pin em down cause they’ll dance. Yes, thank you for making your position clear.

  86. Roger Cornelius


    I’m always Happy when a GOPer bites the dust for illegal activities, in Steve’s case if the evidence shows that he is guilty, and it does, he should plead guilty and resign.

    I was merely pointing out the differences in how these two similar cases have been played out and there is a vast difference.

    In Steve’s case, it would be sad to lose him since he has championed many good causes lately.

    I’ve had many heated conversation with Hickey over time, at one point he was so pissed at me he blocked from his Twitter and Facebook accounts.

    As much as these two cases or any two cases seem to be the same, circumstances, behavior, and actions will make them different.

  87. “Craig and Lynn you 2 could be next.”

    I suppose I could consider that a threat… but honestly there isn’t anything scary or threatening about it. You obviously don’t like it when people disagree with you and you have to resort to name calling or silly tactics. I’m sure Cory has witnessed more than his fair share of these types of antics on the losing side of the debates he judged, but I’m saddened that adults have to play such games.

    As to the subject at hand, as I stated in my initial comment I feel this will be much harder to prove one way or another than it was for Bosworth. Will the state want to pursue charges against Hickey based upon a few statements from witnesses that “don’t recall” whether he was there or not at the time of signing? Is an expensive trial worth it if there is reasonable doubt?

    I can’t say, but I will say we need to be consistent. Whether the person is male or female, Democrat or Republican, sane or mentally unstable… we have to be consistent with the application of the law. If Hickey failed to properly witness the signatures then yes he needs to be held accountable by law. Period.

    The only difference here is Hickey is probably wise enough to accept a plea deal if one was offered. Thus the outcome could be significantly different and likely wouldn’t result in a felony.

  88. tara volesky

    The fight has just begun on the suppression of women who are critical thinkers,voice their opinions, won’t back down to the bloggers that support MJ and the SD Political machine. Kathy Scott is leading the charge, and she can’t be stopped. She has to many connections throughout the US.

  89. Craig,

    Welcome back! Do you see any evidence of a “War against Women? Christians? Missionaries? people that have cats or even Maine Coon Cats for companions or whatever else? I sure don’t! It’s simply against those that break the law.

  90. tara volesky

    2 blog sites against Bosworth……….Several in state and out of state blog sites for Bosworth. It’s spreading like wild fire. Women from both major parties are rising up. This a Woman issue, not a party or religious issue that the 2 blogs are trying to make it out to be. This is prosecution like no other case in America. That is why women are taking a stand against malicious prosecution of MJ. The mass is on our side.

  91. Agreed Lynn – I’ll concede that throughout history many minorities were marginalized whether they were women, Native American, homosexual, African American, Jewish etc. and we know much of this still occurs today.

    However I do not see evidence of this particular issue being driven based upon a war against women. Not in the slightest. I’m sure Kristi Noem and Shantel Krebs would be some of the first in line to tell you women are able to compete (and win) when they have the message that the voters want to hear and when they play by the rules.

    Tara, and others like her, simply need to understand it isn’t their gender that is holding them back. Instead, it is their methods and their views. They simply don’t resonate with the public, and using the continual excuses of gender discrimination isn’t helping them gain any traction. In fact, that suggests that they are the ones who are interested in drawing distinctions between the sexes, because it is they who automatically assume their lack of success is somehow affiliated with their gender. Nonsense – that is an excuse and nothing more.

    It is also worth pointing out that Bosworth isn’t the only one being brought upon charges for election violations, [Clayton Walker anyone?] so how this becomes a sexist issue is beyond me. Bosworth may be the only woman to be prosecuted in recent memory, but she isn’t the first politician (recall the Todd Schlekeway precedent from a few years ago) nor will she be the last.

    The law is the law regardless of gender. Time for people like Tara to stop making excuses that we all know aren’t supported by fact.

  92. tara volesky

    Maybe if Bosworth would have just behaved herself and not questioned the pardon from Mike Rounds, or not dug into the EB-5, or not announced SD as being one of the most corrupt states in the nation. Or maybe she should have kept her mouth shut on the Mette rape case, or the death of Brady Folkens and Richard Benda. Or just maybe she should not have talked about the hundreds of millions of dollars the state has made on Indian kids. Maybe she should have been a good girl like Noem and Krebs and learned her Republican talking points. Maybe then Arends would have given her better legal advice. I don’t recall Krebs or Noem asking these questions……..They know how to behave and obey their masters.

  93. Threats to “out” various people without stating any concrete charges are merely terror tactics with no substance. Knock it off, Tara.

    Kathy Scott doesn’t need to be stopped. She can roll off her own cliff all by herself. Jump before she takes you with.

    But wait. Let me ask why, Tara. Why attack Lynn, Craig, or me? Have we committed any crimes? Have we exploited the electoral system to get rich? Have we abused the public trust in substantive ways demanding that you punish us? Refresh me, what are the crimes any of us here have committed that deserve your or Kathy’s or anyone else’s crusade? Why do we matter so much, when all I’ve done is produce evidence that Annette Bosworth committed a crime, evidence a jury decided warranted guilty verdicts, and when all Craig and Lynn have done (and forgive me, friends, if I misrepresent) is say, “Yup, Cory’s pretty much right”?

    Please, be specific. We might want to alert our lawyers. That’s only fair.

  94. Susan Wismer and Kathy Tyler whom I have a great deal of respect for didn’t seem to have any issues with petitions. Both spoke against what happened in regards to EB-5 and challenged what was happening in Pierre and the misguided policies. Kathy Tyler was unfortunately not in my district so I was not able to vote for her but I did vote for Susan Wismer in the general election for Governor.

  95. Roger Cornelius

    Here is a simple question that should answer whether the Bosworth prosecution and conviction was gender related.

    How many women were on the jury that convicted Bosworth of 12 felonies?

  96. Roger,

    Tara doesn’t even read what we post regarding facts. There must be a list of responses that are copied and pasted across the web similar to spam thinking if you throw enough against the wall one of them might stick.

    Why do we waste out time? Lol

  97. Roger Cornelius

    Exactly Lynn, Wismer and Tyler were very vocal about EB-5, Bosworth put up a Facebook page to fight corruption, remember that? Since Bosworth lacked credibility and knew she herself was a corrupt republican politician, it gain little or no traction.
    And the Bosworth EB-5 video, what did that not get wide coverage? She could of, but didn’t, put that up on her campaign webpage.
    Bosworth wasn’t busy fighting corruption, she was too busy being corrupt.

  98. Roger Cornelius

    Now that Jackley, not my favorite politician, has put to rest Tara’s relentless charge that Bosworth was never offered a plea deal, she only has only one weapon left in her ever dwindling arsenal, that prosecution and conviction of Bosworth was a war on women.
    Are the Clayton Walker charges, which seem to be more severe than Bosworth’s, a war on men?

  99. tara volesky

    It only took one man, your boy MJ to maliciously harass her and prosecute her. I am on the side of justice. You people who support Marty Jackey………..sad sad sad. Sheaple.

  100. tara volesky

    I have talked to a lot of Democrat, Republican, Independent and 3rd party candidates, and not one agrees with your goon girls. Even Richard Winger expertise from Ballot Access News helped the Myer’s campaign with his expertise sue the state and win…………..well maybe you might want to refer to ballot Access News.

  101. Roger Cornelius

    If Tara was on the side of JUSTICE, she would respect the findings of the JURY!!!

  102. No, I might not, Tara. You’re making the threats—follow through. Tell us what crime Lynn, Craig or I have committed. Tell us what we have done to deserve your wrath, and tell us what legal, substantiated form that wrath shall take.

  103. Roger, since Tara didn’t get her wish for jury nullification, she must now nullify the jury… which, as I’ll bet Roger knows, consisted of nine women and five men. I didn’t catch which two were dismissed as alternates, but with nine women to start with, we can say that the verdict came from a jury consisting of a majority of women.

    Lynn, indeed, why do we bother? Tara responds to none of our commenters, just plays possum for a while, then says the same old things, the same old threats, the same old evasions. I’ve asked a civil question, to be told by our accusers on what charges we will be “outed”, and she refuses. She cannot win on facts or logic, she she just keeps screaming at us. This is why I don’t go to bars. Tara, your raving threats turn this comment section into an unpleasant bar, as if one angry drunk were wrecking the pleasant conversation the rest of us are trying to enjoy. Until you specify the charges we face and do so in a civil, objective, non-threatening fashion, we are done here.

  104. Thoroughly entertained, albeit mildly alarmed by the inane ranting of one hysterical woman!

  105. I share your alarm, Rita. I’m waiting for the response… and I will only publish the rational response.

  106. Roger Cornelius


    I read the two national blogs Tara boasts about, and, they are filled with Tara type propaganda with loads of information.

    Just one of many lies I caught was that Nick Nemec is the vice chair of the Democratic Party. So much for research by noted professional bloggers.

    I don’t know what Tara wants to do to you, Craig, and Lynn, maybe takeaway your keyboard or stand in the corner.

    One thing I’m certain of, if these two blogs bothered to investigate and research Bosworth instead of listening Tara and Bosworth, they would back away from it in a New York minute.

    Cory has consistently reported the facts about Bosworth, not innuendo or feel good slogans, furthermore he has provided evidence and documentation of his claims, not threats or irrational zombie land claims.

    Even the ever corrupt SDGOP finally got the message and had to speedily back off the Bosworth corruption that she has been convicted of.

  107. Roger, I take it none of those blogs offered any substantive charges? But they are lashing out at Nick, too? What did Nick ever do to anyone?

  108. Roger,

    I believe is another Kathy Scott entity along with her 1000 imaginary friends. All these women’s groups claimed to support Bosworth most likely one person behind them. Kathy and Tara’s tactics are nearly identical. If you don’t agree with their version of reality the accusations and threats come with outing and whatever else. Deb from Madville now DFP was targeted and someone else during the Kathy Scott/Corinna Robinson fiasco for reasons I have no idea. It made no sense and the posting Kathy made was so distorted. I felt bad for Corinna Robinson since Kathy’s actions and behavior negatively reflected on Corinna’s campaign and Kathy’s association was very limited.

    Tara, Chad, Annette and Kathy Scott birds of a feather

  109. Roger Cornelius


    Tara has also made many references that state Pat Powers and Cory have joined forces to destroy Bosworth, she says this with offering no evidence, documentation, or otherwise. She just says it so therefore it must be fact.

    She has also made numerous references that Cory and Powers have been paid off by the “powers that be”.
    Again, she doesn’t or can’t offer dollar amounts for the payoff or who made them. She just says it, so it must be fact.

    By Tara disregarding and disrespecting the jury’s verdict she has continued to demonstrate that facts and justice don’t matter to her.

  110. My last question for you Tara. How do people outside of South Dakota know more about what goes on in South Dakota then South Dakotans do?

    Take care Tara