What Entities are Behind the Reckless Endangerment of Northern Minnesota and its Water Resources

Leave a comment

Duty to Warn

By Gary G. Kohls, MD – March 6, 2018


The wise blogger wrote:

Industry-controlled ‘science’ is not really science but a smokescreen to pave the way for products that may be harmful – but what do they care as long as they profit? There are many great scientists but there are also some who are willing to be hired to ‘prove’ that something doesn’t cause cancer, or that something is ‘safe’. You cannot trust the EPA, the FDA, or industry ‘science’.”


Here is an incomplete list of some of the culprits:

A) Foreign Mining Corporations (PolyMet, Glencore, Twin Metals, Antofagasta, etc);

  1. Minnesota’s Elected Politicians/Accomplices (both Corporate-influenced “Liberal” Democrats, and “Conservative” Republicans);
  2. Minnesota’s “Regulatory” Agencies that are Supposed to be “Natural Resource Protectors” (Including the DNR, the PCA, and the US Forest Service); and
  3. Most Area Newspapers; Most Area Television Stations; All the Area’s Chambers of Commerce; Minnesota Power (Electric Utility); the Trump Administration; Regional Labor Unions: and Dozens of Suppliers/Businesses that will Temporarily Profit from Supplying the Mining Industry While Simultaneously Risking the Permanent Poisoning of the St Louis River Watershed, Including Lake Superior

This column will point out and try to de-mystify some of the often-perplexing developments in the decades-long debate concerning allowing foreign mining corporations (which could justifiably be considered “Undocumented Aliens”) to invade water-rich northern Minnesota in order to extract our state’s non-ferrous metal deposits- for the selfish enrichment of its foreign shareholders and management, none of whom really care about the long-term consequences to the state’s precious water resources.

Everywhere in the world where copper mines have been dug and the poisonous tailing’s ponds have been installed, there has not been a single one that has not permanently polluted the ground water and the downstream watersheds, often catastrophically, see the list of 100 of them at . State of the art copper sulfide mines inevitably produce as an inevitable by-product sulfuric acid and many other toxic substances that poison the soil, air, ground water, nearby aquifers, lakes and downstream rivers, especially in water-rich environments like northern Minnesota. More


Toxic Copper Mine Tailings Ponds to be Located Upstream from the St Louis River and Lake Superior


Duty to Warn

 By Gary G. Kohls, MD


Requesting honest information from the Minnesota DNR, the Minnesota PCA and the US Forest Service regarding the latest PolyMet project permit application:

Please respond to the concerned folks to which this email has been cc’ed, all the details of the permit that the foreign corporation Glencore has submitted to the MNDNR, MNPCA, or US Forest Service concerning the establishment and maintainance of their enormously dangerous, potentially catastrophic, toxic tailings lagoon, an entity that seems to have been conveniently ignored by the media cheerleaders and even you regulatory entities.

I don’t recall seeing any permit application published for the eventual 250 foot high earthen dams that will hold back for eternity the tens of millions of cubic meters of poisonous liquid sludge that the copper/nickel/sulfuric acid mine will inevitably produce (and need to be stored).

Anybody with any awareness of the risks of the toxic metal and sulfuric acid recognizes that the tailings lagoon MUST be the center of discussion. So far it is rarely mentioned in the occasional news bulletins.

Every copper/nickel liquid tailings pond holds the 99.8% mine waste plus the liquids that is used to pipe the dissolved powder from the processing plant to the pond.

Every copper/nickel sulfide mine in the history of mining has leaked/leached poisons into the groundwater, onto adjacent lands and into the downstream environment. This happens at all copper mine sites that are located in watery environments such as northern Minnesota. More

David Rucki Commits Apparent Mortgage Fraud.


By Michael Volpe


The initial document which started this investigation was sent by Michael Brodkorb, who runs a blog dedicated to bad mouthing Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and anyone who supports her, to an Angie Young.

He sent it to Young because the initial document is signed A. Young and Angie Young is neighbors with Dede Evavold, a supporter of Grazzini-Rucki.


As his divorce was heating up, David Rucki engaged in blatant and brazen mortgage fraud.

According to the tract search, on June 3, 2011, the mortgage on Rucki’s Lakeville home was satisfied, meaning it was paid off, but inexplicably, his house was then foreclosed on- only to have him or his agents buy it back at auction every time- and sold at auction four times.

Rucki continues to own the property with numerous dubious and potentially fraudulent entries.

In the first case, Deutsche Bank Trust is listed as a brand-new mortgagor, the one providing the loan, on June 30, 2012.

On October 11, 2012, as part of a foreclosure, Deutsche Bank Trust was removed as the mortgagor in pen on the property and Wallingford Capital was written in instead.

Lawton King at Deutsche Bank said the loan was being serviced by Ocwen which provided this statement: “This loan is not in our system. We also checked different variation.”

Deutsche Bank, and their public affairs officer Lawton King, did not provide any further details on what happened to the loan.

According to the same document, Wallingford Capital then assumed this loan of $140,365 at 4.75%, an unusually low rate for a property bought at foreclosure, but David Rucki continued to remain in the property. Wallingford Capital did not return a message for comment.

The law firm Shapiro and Zielke was listed as handling the sale; their managing partner, Lawrence Zielke, issued this statement.

This was a public sale.  We do not control which party bids at sale.     I suggest you consult with your own real estate lawyer so counsel can walk your through this process.   I have nothing further to say on this matter.” More



1 Comment

Chuck Frank


(photo: Sweden on fire)

It wasn’t very long ago when President Obama created an agenda to usher in thousands upon thousands of immigrants from various war torn countries, of which many thousands were Muslims, yet only around 6% were Christians. While the horrors of war and terrorism ravaged Syria, the one-sidedness of refugee admissions and favoritism was allowed, all the while the main stream news(MSM), once again looked the other way and interestingly enough, so did Congress. But why? With that much spread between two very different religions, it is more than likely that there was an ulterior motive. Just start by connecting the dots.

As one delves deeper into the agenda, a person finds that various organizations in the U.S. have participated through the years with the influx of migrants.  Refugee status and admission to any country is presently determined by the United Nations. Most persons who enter the U.S.

refugee admissions program are identified and referred for resettlement in the U.S. by the U.N. refugee agency (UNHCR), or a U.S. embassy, or an approved humanitarian aid organization.

Christian charities that are part of the program also profit from Muslim refugee resettlements which also makes them largely responsible for the kind of program that was used during the Obama administration. Catholic Charities, Lutheran Social Services, and several other Christian organizations are profiting from lucrative contracts. Thus there is a huge incentive by charities to help place refugees into various cities across the U.S.  even when the refugees are not vetted properly. Mayors of various cities, through the years, were anxious to cater to these refugees as those city governments would be receiving state and/or federal money for the resettlements that would take place in their communities. More


An Open Letter to Minnesota AG:LPS/Black Knight consent judgement and to demand answers why LPS is not in compliance with the judgement

Leave a comment

Editor’s note:  In reference to the letter below

Black Knight Financial Services is an American corporation that provides integrated technology, services, data and analytics solutions to the mortgage and real estate industries. On January 3, 2014, Fidelity National Financial acquired Lender Processing Services “LPS”, renaming it Black Knight. Wikipedia


MN Attorney General Lori Swanson

445 Minnesota Street
Suite 1400
St. Paul, MN 55101-2131


Under the Minnesota Data Practices Act § 13.01 et seq., I am requesting an opportunity to inspect or obtain copies of public records in order to obtain information about the LPS/Black Knight consent judgement and to demand answers why LPS is not in compliance with the judgement.

As you know, LPS/Black Knight was ordered to remediate forgeries and assignments and to notify people affected by the robo-signing of documents.  There is no indication this has been done.  There are approximately 2 million fraudulent documents in the public record that don’t appear to have been remediated by LPS.  Although LPS was to issue corrective assignments- there is no proof this was done.

If there are any fees for searching or copying these records, please inform me if the cost will exceed $_20.00. However, I would also like to request a waiver of all fees in that the disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest and will contribute significantly to the public’s understanding of the MN Attorney General’s public support in combating the still prevalent overabundance of mortgage servicing, foreclosure and securitization fraud. This information is not being sought for commercial purposes.

I am looking specifically for these answers:

  1. Has your office been receiving quarterly compliance reports as required in the consent judgement?
  2. How many people in the state were impacted by LPS’s illegal practices to include fabricated notes and assignments, forged documents or unreliable documents created for the purpose of foreclosing?
  3. What percentage of the funds the state received from the consent judgement have been used to help citizens of the state? Please provide a distribution report of the allocation of these funds.
  4. Will future homebuyers be vulnerable if they discover their title is clouded by a prior fraudulent note, assignment, endorsement or allonge that was not remediated? Plans to remediate? How?
  5. How did the individual servicers comply with the consent judgement? What were their duties to comply?
  6. If you accepted money from the settlement, why was no follow-up done on the consent judgement to confirm that servicers and their attorneys were in compliance?
  7. Why are these fabricated documents still polluting the public records of this state?
  8. I hereby request copies of all quarterly reports and correspondence.

I would request a prompt response to this request.  If you expect a significant delay in responding to or in fulfilling this request, please contact me with information about when I might expect copies or the ability to inspect the requested records.

If you deny any or all of this request, please site each specific exemption you feel justifies the refusal to release the information and notify me of the appeal procedures available to me under the law.

Thank you in advance.


Tom Kibler


U.S. Marshals in Hot Pursuit of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki


Michael Volpe


The US Marshals have an operation to bring in Sandra Grazzini-Rucki.

Grazzini-Rucki, who is currently in hiding in an undisclosed location, revealed she recently learned details of the operation.

She said she’s been told the US Marshals are treating her as a dangerous fugitive.

Grazzini-Rucki currently has no warrant for her arrest and is not a fugitive.

As such, any operation to bring her in by the US Marshals- which among its mandates tracks fugitives- would be illegal.

This would not be the first time that the US Marshals have inserted themselves in her case and both times previously it was also illegal. More


Though the court has ruled Sandra Grazzini-Rucki too poor to pay for her own filings, her ex-husband’s attorney thinks she should pay for his.


Michael Volpe


Lisa Elliott, the long-time attorney for David Rucki, filed a notice for a taxation of costs- meaning she wants the other side to pay for the costs of filing- with the appeals court.

In her response, Grazzini-Rucki’s attorney, Michelle MacDonald explained to the court that her client is a pauper.

“Appellant, Sandra Sue Grazzini-Rucki, hereby objects to the taxation of costs and disbursements dated September 1, 2017,” MacDonald said in her response, “on the ground that: Appellant was granted informa pauperis status and is a pauper.”

By granting Grazzini-Rucki informa pauperis status the court has deemed Grazzini-Rucki too poor to afford to pay for her own filing fees and they are thereby waived; but that hasn’t stopped Elliott from demanding she pay for her client’s filing fees.

MacDonald, after receiving a $5,000 retainer in early 2013, has been working on Grazzini-Rucki’s custody case pro-bono; she was once forced to conduct part of a custody trial while handcuffed to a wheelchair.

The latest filing follows a similar filing by Elliott in late August asking the court which handled her client’s divorce to order Grazzini-Rucki to pay for all the filing fees- in excess of $3,000- she accrued in that court.

The series of events defy logic. More


Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: