Despite Chairman Puharic's quote in today's Asbury Park Press to the contrary, Anna Little is not the only candidate with problems with the screening process. The concerns go beyond the participants having to agree not to run in a primary if they don't pass the screening committee.
Contrary to Puharic's claim that: The checks will be done by an investigator with a political background, and the findings "will go from the researcher to the candidate. It will be completely private. Under no circumstances will the 24 members of the screening committee see the research, nor can they request that." , the multi-page contract contains language requiring the candidates to hold the Monmouth GOP harmless in the event any of the information leaks, and there is no promise of privacy.
Who would want a Freeholder naive enough to sign a document like that? This is not the way "all big companies" do it.
Puharic's claim of only the investigator and the candidate seeing the report is just not credible. If true, what would be the point? If the committee will not have access to the reports, what are they screening?
As I have said here before, this whole process is a farce. Puharic's real objective all along has been to get rid of Anna Little.
Little said, "If he doesn't want me on the ticket, he should look me in the eye and say that."
That would have been too forthright for this Chairman.
See Abe's post for more
Trump's 12-Year Term
7 hours ago
Posts
2 comments:
This is not the way "all big companies" do it.
Maybe Enron?
"The background process is voluntary. To date, everyone has indicated a willingness to comply.
We are asking the candidates to invest in this process. If a candidate is unwilling to fund their own background, the party will do it. But our funds are not endless and we are all in this together." Adam Puharic
Someone forgot to mention this?
Post a Comment