Final Observations and Conclusions on the Easley Hearings
What we can’t figure out is whether Scott Falmen’s testimony was intentionally complicated and confusing or if the subject is so complicated as to make it almost impossible to understand. Whatever the motive, Falmen’s testimony was clear as mud. Falmen is a smart man and did a great job for Democrats as Executive Director. His entire time as a witness was tedious as the Board was trying to get Falmen to admit something he wouldn’t acknowledge, until the Party’s lawyer started questioning him.
Democratic Party attorney Jim Cooney was trying to demonstrate the party had done nothing wrong but he may have unconsciously helped prove that donations going to the party are indeed designated for the benefit of a particular campaign, something Falmen spent a lot of time refuting. Cooney introduced an exhibit from the 2000 campaign showing Vinroot supporters had given the Republican Party money and, in turn, in-kind expenditures were made on behalf of Vinroot that roughly equaled what was donated. Cooney then asked Falmen if there was anything wrong with this scenario. Falmen stated there was nothing wrong with it or with similar donations to Democrats who were Easley donors. In one statement Falmen admitted that designated contributions and expenditures were a truth. Falmen tried to assert that he and the Party had total control over these circumvented funds and that he could have denied any requests for expenditures on behalf of a specific campaign, but could remember any instances when he had done so.
Tommy Hicks, Easley’s lawyer, shocked many by asking the Board to refer the matter to the Wake District Attorney. Elections Board Chair Larry Leake appeared stunned when Hicks made the request. Once again Easley was gaming the process. Why would he ask such a thing? Perhaps if you were convinced the Board was going to take this action anyway, why not get out in front of this parade? Easley turned the tables on the Board, putting them on the spot. They either had to refer or appear totally partisan and weak.
Every generation has one or more heroes. Bob Hall, with Democracy North Carolina, has to be one of this era’s champions. He is willing to speak truth to power and did so at the end of the hearings. Even as he wandered in his remarks Hall was clear there has been a longstanding practice of establishing shadow campaigns within both political parties. Donors can circumvent the $4,000 contribution limits by making designated donations to political parties to be used on behalf of one or more specific candidates. The NC Senate and NC House leadership PAC’s do it every two years….and everybody knows it. This circumvention is wrong and Hall is one of the few willing to speak publicly against it.
Nobody knows what went on in closed session but the Board referred this case to the Wake District Attorney after fining the Easley campaign and making recommendations to the legislature for changes in laws that would force the candidate to personally be responsible for fines and penalties from the Board.
There were several facts the State Board of Elections could
not ignore. McQueen Campbell gave testimony that was personally detrimental to
himself while accusing Easley. Lanny
Because of the personal relationship Wake DA Colon
Willoughby has with the Easleys’ he immediately recused himself and asked the
Republican DA in Rowan County, Bill Kennerly, to head the investigation, also asking
the Administrative Office of the Courts to assign Kinnerly temporarily to
Raleigh to handle it. Through the years we have come to expect nothing less
from
It is a sad day for

There is much pleasure to be gained from useless knowledge.
Reply to this