You may be right - it may have come from someone or something beyong Liefong, but..remember..the simplest explanation is more often the most accurate. In this case, when we look at all the facts we know so far, and there are a lot - enough to form some conclusions - and we ask "Quo bono?", the answer is Liefong. Liefong benefits, or he did, anyway, in a manner expedient for his needs at the time which was to win a plurality of one-party votes in the primary. Remember, at the time, there was no candidate from an opposing party against which he had to mount a campaign so a win then, was a final win assuring him of keeping office, or so he thought then.
Yep Occum Razor give the answer. Durham may be corrupt. That is up to Durhmites in my view. It is their job to make their city not corrupt.
This case is of broader interst for two reasons:
1. They are picking on outsiders. That is they are taking their corruption to Americans only temporarily in their city. Allowing this type of thing to go on is a threat to any American who must travel to conduct business. There is a long tradition of standing up against exactly this type of case where a local official, using innocent outsiders with NOBODY in the community to stand up for them, to gain political advantage.
2. There is a racial angle. These defendants are being singled out because of their race. The is a less long tradition for Americans not standing for that but it is a strong American tradition.
Without these two characteristics, there would be far less interest in this case. Whether Durham is more or less corrupt than other places is not that interesting to me. As long as they just pillory each other and leave the rest of us alone, it is up to Durhmite and NC voters to decide if they want their criminal justice system to be corrupt and to lock up their fellow citizen in what amounts to a DA dominated lottery.