newsobserver.com projects - Kris Bailey - Comments

Re: Ethics commission takes Merritt to court

MeckDeck — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 18:57:43 -0400

North Carolina has an Ethics Commission? Do Jim Black's unindicted co-conspirators know about this?

Re: Unethical Ethics Commission

FFC1304 — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 18:23:28 -0400

they cannot shed business as usual, because that's the way its been for 100+ years in Rawleigh. Crookedness and criminals run the show in Rawleigh, and everyone knows it now.

dont EVER vote for another NC democrat, they've RUINED our once great state!

Unethical Ethics Commission

ncflyer — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 17:10:52 -0400

It would be one thing to block tainted results from an investigation, but why fear an investigation? Incredible.

This is why I'm beginning to subscribe to the politics of a bumper sticker I saw on the back of an old pick-up in Texas. It said, "Don't re-elect nobody, not even your momma!"

When are people going to get tired of the arrogant, business-as-usual in Raleigh?

Re: What are they afraid of?

newsbaby — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:46:31 -0400

A couple of years, Isaac? Try a couple of months.

Some of the State Ethics Commission upper management is engaging in VERY questionable behavior. First they give preferential treatment to a member of a gubernatorial candidate's staff, then they fire an employee for making a factual notation in a log?! Something doesn't add up. Let's leave politics out of this and look at it objectively. The executive director and assistant director obviously have something to hide. If you can't see that then you are being blinded by partisanship...and this is coming from a hardcore Democrat!!

They should have to play by the rules like everyone else. Let's not forget what we should have learned from Jim Black's case. Whether he was investigated by a Republican auditor or not...the fact remains that he is GUILTY!

Yup, THAT state auditor!

Isaac136 — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:05:50 -0400

And this from an auditor!

Folks think that his investigation of the Ethics Commission would be fair and square? I sure don't.

Re: Ethics commission takes Merritt to court

zoobatmania — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:56:15 -0400

You mean this auditor?

The North Carolina Democratic Party would like to extend best wishes to State Auditor Les Merritt on the retirement of his side business.

Mr. Merritt announced in May that on June 30th he would end on the practice of providing investment advice to private clients.

This followed scorching public scrutiny after Mr. Merritt approved a press release advertising his public job to lure clients at an investment firm through which he and his son provide services. The state’s largest newspapers joined NCDP Chair Jerry Meek in 2005 in calling for Merritt to stop compromising his public job with ads featuring a coupon to receive a free hour of consultation services.

Merritt earns $115,000 a year, three times the annual income of the average North Carolina family. Now that Merritt has decided to stop moonlighting, maybe he could give the people of the state his undivided attention.

When we have a Democratic Auditor, Les Merit will be the first one investigated.

Re: What are they afraid of?

Isaac136 — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:40:38 -0400

Whether or not they have an ethics problem, they have good reason to worry about an "investigation" from an admittedly hostile agency with whom they've been engaged in a feud over the past couple of years. Under that circumstance, they should worry that even if they didn't already have an ethics problem -- one would be found.

Re: Ethics commission takes Merritt to court

FFC1304 — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:26:05 -0400

smellin more coverup here...

it is clear that the democrats do NOT like having a republican AUDITOR, especially with his great performance. they will do whatever they can to keep facts and truth from being exposed. it's obvious.

dont EVER vote for another NC democrat!

What are they afraid of?

AwakeReader — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:04:00 -0400

Seems like the Commission may think they have an ethics problem - or two.

Re: Spokesman's role

jerimee — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:25:13 -0400

To top it off, on June 19th, the same day that Les Merritt failed to justify even the smallest of his supposed concerns, he also incorrectly filed his own Statement of Organization for reelection with the Board of Elections.

Gary Bartlett's office had to contact him to ask him if he needed help filling out a one page form.

You can view the unsigned and incomplete form Merritt submitted here:
http://www.sboe.state.nc.us/cf_pdf/2007/20070619_54561.pdf

You can read more here:
http://ncdp.org/Les_Merritt_Incompetence

A distinction without a difference

Anglico — Sat, 23 Jun 2007 10:29:00 -0400

It's mind-boggling. Only in the black-is-white world created by George Bush could this distinction between intervene and influence be taken seriously.

Let's see.

You launch a full-frontal assault in the General Assembly to derail the consideration of a bill . . . but you don't intend to "influence" the vote on the bill?

I say again, Mr. Mears and Mr. Merritt should resign.

Re: Spokesman's role

dbaseman — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:57:13 -0400

It is important to note that Chris Mears, the spokesman who prompted the Auditor's actions to "impact" the Same Day Registration bill (H-91), was political director of the NC Republican Party as recently as 2006 and was involved there in his own scandal for telling GOP leaders across the state to send him directories of church members for use for GOP voter registration and GOTV work. (Google: Mears Republican Church Vote)

There's more on Mears, Auditor's actions, and other emails at:
http://southernstudies.org/facingsouth/2007/06/full-nc-voter-fraud-scandal-coverage.asp
One correction to this cited blog: Auditor Merritt does NOT deny he wanted to intervene in the Same Day Registration legislation, but he and Mears have repeatedly said they didn't intend to "influence" the vote on the SDR bill, a distinction that may be lost as more details come to light.

I appreciate the invitation, Greenlamp

Anglico — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 21:16:58 -0400

but no thanks. I'll write what I think needs writing wherever I think it might be useful.

More to the point, I'm not the one who is "making every thing a darned political statement." Mr. Merritt's blatant intrusion into electoral politics is reminiscent of too many other examples of attempts by Republicans to engage in voter suppression in other states. It's a familiar pattern and it deserves zero tolerance. Republicans know everything is on the line in 2008 and I believe they will stop at nothing to keep Democrats from getting veto-proof majorities.

And I daresay, Congress's approval rating is in the toilet for one reason and one reason only. Democrats don't have wide enough margins to get the job done. Republicans have obstructed every Democratic effort to bring accountability to government and they have circled the wagons around the corrupt and arrogant Bush White House.

I'm sure you don't think these issues are "political," and that's your prerogative, but I do think they are . . . and that's mine.

Re: Spokesman's role

greenlamp — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:43:34 -0400

I should be used to Anglico's blatant partisan hacking, but I'm getting kind of sick. Can you keep your comments on your blog blueNC and stop tainting Dome? If you wonder why congress' approval rating is 14% its because people are tired of both the "right-wing noise machine" and the "left-wing noise machine" making every thing a darned political statement.

Re: Spokesman's role

bskeels — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:26:47 -0400

Good work, please continue following up on the story.

We still do not have any sense of the genesis of the audit; whose idea was it, was it suggested by an outside party, did the Auditor's Office have any communication with an outside party (DoJ? National GOP?), and are there any records of any such communication (especially email)?

It has never made much sense that they would have come up with the notion of an audit of such an unprecedented nature on their own.