The Dakota Beacon http://dakotabeacon.com/ en swcates@cates-esti.com Copyright 2009 2009-11-11T17:19:21+00:00 THE PREVARICATING PROSECUTOR III, NO. 1: ASSISTANT STATE’S ATTORNEY LIES TO JUDGE http://dakotabeacon.com/entry/the_prevaricating_prosecutor_iii_no._1_assistant_states_attorney_lies_to_ju/ Burleigh County Assistant State’s Attorney Feland lied to the Court (Pre-Trial Hearing, November 3, 2008) in response to Judge Bruce Romanick’s concern “that all of a sudden we say, 30 days out, well, here's another 150,000 dollars when the case has been in the mill for a year.” Feland responded to Judge Romanick’s concern about adding new items relating to David Spencer and a North Dakota Firefighters’ Association safety grant at the last minute. Sandy Blunt Persecution From the October 2009 Dakota Beacon - The Prevaricating Prosecutor III Series

 

  1. FELAND LIES TO JUDGE ROMANICK

 

  1. Assistant State’s Attorney Feland lied to the Court (Pre-Trial Hearing, November 3, 2008) in response to Judge Bruce Romanick’s concern “that all of a sudden we say, 30 days out, well, here's another 150,000 dollars when the case has been in the mill for a year.” Feland responded to Judge Romanick’s concern about adding new items relating to David Spencer and a North Dakota Firefighters’ Association safety grant at the last minute by stating: “I can tell the Court that the information pertaining to this was part of the original audit that was conducted. The information pertaining to sick leave, the information pertaining to the relocation expense, the information pertaining to grant funds, that was part of the original.” Feland further stated to the Judge that these newly added criminal acts were “always (in) the case from the get-go;” a case charged against Blunt on April 18, 2007. Interestingly though, research shows that “The only evidence being held … in this case is the copy of the State Performance Audit done by North Dakota State Auditor, which is also a matter of public record and the accompanying documents that go with it.” And the 2006 Performance Audit (the only evidence being held) mentions none of the added items, not one. So if these items NEVER appeared in the audit in evidence, then how could they have “always (been in) the case from the get-go?” What provision in the legal system allows/justifies Feland to so obviously deny Blunt his due process by lying to a District Court Judge in open Court?
]]> 2009-11-11T16:19:21+00:00 SALLLY MORRIS: CHALK ANOTHER ONE UP FOR “DIVERSITY” KILLING http://dakotabeacon.com/entry/chalk_another_one_up_for_diversity_killing/ When will we finally stand up and scream “ENOUGH!”?  Enough of hearing the Left bawling that we’re “racist” if we employ profiling that fends of attacks and saves lives; enough of whitewashing honor killings and child and spousal abuse by calling it “domestic disturbance”; enough of special, state-funded, interest-free mortgage schemes exclusively to benefit Muslims who refuse to adjust to our financial practices; enough of prayer rooms and footbaths in public facilities – places where Christians and Jews may not post the Ten Commandments and where we may not sing Christmas carols; enough of Saudi students who develop into suicide pilots; enough of insane foreigners in robes jerking our airlines around; enough of taxpayers sending Muslim congressmen to Mecca for religious duties; enough strangulation of our sacred American liberty because demented Muslims are threatening to blow us up! How we react to the Ft. Hood terrorist attack will be an indicator of the state of the nation’s health.  If the reaction is one of PC whining that we’re “rushing to judgment” and that we shouldn’t hold the mass murderer’s name against him because that would be “profiling”, we can stick a fork in it and fill out the death certificate – for then America is officially dead.  On the other hand, if Americans finally awaken and our outrage demands and effects the corrective measures required to ensure that this will NOT happen again on our shores, then the vital signs will indicate that America still lives and is about to recover.

 

When will we finally stand up and scream “ENOUGH!”?  Enough of hearing the Left bawling that we’re “racist” if we employ profiling that fends of attacks and saves lives; enough of whitewashing honor killings and child and spousal abuse by calling it “domestic disturbance”; enough of special, state-funded, interest-free mortgage schemes exclusively to benefit Muslims who refuse to adjust to our financial practices; enough of prayer rooms and footbaths in public facilities – places where Christians and Jews may not post the Ten Commandments and where we may not sing Christmas carols; enough of Saudi students who develop into suicide pilots; enough of insane foreigners in robes jerking our airlines around; enough of taxpayers sending Muslim congressmen to Mecca for religious duties; enough strangulation of our sacred American liberty because demented Muslims are threatening to blow us up!  

 

Who are these people who have such a problem with this being AMERICA?  They shriek that we’re racist when we propose policies that save thousands of lives.  They look the other way in cases where Islam is clearly a factor in an act of violence.

 

A virulent strain of Islam is at war with America.  Our enemy is not “the Taliban”, “Al Qaeda” nor rogue states, but the power and ideology behind them. Is Islam a religion we can accept here, like Buddhism, Judaism or Christianity?  Is it rather, a violent, oppressive, militaristic political cult, founded on a barbaric culture whose central purpose is to dominate or destroy any entity not in strict conformity with its often repugnant tenets?                   

 

Our government has misplaced a higher priority on “political correctness”, “sensitivity” and “diversity” than on the preservation of our country and the safety of our people.  This must now change.  It has led to placing our trust in a military riddled with jihadists.  Our armor is made of gauze.  We need to address this crisis – for a true crisis it is – now, today.  We can’t expect our soldiers to obey an officer corps thus tainted by treachery.  We can’t hold our young men and women to their military commitments when they can no longer trust their officers.

 

Do we need to purge those professing the Muslim “faith” from our armed forces, as well as any foreign national from a nation or region controlled by Islam?  We must stop listening to the wailing of the Left.  We have given the proponents of “political correctness” their day.  The sun set on that day on Thursday, November 5, 2009.  It is time for America to decide whether to take that bottle of sleeping pills or to do what we must to survive.  It is no more complex than that.     

 

Next we must have a housecleaning in our universities and training facilities.  The University of North Dakota School of Aerospace Studies is currently training people from China, the Middle East and nations we cannot consider “friends” of America.  Will, one day, these same pilots fire on or bomb our troops as Nidal Malik Hasan did?  And we should exclude also American-born persons who, like Hasan, give their allegiance to a foreign ideology, rather than their native land.

 

This is important.  The case of Hasan exemplifies the fallacy of accepting these unfortunate people.  Here was a man born in Virginia, the cradle of American history, educated lavishly.  Few of us have the advantage of the education of a psychiatrist.  And yet this Muslim could not assimilate.  He could not bring himself to give his loyalty to the country that nurtured and accepted him.  This is because Islam demands total commitment.  So Hasan cheered the terrorists on, committed malpractice as a psychiatrist at Walter Reed by promoting jihad, advocated beheadings (hmm, would this qualify as “hate crime/speech” under recent legislation?. . . no, real Americans are not a protected class) and handed out copies of the Koran to his mates, and then, with the cry of “Allah Akbar!” he assassinated them.  Our military seems to have been more concerned that they not offend Hasan than with the offensive sewage spewing forth from his lips.  It is most fortunate that Hasan was not deployed – he’d have made a lousy and dangerous soldier.

 

What is truly sickening about this episode is that had our Commander in Chief effected the reforms indicated herein this might not have happened.  Hasan is, in fact, a product of the sloppy, misguided Bush II administration’s clumsy, pussy-footing, PC response.  This tragic attack could have been stopped at so many points along this criminal’s path since 9-11.

 

We wouldn’t have won WWII had our officer corps included Americans or foreigners who gave allegiance to Nazism or Hitler; we wouldn’t have survived Viet Nam had we permitted adherents of Ho Chi Minh to sit at the Officers’ Mess, even though it would have been “politically correct”.   We must accept that we live in a dangerous world and this is a perilous time for America and all it stands for.  No Muslim’s “sensitive feelings”, no “cultural diversity” can be allowed to take precedence over our nation’s security.

 

On November 5, 2009, America paid a very dear price for “diversity”.  We lost thirteen innocent and valuable lives and some thirty-eight others sustained life-altering injuries, all on the altar of this “diversity”.  I think we’ve had enough.  Write your Congressmen and Senators and the Commander in Chief and tell them so.

 

Sally Morris is a member of Americans for Constitutional Government 

]]> 2009-11-10T15:47:56+00:00 DENNIS PATRICK: THE DEVIOUS HATE CRIMES LAW http://dakotabeacon.com/entry/dennis_patrick_devious_hate_crimes_law/ Will Major Hasan be charged with a hate crime under the NDAA that Obama just signed into law? Probably not. His victims were not a protected class of citizens. However, a case may be made that he is an Islamic extremist falling into the category of a home-grown, self-radicalized terrorist. President Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2010 on October 28, 2009. The signing followed convoluted action by the congress. Funding all activities and procurement for the entire Department of Defense for the fiscal year 2010 beginning October 1, 2009, was the primary purpose of the bill.

 

With the exception of individuals who have ties to the military, most people have little reason to pay attention to the progress of this legislation. Contrasted with the astronomical cost of pending health care legislation, this year’s Department of Defense budget of $680 billion pales by comparison.

 

The Pentagon is not the kind of place that can turn on a dime,” said Defense secretary Robert Gates at the NDAA signing. Likewise, American society cannot turn on a dime either, Mr. Gates. Liberals will try anything to advance their cause.

 

The NDAA’s progress went like this. Appropriately, the original House defense spending bill, H.R. 2647, did not include hate crimes language. Hate crimes language was included in a separate bill, H.R. 1913, which passed the House on April 29 but it wasn’t clear the Senate would pass the bill.

 

Those in the Senate supporting hate crimes legislation were able to attach hate crimes language from H.R. 1913 to the Senate version of the NDAA, S. 1390. After all, who would vote against “supporting the troops” just because of some measly gay activist amendment? The Senate passed their version of the bill on July 28, 2009.

 

The House and Senate conference committee reconciled minor differences between their respective versions of the NDAA during the week of October 6 Then, on October 28, 2009, Obama signed the NDAA into law.

 

If the FY 2010 NDAA drew little public attention, amendments to the bill drew even less. The radical new hate crimes legislation attached to the defense appropriations bill gave it the alternative title of the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

 

The latest hate crimes legislation is the largest expansion since 1968. It includes “perceived” hate crimes (thought crimes) based on sexual orientation, increased penalties for hate crimes although penalties already exist for these crimes and opens the door permitting prosecution for the same crime at both the state and federal levels (double jeopardy). Additionally, people of faith who speak in opposition to homosexuality on religious grounds may be in violation of this law. Some lucky folks will eventually have to experience grief and legal costs to test the constitutionality of the law in court.

 

Because the expanded hate crimes legislation would never pass the senate on its own merit, some vehicle had to be found which would avoid a floor debate and the senate would not vote against. The NDAA was the perfect vehicle. Who would dare vote against supporting our troops in harm’s way?

 

That’s no way to pay respect to our men and women in uniform.

 

Enter Major Nidal Malik Hasan and the travesty (not tragedy) he perpetrated on November 5, 2009, at Ft. Hood, TX. How ironic that he committed mass murder almost a week to the day after Obama signed into law the NDAA hate crimes provision. Shouting “Allahu Akbar” (“God is great”) he shot 42 fellow soldiers at a processing center before he himself was taken down.

 

How much of this scenario stemmed from a vibrant diversity of a politically correct society is anybody’s guess. It is known that the good psychiatrist sympathized with suicide bombers, was attempting to contact al Qaeda and that he had no problem with the recruiting station murder of a soldier on June 1, 2009, in Little Rock, AR by Abdulhakim Muhammad. The mainstream media has apologetically airbrushed the story expressing sympathy for the murderer with scant focus on families and survivors who will live with the carnage.

 

Hasan had not served in Iraq or Afghanistan but was on orders to deploy to the war zone. Therefore, he wasn’t suffering from the current understanding of PTSD -- Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome. The way he has been reported you might think Hasan suffered from a new-fashioned disorder -- a reverse PTSD or Pre-Traumatic Stress Syndrome.

 

Will Major Hasan be charged with a hate crime under the NDAA that Obama just signed into law? Probably not. His victims were not a protected class of citizens. However, a case may be made that he is an Islamic extremist falling into the category of a home-grown, self-radicalized terrorist.

 

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or bnt@midstatetel.com.

]]> 2009-11-09T15:04:17+00:00 DR. PAUL KENGOR: ALEUTIAN CAMPAIGN - THE FORGOTTEN BATTLE OF WW II http://dakotabeacon.com/entry/dr._paul_kengor_aleutian_campaign_-_the_forgotten_battle_of_ww_ii/ In anticipation of Veterans Day next week, Dr. Paul Kengor recalls an epic battle that, to this day, is known of by relatively few people. In spite of the battle’s lack of fame, he explains, “Some believe it was the bloodiest battle of World War II.” In “The Forgotten Battle of World War II: Remembering the Aleutian Campaign”, professor of political science and executive director of The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College—Dr. Kengor—marks Veterans Day by commemorating “those who served in some faraway place long ago, many of whom paid that ultimate sacrifice. Every Veterans Day presents an opportunity to commemorate those who served in some faraway place long ago, many of whom paid that ultimate sacrifice. World War II offers its share of remembrances: Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941; Normandy, June 6, 1944; the Battle of the Bulge, December 16, 1944; to name a few.

 

Sadly, however, one series of battles continues to be ignored.

 

On June 3, 1942, the Japanese bombed Dutch Harbor, located at the Aleutian Islands, west of the Alaskan peninsula. Three days later, they landed on the islands of Kiska and Attu, culminating in the only battles of the war fought in North America. Many of the men there went through hell.

 

Remarkably, the battle is barely known.

 

One person who has not forgotten is renowned World War II historian, Donald Goldstein. Goldstein, a retired University of Pittsburgh professor, authored one of the only books on the campaign, called the “Williwaw War,” named for the freezing, high-velocity winds flowing from Siberia and the Bering Sea, which made service in the Aleutians a constant misery.

 

"It was strategically very important who controlled those islands," says Goldstein. The Americans stationed there "kept the Japanese from the West Coast and from invading the U.S. mainland.... From a strategic point of view, you can't underestimate the situation there. Look at a map! The Aleutians aren't very far from Seattle."

 

In the Aleutians, American troops battled not only the Japanese, but debilitating weather and boredom. To combat the fierce and unpredictable williwaws, soldiers leaned forward as they walked, before falling on their faces as the winds abruptly ended. They battled blinding, waste-deep snow, dense fog, sleet that felt like a sandblaster.

 

To escape the climate, troops spent hours inside. The boredom was so bad that some drank anything they could find. There were stories of casualties from "torpedo juice." Morale was awful.

 

"War is boredom mixed with moments of stark terror," says Goldstein. "You sit and wait. And then all at once it comes."

 

And when it came to the Aleutians, it came with ferocity. Shortly after bombing Dutch Harbor, the Japanese took Attu and Kiska. Thirteen months later, in August 1943, American forces sought to drive them out. Kiska was easy, since Japanese forces had bailed out two weeks earlier. Attu, however, was another story.

 

Attu was taken back only after a horrible fight. Japan fought to the last man. Facing defeat, 500 Japanese soldiers committed suicide with their own grenades. Whereas Dutch Harbor witnessed fewer than 100 casualties, U.S. burial patrols at Attu counted 2,351 Japanese bodies. Total U.S. casualties were 3,829—549 killed. Some believe it was the bloodiest battle of World War II.

 

And yet, few Americans have heard of the battle. Notes Goldstein: "Even [at the time] there was hardly any press coverage. If you ask most people today where Attu is they have no idea.... It's forgotten."

 

Do the veterans of this campaign feel neglected?

 

"Oh, yes," says Goldstein. "They're bitter. These guys never got the credit they deserve."

 

Many of the unrecognized survivors suffered premature deaths once they got home. One was Andrew Boggs Covert, a tall, lanky fellow who had worked at Pullman Standard in Butler, Pennsylvania prior to the war. Boggs found himself drafted into the Marines Corps as a 30-year-old with seven children. His surviving son, Jim, recalls riding to Pittsburgh to say goodbye to his father in 1942.

 

It was not a permanent goodbye, as Andrew survived the brutal combat. “He told me about some of the hand-to-hand stuff,” says his son today. “It was traumatic. But he was matter of fact: ‘Do it, take care of it, serve your country, get over it.’”

 

Still, getting over it was not that easy. Andrew died in October 1966 at age 54.

 

A survivor who outlived Andrew was Leonard Levandoski of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, a member of the 11th Fighter Squadron, who spent two grueling years at Attu.

 

A few years back, while writing for a newspaper, I tried to track down Leonard on a tip from the Department of Veterans Affairs: “This guy is perfect for you to interview,” said the press person. “Every year he writes letters-to-the-editor trying to get people to remember what happened. He’ll be thrilled to get your call.”

 

When I called, Leonard’s wife, Geraldine, answered. “Who is this?” she said slowly. When I gave my name and purpose, Geraldine began to cry. “Leonard just passed away,” she told me. “He waited years for someone to call.”

 

Many of those veterans have now passed away. The years have slowly faded, with no one calling about the Aleutians. It is about time we remember.

 

— Dr. Paul Kengor is professor of political science and executive director of The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. His books include "The Judge: William P. Clark, Ronald Reagan's Top Hand" and "The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism."

]]> 2009-11-06T23:57:40+00:00 MISCONDUCT, MALFEASANCE, CRIME IN OFFICE, NEGLECT OF DUTY IN OFFICE, GROSS INCOMPETENCY http://dakotabeacon.com/entry/misconduct_malfeasance_crime_in_office_neglect_of_duty_in_office_gross_inco/ In my opinion, it has now come to the point where – for the good of Burleigh County, the citizens of the state of North Dakota, and for the assurance of justice -- that Feland, Suhr, and Riha be placed under review for their actions. Their behavior appears to me to be clearly in violation of the mandates of their profession and professional obligations. As free men of a society whose very foundation is the just application of law,  it is critical that each of us as citizens demand that a full and unobstructed investigation is undertaken into the ethical and possibly illegal behavior/actions of Feland, Suhr, Riha, and other individuals so that their misconduct is brought into the antiseptic light of day and thus can not be swept under the rug of local politics. Sandy Blunt Persecution As a result of publishing a sampling of what I believe to be documented misconduct by the ND State Auditor’s Office and the Burleigh County State’s Attorney’s Office (BCSAO) in the “persecution” of Sandy Blunt, I have been contacted by readers with still more examples of apparent prosecutorial misconduct meted out under the direct supervision and leadership of Richard Riha. As I have not been able to thoroughly examine and document these new examples, I am not comfortable publishing them just yet. BUT, unfortunately, these examples continue to paint a larger and more disturbing picture of what appears be a consistent pattern of misconduct by the BCSAO.

 

The documented misconduct in Blunt’s case and the mounting new examples of apparent misconduct in others’ case’s have led me to look closer at the obligations and responsibilities of these prosecutors. What I discovered was that under North Dakota Century Code (NDCC) 27-13-08 (Misconduct of Attorney): “Every attorney who … Is guilty of any deceit or collusion or consents to any deceit or collusion with intent to deceive the court or any party … is guilty of a class A misdemeanor and in addition forfeits to the party injured treble damages to be recovered in a civil action.”

 

The examples printed in the October 2009 Dakota Beacon magazine ALONE appear to clearly show that Cynthia Feland and Lloyd Suhr of the BCSAO are at a minimum guilty of multiple class A misdemeanors and that Blunt has cause for a very significant civil action against the county. And if each violation of 27-13-08 can be stacked over-and-over again as part of a continuing course of conduct (as they did to Blunt), would Feland and Suhr then eventually be guilty of a felony? I have no idea, but it is an intriguing question. And if Blunt was charged with multiple Misapplication of Entrusted Property charges for things that others “supposedly” did while he was the CEO, then aren’t Feland, Suhr, and RIHA also guilty of Misapplication of Entrusted Property for “willfully” (engaging in intentional, knowing, or reckless conduct) prosecuting Blunt for provably LEGAL actions? If it is good for the goose, then is it not also good for the gander? I say yes.

 

But the laws and rules governing attorney conduct do not stop with just NDCC 27-13-08. I have also discovered additional rules and laws governing their conduct such as ...

 

NORTH DAKOTA RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT PREAMBLE: A LAWYER'S RESPONSIBILITIES [1] A lawyer, as a member of the legal profession, is a representative of clients, an officer of the legal system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the quality of justice.

 

RULE 3.3 CANDOR TOWARD THE TRIBUNAL (a) A lawyer shall not knowingly: (1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer;

 

NORTH DAKOTA CENTURY CODE (NDCC) 27-13-01 DUTIES OF ATTORNEYS. Every attorney and counselor at law shall (in part):

 

1. Maintain respect for courts of justice and judicial officers;

3. Perform faithfully the attorney's responsibilities as an officer of the court and protector of individual rights;

5. Work to make the legal system more accessible, responsive, and just;

6. Employ for purposes of maintaining the causes confided to the attorney, those means only as are consistent with truth and honor, and never seek to mislead the judge or jury by any artifice or false statement of fact or law

 

NORTH DAKOTA RULES OF ATTORNEY PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT 1.0 Terms; (e) "Fraud" or "fraudulent" denotes conduct having a purpose to deceive and not merely negligent misrepresentation or negligent failure to apprise another of relevant information.

 

NORTH DAKOTA RULES OF ATTORNEY PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT, 1.0 Terms Comment Fraud -[5] When used in these Rules, the terms "fraud" or "fraudulent" do not include merely negligent misrepresentation or negligent failure to apprise another of relevant information. For purposes of these Rules, it is not necessary that anyone has suffered damages or relied on the misrepresentation or failure to inform in order for the misrepresentation or failure to inform to constitute fraud.

 

NORTH DAKOTA RULES OF ATTORNEY PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT Scope [4] … since the rules do establish standards of conduct for lawyers, a lawyer's violation of a rule may be evidence of breach of the applicable standard of conduct. Failure to comply with an obligation or prohibition imposed by a Rule is a basis for invoking the disciplinary process.

 

RULE 3.4 FAIRNESS TO OPPOSING PARTY AND COUNSEL A lawyer shall not: (a) unlawfully obstruct another party's access to evidence or unlawfully alter, destroy or conceal a document or other material having potential evidentiary value;

 

RULE 3.8 SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF A PROSECUTOR The prosecutor in a criminal case shall:

 

(a) refrain from prosecuting a charge that the prosecutor knows is not supported by probable cause;

(d) disclose to the defense at the earliest practical time all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense, and, in connection with sentencing, disclose to the defense and to the tribunal all unprivileged mitigating information known to the prosecutor …

 

RULE 4.1 TRUTHFULNESS IN STATEMENTS TO OTHERS In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not make a statement to a third person of fact or law that the lawyer knows to be false. Comment (Misrepresentation) A lawyer is required to be truthful when dealing with others on a client's behalf … Misrepresentations can also occur by partially true but misleading statements or omissions that are the equivalent of affirmative false statements. For misrepresentations by a lawyer other than in the course of representing a client, see Rule 8.4.

 

RULE 8.4 MISCONDUCT It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:

 

(a) violate or attempt to violate these Rules, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;

(b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;

(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation that reflects adversely on the lawyer's fitness as a lawyer;

(f) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice …

 

Comment

[1] Lawyers are subject to discipline when they violate or attempt to violate these Rules, knowingly assist or induce another to do so or do so through acts of another, as when they request or instruct an agent to do so on the lawyer's behalf.

[2] Many kinds of illegal conduct reflect adversely on fitness to practice law, such as offenses involving fraud … Although a lawyer is personally answerable to the entire criminal law, a lawyer should be professionally answerable only for offenses that indicate lack of those characteristics relevant to law practice. Offenses involving violence, dishonesty, breach of trust, or serious interference with the administration of justice fall within that category. A pattern of repeated offenses, even ones of minor significance when considered separately, can indicate indifference to legal obligations.

[4] N.D.C.C. Section 27-14-02 provides for the revocation or suspension of the certificate of admission of any lawyer who has committed an offense determined by the North Dakota Supreme Court to have a direct bearing on the lawyer's ability to serve the public as a lawyer and counselor at law. Statutes also provide for revocation or suspension in other instances of misconduct, including 27-13-01 (duties of attorneys), 27-13-08 (misconduct of attorneys), 27-13-09 (permitting use of the attorney's name), 27-13-11 (involvement in the defense while a partner of the prosecutor), and 27-13-12 (involvement in the defense after involvement as state's attorney or other public prosecutor).

[6] Lawyers holding public office assume legal responsibilities going beyond those of other citizens. A lawyer's abuse of public office can suggest an inability to fulfill the professional role of a lawyer.

 

RULE 5.1 RESPONSIBILITIES OF PARTNERS, MANAGERS, AND SUPERVISORY LAWYERS

 

(b) A lawyer having direct supervisory authority over another lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the other lawyer conforms to these Rules.

(c) A lawyer shall be responsible for another lawyer's violation of these Rules if:

 

(1) the lawyer orders or, with knowledge of the specific conduct, ratifies the conduct involved; or

(2) the lawyer is a partner or has comparable managerial authority in the law firm in which the other lawyer practices, or has direct supervisory authority over the other lawyer, and knows of the conduct at a time when its consequences can be avoided or mitigated, but fails to take reasonable remedial action.

 

And on-and-on it goes from there.

 

As I am not a law trained individual, I will not attempt to interpret or apply the above cited rules and laws –that is to be left to the appropriate legal officials. And in the case of this prosecutorial misconduct, the appropriate legal officials are the ND Supreme Court (which can revoke a certificate of admission of an attorney to the Bar of ND) and the Governor (which can remove a elected official from office for cause).

 

In my opinion, it has now come to the point where –for the good of the county and for the assurance of justice-- that Feland, Suhr, and Riha be placed on notice and placed under review for their actions. Their behavior appears to be clearly against the mandates of their profession and professional obligations. As citizens we have a responsibility to point out injustice and abuse when we find it.

 

Look for an official action of accountability to occur soon in this case. And when this public action is taken, it will be important for each of us as citizens of this state and this county to demand and assure that a full and unobstructed investigation is conducted into the unethical and possibly illegal behavior/actions of Feland, Suhr, Riha, and other individuals so that their misconduct is not just simply swept under the rug.

]]> 2009-11-06T17:06:30+00:00 SCHMID - LOOKING BACK FROM THE LEFT COAST: NOVEMBER 6, 2009 http://dakotabeacon.com/entry/schmid_-_looking_back_from_the_left_coast_november_6_2009/ ONE OF THE WORLD’S GREAT NUCLEAR POWERS, UNMANNED AIRCRAFT, LESS BANG FOR THE HIGHER EDUCATION BUCK, SMALL PUBLIC COLLEGES, CONTROVERSIAL DECISION, IT’S ALL OF US, TELEVISION IS NOT REALITY, BLOWING UP AN OUTHOUSE, CLOSED MIND, THREAT TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, BCBS PUSHED BOUNDARIES, MEXICAN CRIME RINGS, BARBED WIRE,  DAKTOIDS Minot AFB has a very sensitive assignment -- Minot is the only base with dual nuclear capability: land based ICBMs and B-52 strategic bombers.  This makes recent blunders at the base even more embarrassing.  Satirists refer to Minot as ONE OF THE WORLD’S GREAT NUCLEAR POWERS.  A series of mistakes began in 2007, when a bomber mistakenly flew six nuclear missiles from ND to Louisiana.  The base commander was removed, but other incidents followed.  His successor, Col. Joe Westa, who commanded both the base and a B-52 wing, has just been removed.  The Air Force said Westa was unable to “foster a culture of excellence.”  Two weeks prior, Col. Christopher Ayres, the missile wing commander, was also removed.  There have been two total changes of command at MAFB in the last two years.


Col. John Michel is enthusiastic about the future of UNMANNED AIRCRAFT at Grand Forks AFB.  The base commander told an economic development group in GF, “We are where Microsoft was in 1980.”  He wasn’t always so optimistic, when he arrived in GF 16 months ago, “I saw the movie ‘Fargo’ and I freaked out.  We have an image problem.”


For its size, ND probably has one of the most overextended higher education systems in the nation.  The state has six state four-year universities and five other state colleges, plus four Indian colleges and two private four-year universities.  These extremes were noted in a GF Herald column by Richard Vedder, an economist at Ohio University, who concluded the state gets “LESS BANG FOR THE HIGHER EDUCATION BUCK.”  He noted ND’s per capita spending for higher education was 57 percent above the national average and the state leads the nation in population-adjusted number of four-year state universities.  Two days later, Gov. John Hoeven countered with a letter aggressively rebutting Vedder.  Hoeven’s principal argument was the state’s healthy economy -- the redundant small colleges were carefully never addressed.


In fairness to Hoeven, there is not a lot he can do about a university system woven into the state’s constitution -- a system which ignores today’s population distribution, demographics, transportation and communications.  The SMALL PUBLIC COLLEGES are critical to the economic well-being of their host towns and any effort to curb them produces legislative gridlock.  It’s also politically risky to challenge the system while the state has a budget surplus.  Suggestion: Buy them out!  ND’s higher education system could be both leaner and better.


The Hope Lutheran Church is Fargo’s largest congregation in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA).  Hope has followed other Lutheran churches in Fargo in suspending funding to ELCA, because of a CONTROVERSIAL DECISION at a recent Churchwide Assembly to allow homosexual clergy. 


A Bismarck Tribune editorial speculated about the cause of the city’s bad driving record.  Was it hicks from the sticks, squinting seniors, those “women” drivers, cellphones or crazy teenagers?  Before you express your outrage as a member of one of those groups, you should hear the Tribune’s conclusion -- IT’S ALL OF US.  The Tribune then blandly advised everyone to step up and become defensive drivers.

 

Chief Justice Gerald VandeWalle met with students in Petersburg (45 mi. west of GF) and he issued a landmark opinion: TV Judge Judy is “rude” and “crude” -- “TELEVISION IS NOT REALITY.”  VandeWalle and other members of the ND Supreme Court periodically visit schools around the state.  The Petersburg visit was covered by Herald writer Marilyn Hagerty.


Just recently, I teased the Jamestown Sun for its parochial  “Bravos and Buffalo Chips” and reluctance to award chips to local residents.  Well, they showed me, after showering buffalo chips on the distracted NW Airlines pilots, they targeted unidentified local bad boys for . . . BLOWING UP AN OUTHOUSE.  The Sun gets this week’s courage in journalism award.


Many ND Indians and non-Indians alike still hope there can be a negotiated settlement to the UND Fighting Sioux nickname controversy.  One group has a CLOSED MIND on the issue -- they said "declare the old logo history . . . quit stalling."  Guess who it is, you got it -- the Fargo Forum editorial board.


The Forum writes “smash mouth” editorials -- you know where they stand.  The Bismarck Tribune editorials are, well, more ambiguous, if you like, nuanced.  Editor John Irby began a recent editorial by discussing the stigma attached to AIDS sufferers and the need to sometimes protect their identities.  It seemed as if Irby was headed for more privacy regulation, then he swung a U-turn and came the other way suggesting that well-meaning privacy laws had become a THREAT TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST.  He said, “The laws that have been enacted with good intent should be revisited and amended because the masses deserve protection.”


The problems of Blue Cross Blue Shield of ND and its former CEO are widely reported.  Now, a September audit report on the web site of the state Department of Insurance (exam #537) describes how BCBS PUSHED BOUNDARIES in many areas.  Some examples: BCBS directors, who represent consumers and providers, received $12,000 a year, plus $1,200 a day for meetings, +++, all presumably, on top of compensation the directors receive from their full-time employers.  In 2006, the board brought scathing charges against the CEO for drunken driving, excessive drinking, lying and engaging in conduct which harmed the organization.  Yet, the CEO was terminated without cause and given $2.2 million of termination benefits.  The report, addressed to Chairman Dennis Elbert and new CEO Paul Von Ebers, states board and management did not act in the best interest of members.


MEXICAN CRIME RINGS are generally not thought to be a ND problem -- it’s something that happens in Arizona or California.  Not so, Mexicans are active in ND drug crimes, but also other types of crime.  A group of illegal immigrants believed to be from Mexico have been operating a check fraud scheme in larger ND cities.  They broke in and stole payroll checks from businesses, forging and cashing them at unsuspecting banks.  After Fargo and Grand Forks were hit, police were clever enough to anticipate Bismarck would be next.  As a result of alerts, a drive-up teller in Bismarck called police and six members of the ring were arrested.


Oh Boy!  Makers of public policy are asked to find a balance between the public interest and that of individuals.  It’s not easy, and bureaucrats can easily cross lines of common sense.  Take barbed wire, thousands of miles of it -- part of the West for at least a hundred years.  Environmentalists believe BARBED WIRE is killing too many sage grouse in states such as ND, and they are pressuring the Fish and Wildlife Service to protect the birds under the Endangered Species Act.  For starters, they want colored tags on wires to make them easier to see.


 DAKTOIDS:  Volunteer fire departments around ND are folding: shriinking towns and aging populations . . . Back to the future -- Stutsman County has purchased a machine to turn paved roads into gravel . . . Although the economy is good, the number of families in Grand Forks needing social services is rising steeply.  Much of the increase is attributed to out of state people who have entered the area looking for work . . . It makes the state Tax Dept. feel good -- the number of ND millionaires (adjusted gross income over $1 million) rose to 470 in 2008 compared to 270 in 2005.  The big reason, you guessed right, oil company payments.

]]> 2009-11-06T15:45:57+00:00 MARK STEYN: MULTICULTURAL ILLUSIONS KILL - NO STRATEGY TO DEFEND AGAINST IDEOLOGY http://dakotabeacon.com/entry/mark_steyn_multicultural_illusions_kill_-_no_strategy_to_defend_against_ide/ What happened to those men and women at Fort Hood had a horrible symbolism: Members of the best trained, best equipped fighting force on the planet gunned down by a guy who said a few goofy things no one took seriously. And that’s the problem: America has the best troops and fiercest firepower, but no strategy for throttling the ideology that drives the enemy – in Afghanistan and in Texas. Thirteen dead and 31 wounded would be a bad day for the US military in Afghanistan, and a great victory for the Taliban. When it happens in Texas, in the heart of the biggest military base in the nation, at a processing center for soldiers either returning from or deploying to combat overseas, it is not merely a “tragedy” (as too many people called it) but a glimpse of a potentially fatal flaw at the heart of what we have called, since 9/11, the “war on terror”. Brave soldiers trained to hunt down and kill America’s enemy abroad were killed in the safety and security of home by, in essence, the same enemy – a man who believes in and supports everything the enemy does.

And he’s a US Army major.

And his superior officers and other authorities knew about his beliefs but seemed to think it was just a bit of harmless multicultural diversity – as if believing that “the Muslims should stand up and fight against the aggressor” (ie, his fellow American soldiers) and writing Internet paeans to the “noble” “heroism” of suicide bombers and, indeed, objectively supporting the other side in an active war is to be regarded as just some kind of alternative lifestyle that adds to the general vibrancy of the base.

When it emerged early on Thursday afternoon that the shooter was Nidal Malik Hasan, there appeared shortly thereafter on Twitter a flurry of posts with the striking formulation: “Please judge Major Malik Nadal [sic] by his actions and not by his name.”

Concerned tweeters can relax: There was never really any danger of that – and not just in the sense that The New York Times’ first report on Major Hasan never mentioned the words “Muslim” or “Islam”, or that ABC’s Martha Raddatz’s only observation on his name was that “as for the suspect, Nadal Hasan, as one officer’s wife told me, ‘I wish his name was Smith.’”

What a strange reaction. I suppose what she means is that, if his name were Smith, we could all retreat back into the same comforting illusions that allowed the bureaucracy to advance Nidal Malik Hasan to major and into the heart of Fort Hood while ignoring everything that mattered about the essence of this man.

Since 9/11, we have, as the Twitterers recommend, judged people by their actions – flying planes into skyscrapers, blowing themselves up in Bali nightclubs or London Tube trains, planting IEDs by the roadside in Baghdad or Tikrit. And on the whole we’re effective at responding with action of our own – taking out training camps in Afghanistan, rolling up insurgency networks in Fallujah and Ramadi, intercepting terror plots in London and Toronto and Dearborn.

But we’re scrupulously non-judgmental about the ideology that drives a man to fly into a building or self-detonate on the subway, and thus we have a hole at the heart of our strategy. We use rhetorical conveniences like “radical Islam” or, if that seems a wee bit Islamophobic, just plain old “radical extremism”. But we never make any effort to delineate the line which separates “radical Islam” from non-radical Islam.

Indeed, we go to great lengths to make it even fuzzier. And somewhere in that woozy blur the pathologies of a Nidal Malik Hasan incubate. An army psychiatrist, Major Hasan was an American, born and raised, who graduated from Viriginia Tech and then received his doctorate from the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, which works out to the best part of half-a-million dollars’ worth of elite education. But he opposed America’s actions in the Middle East and Afghanistan, and made approving remarks about jihadists on American soil. “You need to lock it up, Major,” cautioned his superior officer, Colonel Terry Lee.

But he didn’t really need to “lock it up” at all. He could pretty much say anything he liked, and if any “red flags” were raised they were quickly mothballed. Lots of people are “anti-war”. Some of them are objectively on the other side – that’s to say, they encourage and support attacks on American troops and civilians. But not many of those in that latter category are US Army majors. Or so one would hope. Yet why be surprised? Azad Ali, a man who approvingly quotes such observations as “If I saw an American or British man wearing a soldier’s uniform inside Iraq I would kill him because that is my obligation” is an advisor to Britain’s Crown Prosecution Service (the equivalent of the US attorneys). In Toronto this week, the brave ex-Muslim Nonie Darwish mentioned en passant that, on flying from the US to Canada, she was questioned at length about the purpose of her visit by an apparently Muslim border official. When she revealed that she was giving a speech about Islamic law, he rebuked her: “We are not to question Sharia.”

That’s the guy manning the airport security desk. In The New York Times, Maria Newman touched on Hasan’s faith only obliquely: “He was single, according to the records, and he listed no religious preference.” Thank goodness for that, eh? A neighbor in Texas says the major had “Allah” and “another word” pinned up in Arabic on his door. “Akbar” maybe? On Thursday morning he is said to have passed out copies of the Koran to his neighbors. He shouted in Arabic as he fired.

But don’t worry: As the FBI spokesman assured us in nothing flat, there’s no terrorism angle.

That’s true, in a very narrow sense: Major Hasan is not a card-carrying member of the Texas branch of al-Qaeda reporting to a control officer in Yemen or Waziristan. If he were, things would be a lot easier. But the same pathologies that drive al-Qaeda beat within Major Hasan too, and in the end his Islamic impulses trumped his expensive western education, his psychiatric training, his military discipline – his entire American identity. One might say the same about Faleh Hassan Almaleki of Glendale, Arizona, arrested last week after fatally running over his “too westernized” daughter Noor in the latest American honor killing. Or the two US residents – one American, one Canadian – arrested a few days earlier for plotting to fly to Denmark for the purposes of murdering the editor who commissioned the famous Mohammed cartoons. But Noor Almaleki’s brother shrugs that’s just the way it is. ““One thing to one culture doesn’t make sense to another culture,” he says.

Indeed. To infidels, Islam is in a certain sense unknowable, and most of us are content to leave it at that. The vast majority of Muslims don’t conspire to kill cartoonists or murder their daughters or shoot dozens of their fellow soldiers. But Islam inspires enough of this behavior to make it a legitimate topic of analysis. Don’t hold your breath. We’d rather talk about anything else – even in the army.

What happened to those men and women at Fort Hood had a horrible symbolism: Members of the best trained, best equipped fighting force on the planet gunned down by a guy who said a few goofy things no one took seriously. And that’s the problem: America has the best troops and fiercest firepower, but no strategy for throttling the ideology that drives the enemy – in Afghanistan and in Texas.

 

© Mark Steyn 2009

]]> 2009-11-06T13:59:23+00:00 FORMER AMA PRESIDENT GIVES BRILLIANT ANALYSIS OF OBAMACARE http://dakotabeacon.com/entry/former_ama_president_gives_great_analysis_of_obamacare/ This video produced by The Wall Street Journal is a brilliant discussion about medicine and freedom. Dr. Donald Palmisano, former President of The American Medical Association (AMA) and head of dissident group of over 10,000 doctors called Coalition to Protect Patient Rights, will try to force AMA to drop their "support" for the public option, calling current legislation "anathema to Doctors and Patients". This is one great video! Highly recommended!

]]> 2009-11-06T01:55:15+00:00 LYNN BERGMAN: MICE IN BIG TENT SCARE ELEPHANTS, A FEW RABID! http://dakotabeacon.com/entry/lynn_bergman_mice_in_big_tent_scare_elephants_a_few_rabid/ RINOs are few in number; the term “Liberal Republican” is practically an oxymoron, representing only 1% of potential voters. These “mice in the big tent” are scary to the elephants but the real problem begins to materialize when the “mice in the big tent” are placed on the ballot! RINOs in office, working clandestinely and/or openly with Democrats would ultimately destroy the Republican Party “brand”. The Monday, October 26, 2009 Gallup Poll article can be found at:

http://www.thehotjoints.com/2009/10/26/gallup-poll-40-of-america-is-conservative-20-liberal/

The results of the above referenced poll were examined and placed in the following format to provide clarity to the results. The matrix combines potential voters into two sets of criteria. The first criteria (top row of descriptors) identifies the percentages that are Republican, Democrat, Independent (leaning Republican), Independent (leaning Democrat), and Others (those so disinterested or disillusioned that they rarely vote). The second criteria (left column descriptors) identify those that label themselves Conservative, Moderate, Liberal, and Other.

October 26, 2009 Political Matrix of the United States

                       Republican    Democrat  Ind (leaning R)  Ind (leaning D)   Other      Total

Conservative     19.4%             7.7%               5.2%                     4.6%                 3.1%             40%

Moderate            6.5%            13.7%               6.4%                     5.6%                4.8%              37%

Liberal               1.0%            13.0%               2.7%                      2.3%                1.0%              20%

Other                 0.1%             0.6%                0.6%                     0.6%                 1.1%                3%

Total                 27%               35%                  15%                     13%                   10%              100%

 

Matrix Observations

40% of potential voters describe themselves as Conservatives; 19.4% are Conservative Republicans, 9.8% are Conservative Independents, and 7.7% are Conservative Democrats. 20% of eligible voters describe themselves as Liberals; 13% are Liberal Democrats, 5.0% are Liberal Independents, and 1.0% are Liberal Republicans.

The Mathematical Winning Combination

The combination of voters that most easily achieves a majority is those that term themselves either “Conservative”, “Republican”, or Independent (Leaning republican), yields 53.5% of total voters (see below). The math says that a “Conservative Republican” has the best chance of winning. On the other hand, the math says that a “Liberal Republican” can count on only 3.7% (1% + 2.7%) of the vote.  The political matrix screams out to the Republican Party “A Conservative Republican candidate has a 14 times better chance of winning than a Liberal Republican candidate”. Even if ALL Liberal Republicans leave “the fold” because they are not availed of the opportunity to run for office, so be it… losing 1% of the 27% of Republicans is not the end of the world; the winning combination is reduced from 53.5% to 52.5%! The decision to avoid running Liberal Republican candidates (that drop out and support the Democrat opponent) must be made by the Party PRIOR to candidate selection, not after!  NY23 must NEVER again be allowed to happen!

Self-described political affiliation in numerical order by percent (excluding “Other” categories)

Conservative Republican      19.4%

Moderate Democrat              13.7%

Liberal Democrat                  13.0%

Conservative Democrat           7.7%

Moderate Republican              6.5%

Moderate Independent (R)       6.4%

Moderate Independent (D)      5.6%

Conservative Independent (R) 5.2%

Conservative Independent (D) 4.6%

Liberal Independent (R)          2.7%

Liberal Independent (D)         2.3%

Liberal Republican                1.0%

 

Conservative or Republican Total               53.5%

Liberal or Democrat Total                      34.6%

 

Republicans In Name Only (RINOs)

 

RINOs are few in number; the term “Liberal Republican” is practically an oxymoron, representing only 1% of potential voters. These “mice in the big tent” are scary to the elephants but the real problem begins to materialize when the “mice in the big tent” are placed on the ballot! RINOs in office, working clandestinely and/or openly with Democrats would ultimately destroy the Republican Party “brand”.

 

So Why Would Anyone Run as a Liberal Republican?

The answer is simple… a candidate with a liberal voting record that chooses to run as a Republican wishes, above all, to get elected in a predominately Republican district where the term “Democrat” is somewhat toxic to getting elected.

So-called “Liberal Republican” Officeholders and “Liberal Republican” Candidates are limiting Republican Party success, not the number of Liberal Republican Party members. The Republican party must do what the Democrat party does to increase the possibility of success, invite all citizens to join the party (the “big tent”) but select candidates that adhere to the party platform.

Education and Enlightenment

The best way to reveal politicians that are less than honest concerning their political views is a comprehensive voting analysis that reveals their votes on the measureable issues of the day.

A coming issue of the Dakota Beacon will reveal such a study. If you wish to see that the upcoming Dakota Beacon featured study is printed in every large ND newspaper, read the next Dakota Beacon.

]]> 2009-11-05T19:07:48+00:00 BRENT MCCARTHY: IGNORANT POLITICIANS OR EVIL INTENTIONS? http://dakotabeacon.com/entry/brent_mccarthy_ignorant_politicians_or_evil_intentions/ It’s conceivable that our politicians really are this ignorant and incompetent, but at some point we must consider the possibility that they know what they are doing, this is by design and they are evil.

There will be no cost of living increase for Social Security. Its going broke and has no trust fund. The Socialist Democratic Party also wants to gut Medicare to start up socialized medicine. What government gives, it eventually rations and then takes away as money dries up and political priorities shift.

 

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Freddie and Fannie are bankrupt. Socialized medicine was bankrupt before the debate began. The welfare state is bankrupt. Democrats are using Marxist tactics like blaming the chaos they created on freedom, capitalism, and the ‘rich’.

Self reliance and capitalism are the best poverty fighters tried by mankind. Capitalism works whenever it’s allowed to flourish. Democrat welfare programs have created only poverty through dependence on government and unemployment through higher taxes. Welfare has destroyed families and ravaged entire communities while keeping people in poverty for generations (hitting minorities the hardest). The Democrat’s war on poverty is looking more like a war on self reliance, prosperity and freedom.

 

We enjoy it when politicians pander to our envy of the wealthy and attack profits and so-called ‘corporate greed’. It sounds justified when politicians promise to take the ‘excesses’ of the wealthy to provide us with the necessities of life. Mass murdering liberal idols like Lenin, Mussolini, Hitler, Castro and White House favorite Mao Zedong (who murdered 30 million people) rose to power on this promise. They promised to eradicate poverty if everyone traded freedom for dependence.

 

Margaret Thatcher said it best ‘The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money’.  In the end, the political elite gain wealth and power while all the rest live in abject poverty and misery with no way out. Dependence on government inevitably leads to bondage and destitution. Socialism has failed all but politicians every time it’s been tried. The promises politicians make with the wealth and property of others are never kept.

 

It’s conceivable that our politicians really are this ignorant and incompetent, but at some point we must consider the possibility that they know what they are doing, this is by design and they are evil.

]]> 2009-11-04T18:32:06+00:00