Press "Enter" to skip to content

Secretary Barnett Forwards Noem/Sioux Falls/Trump Complaint to DCI

Remember Sheryl Johnson’s formal complaint that Kristi Noem and the City of Sioux Falls violated campaign finance law in making taxpayers cover the cost of security for Donald Trump’s campaign rally for Noem on September 7? Secretary of State Steve Barnett decided this week that the complaint was serious enough to send to the Department of Criminal Investigation:

Secretary Barnett doesn’t say much; he mostly quotes SDCL 12-27-47, the statute governing reports of campaign finance violations. According to that statute, the Secretary of State could just sit on the complaint or reject it outright; referring the complaint to the Attorney General is allowed but not required. So at least Secretary Barnett has taken a step beyond what the law demands.

Interesting now will be DCI’s determination of whether there is probable cause to proceed with a contested case.

10 Comments

  1. Buckobear 2019-01-26

    “Lock ‘er up” probably isn’t appropriate, eh ?

  2. SDBlue 2019-01-26

    Why can’t No Show just admit she was wrong and write a check to the City of Sioux Falls. She can afford it.
    Oh, wait.
    That would require her to show some integrity, and character, and ethics, and morals, and intelligence, and…

  3. mike from iowa 2019-01-27

    Who controls DCI in South Dakota? I’d ask who oversees DCI if I knew I wouldn’t puke from such a bad joke. Oversight is so liberalish.

  4. David Hubbard 2019-01-27

    Oversight is not “liberalish,” it is necessary. If Democrats got away with the same issue with Obama you would be raging, Mike from Iowa. Spare us your partisan platitudes.

  5. mike from iowa 2019-01-27

    Oversight is not “liberalish,” it is necessary.

    In a wingnut controlled state or country? Surely you jest. Spare me yer partisan platitudes.

  6. RICHARD SCHRIEVER 2019-01-27

    My experiences with these sorts of complaints is that they will be forwarded to an investigative agency when the forwarder is ALREADY PRETTY SURE (based on their view the complaint is at least partially politically motivated) the investigation will lead to no charge/ On the other hand, if they believe what they feel is at least a partially politically based complaint has a chance of succeeding – they will decline to act. Just my experience.

  7. John Kennedy Claussen, Sr., 2019-01-27

    That law is so broadly written, that it appears to me, that even an event which is open to the public -where government security is necessary – would be a violation of the law, too. If a given campaign did not reimburse those governmental entities, which were involved.

    In fact, an argument could be made that the mere governmental facilitation of a given event in and of itself – even with reimbursement – is a violation.

  8. leslie 2019-01-27

    Hilarious again. MFI your liberal humor is always appreciated. Perhaps Dave doesn’t kno you😀. Nepotist Barnett forced to lock horns with our 1st female gov. DCI Stormtroopersforced to confront her too. Brightest and best😀. Contested case procedure would be a burden for Africa to to carry alone. Dying to hear how Jason is advised by lawyers to proceed.

  9. leslie 2019-01-27

    Thune is an acolyte of magority leader McConnell. Mitch’s single focus is an obsession with unregulated campaign financing and has mustered FEC and SCOTUS and the rest of the fed judicial system to do so. Why does Thune think this way????? Mitch started the argument defending the corrupt election system 20 yrs ago in Feingold/McCain debates. Lawrence Lessing Harvard 12.18 youtube. I think it is nepotistic incest”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.