« GROWING LIST OF PEOPLE THINK SECRETARY OF STATE RITCHIE LIED; EXTENSIVE POST DETAILING DECEPTION COMES TOMORROW | Home | THE LIST OF LIES IN THE GROWING SCANDAL INVOLVING SECRETARY OF STATE MARK RITCHIE #2 »
THE LIST OF LIES IN THE GROWING SCANDAL INVOLVING SECRETARY OF STATE MARK RITCHIE
By Michael B. Brodkorb | November 23, 2007
I've documented the lies I believe were told by Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and a representative of his office in the growing scandal surrounding allegations that Ritchie used his official office to fund his political machine.
I'm not the only one who thinks Secretary of State Ritchie has lied. Legislators, conservative bloggers, liberal bloggers, Republicans and Democrats all believe that Secretary of State Ritchie has lied.
As with all of my posts involving Secretary of State Ritchie, I encourage someone to respond to one of the numerous requests I've sent to his campaign and official office asking for a comment or interview. I will publish any reply I received from Ritchie's official office or from his campaign responding to the specific allegations.
Below is the list I have complied with the supporting documentation. This is a very long post, but I encourage the dedicated readers of Minnesota Democrats Exposed to comment and send this post to their contacts.
#1. Secretary of State Mark Ritchie lied when he told the Star Tribune that he didn't authorize the use of a list of attendees at the civic-education meeting by his campaign:
- "But [Ritchie] said he did not authorize the use of the list for his campaign." Source: Star Tribune, October 29, 2007
I believe this is a lie. Ritchie has now admitted that he "personally provided" this list to his campaign:
- "Ritchie said Tuesday that he personally provided a copy of the directory to his campaign and requested that those on the list get a copy of his campaign's civic engagement newsletter, which is distributed to about 12,000 individuals and groups whom he described as active in civic life in the state. Source: Star Tribune, November 20, 2007
#2. Secretary of State Mark Ritchie lied when he told the Star Tribune that he didn't know how Giga and Tomczak's names were included in the e-mail sent on October 22, 2007 by Ritchie's campaign:
- "Asked how Giga and Tomczak's names were included in the campaign newsletter if they did not sign up for it, other than through the civic engagement list, Ritchie said: 'Well, I don't know about that.'" Source: Star Tribune, October 29, 2007
I believe this is a lie. Ritchie has now admitted that he "personally provided" this list to his campaign:
- "Ritchie said Tuesday that he personally provided a copy of the directory to his campaign and requested that those on the list get a copy of his campaign's civic engagement newsletter, which is distributed to about 12,000 individuals and groups whom he described as active in civic life in the state. Source: Star Tribune, November 20, 2007
On October 31, 2007, Representative Laura Brod and Representative Tom Emmer sent a letter to Secretary of State Ritchie's office requesting information regarding allegations that Ritchie may have used his official office to fund his political machine.
Brod and Emmer asked Ritchie eleven questions. On November 9, 2007, a representative of Ritchie's official office responded to Representative Brod and Emmer's letter.
The next two lies I believe were told come directly from Secretary of State Ritchie's official response to Representative Brod and Emmer's letter. Ritchie's letter was signed by Bert Black, legal advisor to Secretary of State Mark Ritchie.
#3. Ritchie's official office claimed the answer to the question asked by Representative Brod and Emmer of "[w]ho entered the data into the Mark Ritchie campaign database?" was "not known to the Office of the Secretary of State."
I believe this is a lie. Ritchie has now admitted that he "personally provided" this list to his campaign:
- "Ritchie said Tuesday that he personally provided a copy of the directory to his campaign and requested that those on the list get a copy of his campaign's civic engagement newsletter, which is distributed to about 12,000 individuals and groups whom he described as active in civic life in the state. Source: Star Tribune, November 20, 2007
Since Ritchie's provided this list to his campaign, Ritchie in fact knew who "entered the data into the Mark Ritchie campaign database."
#4. Ritchie's official office claimed the answer to the question of "who developed the campaign email distributed to Jack Tomczak and Mark Giga on October 22, 2007" was "not known to the Office of the Secretary of State."
I believe this is a lie. Ritchie has now admitted that he "personally provided" this list to his campaign:
- "Ritchie said Tuesday that he personally provided a copy of the directory to his campaign and requested that those on the list get a copy of his campaign's civic engagement newsletter, which is distributed to about 12,000 individuals and groups whom he described as active in civic life in the state. Source: Star Tribune, November 20, 2007
Since Ritchie provided the list to his campaign, Ritchie in fact knew the answer to who "developed the campaign email distributed to Jack Tomczak and Mark Giga…"
Ritchie also told John Croman from KARE-11 in an interview that "[o]ne of our volunteers typed in the names of the groups who said they were interested in civic education and civic engagement…" Once again, Ritchie statement to Croman proves that he knew who "developed the campaign email distributed to Jack Tomczak and Mark Giga…" contrary to information provided by his official office.
As I wrote on Wednesday evening, Ritchie's interview with KARE-11 has created numerous problems for himself. In this interview, Ritchie provides specific details missing from his official office's response to questions from Representative Brod and Emmer.
I also want to echo what former Secretary of State employee Kent Kaiser said about Bert Black, legal advisor to Secretary of State Mark Ritchie. Kaiser told me in an interview for Minnesota Democrats Exposed that Black is man of integrity and that he wouldn't knowingly provide misleading or false statements to anyone, including legislators.
I completely agree, as I have spoken with Black on more than one occasion and he has been a total professional. Others that I have spoke with today agree with Kaiser that Black's answer to the questions asked by Representative Brod and Emmer mentioned above are not consistent with Ritchie's public statements to reporters.
My discussions with people about Black's answers continually end with the agreement that his answer to Representative Brod and Emmer's question must have been based on faulty information provided by Ritchie or a designated representative. The fault for the lie lies with Ritchie and not with Black.
#5. Secretary of State Ritchie lied when he told the Star Tribune his e-mail of October 22, 2007 was "not a vehicle for solicitation":
- "'It [the newsletter] is distributed as an information source on civic engagement in Minnesota, not a vehicle for solicitation,' Ritchie said. The Oct. 22 newsletter, however, invites recipients to an upcoming fundraiser and links to Ritchie's campaign website for anyone wishing to donate to 'help me cover my campaign related expenses for this year.'" Source: Star Tribune, November 20, 2007
As noted in the Star Tribune story of November 20, Ritchie's campaign e-mail of October 22, 2007 ended with a solicitation for contributions:
- "Also, please join me for a NOVEMBER 2 Anniversary Party and Fundraiser, featuring author and radio commentator Jim Hightower, Friday, November 2, 5-7 p.m. at the home of Jeff and Emily Blodgett, 1437 Chelmsford in St. Paul. Check here for more details. If you can’t make it to this event but would like to help me cover my campaign related expenses for this year, you can donate online here. You can still qualify for the State of Minnesota refund of up to $100 per couple if you make your contribution in this year." Source: Ritchie for Secretary of State email, October 22, 2007
It defines logic that Ritchie didn't know that his own campaign's e-mail of October 22, 2007 contain a solicitation for contribution. I believe Ritchie has lied.
If you have another example of a lie you believe was told by Ritchie in response to the allegations that he used his official office to fund his political machine, please leave a comment with the supporting documentation on this post.
Finally, this growing scandal with Secretary of State Ritchie is very similar to the scandal that eventually lead to Representative Matt Entenza ending his campaign for Attorney General in 2006. While Ritchie's problems are more serious, the pattern is clear: a DFL elected official is caught in a lie trying to cover-up their bad behavior.
Please check back to Minnesota Democrats Exposed for more information on this developing story.
Topics: Uncategorized | 11 Comments »
11 Responses to “THE LIST OF LIES IN THE GROWING SCANDAL INVOLVING SECRETARY OF STATE MARK RITCHIE”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
November 23rd, 2007 at 3:28 pm
MDE, great work.
Very detailed, well thought-out post. This is why you are the preeminent blogger in Minnesota.
Mark Ritchie is in some serious hot water. I’m sure he’s been feeling the heat over the Thanksgiving holidays.
Stay vigilant, MDE.
November 23rd, 2007 at 4:19 pm
Ritchie also says in the KARE story that it was a volunteer who typed in the names, but it wasn’t: It was either administrative assistant Kate Mohn or her student worker, David, who is no longer working at the SOS office. (Maybe he’s parsing his words here: It could be that David is now a “volunteer” on the campaign, but he would have been in a paid state capacity at the time the names were typed in). Someone should be looking to apply the recall provisions outlined here: http://www.sos.state.mn.us/home/index.asp?page=238
November 23rd, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Everyone knows that it violates state statute to use your state-paid offices to solicit campaign contributions- a freshman rep would know this. The SOS must certainly know this.
So aside from all of the lies- He’s now admitted that he used his state office and an official non-partisan/educational event to solicit emails. He then sent them a direct request for political contributions. He’s still saying he doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with this. Is it- or is it not- a violation of state statute? You can’t make a fundraising phone call from your state office- were these state computers or not? Were these state staffmembers of not?
My guess is he’s done this from Day 1- and there are many other examples- this is just the first time he’s been questioned on it.
This guy thinks he’s above the rules and that it’s his right to use the Office of SOS to build a database of supporters. He doesn’t get it, he doesn’t get the job he’s been elected to do. It’s very concerning and he’s definitely unfit for the office. No question about it.
Now- where are the Democrats??
November 23rd, 2007 at 6:07 pm
[...] November 23rd, 2007 • 7:07 pmRitchie’s Lies Earlier today, Michael Brodkorb compiled a list of 5 lies on his blog. I just discovered a sixth lie. Here’s what Mr. Ritchie is quoted as saying in the Strib article: Previously, Ritchie had denied knowing how the campaign got the list. He now insists that it solicited contributions only to pay for the newsletter itself. [...]
November 23rd, 2007 at 6:16 pm
And Mike lets not forgot something here. While you’re so eager just to show lying:
* He abused his access to state data for his own benefit. A crime that can get me fired as a public employee. And one of things you have documented is this conduct has exposed potentialling confidential information.
* The data that he took based on the letter you quoted from Black indicates that it showed have been for. The list was given to Mark Ritchie personally and than his campaign. This list was stolen twice from the state of Minnesota for Ritchie’s own gain.
* He has caused because of this lying an investigation to take place by the legistative auditor. It seems fair that he should paid for the investigation he caused by this lying!
* He ran for the office saying that he will make the office nonpartisan and be better run. He has just turned this into the most partisan fight about the office since I’ve been alive.
* He has said the system needs firewalls which will be put in place now when the most important firewall Mark Ritchie failed.
The lying is the tip of iceberg in his misconduct everyone!!!
If Mark Ritchie will take responsibility like he claims he will he would’ve already resigned!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
November 23rd, 2007 at 6:41 pm
Interesting is that Ritchie is trying to paint the campaign solicitation as a “civic engagement” newsletter.
“Civic engagement” newsletters could come from Ritchie, but they should come from him in his capacity as SoS.
Any literature distributed by his campaign is campaign literature, and therefore separate from his official responsibilities. Calling the literature a “civic engagement newsletter” is nothing more than more lies and spin from Mark Ritchie.
Ritchie wants a firewall between the SoS office and his campaign. But it seems the only way to separate the two is to firewall Ritchie from the SoS office.
November 23rd, 2007 at 7:06 pm
Say what you want about Mark Ritchie…he’s no
Rebecca Otto.
November 23rd, 2007 at 8:14 pm
[...] « THE LIST OF LIES IN THE GROWING SCANDAL INVOLVING SECRETARY OF STATE MARK RITCHIE | Home [...]
November 28th, 2007 at 3:45 am
[...] Mark Ritchie lied to Rep. Laura Brod & Rep. Tom Emmer. He also lied to Legislative Auditor Jim Nobles. Those lies are chronicled here & here. Here’s where I take issue with the Bemidji Pioneer: Republican Party officials have asked Ritchie to resign, a far too drastic measure that is basically a knee-jerk reaction and even perhaps political payback for the rough time Ritchie gave Kiffmeyer. [...]
November 30th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
[...] Let’s review the facts: Mark Ritchie lied repeatedly to James Nobles, the state Legislative Auditor, as well to Rep. Laura Brod, (R-New Prague) & Rep. Tom Emmer, (R-Delano). [...]
November 30th, 2007 at 9:45 pm
[...] Let’s review the facts, facts which Michael has posted about & that I’ve posted about. Here’s something that Michael posted: Below is the list I have complied with the supporting documentation. This is a very long post, but I encourage the dedicated readers of Minnesota Democrats Exposed to comment and send this post to their contacts. [...]