Following the Money: Glenn Reibman Gives a Little Sugar

The 30-day post election reports are starting to trickle in, and that includes one filed by former Northampton County Executive Glenn Reibman. These days he's Director of Policy and Planning at The Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission, where he has a $78,000 yearly salary.

Between June 25 and November 26, he spent $7,500, making contributions to the following candidates: $2,000 to Steve Barron (Northampton County Controller); $2,000 to Lamont McClure and $1,000 to Tony Branco (Northampton County Council); $500 to DA John Morganelli; $500 to Sal Panto (Easton Mayor); $250 to Jeff Warren (Easton city council); $500 to Bill Leiner (Lehigh County Commissioner); and $500 each to Sue McCool and Theresa Merli (Monroe County Commissioner). And although Rendell's not running for anything, Glenn gave him $1,000, obviously for good will.

Here's my question. Reibman pretty much despises Ron Angle. There's no love lost between those two. So why no money for John Maher, who was trying to unseat Angle?

A Little Comment About Those Comments

The part of this blog that I like best is its comments feature. I already know what I think. I'm more interested in your view, and learn a great deal from them.

Until today, I'm always notified whenever someone posts a comment. But the blogging gods have disabled that feature, so I'll be a little slow in responding to comments until it is fixed.

Now I'll have no excuse for some of the lousy typing skills I've demonstrated.

Political Consultant Tom Severson: Sleaze Exposed by Unlikely Source

Earlier today, I told you about the the unemployment compensation claim against political consultant Tom Severson. He lost, and here are the "Findings of Fact" made about a year ago by the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review. It casts a glaring spotlight on the dark world inside the largest political consulting firm in Penssylvania.

FINDINGS OF FACT:

1. Claimant was last employed as director of operations for Precision Marketing, Inc. from August of 1998. Claimant's last day of work was October 18, 2006. Claimant was last salaried at $875 per week;

2. The employer operates a political consulting firm, which, among other services, helps plan and implement campaign strategies for political candidates throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and conducts voter demographic and preference surveys.

3. Claimant quit the employment after an incident occurring on his last day, while the owner/president, and several coworkers were conversing over lunch in the company's break room.

4. The owner was discussing politics, and declaring that he planned to "kill" his political enemies. The employer further added that one day he would "stab these people."

5. Claimant was, however, upset by these remarks, and stated to the employer "you better be careful who you pull a knife on."

6. The employer then responded to claimant that "one day I'll sneak up behind you and stab you."

7. The claimant was threatened by the employer.

8. Claimant departed the lunchroom, and several minutes later, had collected his belongings and threw his keys on the lunch table in the presence of the entire company declaring "I don't work for assholes".

9. The employer responded with "f__k you", and claimant departed.

10. In September of 2005, the company vice president was eating in the lunchroom and the president opened a knife and lunged within an inch of the vice president's neck.

11. About 5 years earlier, the president discovered that an employee of another employer that was assigned to one of the campaigns that the employer was working on had destroyed voter registration forms.

12. The present[president] brandished one of his knifes at the offender and directed him to leave the office and never return.

13. In May of 2005, the president compared the claimant's homes, cars and wives with the claimant. The employer then told the claimant f—k you, your wife, daughter, son and entire family.

14. The president would give gifts of knives to employees for their protection.

15. In one incident, about two years earlier, in an attempt to avoid it being publicly known that the employer also occasionally represented local Democratic candidates (the employer primarily works on behalf of Republic[Republican] Party interests), the employer suggested that claimant sign his name to a bulk mailing permit to be taken out by a tenant/neighboring business on the employer's premises, with whom the employer contracts a good deal of printing work.

16. Claimant, believing-that such signature was unlawful or unethical, refused to comply but was not disciplined or threatened with discipline although he was addressed with profane language.

17. The claimant quit his employment because he feared for his safety and he could not complain to anyone in authority as there was no one above the owner/president.

18. Claimant was subsequently employed in a temporary position by [redacted], but did not earn a sum equaling or exceeding six times his weekly benefit rate ($2,982) in that later employment.

LV Hispanic Leader Condemns Bigotry and Hate at Morning Call Reader Forum

Lázaro Fuentes is one of thirteen citizen-soldiers honored last month by the Army Secretary with the Army Commendation Medal for his heroism and meritorious service during rescue efforts on 9/11. After reading about The Morning Call's reader forum, he sent me this statement, and in another capacity.

As chairman of the Lehigh Valley Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, I agree whole-heartedly that the Morning Call is acting irresponsibly in allowing such bigotry and hate on their forums. Sensationalism gets readers and ultimately, advertising impressions, so I understand why they do it – it is profitable.

But they should think twice about how they are choosing to make money, because campaigns are sprouting all over against media companies that use hate and sensationalized bigotry to make profits.

Severson's Strange Switchblades & Stabs

Last week, I told you all about Tom Severson, the King of Sleazeball Politics. He's currently under investigation by Attorney General Tom Corbett for possible election law violations. One item being considered is Severson's "anonymous" smear campaign against district judge candidate Brian Monahan.

Severson's sleaze campaign was a solo affair - he represented no candidate. Ever wonder why Severson had such a hot nut for Monahan? Today, I got my answer. You see, Monahan had the temerity to represent one of Severson's former employees in an unemployment case. Thanks to our Right to Know laws, I finally got my dirty little hands on the file. Severson likes to talk about stabbing and killing his enemies, pulls knives on office workers and scared an employee away by threatening to stab him, too. Incidentally, his connection to MJR Services, Inc. is established, which he used to hide his work for Democrats.

Below you will see a portion of the transcript. The referee is R. The claimant is C. His attorney is CL. And Severson's attorney is EL. Incidentally, Severson's attorney just happens to be Jay Leeson, whose office notarized the independent "John Doe" financial report of the subsequent campaign against Monahan.

A Little Background

CL You filed the Petition for unemployment compensation and ultimately an appeal. What company were you employed with regarding this appeal?

C Precision Marketing in Easton, Pennsylvania.

CL And according to your -- the president was Mr. Severson?

C That's correct.

CL What was your role at the company?

C I did a variety of jobs. I was — on my business card I'm the director of operations but I've done quite a few different jobs there.

CL When did you begin your employment with Precision Marketing?

C Back in 1998.

CL In August of 1998?

C I believe it was in August.

CL And what was your last date of employment at Precision Marketing?

C It was October 18, 2005.

CL And how were you paid?

C I was on salary.

CL What was your salary at the time of your leaving, your separation?

C $875.

Severson Brags About Stabbing His Enemies and Killing Them

CL Okay. Now, concerning your separation, could you explain to Referee Geld what circumstances lead to your leaving the company, leaving your employment?

C Well, the circumstances, the initial circumstance was we were sitting down eating lunch one day and Mr. Severson was discussing, talking about his enemies and how eventually he would destroy them. And he pointed to another employee and he asked him, do you believe that I would do this and this employee said...

EL Objection, as to what the employee said. That's hearsay testimony.

R Response?

CL I think it's — what did Mr. Severson say? What did Mr. Severson do and say?

C All right. Mr. Severson said that he would one day stab these people and kill them. And I said to Mr. Severson, I said to him, you better be careful because maybe one day you'll pull a knife on somebody and they might turn it against you. And I said this for two reasons. The first reason, by his own admittance, he did actually pull a knife on a campaign...

EL Objection. This is not germane to what happened on the day of the lunch meeting, Mr. Potts.

R Which the which date has not yet been established.

CL Correct. I believe the testimony...

R I think it might need to be established. I'm going to sustain the objection but give you the opportunity to lay a foundation.

CL Sure. On what date was your final date of employment?

C Was October 18.

CL And that was the same date as the lunch you're talking about?

C Yes.

CL Okay. Now, the incident which you're referring to where you indicated Mr. Severson admitted pulling a knife. Do you know when that occurred?

C That occurred on a campaign about four years ago.

CL Now, let me — you said the reason you responded as you did...

C Because I think he's capable of pulling a knife on people, yes.

EL Objection. That's a statement of opinion. It's not a statement of fact.

C The reason...

EL [inaudible], Your Honor, [inaudible] be stricken from the record.

R And response?

CL My response is that I believe it's admissible. One because the admission, I believe is germane because it goes to the state of mind on why [claimant] would believe this is an actual threat as opposed to someone just talking.

R Are you going to link that up to the reason that he left the company?

CL Exactly, that's what I'm...

R All right. Over-ruled with that promise of link up.

CL Let me ask you/ when you heard this talk of the knife...

C Right.

CL ...did you take this seriously?

EL I'm going to object, Your Honor, to this talk about a knife. This is hearsay testimony.

CL It's an admission ...

EL This individual was not a witness to any type of incident of the nature described. Now they're trying to take hearsay and build a case based on hearsay.

CL I believe that the testimony was that Mr. Severson made this statement which makes it an admission. It's not hearsay.

R I understand that.

CL It's certainly not hearsay at this point. It's a...

R Then your last question asked him about his feelings?

CL His feeling, why he...

R Over-ruled.

CL ...believed it was a threat.

R Over-ruled.

CL And I'll re-state the question. You believed this threat to be a real threat?

C I believe he is capable of pulling a knife on somebody, yes.

CL And why?

C Well, another incident occurred...

EL Objection, Your Honor. Unless this individual was an eyewitness and that has not been in relation to...

C 1 am an eyewitness to this other...

R Well, I'm not sure the question was completed but you can start the question again.

Severson Threatens to Stab Employee

CL You indicated Mr. Severson at some point told you something about another, what did he tell you?

C Let me get my thoughts back in order please.

CL Sure.

C Mr. Severson asked me then that if I were to — that if he were to pull a knife on me, would I turn it back against him and I said yes, I would. The reasons being because I know he might put me into that situation one day. He then said, well, then one day I'm going to sneak up behind you and stab you and I became very upset and angry. I left the lunch table, went back to my office, I took a deep breath. Something inside said, it's time to get out. It's time to leave here. So I got up. I walked out, I threw him his keys, I told him I don't work for assholes. I turned around and left and he yelled, "fuck you" as I walked out the door.

CL Now, I'm going to ask you again. You indicated that you perceived this to be an actual threat?

C Yes.

CL And you perceived it because of past incidents?

Severson Pulls Knife on Another Employee

C Yes. About a month before that, Mr. Severson had a little tiff with another employee.

CL Were you present for this incident?

C Yes, I was. I was not present for what he was mad at the other employee for. But it was at the lunch table.

CL Then only tell the...

C I'll only tell him what I saw, what I observed.

EL I'm going to object as to something with another employee because unless we get into the circumstances about whether this other incident was, in fact, an employee, whether there was kidding, whether there was jesting, has taken it terribly out of context. There's no foundation for this type of testimony.

R Well, at this time I think it's premature to make that objection. If that is a valid objection, then you can renew it afterwards then the testimony will be stricken at that point. So I'll allow you to renew but I think the objection is premature at this point. Proceed.

C All right. So we were eating lunch and the employee was eating a sandwich and Mr. Severson walked up, flipped open the knife, lunged the knife toward the back of the employee's neck, it was maybe about an inch away from the back of his neck, starting giggling and went into the men's room. And while that employee was eating lunch, if he would have leaned back at that moment, I believe he would have definitely got hurt.

EL Now, Your Honor I'm going to move to strike because by the witness' own testimony, Mr. Severson, assuming this is true, which we're not conceding that point, but assuming it is, Mr. Severson's giggling is as if this is some type of a joke by the witness' own testimony, the reference to giggling.

R I think that goes to credibility rather than admissibility.

C I'm just...

R And you'll certainly be given full opportunity for a cross. Over-ruled.

CL And you indicated previously Mr. Severson had told you something about an incident involving a knife.

C Yes, that was during a campaign.

R I think at this point I'm going to interject with a question or two.

C Sure.

R You say a campaign. What type of campaign?

C It was a political campaign for somebody running for an office.

R And how is the company involved?

C The company was running the campaign for the client.

CL I guess, just for the Referee's — what did the company do? I think that would be...

C Yes, the company is a political consulting firm.

R I see. Can you share the name of the candidate or is that confidential?

C The candidates always treated me very well and I prefer not to but if I have to...

R Well, was this for a municipal office, a state office, a federal office?

C This is for a state office.

R A state office. All right. Good enough. And the employee or co-worker who was in the lunchroom on the incident that you testified to, will that person remain anonymous?

C I prefer not to get the other employees involved, Your Honor. I've done that — I was very reluctant to even have to tell the unemployment office this.

CL Honestly, I would ask at this point that you provide the name because I think it's...

R Well, I think it goes to whether or not the employer will have a fair turn of rebuttal.

CL I do too so I would advise you to provide the name.

R And we do have — if you want to, we can exclude the young lady in the back and I'm not sure that she's necessary now if we want any further degree of in camera privacy so to speak. And certainly the immunity in these type of hearings but if you want to exclude her, by all means.

EL Would you prefer we have the — just yourself...

R I'll just leave counsel and the two primary principals.

CL The Referee, actually he can have — get a witness excluded when you describe who the other employee is or are you just going to tell him?

C No, at this point, I'll go ahead and tell you. Okay? Marylou was there.

R All right.

C Okay. Also Sheryl Dorcius [ph], I believe her last name is. She was there. She's a graphic designer. And it's a very small company. And myself was there and a new gentleman that just started by the name of Dan was there. I can't remember his last name.

CL Now, who was the employee who the knife was waived near?

C You're talking — I'm sorry.

CL Yeah..

C I was referring to the incident when I left. All right.

CL You referred to the incident once, who was present for that?

C Yeah, just who I told him. The incident at the luncheon, when I left are those people who were there.

CL The incident with the knife when you observed...

C Right, when I observed that knife. The only other person there was Marylou.

CL Okay.

C She was sitting to the left of me.

CL And who did he put the knife towards?

C It was Tim Butler.

CL Okay.

R His position?

C Pardon?

R His position with the company?

C I believe he's the vice-president of the company.

R Go on.

Severson Brags About Pulling Knife on Campaign Worker

CL Now, I was asking you, there were statements made by Mr. Severson regarding pulling a knife on somebody, did you want to testify to that?

C Yes, that's -- during this campaign, there was a campaign worker who evidently shredded and destroyed registrations from the opposing, party...

EL I'm going to object to this kind of testimony. You know, about a campaign worker for some candidate doing something that has nothing to do with this case.

R All right. It's a relevancy objection.

CL If you could just get to the point of...

C All right.

CL I think I asked [inaudible] Mr. Severson advised you regarding...

C Mr. Severson often relayed the story about him chasing this campaign worker out of the office with a knife.

CL. And based upon these episodes you just described, that's what lead you to believe this was a real threat to you?

C Yes, I believe — the threat, is I believe he's capable of putting me in a position by pulling a knife on me.

R The campaign worker, was the campaign worker an employee or a volunteer?

C He was a volunteer for the campaign.

R Okay. And he was suspected of some type of misconduct on the campaign?

C That is correct. And he came in to confront Mr. Severson about it and that's when that incident occurred.

CL Now, regarding your separation, this is a voluntary termination because you concede that this wasn't a firing?

C Yes. Yeah, I lost my temper, I became very angry and I left, yes.

CL Now, were there any other factors that led to your leaving the company beside those you've already related to the Referee?

Severson Demanded Employee to Forge Signature to Hide Connection to MJR

C There were a few other factors. There was another incident — you know, I have to explain the whole situation in order to get to the point I'm trying to make. Sometimes the company does work for the opposing party and...

R In the same campaign?

C No, on different campaigns but... I

R Are you saying the company is exclusive or not exclusive or primarily [inaudible] from one party?

C The company sometimes hides the fact that it deals with the Democratic Party.

R Is that a significant thing in this trade or business? In other words, do clients expect a marketing firm to only work for candidates of one party?

EL Well, Your Honor, can I just object because this individual is not in a position to deal with the clients of the firm. And may I also object to...

CL All right.

EL Well, not that this is really germane to the lunch incident where he stormed out and lost his temper.

R Wall, I think my questions are relevant to the point that's being brought up.

C [inaudible]

R And it's starting a second ground.

CL Correct. Where I'm going is, essentially, that certainly the one incident was the tip of the iceberg.

R And, obviously, there's been no foundation yet laid. Perhaps as I had noted before we began the testimony sometimes I do ask questions that maybe you would have explained a little later but, you know, this is something that I don't think I can take judicial notice of, the workings of this industry or trade. And that may be relevant to the testimony, so again, I'm going to over-rule the objection to my question. How is that significant, Mr. [claimant]?

C Okay. It's significant because I was asked to forge a client's name on a mailing statement. The situation is there is a company that sub-leases space with Precision Marketing and they are also a mailer in their own right. During this campaign, the other company was using their...

R What do you mean by other company?

C Yeah, the company that leases from Precision Marketing.

CL Who are they just so...

C It's MJR Services.

R Do they have anything to do with the trade of politics and campaigns?

C No, I believe they were doing it as a favor until the client started writing out checks to this other company and there was a little...

R The client is the candidate?

C The candidates, right. And the only...

R To a tenant of Precision Marketing?

C I'm sorry?

R Someone who leased space? MJR is a tenant?

C Yes.

R ...of Precision Marketing?

C Yes. Okay. And what happened was, the people who would take' care of her financial business said she shouldn't be taking these checks. So she refused to take the checks and then she refused to sign the mailing permit. I couldn't sign the mailing permit because I was an employee of Precision Marketing and people know that and so I was in a — I didn't know what to do for this mailing. I went up to see Mr. Severson and I asked him, I said, would you mind having the client sign this mailing perm.it. And he said, you just forge his name on it. And I told him, I'm not comfortable doing that. I said, he's your friend, why don't you forge his name on it?

R Maybe I'll need a little more foundation to understand what's going on because I don't know what a mailing permit is.

C A mailing permit is what you have to give to the post office, which tells the post office the price of the mail and how many pieces are in the mail.

R Is that used in bulk mail?

C Yes, it's used in bulk mail.

R Okay. Now, how does — what was the relationship here between your tenant, MJR Services, and the client?

C What do you mean by that?

CL What was MJR's role? I mean, why is...

R This bulk mailing permit.

C Yes. MJR was using their permit because he did not want people to know that he was doing Democratic campaigns.

CL Now, when you say he, Mr. Severson?

C Mr. Severson, yes.

R I see.

CL And so he asked you to sign your name?

C He asked me to sign the client's name on the postal permit.

EL Your Honor, I'm going to object again. The last time I checked, you know, even business has available [inaudible] the United States and this MJR company, to the extent of choosing to work for Democrats, what's the relevance of this entire line of questioning?

CL The relevance is that he was asked to forge a document in which...

R Well, in terms of the objection to relevance, there's been no been timeline established and I think. I'd like to consider that on the objection...

CL And when did...

R ...so take that under advisement.

CL When did this incident occur?

C I believe it was two years ago.

R Would counsel like to — do you still have the objection?

EL I still object.

R Counsel like to argue that objection in terms of the potential remoteness of the incident?

CL Sure! I think that's certainly a consideration, however, I think in this circumstance it's certainly relevant. I don't know that things have to -- we're basically deciding the sole issue, whether there's a necessitous and compelling reason for the voluntary termination of Mr. [claimant's] employment. I think a pattern of conduct, as well as perhaps an isolated incident.,,

R Well, is there going to be any evidence of more recent incidents that offended his ethical — which I understand that's what this would go to, his ethical sense?

EL Right.

CL I don't believe that there's any more recent than this.

C No, this was the most recent one when I was asked to actually forge somebody's name on the mailing permit.

R Did you do it?

C No, I did not. What he said to me, he got angry, he said, just go sign his fucking name and get the fuck back to work. But I didn't because of the incident with the other campaign, how he left this other campaign worker on the limb
and when he confronted him...

R Well, [inaudible] but I'm not going to rule it inadmissible because of the remoteness, however, I certainly will allow only cross but opportunity to argue in closing argument as to the relevance of a two-year old incident.

CL Let me ask you, Mr. [claimant] at that point, you indicated you were somewhat offended by the request, why didn't you leave or separate your employment at that time?

C Because I needed my job and, for the most part, I enjoyed my job at that point.

Later today, I'll publish the Findings of Fact from the state's Unemployment Compesnsation Board of Review.

Congressional Wannabe Bill Hall To Discuss Health Care Crisis

Bill Hall, candidate for the Lehigh Valley's Democratic nomination to Congress, has scheduled a news conference for Thursday, Noon, at the Lehigh County government center, to discuss our growing health care crisis. He believes that is symptomatic of a bigger problem - broken government.

He has some proposals to combat the problem, including a cap on pain and suffering awards and allowing citizens to import prescription drugs from Canada. He advocates allowing citizens and small businesses to band together for discounted rates, and would stop insurers from charging exorbitant rates to those with pre-existing conditions. He is also proposing tax breaks to families who care for loved ones at home instead of at nursing homes.

You can contact Bill at BillHallforCongress@yahoo.com.

Online Bile Makes Morning Call Vile

The Lehigh Valley has two dailies - The Express Times and Morning Call. Both papers allow readers to comment, but only The Morning Call's reader forum sounds like a Klan rally. After speaking to the people responsible for this interactive feature, I know why. One newspaper carefully monitors what is being said, while the other doesn't seem to care.

That's the whole point, isn't it? Newspapers have become interactive because they really, really, really, really want to hear from their readers. They're supposed to care, right?

Express Times LehighValleyLive editor Alyssa Young spells out three big differences between the two dailies. First, before anyone can post a comment at The Express Times, registration is required. This helps eliminate trolls who use sock puppets to post cruel remarks or impersonate others. Second, The Express Times' comment feature is available only for some stories. This makes it easier to monitor. Third, when a comment is received, editors get an email notifying them so they can monitor what is being said. In short, the Express Times allows its staff to keep up with what readers think. As a result, there is none of the cruel, racist, and misogynist commentary that has become standard fare at The Morning Call.

I told you about this standard fare yesterday. Some of the garbage I mentioned remained until mid-afternoon, even though those comments were flagged on Saturday and I sent two separate emails about them. And the slime continued throughout the evening. In a story about yet another Allentown shooting, readers posted little nuggets like this. "This story should be printed in Spanish, since that's who's involved." And this. "Save the taxpayers' money and kill all involved. Case closed!!" And in the inquisition into the private sex life of Senator Larry Craig, we get this homophobic pearl. "Anyone really care what eight queers claim?"

And get this. Some bastard is posting some really hateful remarks disguised as me, and now I'm getting online threats. "Bernie, I hope your name and address is listed in the phone book......coming soon..."

Whoopee!

It's a good thing I can run like hell for a fat guy, but I better buy some new sneaks just in case. The Morning Call assured me it had stopped that problem. Guess not.

When you come right down to it, The Morning Call is downright hypocritical. It piously proclaims it really, really, really, really wants to hear from us. And then it ignores comments, making it pretty clear it places no value at all on reader input. In fact, by the way it has ignored the threat against me, I question whether it values its readers' lives. Fortunately, I have an invisibility cloak I picked up at a yard sale this summer.

The Morning Call is by no means alone. I've read accounts about similar problems at Iowa's Telegraph Herald, Miami Herald, Chicago Tribune and Washington Post. The problem even exists in Australia. In a way, that's reassuring. At least we know the Lehigh Valley does not have the largest concentration of KKK grand wizards in the world.

In an outstanding post at Diacritical, the need to monitor, or "curate," comments is emphasized. The complaint that this just wastes resources is dismissed for these reasons:

1. The interactive audience is much more loyal than the passive one.
2. Reader comments, managed well, are important content that helps define a publication's personality and puts it in conversation with its audience.
3. Everything on a website sets the tone of a publication - stupid comments suggest this is a stupid place, smart comments attract other smart, engaged readers.
4. Paying lip service to being interactive is worse than ignoring your audience altogether.

The hate speech has been appearing at The Morning Call now for years. It sets a bad tone for that otherwise excellent paper, and is actually damaging its reputation. If it is unable effectively to monitor its comment feature, it needs to drop it. A Filter that prevent words like bastard and shithead is not monitoring. As The Curmudgeon noted yesterday, "They don't encourage community discussions, they encourage hate-mongering and they are an embarrassment to the Valley."

So how do they correct this? Simple. First, require registration. Second, only allow comments on stories that you have the resources to monitor. Third, when someone is threatened, it might be nice to warn him now and then. Thow me a frickin' bone!

Instead, The Morning Call continues to allow the hate, especially when it permits comments on crime stories. Those always bring out the worst in people. The Morning Call is inviting sensationalism from its readers. Editors can beat their breasts and claim to be shocked, totally shocked, by what they see. But we're beyond that now. It's happened too many times to feign ignorance. If publishers allow this to continue, it will be for the money.

Stop the hate.

Afternoon Update: Before I published this midnight post, I flagged each of the offensive comments I talk about. As of 3 PM, all but the personal threat against me are still standing tall. The Morning Call is actually acquiescing in a comment that advocates we kill people. Stop the hate.

The Morning Call Forum: Gathering Place For Bigots

I'm more than a little disgusted in the wake of last week's triple homicide in Easton. It's brutal and mindless, hard to comprehend.

Also brutal and mindless are the comments that always accompany these stories at The Morning Call. On Saturday, I read remarks like these.

"This problem ends if you get rid of the negros. Any black man 20 years of age or older not working without a degree gets shipped off to the military. Make them the first wave in any assault."

Or this, supposedly posted by a professional who has patients.

"WHAT DO YOU EXPEXT [sic] FROM A BUNCH OF NY/NJ IMPORTED MINORITY MONGRELS!!!!!!!!

THIS TRASH AND THE SALSA COCKROACH TYPE ALIKE ARE RUINING THE LEHIGH VALLEY AND THE POCONOS!!!!!!!!!

HALF OF MY PATIENTS IN DOWNTOWN ALLENTOWN HAVE NO JOBS NO INSURANCE AND DONT SPEAK ENGLISH WORTH A DAM[sic]!!!

HAVE YOU DRIVEN DOWN HAMILTON BLVD LATELY??????"

I flagged these offensive remarks on Saturday, but they still stand proudly this morning. This would never occur if (1) people were required to register or (2) hate speech was quickly removed by conscientious editors. The cowards who vomit this hate never identify themselves, hiding instead behind sock puppets.

By being so lax about removing hate speech, The Morning Call has become an enabler to bigots and anti-Semites, and its forum has actually legitimized their remarks.

Instead of bringing people together, its forum is dividing us. I don't know a single Lehigh Valley blog that would allow hate speech to stand for days. But these folks in the MSM are getting paid. If they can't monitor the hate speech, they shouldn't have the forum at all.

Bethlehem Mayor John Callahan Goes to the Dogs

I've heard the ladies are always throwing themselves at Bethlehem Mayor John Callahan. And now I know it's true. I saw it myself on Saturday. He was just standing there, yet all these females were still jumping on him, licking him and even smelling his butt.

Mayor John was at Bethlehem's busy dog park, which was packed in spite of the cold weather. My grandson's maniac dog, Suki, forced us to take her there. She's a Jack Russell-poodle mix, and is one of the tramps who threw herself, literally, at Callahan. She's officially called a Jackapoo, but is really just a mutt.

Don't tell her that. Her personality is 110% Jack Russell. She's only ten pounds, but seems to think she's a Bull Mastiff or Great Dane, and loves chasing big dogs or stealing their balls and then running off, even though any one of them could swallow her whole. At Lehigh, she once broke off my leash, dashed into the middle of a lacrosse game, and stole the ball. She leaped across a small stream as players and refs yelled and chased after her. At Jacobsburg, this ten pound furball has gone after three deer, and nearly caught them, too! Last summer, it took me two hours to get her out of a ground hog's hole. She's no foo-foo dog. She's the Captain Danger of designer dogs, and Saturday was no exception.

I was a little surprised to see Bethlehem's mayor go to the dogs. No trumpets announced his presence, dogs can't vote, and for at least forty minutes, no one seemed to know him. I think he enjoyed being just another dog owner.

Until Saturday, I'd only seen him in formal settings. In the dog park, he was quiet and unassuming, yet very congenial to those who spoke with him. He was even nice to me. He seems to know quite a few dogs, including Suki, by name. I listened as he described a few nearby swimming holes to one lady with a black lab. He commiserated with others who were complaining about the cold. And Suki, slut that she is, would have left with him.

He must be a regular. He knows all about Max, a German Shepherd who always enters the dog park by leaping over its six foot fence. As much as the ladies like Callahan, they like Max a little more.

When he found out I was actually a trespasser from Nazareth, he had some good questions about our skatepark. I won't quote him because he had no idea he was talking to that crazy blogger and I wasn't taking notes. But skating enthusiasts would like what he said. He told me Bethlehem is working on one, too. I told him we're working on a dogpark, too.

Eventually, someone blew the mayor's cover. It was kind of sad, really. I think he enjoyed being able to be himself for a few minutes. Those dogs don't know he's the mayor, and they like him anyway.

Best Republican Presidential Pretender - Is it McCain?

Although there are plenty of presidential pretenders on both sides of the fence, I have yet to find a candidate. Today, I'll give you my take on the Republicans.

Ron Paul: - A libertarian version of Ralph Nader. Neo-Nazis just love him. Need I say more?

Rudy Giuliani: - A scary, thin-skinned and unethical little bastard. "Republican Rudy Giuliani vows to be tough on terror, chooses advisers who want to bomb Iran and doesn't think pretending to drown prisoners is torture." He sounds like Bernie Kieklak. Neo-Nazis are in love with the wrong guy.

Mike Huckabee: - What is it about Arkansas Governors that make them so damn likable? But I'm sorry. People who have to tell me they're Christians every ten minutes usually aren't, and scare the hell out of me.

Mitt Romney: - I'm sure his dog loved being strapped on that car roof. And the illegals who worked for this political peacock never needed a strap - they liked it up there.

Fred Thompson: Zzzzzzzzzz.

John McCain: I thought his campaign had imploded, but he seems to have caught a second wind. Here's how The Washington Times sums him up. "McCain is hawkish on defense, securely pro-life, supportive of constitutionalist judges and scornful of government waste. But he is also convinced of global warming's threat to mankind, a two-time opponent of the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 (though today he supports making them permanent), inclined toward the Kennedy-Bush view of immigration, certain that aggressive interrogation methods amount to unacceptable torture and comfortable with de facto First Amendment restrictionism on campaign finance. He is socially conservative but with libertarian inclinations. In short, he is a selective moral crusader, with a war hero's biography and a sense of mission."

Of all of them, the only one who even remotely sounds like a president is McCain. But I doubt he'll last through the primary. What do you think?

Next week, I'll give my take on the Dems.

Properties of Merit: Garden Rakes For Elitists

If you're a member of the arrogant, elitist, self-proclaimed in-crowd, it's highly unlikely you read these ramblings. You're probably sipping a latte at the local Barnes and Noble, pretending to read Harper's. And you probably already know this anyway.

Just a few weeks ago, golden garden rakes were awarded by Sam Bennett's publicly-funded nonprofit, Properties of Merit, to the owners of deserving Easton properties. Upscale restaurants like Sette Luna and Phenom were competing for that coveted plaque. Coordinator Gary Bertsch, also King of the West Ward, thought it important that College Hill be included, although little community revitalization is needed there. Do folks there really need "the 'Tom Sawyer' power of cleaning up and getting others to join" in?

Maybe their privately-hired landscapers do, but not them.

This program is supposedly intended to give "citizens the opportunity to easily become stakeholders without requiring undue investment of time or money." But it's been perverted into a bunch of "I like me " awards for Lehigh Valley brahmins. In Bethlehem, the nominees include places like Ashley Development and Main Street Commons, both of which were publicly funded. But when I saw the heavily subsidized Allentown Brew Works listed, I headed immediately for the Cappy Crappy.

Dennis Lieb, an Easton activist involved in POM when it initially came to Easton, says this. "I saw the POM placards in the yards of $1 million dollar properties. I know that is not the intent. I also saw perfect examples of what kinds of properties should have been nominated that weren't. That's my take."

He blames Bennett. "The real shame of her lack of commitment to the Easton POM program is that people here really don't understand what it's supposed to be about: Accomplishing the most with the least and encouraging a sense of pride in the neighborhoods of lower to middle income residents. This year's candidates were a group of high end businesses and expensive private homes, some of which are on the market for over a million dollars. This isn't supposed to be about how much you paid for your landscaping or helping rich people sell their inflated-priced houses. It is obvious the people here just don't get it. I arrived late to the awards event this year and the presentations had already begun. As I stood outside, looking through the window, I saw how many of the typical crowd of Easton's wannabes and self-important ass-kissers were in attendance. I turned around and went home."

This program is obviously a complete waste of government money.

Garvin Dumped As Norco Elections Commission Chair

During last year's Lehigh Valley congressional race, WGPA 1100 AM's ran a program called "Checks and Balances." It was dreary hour of highly partisan propaganda delivered in a monotone by host WALLY G.

Just the thing for insomnia!

One day, when Wally G was a guest on Don Russo's show, I decided to call. Before being allowed to say anything, Russo always insisted that callers identify themselves. I did, but then said it's only fair that Wally G identify himself, too. That's when I learned he's really Walter R. Garvin, who at that time was both Democratic Committeeman and area chair. In fact, Wally's radio show was touted on the Norco Dem web page with this little promotion: "Sick of Right-Wing Talk Radio Blather? Tired of them insulting our intelligence? Then tune in to WGPA SUNNY 1100 AM and host WALLY G ..."

Garvin was even the parking valet at an anti-Dent campaign rally late this summer. As I attempted to maneuver my Jeep into the parking lot, Wally wildly waved a "Support the Troops - End the War" sign at me, and directed me where to park, which for some reason was right in the middle of Monocacy Creek.

Wally G is a partisan activist, so what?

Let me explain. Wally G also happens to chair the Norco Elections Commission. According to our Home Rule Charter, party officers are barred. When Republicans found, several had strokes and died. Those who survived went ballistic and made their own signs. "Hang WALLY G, From the Nearest Tree!"

When I complained at a council meeting, Council Solicitor Zito told anyone who was listening that an elections commission is a quasi judicial body. It often makes decisions that are essentially judicial. Members must avoid the appearance of impropriety, and conduct themselves with impartiality.

Soon after that, Garvin resigned as committeeman and area chair, and his radio gig was over. Things seemed to die down.

But not for long. Just a few months ago, Wally G was at it again, hosting another radio show that blames Republicans for everything, from pink eye to the recent flooding along the Delaware. Now when you have county council races in which a Dem wins by just 91 votes, the last thing you need is a partisan elections chair.

Yesterday, county council's personnel committee reviewed county exec Stoffa's appointments to the elections commission. Garvin's name is missing. Now he can devote more time to his radio career. But before he goes on air again, he should spend a few weeks at the Ken Matthews school of broadcasting.

Angle and I are both A students.

Update: The Express Times' Sarah Cassi has a detailed report about Stoffa's new elections commission. He explains his Garvin decision. "I like Walt. I think he's a good person. He's a great Democrat. ... I didn't think he was objective."

Isn't It Time to Stop Political Robo Calls?

Tuesday's USA Today includes an op-ed with some encouraging news about political robo-calls. "Half a dozen states have restricted or banned prerecorded or automated political phone calls, and courts so far have upheld the limits."

Will Wisconsin become the seventh? Legislation banning these calls has been proposed, but Citizens for Civil Discourse Founder Shaun Dakin asks this pointed question - "Is this yet another cynical ploy to get voters to believe that legislators actually want to take away a tool in their voter communication toolbox?"

If Northampton County's recent experience is any guide, it's time to drop this useless tool. It might be cheap, but these unsolicited automated calls just annoy people.

Inside word is that someone in the land of midnight payraises is drafting legislation to stop this madness. Stay tuned.

Angle Suffers Wardrobe Malfunction During Budget Hearing

At last week's Northampton County budget hearing, six council members played hooky, and were tagged by The Express Times. "Missing were Tony Branco, Charles Dertinger, Mike Dowd, Lamont McClure, Ann McHale and Diane Neiper. The people who administer the human services budget -- and those who depend upon these services -- deserve better."

As you may have guessed, everyone was present yesterday, excepting Tony Branco. He doesn't count anyway because Peg Ferraro will be sworn in as his successor at any moment.

It was nice they could all drop by because the agenda included the proposed budget for DA John Morganelli (wants a new ADA), Sheriff Jeff Hawbecker (wants his department accredited just like Easton), Coroner Zach Lysek (gives me funny looks and then smiles), Public Defender Mike Corriere (wants a new assistant, too), Director of Court Services Bill Hillanbrand (he's got a blog so he should get whatever he wants) and President Judge Robert Freedberg (incredibly came in $2 million lower than last year).

The first person in the box, amazingly, was not the President Judge, but Morganelli. In fact, the PJ went last for some reason. Go figure.

That was fine by me. You see, Councilman Ron Angle is a little unhappy with Morganelli right now. He knows Morganelli used his hired gun, Tom Severson, to try and get rid of him. He also knows all about Morganelli's Atiyeh ties. So I brought some marshmallows to roast along with Morganelli.

Angle: "So you'd like a new assistant, eh?"

Morganelli: "Yes."

That's it? 'Fraid so. Something was wrong.

Angle kept giving this goofy look and I thought I heard plumbing noises. He kept leaving the meeting and then coming back, looking more ashen each time. Finally, just as Judge Freedberg got going, so did Angle. He bolted out of the room and down the hall, and it looked like his trousers were exploding.

With Angle gone, the meeting ended in about three seconds. But as I walked down the corridor by the Cappy Crappy, I could hear Angle in there, shouting, "Who's your daddy?"

Reports this evening indicate that the state Environmental Protection Agency has sealed off the Cappy Crappy until further notice.

Following the Money: The Atiyeh Connection

Abraham Atiyeh, referred to by Bill White as Allentown's Rajah of Rezoning, is a busy dude. Aside from his gig at Brookside Construction and Easton Ventures, he's worked hard on nursing homes, developments, Easton's Cinema Paradiso and a failed scheme to redevelop Nazareth's racetrack. He even persuaded Bethlehem planners recently to let him subdivide a cemetery for yet another assisted living facility! Residents there can just look out the window and pick a spot.

As busy as he must be, Atiyeh still finds time for his favorite charity - politicians.

State campaign finance records reveal he's given candidates seeking state office over $260,000 since 2000. FEC records show another $20,000. And he gives generously to candidates seeking local office, although those records are unavailable online.

If they're good, elected officials can always look forward to an envelope in their Christmas stocking. His nice list includes Lisa Boscola ($8,250), Jenn Mann ($7,200) and Doug Reichley ($6,500). But not everyone is good. Craig Dally ($100), Rich Grucela ($0) and John Stoffa ($0) must be on the naughty list.

Naughty or nice, Abe's favorite local pol by far has to be John Morganelli, recipient of a whopping $51,000. A Morganelli protege, Paula Roscioli, received another $16,300 in Atiyeh money when John decided it was time for her to run for judge. Morganelli allies like Lamont McClure and Tony Branco have received $6,000 from Atiyeh and business partner Ramzi Haddad in their county council races. And guess what? They all use Morganelli's consultant, Tom Severson, although Branco denies that very unconvincingly.

So Atiyeh gives Morganelli money. Big deal. After all, how the hell can a DA help a developer?

That questioned was answered in 2003. At that time, Atiyeh was lobbying both Northampton County and Easton to get a KOZ tax break for Easton's Cinema Paradiso, which he had just picked up for $700,000. Morganelli quickly penned a letter to each member of city council, disingenuously telling them this area, located next to the police station, was crime-ridden. Atiyeh blew kisses and promised to bring in white collar businesses from Jersey. But after the KOZ was granted, he leased the Cinema Paradiso to another movie operator, who managed to go broke even with the tax break. Atiyeh recently unloaded a portion of this tract for $1.2 million, nearly doubling his money.

Now Atiyeh has a new scheme. He wants the county to team up with him and Lou Pektor to build a combination assisted living and prison center for nonviolent types in West Easton. Guess who's pushing that project? You got it. Although Morganelli has always claimed his job is done once someone is sentenced and refuses to participate in a periodic review of the prison population, he now is lobbying the county to team up with Atiyeh. That's why John did those robocalls claiming Branco is a crime dog. Tony lost anyway. But Morganelli can still count on Lamont McClure. After all, Lamont's wife works for Morganelli.

Northampton County desperately needs a recidivism center. But teaming up with Atiyeh for anything just rewards the "pay to play" mentality of most developers. And Morganelli needs to remember he's the DA - not the county executive.

I wonder if Abe Atiyeh is an illegal immigrant.

Severson's Attempt To Steal Election Exploding in His Face

Last week, the Northampton County Republican Committee's acting chair, Bob Kilbanks, had a small news conference. After being stalled by DA John Morganelli, Kilbanks has finally asked Attorney General Tom Corbett to investigate campaign consultant Tom Severson, the King of Sleazeball Politics. According to The Express Times, Corbett's spokesperson has already stated, "We'll follow the evidence wherever it leads."

It's leading in some strange directions.

Severson is the hired gun who, during the primary, suddenly turned ronin and launched his own anonymous smear campaign against district judge candidate Brian Monahan. In July, he conducted a push poll aimed right at council member Ron Angle. Just a few weeks ago, he was happily smearing both Angle and council wannabe Peg Ferraro with numerous anonymous robocalls and negative mailers. There has been no disclosure of the expenses involved, even though this is required by elections laws. If you expect John Morganelli to investigate, don't hold your breath.

Morganelli and Severson, Sitting in a Tree ...

They're pals. At least that's what Morganelli tells me. Their relationship goes back at least to 1991, when Severson ran John's campaign against then incumbent DA Don Corriere. That race, incidentally, turned nasty.

Morganelli and Severson have at least one thing in common - they both like dirty politics. A few short months ago, Morganelli was caught, red-handed, using a family email account to smear a potential AG rival. Of course, he was doing it anonymously. He told journalist Brett Lieberman that whoever had used his own family's account was just being "cute and stupid." How about dishonest?

Morganelli must have a hard time suppressing his laughter when someone complains about elections laws. In his sixteen years as DA, I can't think of a single prosecution. Knowingly or not, he has given Severson the green light.

The King of Sleazeball Politics

The phrase, "King of Sleazeball Politics," is used often to describe Severson. I didn't coin it. It first appeared in a 1991 Morning Call story. Severson got that title the old-fashioned way - he earned it. Let's review some of his campaigns.

In 1989, county exec hopeful Jerry Seyfried saw his lead dwindle as anonymous telephone calls, made in the waning days of the campaign, warned voters that Seyfried had accepted money from the owner of a local landfill. DA Don Corriere, challenged by Morganelli, complained they actually used callers who disguised themselves as state ethics commission investigators. Seyfried won. Barely. Corriere went down.

Severson also plays on prejudice. When Len Gruppo was running for the state senate in 1998, Severson distributed an anti-welfare campaign mailer containing a photo of mostly black applicants, standing in line, creating the false impression that most welfare recipients are black.

In 2003, Severson's Precision Marketing was paid $9,600 in public money by DA John Morganelli's Drug Task Force to distribute 20,000 "informational" mailers. They included a large photograph of Paula Roscioli, four times the size of other staffers. She just happened to be running for judge at the time. DA Morganelli assured the Express Times (4/9/03) that Precision Marketing was not doing Roscioli's campaign. While technically correct, Morganelli's statement was misleading. Severson was still running the show, but just used another company. And the idea of using taxpayer funds to promote candidates was pushed again by Severson this Spring. Bucks County commissioners paid him $67,000 in taxpayer money for a thinly disguised campaign ad.

Last year, when Joe Brennan was in a four-way dogfight to capture the Democratic nomination for a state rep seat, he was assailed by three mailers, some of which falsely portrayed him behind bars. After turning over a few rocks, Tom Severson ran out. Brennan's opponent falsely claimed that, since he was never charged for Severson's services, he had no obligation to report this in-kind contribution. To this day, the in-kind contribution appears nowhere on any campaign finance report.

These are just a few examples of Severson's modus operandi - anonymous and misleading calls, appeals to prejudice, drug task force money to promote a candidate, misleading mailers and flying below the radar of our disclosure laws. As disgusting as these tactics sound, Severson has become rich using them.

But Sleaze Politics Pays

Severson usually operates under the corporate umbrella of Precision Marketing, Inc., where he is listed as company prez. Between 2000 and today, that company has collected $9.9 million from candidates seeking state offices.

But when Severson wants to stay under the radar, or is working for Dems, he'll use MJR Services, Inc., a New Jersey corporation whose Pa. address just happens to be where Precision Marketing is located. MJR has collected $281,000 from state office hopefuls since 2000. DA John Morganelli and Judges Roscioli and Panella are part of this gaggle.

It doesn't stop there. Severson keeps everyone guessing with Political Strategies, Inc, a California corporation. Although it's not even registered in Pennsylvania, state senator Lisa Boscola paid that outfit $43,659.65 in 2006. And guess what? Finance reports filed by some local candidates indicate this California corporation just happens to have the same address as Precision Marketing! Since 2000, the total amount paid to this business, in state races, is $170,522.

Keep in mind that this total figure -$10.35 million since 2000 - does not include payments to other companies I know nothing about, or payments made in federal and local races. And it only reflects payments that are on the radar screen.

Tom Severson: To Know Him is Not to Love Him

Although Severson's sleaze tactics have made him wealthy, few local leaders respect him. Morning Call and Express Times archives report some of their comments.

Former Norco GOP chair Charlie Roberts (1994): "He's working both sides of the fence. ... I don't trust him. ... He's done more to hurt this party than anyone. ... "How can he work for Seyfried and Ferraro in the same election? How is working for Seyfried going to do anything but hurt Ferraro's chances? Tom Severson works for his pocketbook. I work for the Republican Party."

Former Norco GOP Chair Larry Kisslinger (1991): "He did not handle his affairs with me in an honest way 99-1/2 percent of the time. ... I hope he makes $1 million. I hope he's comforted with the money surrounding him."

Former Norco Councilman Jim Hemstreet (1991): "If telephone calls are being made ... you have a right to know who you're talking to, what they're paid. ... That is really deceptive campaigning. It's like turning your campaign over to a hired gun."

Norco Judge Emil Giordano (1994): "I never heard anything good about the guy. ... It's sleazeball politics, and he's the leader of the pack."

Morning Call columnist Don Russo (1994, then a member of the GOP): "Severson basically goes to the candidate with the money."

District Attorney John Morganelli (1994): "I went to him because I heard he was the best. I wanted to hire the best person to do the job. I didn't care what party he was. The party thing didn't bother me, and I don't think it bothered Mr. Severson. He's staying with me."

The Anti-Monahan Sleaze

When I first told you about the smear campaign against magisterial candidate Brian Monahan last May, one of Seversons's apologists told me that once the election is over, "the only person still whining about this will be you." Well, the election's over, and it looks like the local Republican party is whining, too. And the state AG is listening. This matter is far from over. In fact, it's just starting. Here's some of what Bob Kilbanks had to say last week (with links to some of the documents he mentions).

"This all began during the primary cycle when some very ugly flyers were sent out against a local District Justice candidate. They had no disclaimer, which is required by Pennsylvania's state election laws on every campaign piece to inform the public about the source of any political information that they receive. There were accusations flying all over Northampton County as to who had sent the three mailers. The mailing permit was traced to a person [Pat Vulcano] who said he had no knowledge of its use. An examination of the paperwork at the Post Office yielded nothing because the signature was unreadable. At that time, local blogger Bernie O'Hare presented the situation to District Attorney Morganelli. Mr. Morganelli told Mr. O'Hare that the matter, as he saw it, did not rise to a prosecutable level. He felt that there was case precedent from Ohio [McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n] that made this allowable under the First Amendment. A few days later, and under question of lawful filing date, an independent financial report was filed at the Voter Registration office under the name of 'John Doe.'

"The report arrived complete with the Ohio decision attached to it and a notarization for a 'John Doe.' The Notary works in the offices of a local politically-connected attorney. [This attorney just happens to be Morganelli's campaign treasurer, Jay Leeson]."

Severson's "John Doe" report, of course, is bullshit. He clearly paid more than $500 to send these mailers about a week before the election, but failed to report this expenditure within 24 hours as required by our campaign finance laws. Three mass mailings cost much more than the $861 claimed, and those payments had to be made before the primary, because that's when they were mailed.

How could Leeson's notary, a secretary in his office, acknowledge an anonymous signature? Because he tells her to do so. But a notary exists to identify the person appearing before her, not obscure that person. She must have personal knowledge or satisfactory evidence in the form of a driver's license or other form of identification.

Morganelli Covers For His Pal

According to Kilbanks, "The Republican Committee wrote to Mr. Morganelli and asked him to reexamine the papers because we were afraid that this precedent could lead to only more of the same unattributed smear literature, and perhaps even uglier campaign shenanigans. Mr. Morganelli replied to the Committee with the same answer he gave to Bernie O'Hare."

Rather than address Severson's failure to file a 24 hour report or his misleading "John Doe" statement, Morganelli instead incredibly concludes Severson has a constitutional right to defame someone anonymously. "[W]e will not attempt to enforce these provisions."

Here's my problem. Since Morganelli has a conflict in any allegations against Severson, it's not his call whether or not the elections code should be enforced. In fact, his letter to the Attorney General only dealt with one aspect of the elections code, and was even misleading on that point. Kilbanks' allegations should have been forwarded to the Attorney General so that office could have decided for itself whether an investigation is warranted. Morganelli also should have clearly disclosed the existence of a conflict. He was very quick to condemn an attorney general investigating his own campaign contributors in Bonusgate, but is clearly turning people away when they complain about one of John's pals.

Fortunately, Kilbanks has forwarded all material to Pennsylvania's Attorney General, and the criminal investigation unit is now paying close attention, something that Morganelli has successfully prevented (knowingly or unknowingly) for years.

The Dirty Politics Continue

Because Morganelli refused to make a prompt referral to the Attorney General last Spring, the dirty politics have continued. According to Kilbanks, "Our fears were realized in this past election cycle as unattributed, and very nasty, smear phone calls, whether or not they are considered 'legal,' invaded homes across Northampton County. All of the calls traced back to one phone number [actually, it's two phone numbers - 484-548-6400 and 484-548-6413] that [were] listed as 'not working,' but ownership was traced to a data management corporation in King of Prussia that does robo-calls."

Amazingly, these are the same phone numbers used to do the push polling against Angle in July. The number 484-548-6413 shows up as MCS Industries on Caller ID, and is also the number Lamont McClure used for his robocalls. His campaign consultant? Tom Severson.

Mailings with content identical to these anonymous robocalls were posted with the Northampton County Democratic Committee's bulk mail permit. Lamont McClure, Tony Branco, John Maher and the local Democratic party were obviously using Severson. Against Angle alone, there were twelve negative mailers (estimated cost - $36,000) and twenty-one anonymous robocalls (estimated cost - $31,500). I have not spoken to Peg Ferraro recently, but know of at least four negative mailers and ten anonymous robocalls.

Nothing in the bogus campaign finance reports filed to date reflect anything close to those costs. A concerted effort has obviously been made to keep expenses off the books and under the radar.

If you have any of the negative mailers directed at Angle or Ferraro, please email them to me at BOHare5948@aol.com. I will make sure they are forwarded to the right offices next month.

On December 6, when the 30 day post election reports are filed, it will be pretty clear that there was an attempt to steal this election.

Update: I was more than a little surprised that The Morning Call has an editorial about what's going on. Once again, it appears that Morganelli is actually providing cover for Severson. If he has a conflict, as he insists, then why does he continually try to defend Severson?

Dennis Lieb: Is Easton's Riverwalk Floating Away?

Dennis Lieb attended Tuesday night's Easton Parking Authority (EPA) meeting, and has the only first-hand account: "At tonight's parking authority meeting, representatives of Rizzetto Construction and Tim Haas (garage architect) informed the EPA that project cost is now $29 million!!!

"This is about double the original estimate of 2005, and contingencies (like a sinkhole-prone site) could drive it up even more. They also told EPA that very few local firms can now get bonding for projects over $20 million (something they avoided saying at the January historic review public meeting), that concrete has increased 400% in a year, that steel framing and pilings, rebar, concrete and architectural precast panels are being re-priced on a week-to-week basis and the soonest they can get deliveries is at least 12 months out. I knew all this would happen two years ago when the same people told the LANTA board virtually the same thing at a meeting in Mayor Mitman's conference room, but no one listened to me.

"After this delightful news, EPA's solicitor read a letter received today from Concord Finance - the group providing the bridge loan of $5 million to get this thing started while additional revenue is sought. Concord has concluded that the rising funding gap (now at least $15 million) means that EPA will not be able to cover debt service for the loan out of projected parking revenue as they had previously promised. Concord will not be providing financing.

"After hearing all of this, EPA voted unanimously to once again reject all bids for the project.

"Strike two.

"They then went into closed executive session for 45 minutes to discuss the lawsuit filed by Riverkeeper Network. I'm sure they were trying to come up with a response to the November 30th hearing on the injunction to stop the project. (The public will receive a press release possibly tomorrow informing them that a federal judge has set a hearing date of 11/30/07 to address the motion by Riverkeeper Network for an injunction. The judge has not addressed any of the EPA's three motions for a dismissal.)

"EPA is in a very bad position, having spent lots of money to get nowhere. They tried to pass the buck to Rizzetto for not informing them sooner of the cost overruns but Rizzetto's honchos would have none of it and got pretty feisty, challenging Ferrone directly, telling him that they have been advising EPA since at least March that the project was well over the $23 million mark. They were not going to be EPA's scapegoat and things got pretty testy.

"So, right now we have no garage project in the form that Arcadia desires to have and we will have to see what EPA has up it's sleeve next. They didn't cancel the project...just rejected the bids. Whats next? Who knows, but we are going to court and will see what happens then.

"PS...No press showed up for this meeting. We called all the papers and Ed Seiger of the E-T eventually showed up to take some notes and interrogate the players after the meeting."

Ed Sieger's report, published in The Express Times, is located here. The Morning Call's Jarrett Renshaw, Easton's new beat reporter, also has a well-written report.

Norco Republicans Ask State AG to Investigate Sleaze Politics

If you want to violate Pennsylvania's campaign finance laws, Northampton County is a great place to do it. Not only are theses laws weak, but DA John Morganelli has consistently refused to enforce them.

Let me give you an example. In 2001, Moore Township resident Robert Welsh was the victim of a defamatory anonymous mailer when he sought public office, but Morganelli told him his hands were tied. "[I]t is perfectly permissible for any citizen to distribute anonymous literature to voters." He refused to investigate.

Under Morganelli's tortured interpretation of our election laws, there's no need to place a disclaimer on a campaign mailer. And if that's so, there's really no reason to file campaign finance reports at all. Why bother?

It's funny. Morganelli was all over AG Corbett when the Virginia-based Center for Individual Freedom (CFI) began a "public education" effort obviously designed to promote a candidate for the state high court. He demanded an injunction to force CFI to file a campaign finance report, the only remedy that would prevent irreparable harm in the closing days before the election.

But amazingly, Morganelli refused to lift a finger when local political consultant Tom Severson began his anonymous sleaze campaign against a local magisterial candidate last Spring. He remained silent in July, when Severson started a push poll against Ron Angle, even though that expense appears nowhere on any campaign finance report, even as an in-kind corporate contribution. And when the anonymous robo calls began in earnest against Angle and Ferraro, Morganelli was MIA, even though campaign finance reports fail to reflect the amount of money being spent.

You see, Morganelli and Severson are pals. So John feels it would be a conflict to investigate him. But whenever he has referred a question to the state AG, it has always been a half-hearted request that omits significant details. Severson's style seems to have rubbed off on Morganelli. In September, he started his own anonymous sleaze campaign against a potential opponent in his quest to become state AG.

Today, the Northampton County Republican Committee announced it has asked the state attorney general to investigate Northampton County's dirty politics. I am in the process of scanning all the documents they made available and I'll post them next week.

According to our Elections Code,

* A person who pays for a direct mailing or other ad designed to influence an election must "clearly and conspicuously" identify himself. The author can be anonymous, but the person who pays must disclose.

* Any person who spends more than $100 to advocate the defeat of a clearly identified candidate, is subject to the same reporting requirements as any candidate or committee.

* Any person making an independent expenditure of $500 or more after the final pre-election report, must report that expenditure within 24 hours.

* Corporate contributions are strictly prohibited.

* Violating these laws is a misdemeanor that can get you two years in Northampton County's overcrowded slammer, and District Attorney John Morganelli or Attorney General Tom Corbett has full authority to prosecute.

Next week, when I've scanned the packet supplied by the local Rs, I'll have more to say. Acting Chair Bob Kilbanks summed things up pretty well. "A very poor precedent is being set here."

Update: The Morning Call's brand new reporter, Jarrett Renshaw, has a well-written story concerning yesterday's news conference.