The Holmberg files: the conviction is done; the questions are buried.
A 45-year Republican state senator is in federal prison for traveling to Prague to sexually abuse children. His close friend, the state attorney general, deleted the voicemails. And more than a year after the sentencing, the Trump Justice Department won't release the witness-interview transcripts.
The crime is adjudicated and not in doubt. What this page is about is everything around it — an obstruction finding against the late attorney general, documented communications with associates, and a Freedom of Information Act request the DOJ denied by calling the files a private matter. We grade the hard facts as facts. And we are careful with the living: several associates were interviewed, none has been charged, and each denies any knowledge of the crimes — we carry those denials in full. The question we pose, and do not answer, is the one the sealed transcripts would help settle: who knew what, and when.
What this page argues
Ray Holmberg spent 45 years in the North Dakota Senate, one of the most powerful Republicans in the state. In March 2025 a federal judge sentenced him to 10 years — more than three times the guideline range — for traveling to Prague roughly a dozen times to pay for sex with adolescent boys. That much is settled: he pleaded guilty, and the Justice Department announced the sentence itself.
The unsettled part is the circle around him. The state's current attorney general has said his predecessor and Holmberg's close friend, the late Wayne Stenehjem, “obstructed” the investigation by deleting voicemails — including one in which Holmberg said, “Wayne, this is my burner phone… I'm in big trouble. Don't tell anyone.” State investigative files documented emails between Holmberg and associates. Federal agents interviewed several of those associates. And when The Forum asked for the interview transcripts under FOIA, the DOJ's Criminal Division refused, calling their release an “unwarranted invasion of personal privacy” with no “overriding public interest.” We grade the conviction, the obstruction finding, and the records refusal as facts, and we carry every living associate's denial. The thesis we pose — that withholding the files after a guilty plea protects unanswered questions more than it protects anyone's privacy — is exactly that: a question, graded SOME SMOKE.
Books that go deeper on this story. Links are Amazon affiliate searches — buying through them supports the work at no cost to you.
The same investigation, restaged one beat at a time. Step through it here, or present it fullscreen.
The Holmberg files.
A 45-year GOP state senator is in prison for traveling to Prague to abuse children. His friend the attorney general deleted the voicemails. And the Trump DOJ won't release the interview transcripts.
The record, claim by claim
A 45-year Republican state senator is in federal prison for traveling to Prague to sexually abuse children.
FACTRay Holmberg served 45 years in the North Dakota Senate and chaired its powerful Appropriations Committee. He resigned in 2022 after reporting tied him to a jailed defendant who traded in child sexual abuse material. He later pleaded guilty to traveling to Prague from 2011 to 2016 for illicit sexual contact with minors; prosecutors said he made roughly 14 trips through 2021 and stayed at a brothel catering to men seeking commercial sex with adolescent boys. On March 26, 2025, U.S. District Judge Daniel Hovland called the conduct 'egregious and despicable' and imposed the 10-year statutory maximum — more than three times the guideline range. He is held at the Federal Medical Center in Rochester, with a projected 2033 release. This is adjudicated fact, not allegation.
More than a year after sentencing, the Trump DOJ refused to release the witness-interview transcripts.
FACTThe Forum requested the FBI/federal interview transcripts from the Holmberg investigation under the Freedom of Information Act on October 10, 2025. In a denial letter dated August 20, 2026 — nearly a year later — the Justice Department's Criminal Division refused, writing that 'disclosure of law enforcement records concerning an individual could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy,' and that the files lacked an 'overriding public interest.' The interviews at issue include those of Holmberg's associates. The case was closed; the man had pleaded guilty and been sentenced. The records were withheld anyway.
The state's attorney general says his predecessor — Holmberg's close friend — obstructed the investigation by deleting voicemails.
FACTNorth Dakota's current attorney general, Drew Wrigley, has stated that his predecessor, the late Wayne Stenehjem, 'obstructed' the child-sex-crime investigation into his close friend Holmberg by deleting voicemails. A prosecutor described one deleted message in which Holmberg said, 'Wayne, this is my burner phone,' and, after a search of his home, 'I'm in big trouble. Don't tell anyone.' Stenehjem told federal investigators in December 2021 that he had spoken with Holmberg only once, but phone records showed three calls between them around the interview. Stenehjem died in January 2022. The obstruction finding is the sitting attorney general's own characterization of the record.
State files documented emails between Holmberg and an associate — who condemns Holmberg and denies any knowledge of the crimes.
FACTNorth Dakota Bureau of Criminal Investigation documents included emails between Holmberg and former UND Center for Innovation CEO Bruce Gjovig discussing young men — including one in which Holmberg asked what Gjovig thought of his 'twink,' Gjovig replied that the person was 'too young for me, but nice,' and Holmberg wrote back, 'No one is ever (too) young… rememb(e)r Prague.' The existence of the emails is documented. What Gjovig understood or knew about Holmberg's crimes is NOT established, and we do not assert it: Gjovig has denied any knowledge of criminal activity, condemned Holmberg's conduct, and said through counsel that he 'has been an easy mark for political and media attacks.' We record the document and the denial together, and stop there.
Federal agents interviewed a circle of associates — and the ones who are living deny any involvement or knowledge.
FACTHomeland Security and federal agents interviewed several people in Holmberg's orbit, and fairness requires their responses in full. Fargo businessman and UND Alumni Association chair Jim Poolman was questioned for about 30 minutes in September 2023 about Holmberg's 'associates and activities'; he stated: 'I was not involved, knew nothing of his heinous activities and have done nothing illegal. I never received any communication, electronic or otherwise, that would indicate that he was conducting himself in such a manner.' Others contacted by Holmberg reacted against him: Nick Hacker said an explicit 2016 email from Holmberg was 'unsolicited' and cooperated with law enforcement, and UND law professor Paul Traynor, whom Holmberg approached for legal advice in November 2021, declined to discuss it, citing attorney-client privilege. Being interviewed is not being accused; none of these individuals has been charged, and we name them only to record the denials the reporting contains.
Why seal the files after a guilty plea and a maximum sentence? That is the question — and it is not yet answered.
SOME SMOKEHere is the line we won't cross. Withholding witness-interview transcripts after a defendant has pleaded guilty and received the statutory maximum does not protect a child — the crime is adjudicated. What it plausibly protects is the set of unanswered questions the transcripts might address: who else knew, who was warned, and how a powerful legislator operated for a decade without consequence. We do not assert a proven cover-up, and we acknowledge that FOIA privacy exemptions are routine and that some redaction of victims and third parties is legitimate. But the 'overriding public interest' the DOJ says is absent is precisely what a closed case involving a convicted public official, an attorney general's obstruction finding, and a documented circle of associates would seem to supply. So we grade this SOME SMOKE: a real, unanswered question about what the sealed files hold, not a proven conspiracy.
Where the evidence is strong, and where it stops
- The conviction is bedrock. Holmberg pleaded guilty; the DOJ announced the 10-year sentence. Nothing on this page depends on inference about the crime itself.
- The obstruction finding is on the record. It is the sitting attorney general's stated conclusion about deleted voicemails, not our speculation — and the “burner phone” message is quoted by a prosecutor.
- The associates are not the accused. Documented emails and interviews are not charges. Every living associate denies knowledge of the crimes, and we carry those denials rather than implying guilt.
- The cover-up is a question, not a verdict. The withholding is a fact; its purpose is contestable. We pose who-knew-what; we do not declare a conspiracy the record hasn't proven.
Transparency is cheapest to refuse when the case is closed
A convicted 45-year lawmaker, a “burner phone” plea to the state's top prosecutor, and a paper trail that mentions Prague are not private family matters. They are a record of how power, friendship, and silence operated inside one of the longest Republican careers in North Dakota history — which is exactly why it belongs in Too Big to Jail: the principal went to prison, but the machinery around him did not, and the files that would show how it worked are sealed. It also sits against the movement's loudest theme. The same politics that built a “groomer” panic around teachers and librarians produced this case and then watched a Republican attorney general delete the evidence — the projection our reporting keeps documenting. And it is a straightforward who-knew problem: withholding the interviews after a guilty plea and a maximum sentence does not protect children. It protects the remaining questions about who knew what, and when.
Questions worth taking seriously
Are you accusing the associates of a crime?
No. Being interviewed by federal agents, or appearing in someone's emails, is not being charged with anything. Bruce Gjovig and Jim Poolman both deny any knowledge of Holmberg's crimes, and we quote their denials in full; neither has been charged. We document what the record contains — emails, interviews, denials — and we do not assert what anyone other than Holmberg knew or did. The only adjudicated criminal here is Holmberg.
Isn't it normal for the DOJ to withhold records citing privacy?
Privacy exemptions under FOIA are common and often legitimate — victims and uncharged third parties deserve protection, and we say so. But FOIA also requires weighing that against the public interest, and this is a closed case: a convicted public official, a sitting attorney general's obstruction finding, and a documented circle of associates. That's a strong public-interest case, which is why the DOJ's claim that there's no “overriding public interest” is worth questioning. We're not saying the refusal is illegal — we're saying it's contestable, and the questions it leaves open are real.
If you are named on this page
If you are named on this page, or are a party materially affected by the claims made here, and you wish to respond, correct the record, or add context, use the Contact page. Responses are published verbatim alongside the original claim, with the sender identified and the date of receipt. The channel stays open for the life of the page.
This site aggregates and grades a record that other outlets and primary sources have already put on the record. Every FACT-graded claim above is sourced to court filings, government reports, sworn whistleblower disclosures, published investigative journalism, or named-source statements. The citations are the accountability mechanism; this section is how you get on the record too.
The record
- U.S. Department of Justice — Holmberg sentenced to 10 years (official press release)
- InForum — “DOJ not releasing interview transcripts in Ray Holmberg child sex abuse case”
- InForum — Stenehjem “obstructed” the Holmberg investigation by deleting voicemails, AG says
- InForum — the “burner phone” / “I’m in big trouble” voicemail (prosecutor)
- Grand Forks Herald — federal interviews of associates; Poolman, Gjovig, Hacker, Traynor (with denials)
- The Dickinson Press — the Holmberg–Gjovig emails (and Gjovig’s denial)
- North Dakota Monitor — Holmberg sentenced to 10 years
- Bismarck Tribune — Stenehjem “obstructed” the investigation, AG says