-----Original Message-----
From: J. R. Graham <jrgraham@oricom.ca>
To: t2dxn5@sherbtel.net; service.1st@hotmail.com
Cc: ander151@umn.edu; etphilippifam@q.com; dmashak@aol.com; sueterryazbound@gmail.com; dzpark@nisswa.net; thabes@gvtel.com; Suzanne
Sent: Fri, Apr 16, 2010 6:16 am
Subject: CHRIS BARDEN
TO TERRY DICKENSON AND MIKE PUFFER: Before writing this letter, I wanted to sleep on the question which I am about to address. I have slept on it, and I am now firm in my sentiments.
Please note my correspondence with Ken Anderson which I have set forth below. I am perfectly sincere about what I have said. I think our best option for attorney general of Minnesota is Chris Barden. He holds a doctorate in psychology, and a Harvard law degree. He is licensed to practice law. Yet he is not merely an academic in the ivory tower. He has done solid work and made major advances in the field of exposing false evidence in cases of alleged sexual abuse of children when there was no such abuse at all. His big contribution is attacking the malpractice of mental health quacks who attempted to implant in adults false memory of sexual abuse during childhood. He got a major verdict in a malpractice case in which such wrongdoing was practiced. I have reviewed his work, and like what I saw. Cases of alleged children abuse one of those ares in which judicial misconduct has been particularly rampant and shameful.
When I was a county attorney, prosecuting such cases, I was heavily preoccupied in distinguishing between real guilt among those accused, from those cases which had been drummed up by fanatics and were founded on bad evidence. I paid a heavy political price for my concerns about distinguishing the innocent from among the guilty -- I was crucified in the press --, and I have no regrets about paying that price. i could not have lived with myself if I have put innocent men in prison for sex crimes they did not commit. So I understand what Chris is made of, having been through much the same experience myself. I believe he offers the best chance for the endorsement at the state convention, in the primary election, in the general election, and as our next attorney general. In fact, I think he has an excellent chance to defeat Lori Swanson who does not hold a candle to him in professional standing or political skill. If Chris is elected as attorney general, I think he will be in a position to accomplish more than I could. He is in his prime years, and I am past my prime, even though they can get a lot of work from me yet. I threw my hat in the ring, because there was nobody else with the right credentials and attitude. Well, now there is somebody else, and a giant, better than anybody else I have interviewed up to this point in time, including two law professors, two appellate lawyers, a retiring judge, a metropolitan area county attorney, and a former
U. S. senator. Politically, Chris is less vulnerable than I am to distractions irresponsibly created by the press, and he has fine stature. I was a little worried that he might be naive, but he is not. And he is prudent. One of his objectives is to join and support the suit by now fourteen attorneys general to strike down Obamacare which he clearly understands as a disaster for our country, and in this respect I am fully in agreement with him. I have already sketched out for him my ideas on why Obamacare is unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause, the 9th Amendment, and the 10th Amendment. He understands the underlying principles clearly. He would get an A answer on a bar examination or law school essay question in a constitutional law on Obamacare. I know, I have corrected a lot of law school examinations.
I have personally vetted Chris, and find no fault in his competence, integrity or sincerity. He is not cynical. He is one of us, a citizen politician. He will have his handlers, of course, as I would have had mine, and as everybody running for public office must have -- and handlers are always an annoyance for ordinary citizens --, but I think Chris knows himself, and he will not be led astray, nor do I see any tendency in him to get lost in self-importance. Humility is necessary to avoid abuse of power, like smelling salts or coffee to keep a man alert while driving at night. And Chris has unaffected, natural humility. I have offered Chris my assistance in the fields of constitutional law and history and in forensic science and medicine, in which fields I am competent to help him. It would be improper for him to make any promises to me, nor do I want any such promises, but we have a good working relationship, and respect each other, so I I may be able to assist him somehow or other in work that he and I both consider indispensable for the well-being of our country. Having said this much, my conscience is perfectly clear in endorsing his candidacy without reservation. I could be wrong in my assessment, because I am only a man. But I have forty-two years as a lawyer under my belt, and I have learned something about human nature during those years. I am betting on this fellow not to disappoint us, and consider it a safe bet. -- Jack Graham
----- Original Message ----- From: "J. R. Graham" <jrgraham@oricom.ca>
To: <ander151@umn.edu>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Polluriel détecté] Att'y general race...
> Ken, -- I am perfectly satisfied that Chris Barden is the most qualified > candidate with the best chance of taking both the endorsement and the > election. I believe that it is time for all of us to get real, and > support Dr. Barden. That's my message to all who have been kind enough to > support me, including yourself, and certainly to Senator Ortman. Thanks > for the information. But she really ought to remain in the Senate. It is > most undignified to tilt windmills when there is an urgent need to get > serious, as is true this year. I want to thank you for your confidence in > me, but I think that the welfare of our party and our country adjures us > to support Chris Barden. I know when I have met my match. I can do more > good supporting Dr. Barden, and offering him my assistance than I could > attempting to serve as attorney general myself. -- J. R. G.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: <ander151@umn.edu>
> To: <jrgraham@oricom.ca>
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 5:38 PM
> Subject: [Polluriel détecté] Att'y general race...
>
>
>> You are probably aware, Jack that there may be another candidate, if >> possibly a somewhat reluctant candidate, in State Senator Julianne >> Ortman; there is a draft Ortman movement afoot. I don't know if she's >> truly serious about this or not, it's possible her people want this more >> than she does I suppose....but in any case I passed your contacts on to >> one of her people in case she is interested in talking these things over >> with you and/or Chris Barden....assuming that isn't already happening. >> Just wanted to give you notice that it's possible your phone could ring >> or an e-mail could arrive from her.
>>
>> - Ken
>
Please note my correspondence with Ken Anderson which I have set forth below. I am perfectly sincere about what I have said. I think our best option for attorney general of Minnesota is Chris Barden. He holds a doctorate in psychology, and a Harvard law degree. He is licensed to practice law. Yet he is not merely an academic in the ivory tower. He has done solid work and made major advances in the field of exposing false evidence in cases of alleged sexual abuse of children when there was no such abuse at all. His big contribution is attacking the malpractice of mental health quacks who attempted to implant in adults false memory of sexual abuse during childhood. He got a major verdict in a malpractice case in which such wrongdoing was practiced. I have reviewed his work, and like what I saw. Cases of alleged children abuse one of those ares in which judicial misconduct has been particularly rampant and shameful.
When I was a county attorney, prosecuting such cases, I was heavily preoccupied in distinguishing between real guilt among those accused, from those cases which had been drummed up by fanatics and were founded on bad evidence. I paid a heavy political price for my concerns about distinguishing the innocent from among the guilty -- I was crucified in the press --, and I have no regrets about paying that price. i could not have lived with myself if I have put innocent men in prison for sex crimes they did not commit. So I understand what Chris is made of, having been through much the same experience myself. I believe he offers the best chance for the endorsement at the state convention, in the primary election, in the general election, and as our next attorney general. In fact, I think he has an excellent chance to defeat Lori Swanson who does not hold a candle to him in professional standing or political skill. If Chris is elected as attorney general, I think he will be in a position to accomplish more than I could. He is in his prime years, and I am past my prime, even though they can get a lot of work from me yet. I threw my hat in the ring, because there was nobody else with the right credentials and attitude. Well, now there is somebody else, and a giant, better than anybody else I have interviewed up to this point in time, including two law professors, two appellate lawyers, a retiring judge, a metropolitan area county attorney, and a former
U. S. senator. Politically, Chris is less vulnerable than I am to distractions irresponsibly created by the press, and he has fine stature. I was a little worried that he might be naive, but he is not. And he is prudent. One of his objectives is to join and support the suit by now fourteen attorneys general to strike down Obamacare which he clearly understands as a disaster for our country, and in this respect I am fully in agreement with him. I have already sketched out for him my ideas on why Obamacare is unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause, the 9th Amendment, and the 10th Amendment. He understands the underlying principles clearly. He would get an A answer on a bar examination or law school essay question in a constitutional law on Obamacare. I know, I have corrected a lot of law school examinations.
I have personally vetted Chris, and find no fault in his competence, integrity or sincerity. He is not cynical. He is one of us, a citizen politician. He will have his handlers, of course, as I would have had mine, and as everybody running for public office must have -- and handlers are always an annoyance for ordinary citizens --, but I think Chris knows himself, and he will not be led astray, nor do I see any tendency in him to get lost in self-importance. Humility is necessary to avoid abuse of power, like smelling salts or coffee to keep a man alert while driving at night. And Chris has unaffected, natural humility. I have offered Chris my assistance in the fields of constitutional law and history and in forensic science and medicine, in which fields I am competent to help him. It would be improper for him to make any promises to me, nor do I want any such promises, but we have a good working relationship, and respect each other, so I I may be able to assist him somehow or other in work that he and I both consider indispensable for the well-being of our country. Having said this much, my conscience is perfectly clear in endorsing his candidacy without reservation. I could be wrong in my assessment, because I am only a man. But I have forty-two years as a lawyer under my belt, and I have learned something about human nature during those years. I am betting on this fellow not to disappoint us, and consider it a safe bet. -- Jack Graham
----- Original Message ----- From: "J. R. Graham" <jrgraham@oricom.ca>
To: <ander151@umn.edu>
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Polluriel détecté] Att'y general race...
> Ken, -- I am perfectly satisfied that Chris Barden is the most qualified > candidate with the best chance of taking both the endorsement and the > election. I believe that it is time for all of us to get real, and > support Dr. Barden. That's my message to all who have been kind enough to > support me, including yourself, and certainly to Senator Ortman. Thanks > for the information. But she really ought to remain in the Senate. It is > most undignified to tilt windmills when there is an urgent need to get > serious, as is true this year. I want to thank you for your confidence in > me, but I think that the welfare of our party and our country adjures us > to support Chris Barden. I know when I have met my match. I can do more > good supporting Dr. Barden, and offering him my assistance than I could > attempting to serve as attorney general myself. -- J. R. G.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: <ander151@umn.edu>
> To: <jrgraham@oricom.ca>
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 5:38 PM
> Subject: [Polluriel détecté] Att'y general race...
>
>
>> You are probably aware, Jack that there may be another candidate, if >> possibly a somewhat reluctant candidate, in State Senator Julianne >> Ortman; there is a draft Ortman movement afoot. I don't know if she's >> truly serious about this or not, it's possible her people want this more >> than she does I suppose....but in any case I passed your contacts on to >> one of her people in case she is interested in talking these things over >> with you and/or Chris Barden....assuming that isn't already happening. >> Just wanted to give you notice that it's possible your phone could ring >> or an e-mail could arrive from her.
>>
>> - Ken
>
