darn those near-sighted deer: South Dakota AG hit and run case reveals more facts
Because not wanting to be accountable for perhaps something more felonious like manslaughter is so on brand for Republicans.
The detectives confront him with what they know, starting around 1:10 and building through 1:15 https://t.co/JSVjUYabLB
— Helen Kennedy 🌻 (@HelenKennedy) February 24, 2021
This video clip of the SD AG initially being asked about the glasses found in his car – that, it turns out, belonged to the victim – could be from Law and Order. The detectives ask about glasses after a string of questions about whether he was drinking or on meds. pic.twitter.com/RR6ldtAQMj
— Helen Kennedy 🌻 (@HelenKennedy) February 24, 2021
Washington (CNN)
South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg is under pressure to resign after he was charged last week with three misdemeanor counts in the accident that led to the death of 55-year-old Joseph Boever.
“They’re Joe’s glasses. So that means his face came through your windshield,” an investigator tells Ravnsborg, who lets out an obvious gasp and says, “I wondered about that.”
The South Dakota House of Representatives has begun impeachment proceedings against state Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg over an incident in which he struck and killed a man with his car. @CarsonAndLloyd https://t.co/CCQ5ZXMVod
— Courthouse News (@CourthouseNews) February 24, 2021
South Dakota House lawmakers have begun impeachment proceedings against AG Ravnsborg, who is facing misdemeanor charges for striking and killing a man with his car. https://t.co/ht4zqmSByh
— NBC News (@NBCNews) February 24, 2021
Apparently Ravnsborg also was one of the 17 GOP AGs who attempted to challenge 2020 election results in GA,MI, WI, and PA with a nonsense suit.
Joining challenge to 2020 presidential election results
On December 8, 2020, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, where certified results showed Joe Biden defeated Trump. Paxton, Ravnsborg,[84][85] and 16 other states’ attorneys general who supported Paxton’s challenge of the election results alleged numerous instances of unconstitutional actions in the four states’ presidential ballot tallies, arguments that had already been rejected in other state and federal courts.[86] In Texas v. Pennsylvania, Paxton asked the U.S. Supreme Court to invalidate the states’ 62 electoral votes, allowing Trump to win a second presidential term.[87] Because the suit has been characterized as a dispute between states, the Supreme Court retains original jurisdiction, though it often declines to hear such suits.[88] There was no evidence of consequential illegal voting in the election.[89] Paxton’s lawsuit included claims that had been tried unsuccessfully in other courts and shown to be false.[90] Officials from each of the four states said Paxton’s lawsuit recycled false and disproven claims of irregularity.[91] The merits of the objections were sharply criticized by legal experts and politicians.[92][93] Election law expert Rick Hasen called the lawsuit “the dumbest case I’ve ever seen filed on an emergency basis at the Supreme Court.”[94][95] U.S. Senator Ben Sasse said the situation of Paxton initiating the lawsuit “looks like a fella begging for a pardon filed a PR stunt”, in reference to Paxton’s own state and federal legal issues (securities fraud charges and abuse of office allegations).[96] On December 11, the Supreme Court quickly rejected the suit in an unsigned opinion.[97]
