I suppose it makes sense to put together a list of folks who have been vindicated and the people one might argue have been implicated as a result of the conviction of former North Dakota Workforce Safety and Insurance CEO Charles "Sandy" Blunt last week.  The list of vindicated people first:

• Ed Christensen.  The criminal case against Mr. Blunt did NOT start because the State Auditor's Office sent their conclusions to the state's top law enforcement officer, Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem, who then turned it over to his investigators at the Bureau of Criminal Investigators, who conducted a criminal investigation.  The case happened because one citizen read about the findings of the State Auditor's Office, thought it stunk to high heaven of crime, and he did something about it when nobody else -- not the Governor, not the Attorney General, not ANYBODY -- would or did.  That person -- Ed Christensen -- has been vindicated.  Watch Blunt and his surrogates go after Ed.  They will.
  

• The staff at the North Dakota State Auditor's Office.   The hard-working civil servants working in the State Auditor's Office have been attacked, viciously, by the right-wing-nut-o-sphere of North Dakota, while -- as it turns out -- they were right; Blunt was abusing public dollars.  Twelve citizens heard all the evidence and so now it is indisputable.  Even if Blunt appeals and prevails on some "technicality," (I love that word) it'd be hard to suggest he didn't do anything against the law.  The Auditor's said he did, the prosecutors said he did, and 12 citizens say he did.  The people on staff in the Auditor's office have been called names and been mocked (by WSI's former board chairman) and been accused of being part of some mysteriously vast left-wing conspiracy.  Gordy Smith, Jason Wahl and company have all been vindicated.
  

• The Burleigh County States Attorney's Office.  Dick Riha and his team have been accused of bringing trumped-up charges against an innocent man, with claims there was no evidence supporting the charges.  From internal WSI documents, it appeared as though a plot was being formulated by WSI insiders -- one of whom is a Burleigh County Commissioner -- and others to run Dick Riha out of his job.  In the face of crazy right-wingers who insisted the case against Sandy Blunt was completely unsupported by fact or law, TWELVE (or thirteen? if the thirteenth juror happened to agree) jurors found Sandy Blunt guilty.  Riha, Cynthia Feland and Lloyd Suhr have been vindicated.
  

• The Whistle-blowers.  Remember that there are four people who sought protection from Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem because they were trying to stop criminal conduct at WSI and feared they would be retaliated against?  Remember that!?!  Well, they were all retaliated against.  They were all fired.  Of course WSI came up with "pretextual" excuses for firing all of them -- using a high-priced, out-of-state non-expert "expert" to help them cover their asses -- but anyone with half a brain will recognize that they were all retaliated against.  Kay Grinsteinner, Jim Long, Billi Peltz and Todd Flannagan have all been vindicated.

• About 70 Former WSI Employees.  If you get your news from the mainstream North Dakota media-ocrity, you don't know that about 70 solid state employees have left WSI during and/or because of the Blunt administration, the Indvik/Gjovik Board, and WSI's other "leadership."  Some of those former employees -- believe it or not -- stay in touch with each other, much like other groups of people who survive hostage crises, wars and other traumatic events.  Some of the vindicated former WSI employees testified in the Blunt trial.  Don't feel too sorry for Blunt and company; they have made many of those former WSI employees out to be "disgruntled" and have done all they can to smear many of their good names.  Many of those people left WSI because they couldn't or wouldn't continue doing what they were being asked to do to injured workers and/or state dollars with a clear conscience.  Those people have been vindicated.

• Some Democratic legislators.  Some (though certainly not all) Democratic legislators have been beating the "fix WSI" drum for about 10 years. They have effectively thrown up roadblocks to Republican proposals for WSI "slush funds" and other irresponsible spending and further oppression of injured workers.  Some of them called for Sandy Blunt's dismissal back in December of 2006.  If they had had their way, Blunt would have been gone from WSI nearly a year earlier, and the state of North Dakota would have saved hundreds of thousands of dollars in salary and severance paid to Sandy Blunt.  They have been doing all they can in the face of a right-wing media-ocrity and a GOP super-majority in the legislature and our ineffective Governor and Attorney General, and they have been vindicated.

• Joel Heitkamp --Radio talk-show host Joel Heitkamp, who also happens to fall under the category of "Democratic Legislators" -- has been maligned by the right-wing nutjobs for questioning Blunt's conduct -- and the conduct of others -- at WSI.  Sandy Blunt and his posse at WSI obviously spent way " target="_blank" title="YouTube">too much time criticizing Heitkamp and not enough time looking at what Sandy Blunt was doing.  Joel has been vindicated.

• Me -- I have been vindicated.  Trust me on this.

• Governor John Hoeven.  Somebody tell me, please, one thing John Hoeven has done to support either the investigation or the prosecution of Sandy Blunt or anybody else at WSI.  Tell me, please, one thing.  He and his staff have been nothing but obstructionists, using smoke-and-mirrors tactics to try to make it look like they've been doing their jobs.  They sought Bob Indvik's resignation, but only after I told them they had to and I made the evidence indisputable.  Hoeven did none of the heavy lifting.  He let Bob Indvik and the WSI Board coddle the law breakers at WSI without doing anything about it.  He claimed he had no power to do anything, but then ultimately claimed credit for demanding Indivik's resignation.  (Which is it, John?)  He appointed Bruce Furness -- who has no experience in insurance or workers compensation -- to serve as a figure-head, while allowing the Sandy Blunt Gang to continue to run the show at WSI.  Hoeven officially has ultimate control over WSI, as of a couple weeks ago, but has done nothing to clean house over there.  As far as I can tell, he hasn't even exercised the authority we gave him to appoint a WSI director.  Hoeven is an ineffective "leader" and a cowering enabler.  Hoeven has been implicated.

• Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem.  Wayne Stenehjem is supposed to be North Dakota's top law enforcement officer.  Whistle-blowers went to him, seeking protection from the retaliation they expected to be forthcoming from Sandy Blunt and his cronies at WSI.  Stenehjem sat back and watched as all of those people were retaliated against.  He did nothing to make sure a proper investigation of the allegations in the whistle-blower complaints ever happened.  He played no known roll in ensuring WSI followed the law.  It could be argued that he and his office participated in some of the retaliatory conduct.  That's troubling.  Thought he has provided occasional, marginal help in forcing WSI to comply with open records laws, he's done little to impose sanctions or otherwise deter WSI's records people from stonewalling legitimate requests for information.  Stenehjem has been implicated.
  

• The WSI Board.  (All but two of them.)  Remember what happened when Sandy Blunt was charged criminally?  The WSI Board (minus 2) rallied around Blunt, insisting he had done nothing wrong.  They actively demonized and blamed everybody but Sandy Blunt and his clan at WSI.  First they blamed the civil servants in the State Auditor's Office.  Then they blamed the North Dakota Democratic-NPL Party.  Then they blamed overzealous Democratic (ha!) prosecutors at the Burleigh County States Attorney's Office.  They blamed Joel Heitkamp.  They blamed disgruntled former WSI employees.  They blamed the whistlblowers.  They blamed the left-wing media.  They blamed me.  They blamed injured workers.  They were enablers to criminal conduct.  They adopted their "Carver Model" of governance that allowed them to say, "We have no idea what Blunt is doing at WSI, but we approve of all of it, because it's profitable."  That -- Blunt thought -- gave Blunt cover and gave the Board cover and created a situation where there was no accountability.  For anybody.  Then they gave Blunt over a hundred thousand dollars in (what I'll call) "vacation pay" while Blunt was on paid leave most of last year.  Then they gave him another $140,000 (plus) in severance money.  They (or some of them) deserved to be charged along with Blunt.  They have been implicated.  

• Some Executives and Managers at WSI and One Doctor at MedCenter One -- They know who they are.  So do we.  They're the people who have engaged in illegal, unethical, irresponsible and/or criminal conduct on behalf of WSI (a state agency) along with Sandy Blunt. They've covered up for him and his cronies.  They've attacked critics of WSI.  They (or some of them) had one of the organizers of the Initiated Measure followed by WSI investigators.  They (or some of them) were involved in organizing secret drops of materials in the offices of the media.  They were obstructionists when I (and others) requested records, but handed them out freely (literally freely) and with reckless abandon when Blunt and various WSI apologists asked for them.  They had secret meetings during business hours with legislators and chamber of corruption leaders.  They've engaged in letter-to-the-editor (type) writing campaigns.  They've done it in a calculated, systematic, organized way.  Some of them also snuck provisions into Sandy Blunt's separation agreement that allowed Blunt to seek MORE public money, and did so behind the backs of the WSI Board.  They have been implicated.
  

• Republican Legislators.  Google this phrase: "The ultimate responsibilty for what goes on at WSI rests squarely on the Legislature."  GOP legislators joined in on the fun with the WSI Board, blaming, excusing and enabling.  Accusing and denying.  Meeting in smoke-filled rooms and strategerizing.  They know who they are and they have been implicated.

• North Dakota's Right-Wing Media.  The Fargo Forum (and other Forum Comm newspapers) had one writer who wrote critically about WSI and Blunt.  When he did so, the right-wing Forum Comm owners shut him down (or at least it looked like they did for a while).  The Bismarck Tribune has been incurious and ineffective when it comes to writing about Blunt and WSI.  Tribune writers have done little or nothing to expose problems in the criminally-operated agency.  The Minot Daily and Williston Herald reprint AP stories, and that's about all.  Stories about the corruption at WSI have nearly universally started right here on NorthDecoder.com and been copied by North Dakota's media-ocrity only after it became clear the stories were legitimate and everybody "in the know" in (and sometimes out of) the state was talking about the stories.  North Dakota's media has been lazy, incurious and -- at times -- has played defense for WSI and state government leaders who have dropped the ball.  The media has been implicated.

• Right Wing Know-It-All Bloggers like Tom Heuerman and Rob Port.  These tools joined in and served -- knowingly or otherwise -- as shout-box operators and apologists for Blunt, his WSI Board, the Republican legislators and other WSI crime-defenders.  Without ever bothering to look into the facts or evidence, these clowns have called the Blunt case things like a "politically motivated witch hunt" and argued the indictments were "ridiculous" and that the people who pursued them were "embarassed when the charges" were dismissed (erroneously).  Those of you who've been reading this blog and its predecessor for a long time know Rob Port had a personal financial stake in WSI's operations and has little or no credibility when talking about WSI or much else.  After all, Port's the kind of tool who would argue Blunt "deserved" his $140,000 severence package because he "didn't do anything wrong."  Port's problem -- or his problem regarding WSI -- is that his primary source of information seems to have been discredited right-wing news rag publisher Steve Cates.  These people all claim anyone who criticized Blunt's huge jack-pot severance package were engaging in "political grandstanding."  You have to wonder whether they're now going to blame the 12 citizen jurors for being a part of the grandstanding, partisan, witch-hunting persecution of Sandy Blunt.  These guys -- Heuerman and Port -- are tools and don't even see it.  They've been implicated.

• Dakota Beacon Excreter Steve Cates.  This character, you'll recall, snuck his way onto the agenda for the Burleigh County Commission -- which included his beloved, dear friend WSI executive Mark Armstrong -- with the intention of coming across as " target="_blank" title="Cates">some kind of expert on what was going on at WSI.  He thought he was going to put on some kind of dog-and-pony show, to argue that Burleigh County States Attorney Dick Riha was somehow abusing the trust of the county by pursuing the charges against Blunt.  I watched the video of this.  Cates got the smack-down and bad.  When Blunt was found guilty by 12 Burleigh County citizens, Cates lost any credibility he had (assuming he had any credibility after renegging on the promise he made on the TV news that he would pay anybody $100,000 if they could prove he had written anything that was erroneous, or a misrepresentation or a lie in his Dakota Beacon right-wing news rag.  [click here, here, and here to see how this turned out for Cates.])

This is a partial list.  I'm sure there are more.  Help me think of who they are.

********************

I'd like to talk to some of the jurors.  I suspect their stories might be interesting.  If any of the jurors happen to stumble upon this website, I'd ask them to please send me a note at editor at northdecoder daught com.  I'd like to visit with you.

Comments (39)

What the Heck said:

	Wow Couldn't have summed it up better. Amen.
	report abuse vote down vote up

December 23, 2008
Votes: +1

Truth said:

	Hoeven I do agree that Hoeven has done little if anything and has continued to look the other way about WSI so as not to upset his fellow Republicans, but in fairness to him, it was his office who contacted the HP to look into the DOT issue.
	report abuse vote down vote up

December 23, 2008
Votes: -5

What the Heck said:

	Yes, however... It was also WSI personnel who threw the HP trooper out of the building and what consequences were there? NONE.
	report abuse vote down vote up

December 23, 2008
Votes: +3

S. Fred Wood said:

	Implicated I got one, I got one. I'd put Dave MacIver and the ND Chamber of Horrors (for injured workers) toward the top of the manure pile. As long as we have the lowest rates in the nation I don't care what the CEO does. Congrats on your vindication Chet. Sometimes good things take a long time. Hope you are not done celebrating yet. Justice is a good thing.
	report abuse vote down vote up

December 24, 2008
Votes: +5

iwofndadvocates.com/blog said:

Congrats Chad, and all that kept the fight for justice up!! That is an excellent summary of the issues and the different players in this even. Each one taking a side, and standing to their commitments, and how those commitments affected them. You have the WSI/Blunt backers whom have all they way through kept working their stories to work in their favor, changing any little line to fit for the justice they need. Others whose support was shown through the silence they gave the issue. (Not mentioning any names here ok Hoeven!) Then you had the "Flat Out Truth" which the story never changed, the issues were always the same against WSI, and Blunt. The reason the accusations never had to change is that they were all true. That alone gave Vindication to everyone who kept going at this, and seeing this from the first step all the way through. There is no better justice then a jury, and they will see all sides of the issue then see the truth. Everyone that spoke out about WSI, the executives, the Governor, certain legislators that defended WSI/Blunt and some of the Board Members. All of you that did not give up on this issue and the charges are vindicated. Although now I do not believe that we should say good job and walk away, as I don't think Blunt should take the brunt of this alone. There are many that stood behind Blunt telling him just what to do, and he did it. I believe many of these people are still in need of being brought out, and face some sort of reprimand too. There is still alot to do, and alot to make right with the injured workers, and others that have been abused by these people. Wouldn't you agree Rick Berg,Kaiser,Wald, Ruby, Hoeven,Wayne Stenehjem, and we cant forget the Chamber of Commerce. Thanks Chet for being the truth and the voice that the main stream media was to scared to be, maybe someday the news media in this state might get a clue what is real news, or how an investigative reporter actually does their job.

report abuse vote down vote up

December 24, 2008 | url
Votes: +7

Jerry Becker said:

Thanks Chet, I do feel vindicated My name is Jerry Becker. I worked for WSI for 21 years in the Loss Prevention Department. My job was to help companies set up safety programs to help prevent employee injuries. I also evaluated thousands of workstations throughout the state of North Dakota to ergonomically improve people's environment in the workplace. I was a person that cared about the welfare of people in North Dakota. I am just one of the 70 people that was totally screwed over and forced out by Blunt and company. I was one of the lucky ones - I got to retire - many left without a job to go to - some took a year or better to find another job. To say former WSI employees have formed a communications network within themselves would be an understatement. Blunt's effect on all of us was traumatic, to say the least. I attended quite a few of the board of directors' meetings over the past few years. Their political direction and bias towards Blunt disgusted me. I was in on the ground floor on Measure #4 and was one of its sponsors - something I will always be proud of. I drove my car in parades and collected signatures at the ND State Fair. The passage of the measure was extremely satisfying. In 2006, an email was sent to all WSI personnel that contained the salaries of all the employees at WSI. The information that was sent was public information - anyone could ask for it. The purpose of the message was to expose the atrocious salaries Blunt was paying his executives, nothing more. Blunt went ballistic - he head-hunted until he was convinced I had sent the email. He instructed his Fraud Department to confront me in my own home - something they knew was totally wrong and refused to do it. At this time, I was retired. Blunt wanted State employees to go into the private sector to interrogate a private citizen. Jodi Bjornson, the head of the Legal Department evidently told Blunt and Romi Leingang that it was legal to tap into the Department of Transportation drivers license division to obtain my photo. My photograph was shown to Mandan Library and Post Office personnel in an effort to identify who sent the email. Mark Armstrong, WSI Communications Executive, verified this attempt through an email sent to me. This whole exercise was illegal but since their attorney thought it was legal, it was OK in the judicial world. Only one problem - I didn't send the email. They realize it now, but now it's too late. WSI employees, past and present, are more than aware of the illegalities and unethical actions of WSI management. The State Auditor's office is also aware of this, compliments of many former WSI employees' testimonies. All of the Ohio imports have thankfully been removed. However, this agency still has management people that have to be removed. They are the cancer that still affects the stability of WSI. There are still many former WSI employees that are still banded together to help remove this cancer - if nothing more, for closure. Over 70 good and productive employees were sacrificed because Blunt was trying to make a name for himself. I guess that's the corporate world today. It's a damned shame and a hell of a waste of talent and good people.

report abuse vote down vote up

December 24, 2008 | url
Votes: +15

--- said:

Good post, Jerry! Thanks. That post says a lot. For some of us former WSI employees who got caught up in this WSI circus unfairly and who lost our jobs unfairly and were forced out, it will take a long time for us to have closure to this. The hurt runs deep and we lost a lot. It wasn't just a job. I don't think the public will ever fully understand just what really went on at WSI and yes there is a bond between some of us formers. Some of us went through some very bad times together while at WSI. Our families suffered as well. No worker should ever have to go through what some of us went through at WSI. That conduct by some staff members still on board at WSI is the final item that needs to be addressed. The Governor or his new appointed leader needs to terminate several employees who have contributed to the extensive problems at WSI. Only with these people gone from WSI can WSI have a fresh start.

report abuse vote down vote up

December 24, 2008
Votes: +7

Old school. said:

	Vindicated. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks confirmed criminal behavior at WSI vindicates one Patrick Springer. God bless, and Merry Christmas to all!
	report abuse vote down vote up

December 24, 2008
Votes: +5

doug d.riley said:

Just What Just what is it going to take for the FEDS to come in and kick down the door of wsi-over 70 fired employees-hundreds of seriously injured workers wrongfully denied benefits-millions of dollars in surplus-safety grants that can't be traced-states auditor is not allowed in the wsi building-when they are allowed their only to look and see if everyone is smiling-hoeven sends in the highway patrol to investigate(that was a joke all by it's self)and wsi just laughed at them an told them how the investigation was to be run-the chairman of the wsi(indvik)was busted and the board pays his cell phone bill an more than likely the fuel bill to an no-one even looks to see how long this has been going on??blunt offers 150,000 to the firemans acc. but only gives them around 74.000 wheres the other half and why did 15.000 have to be returned when they said it was legel??why does berg get several safety grants in one year??why does the chamber of horrors pick the board members-whys the chamber of horrors even involved with wsi??and the last question of the night is....why does anyone want to be on the wsi board after all this??????...$$$$$$$$$.....

report abuse vote down vote up

December 24, 2008
Votes: +2

iwofndadvocates.com/blog said:

The 70 employees WSI let go are injured workers too. Being involved in injured workers advocates against WSI does not mean just the injured workers who have been injured on the job, and applied for benefits. Injured workers are also those that worked at WSI, and had their lives and their family's lives destroyed by a few at the top trying to make WSI an environment of intimidation. This was unfair to the good employees who were forced out at WSI, so not only were your lives destroyed but your spouses, and children’s lives were destroyed by WSI executives with big egos. My thoughts and prayers go out to all the injured workers WSI has destroyed; injuries from this agency can be physical, emotional, and financial. Injured workers are a group, and I believe that many of the 70 employees lives destroyed by WSI are also injured workers. God bless all of you, and let us keep up the fight for your justice, as well as the other injured workers whom have been denied "sure and certain relief".

report abuse vote down vote up

December 24, 2008 | url
Votes: +2

In the Know said:

It's not over Dear Chad, Jerry Becker, whistleblowers et al, Thank you for all the hard work and sacrifice for doing what the State of North Dakota and the North Dakota media should have done. I really appreciate it. Sadly, WSI is far from fixed and most of the main perpetrators are still there being enabled and encouraged by the political powers that be. The WSI situation has jolted me out of my naive belief that North Dakota is relatively corruption free. If we can see the mind bogglingly corrupt WSI perpetrators and Republicans dodge any serious challenge to their power, what other corruption can thrive in other state agencies? How much corruption does there need to be for a corrupt state agency to be exposed and the corruption remedied? I am looking forward to seeing the process and outcome of the lawsuits brought by Jim Long and Todd Flannagan (Peltz and Grinsteiner?) against WSI and many of the corrupt WSI perpetrators. Can you imagine what we will find out if these cases go to trial? While I wish Jim and Todd would not have to go through the struggles of trials like this, I do want to see WSI exposed more in court. I also want the whistleblowers to win huge awards from WSI, Jodi Bjornson, John Halvorson, Sandy Blunt, Bob Indvik, Rob Forward, and Tim Wahlin. Thanks again to everyone who is trying to do what is right.

report abuse vote down vote up

December 25, 2008
Votes: +8

doug d.riley said:

It Seems It seems that one of the most dangerous people that the injured workers of this state have is at it again-rick berg-he is going to do his damndest to shoot down measure 4 or to over-ride it by passing a new bill that will keep the state auditor out of the wsi building-now i'm sure that just about all the pro wsi groupies are jumping up and down while peeing all over themselves but for all the other good folks of North Dakota their wondering why anyone with half a brain would want to pass such an outragest bill-it makes one wonder just how deep is berg really into wsi or better yet how deep is wsi into rick berg-for an organization that has had i think 6 audits until they found or should i say paid two that would give them a favorable outcome-for an organization that is millions of dollars over surplus-for a organization that has been under fire for a few years for mistreatment of wsi employees as well as horrible treatment of injured workers,that refuses to comply with open meetings laws,that seems to have undocumented safety grant customers except rick berg who seems to have gotten quite a few in the pass couple of years??? now just why would you think that he doesn't want wsi to be audited any more-damn just how stupid does he think we are-he's swimming in the middle of the sewer pond-berg you can bullshit some of the people but you can't bullshit all the people-just where's the RICO act?????

report abuse vote down vote up

December 27, 2008
Votes: +1

Chet said:

It's funny... WSI has been through a record number of internal auditors that have had very short tenures at WSI. If I recall correctly, one was even the niece (?) of a state legislator. Seems WSI has a problem with being audited, whether from within or without. In the auditing world, I think they call that a "big red flag." What's the Republican solution for fixing a corrupt state agency that can't withstand a simple audit?!? Pass a law making the agency LESS accountable. No more audits. Audits in Wonderland.

report abuse vote down vote up

December 27, 2008
Votes: +4

What the Heck said:

	Setting the stage? Is Berg and Company laying the groundwork for taking WSI private? Then they can argue how WSI will be regulated by the Insurance Commissioner so they won't need audits? What the hell is wrong with this state that people can't see through what is going on. It's beyond ridiculous. And yes, WSI has fired 2/3 of their internal auditors. That's quite a track record.
	report abuse vote down vote up

December 27, 2008
Votes: +3

iwofndadvocates.com/blog said:

If..... In North Dakota......if it is illegal...pass a law to make it legal....if an illegal act is exposed by an audit....make audits illegal.....if it is illegal to hand out public money....design a program to make it legal to pass out "Safety Gifts"......If it is illegal to hold private meetings.....use personal cell phones to make it legal.....If it is illegal........Come to North Dakota throw around a bunch of money at the ones that can make it legal.....and it will soon be legal in North Dakota. What a great state we live in, the one place they will openly try to change laws to cover their own butts.....although I won't mention names of people trying to do this if that is ok with you Rick Berg.

report abuse vote down vote up

December 27, 2008 | url
Votes: +3

Truth said:

... The plan all along was to make WSI either a private company or a mutual insurance company. The plans were in the works during the last legislative session but with the audit and Blunt charges it was put aside because it was too polarizing. Now look for things to heat up again. Remember Berg and his crew had people from NV and one other state in to talk about privitazing WSI. My concern with the privatizing is that ND employers would still be required to buy from WSI only. I say if they want to privatize it fine, but then allow for competition (I think that would mean changing the ND constitution) otherwise you would have a government entity bascially creating revenue for a private business. Look for the Republicans to try to sneak this by the people of ND. That has been Pat Traynor's goal all along (and he had John Halvorson running people off at WSI who don't agree with that).

report abuse vote down vote up

December 29, 2008
Votes: +1

doug d.riley said:

The Other The other state was West Virgina,when this was brought up i called w.v. an asked them if when they went private from their states workmen comp did they stay with the bills that the workmens comp had,they told me No and said that when they went private that they had to change just about all the bills that the state had made for workmens comp-so if you go by what these states did all you have to do in this state is just flush the top half of wsi-the board and all the bills that rick berg an his cronies have made against the injured workers in the last ten years down the toilet and you will have a great workmens comp.....

report abuse vote down vote up

December 29, 2008
Votes: +0

Big Jake said:

... Right on Chet----and all who have continued to speak out on this subject. Vindication is a wonderful thing----however, what happens from this point on is what is important. A plan to privatize is most likely---might get some traction. The good ole boys still have a lot of covering up to do. The whistleblowers lawsuits offer the best chance of getting more of the facts out. It remains to be seen if the docile North Dakotans will ever be willing to set denial aside and demand good government. Hasn't happened yet. As an interesting aside, I have heard more union bashing in the past 90 days than in the past 10 years. An unorganized work force will never achieve adequate pay----just can't happen.

report abuse vote down vote up

December 29, 2008 | url
Votes: -1

Thoughts said:

To Doug Be careful what you wish for!!! The process to mutualize both W.V and Nevada was done only because both funds were so far in the red there was no chance to bring them back. Berg and his committee only brought in people who would talk about how good it was for their state. The man from Nevada also told the committee that labor was in favor of the change, that was not a true statement, as I know for a fact that Nevada labor groups fought for two sessions to NOT ALLOW the change to take place. If you think there is any way the laws will change in the workers favor, you have not attended enough of those committee meetings! I am well aware that changes need to be made, this IS NOT one of them. How would you like to have Rick Berg as the CEO of WSI???

report abuse vote down vote up

December 29, 2008
Votes: -1

doug d.riley said:

To Thoughts To Thoughts;Thanks for the advice ,i'm fully aware of what will happen but it was funny that out of the blue,berg pops out and cries privatization,you have to remember just who your dealing with(BERG)chairman of wsi-he would be doing this for only two reasons-reason one would to be a private business that would not fall under the states rules-to have surplus as high as the sky could go with no audits(reason two)is a diversion to pull the heat away from wsi an himself-bergs in the hot seat as we write and he's trying to paint different pictures for everyone in order to slide out the back door or to stall an give him and his cronies enough time to hide everything,as for me i'll try to expose this scum sucker for what he is-berg and his cronies are trying very hard to pass bullshit bills that all they will do is let them off the hook,then they can go right back on their merry little way and start relining their pockets(berg) doesn't like me but the feelings about the same because i don't care for scumsuckers that stand there an smile all the while knowingly that the money that their getting comes off the bloody hands an backs of seriously injured workers,so in my opinion that makes them the lowest forum of human feces......

report abuse vote down vote up

December 29, 2008
Votes: +0

What the Heck said:

Conolly & Ilk It was Conolly who first laid the groundwork by including the recommendation to have WSI regulated by the Insurance Commissioner. Who did he meet with? The Governor's office, Repuglicans, a token Democrat or two, a couple labor reps, and virtually all of WSI's upper eschelon. Remember, this was the GOVERNOR's review (and one could say, HIS consultant). Does anyone believe this was a coincidence????? No way.

report abuse vote down vote up

December 29, 2008
Votes: +2

My Opinion said:

Thank You! I would like to say THANK YOU to Chet and everyone who have worked to helped expose what was/is going on at WSI. I am a former employee at WSI who was forced to leave because I would not tolerate the unethical behaviors and illegal actions of the Executives at WSI. While I thought I had moved beyond the trauma of WSI, Sandy's conviction has caused me additional healing and peace. As someone who unsuccessfully tried to stop the unethical behavior at WSI years ago, I know standing up to WSI and those politically connected with the organization is far from easy. If it were not for the persistence of Chet and many others, no one would be aware of the illegal and unethical behaviors of those in power at WSI and around the state; and without awareness there cannot be change. While I know there are others besides Sandy who still need to be brought to justice, I am thankful that at least he has been held accountable for some of the things he did while leading WSI. Thanks again to everyone for your tenacity and tremendous effort in helping the truth to be told!

report abuse vote down vote up

December 31, 2008
Votes: +3

I have issues said:

	Crackhead letter to the Dickinson Press I think this lady was on crack when she wrote this letter... http://www.thedickinsonpress.com/articles/index.cfm?id=18912§ion=Opinion
	report abuse vote down vote up

January 02, 2009
Votes: +0

What the Heck said:

	... Even Armstrong could put together a better letter than that. Good grief. Sophia must be a member of the crazy right-wing nut club.
	report abuse vote down vote up

January 02, 2009
Votes: +1

doug d.riley said:

	if this if this woman was so concerned about blunt why didn't she warn him and his cronies before they moved hear-why didn't she expose the government corruption before blunt took the ceo job,why is she just crying about this now along with the rest of the pro-wsi scum....
	report abuse vote down vote up

January 02, 2009
Votes: +0

Truth said:

	... Its quite interesting that neither Rob Port, Steve Cates or Scott Hennen have felt the need to comment on Blunt's conviction. Perhaps they are too busy getting the feathers out of their mouth from eating crow that they don't have time to comment, or perhaps they knew all along the type of person Blunt was/is and are embarassed for sticking up for him.
	report abuse vote down vote up

January 02, 2009
Votes: +1

doug d.riley said:

	To Truth To Truth,i believe these three einsteins are more than likely working on blunts appeal,i'm sure cates will come up with the opening statement.....
	report abuse vote down vote up

January 02, 2009
Votes: +1

Tom Heuerman said:

Right Wing Blogger I feel honored to make the "implication" list of whoever the writer of this ignorant article is. To be confused as a "right wing blogger" shows the confusion of the writer. My strong support of Barack Obama and many commentaries published in The Forum gave me the label of "resident leftist" by one letter-writer. I'd consider myself a "truth-teller" rather than a political standard-bearer. The real winner in the Blunt case is the Myopic thinking of North Dakota provincialism. Those who use the law to obstruct organizational change and to deal with petty political issues not worthy of such attention can now crawl back into the darkness of Plato's Cave.

report abuse vote down vote up

January 04, 2009 | url
Votes: -3

Truth said:

... Tom, to get a full understand of your change in heart about Blunt (you have indicated you were critical and now support Blunt) I have a few questions. 1. Were any of the numbers from Indvik's cell phone to you in either your personal or business numbers 2. Do you support management by tyranny? 3. Do you think its OK to continue to break the law after you are told about it (ie. testimony from the retired Risk Mgmt director) rather than try to change the law? 4. Do you agree with Blunt's tactics about trying to hunt down and threaten/harass/intimidate former employees (whom he thought sent a LEGAL email but he was wrong on every picture he pulled). Do you agree with managment by fear? 5. Do you agree with the attack the messenger tactics by Blunt and the WSI board on the audit report? Do you agree with the sworn testimony of Blunt to try to blame others about the negative audit while taking no responsibility himself. Its easy to sit and criticize North Dakotan's when you yourself live in MN and have no stake in the issue at ND. Who got to you and convinced you to change you mind? I have dealt with Blunt on a daily basis and know how he really is, you have probably only had converstions with his supporters and formed your opinion (which you are entitled to) about Blunt as a person but not as a manager. I do notice you don't deal with the real issues of the guilty verdict, rather you deflect to something by blaming others which is typical of Blunt/WSI supporters. What responsibility does Blunt have in his own downfall?

report abuse vote down vote up

January 04, 2009
Votes: +7

What the Heck said:

Respect your right to an opinion Tom, however... Can you please explain how the law was used to obstruct organizational change??? Even if it were true there was a grand conspiracy by a handful of current WSI employees and a lot of former employees and they somehow had the power and influence to force the BCSA's office to prosecute this crime (EVEN IF), are you suggesting it's okay to break the law in the name of change? Just what organizational change was Blunt aiming for that justified breaking the law? Improved morale? You can't even justify that argument with results, morale under his leadership was pathetic. Blunt surrounded himself with yes men. That was his downfall, not the law.

report abuse vote down vote up

January 04, 2009
Votes: +2

iwofndadvocates.com/blog said:

Tom I am not sure your conspiracy theory will be all that you think it should be, and that not all things are, as they seem. Then again, I have met people that still believe they have been abducted by aliens, and had implants put into them…although that is another conspiracy theory. Then again, with your far-fetched ideas, you could have an implant in you too from the space aliens. Ok now for reality, I believe Tom you should possible do an open records request for all the information on Blunt, read through all the complaints, and then read different articles written by ex-employees of WSI, just to name a few references. Read it all with an open mind, not as if you were one of Blunts flunkies, you might then really see the issues. Although I will not hold my breath waiting!!!!!

report abuse vote down vote up

January 05, 2009 | url
Votes: +1

nimrod said:

	government we have a government of laws, not of men. No man may place himself above the law, regardless of the "rightness" of his motivation or his goals. The law does not apply only to those whom you disagree with.
	report abuse vote down vote up

January 05, 2009
Votes: +1

I have issues said:

	Blunt wants vindication too... ... Bismarck Tribune Online says... http://www.bismarcktribune.com/articles/2009/01/05/news/update/doc49623c82a22e8957894799.txt
	report abuse vote down vote up

January 05, 2009
Votes: +0

What the Heck said:

	Blunt's request So how likely will it be Romanick throws out the conviction? I wonder how the jurors would feel and on what basis it should be thrown out? Wefald tried that already.
	report abuse vote down vote up

January 06, 2009
Votes: +0

I have issues said:

	just ask Pickett... It has been done in civil cases but I am not sure about criminal cases. Chet? any insight? Here is the Pickett v. Tyson thrown out verdict... http://www.competitivemarkets.com/news_and_events/press_releases/2004/6-16-04PRpickett.htm
	report abuse vote down vote up

January 06, 2009
Votes: +0

iwofndadvocates.com/blog said:

... Blunt wants the charges dropped? Are you kidding me? This man has such an ego that he would just do the same thing over again somewhere else if he is just let go. Every trial that I have ever known has usually gone ahead because the defendant refused to take a plea bargain that was offered by the prosecuting attorneys office. If Blunt was not offered this, it would be something that I would call as a rare case. I think Blunt was offered this but refused, and decided to go to trial thinking there could not be a jury in this state that could convict him. Well I guess he was wrong, and now wants a re-play on the trial with only the judge deciding rather then a jury of his peers. If the judge were to just drop these charges it would just make a mockery of the justice system in North Dakota, and invite other white-collar criminals to set up shop in North Dakota. We can only hope that Judge Bruce Romanick refuses this request, and proceeds with the sentencing hearing. It is time for the corruption in this state to know that there is a penalty for your actions. Although Blunt might have one "out" if this request is turned down. Blunt may have an opportunity to reduce his sentence if he were to offer up some others that might have been involved in this illegal act. This could range from WSI executives, Chamber members, WSI Board members, and even some Lawmakers. Now if I was Blunt I would want the smallest sentence possible, no matter who else was taken down to get that smaller sentence.

report abuse vote down vote up

January 06, 2009 | url
Votes: +1

a reader said:

Wayne is off to Rome. AG Wayne Stenehjem and two other counterparts will be participating in a weeklong conference in Rome to discuss how Italian authorities fighting organized crime and other issues. http://www.kxmc.com/News/393327.asp In December 2008 USA Today named North Dakota as the most corrupt state in the nation. AG Wayne Stenehjem responded in a letter to USA Today stating “North Dakota regularly leads the nation with the cleanest and most honest government officials in the country, just as it does with the lowest crime rate and a quality of life that is off-the-charts high.” Is this trip a misuse of public funds?

report abuse vote down vote up

June 22, 2009
Votes: +3

Truth said:

	... Where is the issue on Blunt asking to have the charges dropped? Haven't heard much on this, he could have done his community service by now and this can all go away.
	report abuse vote down vote up

June 23, 2009
Votes: +1

doug d.riley said:

	when are the people of this state going to wake up,the ag going to rome,whats wrong with calling in the FBI.it seems that have done pretty good in taking down the mob,and i do'nt remember where they went to rome,maybe when the ag gets back we can buy him the series of hawii five o.....
	report abuse vote down vote up

June 24, 2009
Votes: +1

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment Preview