Minnesota's two Attorney General candidates held a recent debate moderated by MPR. Schultz debated his "thoughts" and agenda. Ellison, as incumbent, knows the range of requirements of the office, which have coalesced over decades. Ellison would have liked to have added a few criminal law specialists to his payroll to aid county attorneys when they request assistance from his office, hence, he sought legislative funding to do so, (it being county attorneys who charge and prosecute crimes on info brought to their offices by investigating sheriffs or police officers, with the AG uninvolved unless expressly requested). Mary Kiffmeyer led other MN. Senate Republicans, holding the majority, in denying additional AG funding for Ellison to expand staff. Packing the AG office with a vastly higher number of new prosecutors, spending for that, as Schultz says he'd do, what benefit at all would that bring? Schultz is taking a hot-button issue and jiving everybody who'll take him seriously in what basically reduces to fear-mongering. When facts are examined, his agenda of spending on a trove of new AG lawyers, as crime-busting prosecutors, is a pipe dream fantasy Schultz is trying to sell that makes no real sense.

Clearly the headlining of this post is judgmental. The question for readers, what hangs together, what does not?

First, reporting - Pioneer Press reported, this link. First observation, Schultz tried an amateur "Gotcha" which, in reporting, was a self-inflicted wound:

Schultz asked Ellison whether he knew the name of the special agent in charge of the Minneapolis FBI office, which is overseeing the investigation. He didn’t give Ellison a chance to answer before naming the agent as Joseph Thompson. Schultz suggested that Ellison had failed the test and was “missing in action.” But Schultz failed his own test. Thompson is not the head of the FBI office; he’s a federal prosecutor on the case. The local special agent in charge is Michael Paul.

Besides being a dumb mistake, there is more to this. Schultz confuses function. Investigators investigate criminal events in hope of identifying, apprehending and detaining suspects. They solve a crime or fail to. Prosecutors are uninvolved bystanders until results of a successful investigation has happened. Surely things such as added liability, such as a felon in possession of a handgun, or discovery of contraband can be side benefits, but first a perp must be identified and confronted. 

 Prosecutors analyze and act on investigation results. Their job is to neither imperil an ongoing investigation, nor to try to co-opt the investigative function, for which they are not trained. In his attempted Gotcha Schultz showed his confusion over functions.

Back to PiPress:

Democratic Attorney General Keith Ellison defended his record on crime Friday against aggressive attacks from his Republican challenger, Jim Schultz, who charged that the state’s top prosecutor has failed in his duty to keep Minnesotans safe.

Ellison — a former congressman, state legislator and criminal defense attorney — countered that the 36-year-old Schultz, a hedge fund lawyer who has no courtroom experience, lacks the background needed to be Minnesota’s chief legal officer.

Crime, abortion rights and the Feeding Our Future scandal — a $250 million food program theft that has raised questions about whether state officials responded properly to it — dominated their spirited debate on Minnesota Public Radio, their first of four before the Nov. 8 election in what’s seen as a tight race. Here are some key takeaways:

CRIME

Crime has been Schultz’s signature issue, and he renewed his claims that Ellison supports “defunding the police,” something Ellison has long denied.

“That is extraordinarily wrong, and it is reckless, and it has helped deliver extraordinary crime to our communities,” Schultz said.

While Ellison supported a Minneapolis charter amendment last year to replace the police department with a loosely defined department of public safety, which voters rejected, he insisted he never supported cutting funding for police. He said he even asked the Legislature for “millions of dollars” to fight crime but was thwarted by key Republicans.

“If I’m supposed to be this ‘defunder,’ I must be the worst one ever because I am seeking more resources for law enforcement,” Ellison said.

Schultz called Ellison’s response “complete lies” and added, “Everyone knows that the Minneapolis charter amendment was focused on defunding and deconstructing the Minneapolis police force.”

What the ballot measure said and commentary on it:  Strib, FOX9, MPR, Ballotpedia.

PiPress earlier published:

 The Attorney General’s Office currently has three attorneys working in its criminal division and Ellison said the current staff has been unable to meet the demand around the state.

The criminal division is a backstop when local prosecutors need help to bring a criminal case. State prosecutors can’t step in without an invitation from those local attorneys, under state law.

The $1.8 million boost would allow the division to hire seven additional prosecutors and two administrative assistants, Ellison said.

“It would put us in a position where we don’t have to triage and tell people ‘no,'” he said.

Minnesota House Democrats have included the additional funding in their supplemental budget proposals, meanwhile, Senate Republicans have opposed the extra funding, saying that Ellison’s office got a budget increase last year.

“The attorney general had plenty of time and resources to shut down businesses last year, I think he has enough time and resources to prosecute crime now,” Sen. Mary Kiffmeyer, R-Big Lake, said, referring to the office’s enforcement of COVID-19 related state regulations.

Senate Majority Leader Jeremy Miller, R-Winona, on Thursday said members of a legislative conference committee would determine whether to approve the money during negotiations in the next two weeks.

Three Twin Cities metro area county attorneys flanked Ellison during his news conference and said their greater Minnesota peers didn’t have the staffing or resources that they did to bring complex criminal cases.

“I stand here in support of my colleagues who are doing the great work that they do in greater Minnesota,” Anoka County Attorney Tony Palumbo said. “They are fighting the battles that we in the Metro also have to face and I also have to fight but we have many resources to be able to do that. They do not when they have a major case.”

[Italics added.] Upon request of the Hennepin Country Attorney Ellison's office successfully prosecuted Derek Chauvin for his murder of George Floyd. Despite Republicans squeezing him via denial of his budget request to expand criminal staff.

More from the originally cited PiPress report on the debate: 

Schultz also accused Ellison of using abortion to distract from an alleged scheme that federal prosecutors say stole at least $250 million from a program to feed children during the pandemic. The nonprofit at the center was called Feeding Our Future. Nearly 50 people have been charged with federal crimes. But questions remain about what state officials including Ellison knew about the magnitude of the fraud, when they learned of it and whether they could have stopped it earlier.

Schultz said Ellison should have used the power of his office before $250 million in taxpayer money went out the door. Federal authorities have recovered about $50 million so far.

Ellison hailed the investigation as a successful collaboration between state and federal authorities. He noted that three of the defendants have already pleaded guilty. He repeated assertions by him and Gov. Tim Walz’s administration that the FBI asked them not to stop the flow of money in order to protect the secrecy of the pending investigation.

“Because of the collaboration, we believe that this whole thing has been pulled out root and branch,” Ellison said.

Schultz accused Ellison of lying about his role. “The FBI does not tell victims of theft to send out $200 million to people we know to be thieves,” he said.

Note, federal prosecutors, in the first sentence. It was a federal program, and the crimes are federal offenses. It is offensive Schultz, a hedge fund lawyer only, saying "The FBI does not tell victims of theft to send out $200 million to people we know to be thieves." He was not privy to any FBI discussions with State officials, and nothing, zero, zippo in his background bolsters his having any knowledge of how the FBI operates. Both candidates should hash out details, instead of repeating responses already made. The FBI likely would deny any statements about a pending investigation, so, Schultz slings mud, Ellison was there and conversed with federal officials about best steps as things evolved.

Moving from things said back and forth in the recent debate, facts exist, facts matter.

CBS News, Sept. 2021 -

Unsolved Crime Rate Increases In Minneapolis, With 88% Resulting In No Arrests

Yes. Schultz could put a thousand super-sharp prosecutors on an unlimited payroll and yet the truth is that crime stopping involves crime solving, and if Schultz were wanting to make an impact there he would run for mayor, or county attorney, or sheriff - because that is where bolstering the process would work. He's grandstanding and not looking at the effectiveness of those who are endorsing him, whereas Ellison wants better professionalism and accountability.

Police Tribune, July 2021 - stating -

Police chiefs from the Brooklyn Park, Crystal, Maple Grove, Plymouth, and New Hope police departments described the spike in gun violence that they’re seeing in their communities to KMSP.

Violent crime in Hennepin County was up 24 percent last year from the prior year, and it skyrocketed up to 36 percent in the last three months of 2020.

But when you take Minneapolis proper out of the calculations, crime was still up by 19 percent in the suburbs, KMSP reported.

[bolding added]. Ellison is attacking handgun straw buying presently, in litigation against Fleet Farm's negligent gun sales practices. Schultz has no handgun regulation proposal because - who knows? Schultz is dismissive of Ellison's litigation, but has no real promising answer to the situation. He just complains.

Moreover, despite crime, crime, crime from Schultz, and that is handgun crime, be it murder or car jacking at gun point; the fact is handgun suicide is a greater cause of death than handgun homicide. Handgun proliferation, the Schultz answer? He has none.

Strib debate coverage included:

When Ellison talked about sitting with crime victims, Schultz recalled being with his sister after her north Minneapolis home was hit by gunfire. Those sorts of gun crimes are "exactly" why his office is suing Fleet Farm for negligently selling guns, Ellison said.

Schultz had repeatedly referred to the Fleet Farm lawsuit as an election-year stunt.

Ellison responded, "It's not politics, man, it's real and going upstream with guns is the right thing to do."

Gun retailers are the source. Squeeze better responsibility, get better results. It is something Schultz could have advocated himself, but now that Ellison is already there, throw stones. Again, Schultz is not even saying stop-and-frisk, which would at least propose something concrete instead of being Chicken Little about the sky falling. Bloomberg proved in New York City that stop/frisk fails, but at least it is a proposal; and Schultz offers no real on-the-street answer. None. A hundred new prosecutors; a thousand angels, would make no difference if crimes happen and go unsolved.

Aside from year-old statistics; Strib, weeks ago: 

Task force urges Minneapolis to be more aggressive against violent crime

The city has solved just 38% of homicides and 12% of carjackings, according to a new report 

By David Chanen Star Tribune

September 9, 2022

Again, the people endorsing Schultz are not solving crimes. Not apprehending. That is not to say solving crime is easy, because it is not. What it is saying is that Schultz is not too dumb to know the score, but he is not running for mayor or sheriff, so he is not saying more money and reformed thinking is needed in law enforcement; he is running for a job another holds and is doing better than a hedge fund lawyer could, so he is saying more prosecutors. 

More cops, better trained, is the answer, but that answer gives Schultz no mud to sling.

Rand has ideas. Individuals have ideas. Schultz likely has none, while certainly he offers none. Except, more prosecutors. 

Throwing more lawyers at anything has seldom if ever improved anything, much less solved how to solve and reduce crime.

When Schultz criticizes recidivism or "soft on crime" he's redoing the Bush revolving door ad. HOWEVER - If he thinks judges are too lenient, that they impose inadequate sentences or set low or no bail, then he should be running to be a tough-on-crime judge.  But the Bush revolving door ad taught, blame the guy you are running against, never mind the logic of who to blame and where you should be running, given your complaint. The fact is the Minnesota Attorney General does not set bail or terms of detainee release. Judges do. Police solve and apprehend. County Attorneys plea bargain and convict and recommend sentences. 

The Attorney General is not a cop. Not a prosecutor, but an administrator mainly focused on civil law involvements of state departments and officials, and also strongly focused on consumer protection - where the truth is you're far, far more likely to be cheated in a contract than shot to death on a steet; and the criminals that fuck over consumers are more numerous with money as an incentive so that deterrence can work there; quelling rational optimizers such as consumer cheaters, as with Fleet Farm being sued being notice to Gander Mountain and Cabala, notice that can rein in a money-driven motive to relax attention and/or to push boundaries, in a way making more money than if reined in and deterred. 

Deterring somebody seventeen years old carrying a stolen handgun and getting into anger-management problems with other similarly situated armed hot-heads at bar break is a far harder thing to accomplish; so put the effort into what works. Quelling the Gangsta outlook is also hard to deter; while legalizing recreational marijuana and taxing and regulating it as with liquor would take one of the incentives out of a lot of Gangsta posing and activity.

How can you deter ones who post on Facebook pics with a fanned out hand of hundred dollar bills or showing off a handgun while giving a hand sign, when prudent criminals would never do that? 

Schultz surely does not know how to deter. He likely has never seen such online demonstrations. He probably does not use Facebook. Making hedge fund money is something where a Facebook account is of no help.

LAST: With time having passed, viewing one or both of two interviews online of four Mpls. Police Union board officials is worth the effort, (here and here) now, when they say - We do not train. We do not investigate. We grieve some disclipline not all. We negotiate pay and other terms of employment. We do not set policy.

Mayor Frey, after effort to defeat the Public Safety Amendment, is moving to do something about police-community relations issues. That's positive. 

Schultz is throwing shit at his opponent over things where the problem he hinges his campaign on is headquartered far and away from his opponent and the office his opponent holds while he is shooting for it; and the facts line up proving that. 

Demagoguery, big time, with no answer but to criticize and bloviate and reinvent repackage the equivalent of the Bush 1988 revolving door ad hardly suggests capability if put in office. He is a dangerous man. His approach is reckless.

____________UPDATE____________

Strib's image. Body language.Who's smug? Who's not? What's your reaction?

click the image to enlarge and view better

  ___________FURTHER UPDATE___________

Axios has unusually lucid coverage.

FURTHER: Strib, covering responses from the two candidates in August, during the State Fair. Schultz's response as reported on Abortion has been reconstituted since then.