RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
A Tale of Two Cuomos Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=27607"><span class="small">Greg Palast, Reader Supported News</span></a>   
Saturday, 03 January 2015 09:35

Palast writes: "But there was another Cuomo, the one that tried to stop the US publication of my book, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy; the Mario Cuomo who went to court to try to put the Palast Investigative team out of business while we worked to expose the Bush Family election heist and the con job leading to war."

New York governor Mario Cuomo tours the decommissioned Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant on June 28, 1990. (photos: Don Jacobsen, Thomas A. Ferrara/Newsday)
New York governor Mario Cuomo tours the decommissioned Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant on June 28, 1990. (photos: Don Jacobsen, Thomas A. Ferrara/Newsday)


A Tale of Two Cuomos

By Greg Palast, Reader Supported News

03 January 15

 

The tragic end of the inspired voice and the duplicitous pol

knew Mario Cuomo well. Too well.

I helped write the talking points for the speeches that got him elected governor and I grieved that he did not become president.



But there was another Cuomo, the one who tried to stop the US publication of my book “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy”; the Mario Cuomo who went to court to try to put the Palast Investigative team out of business while we worked to expose the Bush Family election heist and the con job leading to war.

I just read the glowing New York Times obit. Even in death, Cuomo has pulled off one last con. The Times lauds his single stellar accomplishment as governor: “He closed the Shoreham nuclear plant on Long Island,” New York.

No, he didn’t. As usual with Mario, he gave a great speech – and won election by calling for the nuclear plant’s closure. But behind the scenes, the other Mario, the back-room wheeler-dealer, the toady to the bankers and power industry magnates, moved heaven and earth to stand in the way of the courageous statesmen and activists who actually closed this dangerous, radioactive monstrosity.

On July 2, 1985, the New York State Legislature was about to pass the historic law authorizing the public takeover of the out-of-control private company that owned Shoreham. Near midnight, one of Cuomo’s stooges called me (the legislature had tasked me to write the law’s first draft) to ask that we delay the vote, “because the governor still hasn’t made up his mind.” I said, “Tell Governor Hamlet that history won’t wait for him.”

The bill passed the next day – and Cuomo made a big show of signing the bill he secretly tried to dilute and kill. But I admit, he gave a great speech.

After nearly a decade of investigation, I recommended that the government bring civil racketeering charges against the builders of the Shoreham nuclear plant for, among other frauds, falsifying records on the plant’s earthquake safety and emergency diesel generators. (See the “Fukushima, Texas” chapter in “Vultures’ Picnic.”) Charges were brought, and a federal jury found the nuclear industry bigs liable for conspiracy, fraud, and racketeering.

The jury award would cost the plant owner $4.3 billion.

In public, Governor Cuomo praised the jury verdict; but behind the scenes the other Cuomo went to work, scheming in back rooms to cut the award and save the company from bankruptcy – and save the banks that held its bonds. Daily, the judge’s master would tell us, “The governor called again.” There’s nothing corrupt or illegal about the governor secretly calling the judge’s chamber, just two-faced and sickening.



Cuomo won. He got the case settled, over the objections of the officials and activists who had brought the charges, for less than a dime on the dollar. The public got shafted out of billions, and the company and banks were saved.

Cuomo took full credit for putting the rogue company out of business, for closing the plant and buying it for just $1. It was a great speech – a great fairy tale.

Cuomo’s little games meant the nuclear plant would cost the public billions of dollars, not a buck. When I tactfully explained this uncomfortable fact to the governor, he responded with an Italian gesture that cannot be translated in a family newspaper.

But duplicity has its price, and the Devil has the last laugh. While Cuomo was pleasing the bankers in private while publicly waving the liberal anti-corporate banner, a much brighter politician in Arkansas both pleased the bankers and sang their praises. The bankers’ favorite, their champion of the deregulation that Reagan could never dream of accomplishing, became president. And Cuomo spent his last, bitter years trying to hush up those like me who cast a shadow on his fabricated Glory Days.

Let me name a few of those who did close the Shoreham nuclear plant: Peter Maniscalco, Nancy Newell, Steve Liss, the Hon. Wayne Prospect, and the Hon. Paul Harenberg. I name them here because I doubt their obituaries will make the front page of The Times. They are the heroes, all of them bullied by Cuomo but unbowed. I cherish them for their actions, not their speeches.

It is the harsh and uncomforting work of a journalist to reveal the unforgiving facts when history is falsified. It’s a task I would rather avoid, especially now that The Governor’s great, golden voice, the voice that spoke for the working person, is silenced forever.

The conflicted soul he carried within him must have been a terrifying burden.

Now, may you rest in peace, Mario Cuomo. Both of you.



Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Murdoch, Scaife and CIA Propaganda Print
Saturday, 03 January 2015 09:22

Parry writes: "The rapid expansion of America's right-wing media began in the 1980s as the Reagan administration coordinated foreign policy initiatives with conservative media executives, including Rupert Murdoch, and then cleared away regulatory hurdles, reports Robert Parry."

Australian-American media mogul Rupert Murdoch. (photo: AP)
Australian-American media mogul Rupert Murdoch. (photo: AP)


Murdoch, Scaife and CIA Propaganda

By Robert Parry, Consortium News

03 January 15

 

he Reagan administration pulled right-wing media executives Rupert Murdoch and Richard Mellon Scaife into a CIA-organized “perception management” operation which aimed Cold War-style propaganda at the American people in the 1980s, according to declassified U.S. government records.

Although some records relating to Murdoch remain classified, several documents that have been released indicate that he and billionaire Scaife were considered sources of financial and other support for President Ronald Reagan’s hard-line Central American policies, including the CIA’s covert war in Nicaragua.

A driving force behind creation of Reagan’s extraordinary propaganda bureaucracy was CIA Director William Casey who dispatched one of the CIA’s top covert action specialists, Walter Raymond Jr., to the National Security Council to oversee the project. According to the documents, Murdoch was brought into the operation in 1983 – when he was still an Australian citizen and his media empire was much smaller than it is today.

Charles Wick, director of the U.S. Information Agency, arranged at least two face-to-face meetings between Murdoch and Reagan, the first on Jan. 18, 1983, when the administration was lining up private financing for its propaganda campaign, according to records at the Reagan presidential library in Simi Valley, California. That meeting also included lawyer and political operative Roy Cohn and his law partner Thomas Bolan.

The Oval Office meeting between Reagan and Murdoch came just five days after NSC Advisor William Clark noted in a Jan. 13, 1983 memo to Reagan the need for non-governmental money to advance the project. “We will develop a scenario for obtaining private funding,” Clark wrote, as cited in an unpublished draft chapter of the congressional Iran-Contra investigation.

Clark then told the President that “Charlie Wick has offered to take the lead. We may have to call on you to meet with a group of potential donors.”

The documents suggest that Murdoch was soon viewed as a source for that funding. In an Aug. 9, 1983 memo summing up the results of a Casey-organized meeting with five leading ad executives regarding how to “sell” Reagan’s aggressive policies in Central America, Raymond referred to Murdoch as if he already were helping out.

In a memo to Clark, entitled “Private Sector Support for Central American Program,” Raymond criticized a more traditional White House outreach program headed by Faith Whittlesey as “preaching to the converted.”

Raymond told Clark that the new project would involve a more comprehensive approach aimed at persuading a majority of Americans to back Reagan’s Central American policies, which included support for right-wing regimes in Guatemala and El Salvador as well as the Contra rebels fighting the leftist Sandinista government of Nicaragua.

“We must move out into the middle sector of the American public and draw them into the ‘support’ column,” Raymond wrote. “A second package of proposals deal with means to market the issue, largely considering steps utilizing public relations specialists – or similar professionals – to help transmit the message.”

To improve the project’s chances for success, Raymond wrote, “we recommended funding via Freedom House or some other structure that has credibility in the political center. Wick, via Murdoch, may be able to draw down added funds for this effort.”

Raymond included similar information in a separate memo to Wick in which Raymond noted that “via Murdock [sic] may be able to draw down added funds” to support the initiative. (Raymond later told me that he was referring to Rupert Murdoch.)

In a March 7, 1984 memo about the “‘Private Funders’ Project,” Raymond referred to Murdoch again in discussing a request for money from longtime CIA-connected journalist Brian Crozier, who was “looking for private sector funding to work on the question of ‘anti-Americanism’ overseas.”

Raymond wrote: “I am pursuaded [sic] it is a significant long term problem. It is also the kind of thing that Ruppert [sic] and Jimmy might respond positively to. Please look over the stack [of papers from Crozier] and lets [sic] discuss if and when there might be further discussion with our friends.”

Crozier, who died in 2012, had a long history of operating in the shadowy world of CIA propaganda. He was director of Forum World Features, which was set up in 1966 by the Congress for Cultural Freedom, which received covert funding from the CIA. Crozier also acknowledged in his memoir keeping some of his best stories for the CIA.

At least one other document related to Murdoch’s work with USIA Director Wick remains classified, according to the National Archives. Murdoch’s News Corp. has not responded to requests for comment about the Reagan-era documents.

Helping Murdoch

Murdoch, who became a naturalized citizen of the United States in 1985 to meet a regulatory requirement that U.S. TV stations must be owned by Americans, benefited from his close ties to both U.S. and British officialdom.

On Monday, the UK’s Independent reported that Ed Richards, the retiring head of the British media regulatory agency Ofcom, accused British government representatives of showing favoritism to Murdoch’s companies.

Richards said he was “surprised” by the informality, closeness and frequency of contact between executives and ministers during the failed bid by Murdoch’s News Corp. for the satellite network BSkyB in 2011. The deal was abandoned when it was discovered that journalists at Murdoch’s News of the World tabloid had hacked the phone of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler and others.

“What surprised everyone about it – not just me – was quite how close it was and the informality of it,” Richards said, confirming what had been widely reported regarding Murdoch’s access to powerful British politicians dating back at least to the reign of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. The Reagan documents suggest that Murdoch built similarly close ties to leading U.S. politicians in the same era.

In 1983, Murdoch’s rising media empire was still based in Australia with only a few U.S. properties, such as the Star tabloid and the New York Post. But he was eyeing expansion into the U.S. media market. In 1984, he bought a stake in 20th Century Fox and then six Metromedia television stations, which would form the nucleus of Fox Broadcasting Company, which was founded on Oct. 9, 1986.

At the time, Murdoch and other media moguls were lobbying for a relaxation of regulations from the Federal Communications Commission, a goal that Reagan shared. Under FCC Chairman Mark Fowler, the Reagan administration undertook a number of steps favorable to Murdoch’s interests, including increasing the number of TV stations that any single entity could own from seven in 1981 to 12 in 1985.

In 1987, the “Fairness Doctrine,” which required political balance in broadcasting, was eliminated, which enabled Murdoch to pioneer a more aggressive conservatism on his TV network. In the mid-1990s, Murdoch expanded his political reach by founding the neoconservative Weekly Standard in 1995 and Fox News on cable in 1996. At Fox News, Murdoch has hired scores of prominent politicians, mostly Republicans, putting them on his payroll as commentators.

Last decade, Murdoch continued to expand his reach into U.S. mass media, acquiring DirecTV and the financial news giant Dow Jones, including The Wall Street Journal, America’s leading business news journal.

Scaife’s Role

Richard Mellon Scaife exercised his media influence on behalf of Reagan and the conservative cause in a different way. While the scion of the Mellon banking, oil and aluminum fortune did publish a right-wing newspaper in Pittsburgh, the Tribune Review, Scaife mostly served as a financial benefactor for right-wing journalists and think tanks.

Indeed, Scaife was one of the original financiers of what emerged as a right-wing counter-establishment in media and academia, a longstanding goal of key Republicans, including President Richard Nixon who recognized the importance of propaganda as a political weapon.

According to Nixon’s chief of staff H.R. Haldeman, as reported in The Haldeman Diaries, one of Nixon’s pet ideas was to build a network of loyal conservatives in positions of influence. The President was “pushing again on project of building our establishment in press, business, education, etc.,” Haldeman wrote in one entry on Sept. 12, 1970.

Financed by rich conservative foundations and wealthy special interests, Nixon’s brainchild helped tilt politics in favor of the American Right with Richard Mellon Scaife one of the project’s big-money godfathers. By using family foundations, such as Sarah Scaife and Carthage, Scaife joined with other leading right-wing foundations to fund think tanks, such as the Heritage Foundation, which Scaife helped launch in 1973.

In 1978, Nixon’s friend and Treasury Secretary William Simon provided more impetus to this growing machine, declaring in his book, Time for Truth: “Funds generated by business … must rush by the multimillion to the aid of liberty … to funnel desperately needed funds to scholars, social scientists, writers and journalists who understand the relationship between political and economic liberty.”

With Reagan’s inauguration in 1981 – and Casey’s selection as CIA director – Scaife and other right-wing ideologues were in position to merge their private funding with U.S. Government money in pursuit of the administration’s geopolitical goals, including making sure the American people would not break ranks as many did over the Vietnam War.

Building the Operation

On Nov. 4, 1982, Raymond, after his transfer from CIA to the NSC staff but while still a CIA officer, wrote to NSC Advisor Clark about the “Democracy Initiative and Information Programs,” stating that “Bill Casey asked me to pass on the following thought concerning your meeting with Dick Scaife, Dave Abshire [then a member of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board], and Co.

“Casey had lunch with them today and discussed the need to get moving in the general area of supporting our friends around the world. By this definition he is including both ‘building democracy’ … and helping invigorate international media programs. The DCI [Casey] is also concerned about strengthening public information organizations in the United States such as Freedom House. …

“A critical piece of the puzzle is a serious effort to raise private funds to generate momentum. Casey’s talk with Scaife and Co. suggests they would be very willing to cooperate. … Suggest that you note White House interest in private support for the Democracy initiative.”

In subsequent years, Freedom House emerged as a leading critic of Nicaragua’s Sandinista government, which Reagan and Casey were seeking to overthrow by covertly supporting the Contra rebels. Freedom House also became a major recipient of money from the U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy, which was founded in 1983 under the umbrella of the Casey-Raymond project.

The role of the CIA in these initiatives was concealed but never far from the surface. A Dec. 2, 1982 note addressed to “Bud,” a reference to senior NSC official Robert “Bud” McFarlane, described a request from Raymond for a brief meeting. “When he [Raymond] returned from Langley [CIA headquarters], he had a proposed draft letter … re $100 M democ[racy] proj[ect],” the note said.

While Casey pulled the strings on this project, the CIA director instructed White House officials to hide the CIA’s role. “Obviously we here [at CIA] should not get out front in the development of such an organization, nor should we appear to be a sponsor or advocate,” Casey said in one undated letter to then-White House counselor Edwin Meese III as Casey urged creation of a “National Endowment.”

On Jan. 21, 1983, Raymond updated Clark about the project, which also was reaching out to representatives from other conservative foundations, including Les Lenkowsky of Smith-Richardson, Michael Joyce of Olin and Dan McMichael of Mellon-Scaife. “This is designed to develop a broader group of people who will support parallel initiatives consistent with Administration needs and desires,” Raymond wrote.

Bashing Teresa Heinz

One example of how Scaife’s newspaper directly helped the Reagan administration can be seen in clippings from the Tribune-Review that I found in Raymond’s files. On April 21, 1983, the newspaper published a package of stories suggesting illicit left-wing connections among groups opposed to nuclear war.

The articles leave little doubt that Scaife’s newspaper is suggesting that these anti-war activists are communists or communist fellow travelers. One headline reads: “Reds Woo Some U.S. Peace Leaders.”

Another article cites an accusation from one congressman in the 1950s, after hearings on foundation grants “to numerous Communists and Communist-front organizations,” that “Here lies the story of how Communism and Socialism are financed in the U.S. – where they get their money.” The 1983 article then asks: “Is history repeating itself?”

Ironically, one of the philanthropists who is singled out in these red-baiting articles is Teresa Heinz, then married to Sen. John Heinz, R-Pennsylvania, who died in a 1991 plane crash. In 1995, Teresa Heinz married Sen. John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, who is currently Secretary of State.

The organizational role of Casey and Raymond in this domestic propaganda campaign raised concerns about the legality of having two senior CIA officials participating in a scheme to manage the perceptions of the American people.

Both in internal documents and a deposition to the congressional Iran-Contra committee, Raymond made clear his discomfort about the possible legal violation from his and Casey’s roles. Raymond formally resigned from the CIA in April 1983, so, he said, “there would be no question whatsoever of any contamination of this.”

That sensitivity was also reflected in press guidance prepared in case a reporter noted Raymond’s CIA background and the problems it presented to the “public diplomacy” effort. If someone challenged press reports that asserted “there is no CIA involvement in the Public Diplomacy Program” and then asked “isn’t Walt Raymond, a CIA employee, involved heavily?” – the prescribed answer was:

“Walter Raymond is a member of the National Security Council staff. In the past he has worked for Defense, CIA and State. It is true that in the formative stages of the effort, Walt Raymond contributed many useful ideas. It is ironic that he was one of those who was most insistent that there be no CIA involvement in this program in any way.

“Indeed, it is a credit to the Agency that it has stressed throughout that the United States ought to be completely open about the programs it puts in place to assist in the development of democratic institutions and that none of these programs should come under the aegis of the CIA. They do not want to be involved in managing these programs and will not be. We have nothing to hide here.”

If a reporter pressed regarding where Raymond last worked, the response was to be: “He retired from CIA. He is a permanent member of the National Security Council.” And, if pressed about Raymond’s duties, the scripted answer was: “His duties there are classified.” (Raymond’s last job at the CIA was Director of the Covert Action Staff with a specialty in propaganda and disinformation.)

Beyond how Raymond’s “classified duties” contradict the assertion that “we have nothing to hide here,” there was a more deceptive element of the press guidance: it didn’t mention the key role of CIA Director Casey in both organizing and directing the project – and it suggested that Raymond’s role had been limited to offering “many useful ideas” when he was the hands-on, day-to-day manager of the operation.

Casey’s Hidden Hand

Casey’s secret role in the propaganda scheme continued well into 1986, as Raymond continued to send progress reports to his old boss, even as Raymond fretted in one memo about the need “to get [Casey] out of the loop.”

The “public diplomacy” operation was “the kind of thing which [Casey] had a broad catholic interest in,” Raymond shrugged during his Iran-Contra deposition. He then offered the excuse that Casey undertook this apparently illegal interference in domestic politics “not so much in his CIA hat, but in his adviser to the president hat.”

Though the Casey-Raymond teamwork ended with the exposure of the Iran-Contra scandal in late 1986 and with Casey’s death on May 6, 1987, its legacy continued with Scaife and other rich right-wingers funding ideological media that protected the flanks of President Reagan, his successor President George H.W. Bush and other Republicans of that era.

For instance, Scaife helped fund the work of Steven Emerson, who played a key role in “discrediting” investigations into whether Reagan’s 1980 campaign had sabotaged President Jimmy Carter’s hostage negotiations with Iran to gain an edge in that pivotal election. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Unmasking October Surprise Debunker.”]

Scaife also helped finance the so-called “Arkansas Project” that pushed hyped and bogus scandals to damage the presidency of Bill Clinton. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Starr-gate: Cracks on the Right.”]

Walter Raymond Jr. died on April 16, 2003. Richard Mellon Scaife died on July 4, 2014. But Rupert Murdoch, now 83, remains one of the most powerful media figures on earth, continuing to wield unparalleled influence through his control of Fox News and his vast media empire that stretches around the globe.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Jeb Bush Resigns as George W. Bush's Brother Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=9160"><span class="small">Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker</span></a>   
Friday, 02 January 2015 16:48

Borowitz writes: "In the strongest sign to date that he intends to seek the 2016 Republican Presidential nomination, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush has officially resigned his position as George W. Bush's brother."

In a politically prudent move, Jeb Bush resigns as George W. Bush's brother. (photo: Jason Reed/Reuters)
In a politically prudent move, Jeb Bush resigns as George W. Bush's brother. (photo: Jason Reed/Reuters)


Jeb Bush Resigns as George W. Bush's Brother

By Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker

2 January 15

 

The article below is satire. Andy Borowitz is an American comedian and New York Times-bestselling author who satirizes the news for his column, "The Borowitz Report."

n the strongest sign to date that he intends to seek the 2016 Republican Presidential nomination, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush has officially resigned his position as George W. Bush’s brother.

“No longer being related to his brother is a key step to clearing Jeb’s path to the nomination,” an aide said on New Year’s Day. “We expect his poll numbers to soar on this.”

According to the aide, the former Florida governor resigned his post as brother in a ten-minute phone call with George W. Bush, after which he blocked the former President’s phone number and e-mail address.

In an official statement, George W. Bush said that he “understands and supports” his former brother’s decision.

“If I were him, I would no longer be related to me either,” he said.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Twin Peaks Planet Print
Friday, 02 January 2015 16:45

Krugman writes: "In 2014, soaring inequality in advanced nations finally received the attention it deserved."

Economist Paul Krugman recommends examining capital globally rather than nationally. (photo: Reuters/Chip East)
Economist Paul Krugman recommends examining capital globally rather than nationally. (photo: Reuters/Chip East)


Twin Peaks Planet

By Paul Krugman, The New York Times

2 January 15

 

n 2014, soaring inequality in advanced nations finally received the attention it deserved, as Thomas Piketty’s “Capital in the Twenty-First Century” became a surprise (and deserving) best seller. The usual suspects are still in well-paid denial, but, to everyone else, it is now obvious that income and wealth are more concentrated at the very top than they have been since the Gilded Age — and the trend shows no sign of letting up.

But that’s a story about developments within nations, and, therefore, incomplete. You really want to supplement Piketty-style analysis with a global view, and when you do, I’d argue, you get a better sense of the good, the bad and the potentially very ugly of the world we live in.

So let me suggest that you look at a remarkable chart of income gains around the world produced by Branko Milanovic of the City University of New York Graduate Center (which I will be joining this summer). What Mr. Milanovic shows is that income growth since the fall of the Berlin Wall has been a “twin peaks” story. Incomes have, of course, soared at the top, as the world’s elite becomes ever richer. But there have also been huge gains for what we might call the global middle — largely consisting of the rising middle classes of China and India.

READ MORE


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
The Appalling Career of Michael Grimm Print
Friday, 02 January 2015 16:41

Ratliff writes: "Michael Grimm's pugnacious career in government service ended with a whimper on Monday night, with an after-hours statement announcing his resignation from Congress."

Michael Grimm, who famously threatened to throw a reporter off of the Capitol Rotunda balcony. (photo: Alex Wong/Getty)
Michael Grimm, who famously threatened to throw a reporter off of the Capitol Rotunda balcony. (photo: Alex Wong/Getty)


The Appalling Career of Michael Grimm

By Evan Ratliff, The New Yorker

2 January 15

 

ichael Grimm’s pugnacious career in government service ended with a whimper on Monday night, with an after-hours statement announcing his resignation from Congress. It had been a week since Grimm, the Republican congressman from Staten Island, pleaded guilty to one charge in a twenty-count federal indictment for tax fraud and perjury. Outside the courthouse that day, he declared that he had no plans to step down. It was easy to imagine that Grimm would keep his word, if only because of the sheer volume of allegations that the congressman had already beaten back—including those recounted here in 2011, in which Grimm, while serving as an F.B.I. agent, was alleged to have pulled his gun in a Queen’s night club and instigated a racially charged incident (acts that he denied).

But step down he did, bringing an end to a congressional tenure consisting of equal parts bluster and farce. Grimm will probably be best remembered for his on-camera threat to throw a NY1 television reporter off of the Capitol Rotunda balcony after he’d dared to ask a question about the Justice Department investigation into Grimm’s fundraising. And no collection of Grimm’s greatest hits can leave out the interview in which he recited almost verbatim a speech from “A Few Good Men” as if it were his own. The Grimmest of Grimm moments occurred, however, during his 2012 campaign, when he publicly insinuated that political forces arrayed against him had broken into his office to gain access to computer files. The break-in turned out to be the work of a troubled teen-ager. The computers, police concluded, hadn’t been touched.

Grimm previously worked as an undercover F.B.I. agent, and he cited that fact repeatedly on the campaign trail—at one point drawing a rebuke from the bureau. In November, he won reëlection in the shadow of his federal indictment and a potential trial. While some Democrats accused him of shamefully holding his guilty plea until after Election Day, he may have done his constituents a favor by saving them from an opponent so inept that he earned more mockery than even the congressman himself. (“In Domenic Recchia, the Democrats have fielded a candidate so dumb, ill-informed, evasive and inarticulate that voting for a thuggish Republican who could wind up in a prison jumpsuit starts to make rational sense,” the Daily News observed in one of the most comically underwhelming endorsements ever published.) Now each party will have a new chance to field a less-bad-than-the-other-guy candidate in a special election.

Ultimately, though, Grimm’s plea and resignation will prove unsatisfying to anyone but political partisans. He has admitted to paying undocumented workers under the table as the owner of a Manhattan restaurant called Healthalicious, filing false tax returns to profit from it, and then lying about all of it to investigators. These are not trivialities, but the public will likely never obtain answers to more serious questions around Grimm’s conduct as an elected representative. In 2012, the Times reported extensively on hundreds of thousands of dollars Grimm raised from the followers of the New York City rabbi Yoshiyahu Yosef Pinto, detailing allegations that Grimm advised contributors on how to exceed legal limits and that he collected donations in envelopes full of cash. (Pinto, in an absurdly complicated investigation spanning New York and Israel, later reportedly accused Grimm of blackmailing him.) By 2014, a federal investigation was underway, and one of Grimm’s campaign contributors (and former girlfriend), Diana Durand, was soon under indictment for using straw donors to exceed contribution limits. The U.S. Attorney’s office had assigned Assistant U.S. Attorney Todd Kaminsky, known for his success in public-corruption prosecutions, to Grimm’s investigation. But Kaminsky left the case in May to run for state assembly, Durand pleaded guilty without implicating Grimm, and no campaign-finance charges were ever brought against the congressman.

Federal prosecutors were left with the Healthalicious tax fraud, which, depending on one’s political affiliation, came off as either Capone-like in its catch-them-for-what-you-can-prove approach or evidence of the “political witch hunt” Grimm had invoked against the allegations all along.

Grimm has long made a habit of leaving such problematic connections in his wake, and then chalking up any accusations of impropriety to conspiracy. I first became interested in him while investigating one of his F.B.I. informants, a scam artist named Josef von Habsburg who helped lure a lawyer into a dubious sting operation. “I am an F.B.I. agent, I took an oath,” the then aspiring congressman railed at me when I asked him questions about his F.B.I. past, including the night-club incident. “You’re trying to do a chop job on me.” When I asked him why he left the F.B.I. when he did, just after having helped build a large and successful case against fraud on Wall Street, he said, “I was really at the top of my career. If I was gonna leave, leave at the top.” Later, the Times reported on Grimm’s post-F.B.I. business ties to a convicted fraudster and former F.B.I. agent in Texas, along with the campaign-finance questions and the allegations that Grimm’s partner in Healthalicious had connections to the Gambino crime family. “This attack is politically motivated,” Grimm responded.

Federal prosecutors have not made clear whether any of their investigations remain open. One former Assistant U.S. Attorney with whom I spoke—who did not have direct knowledge of the case—found it unlikely that Grimm would have taken any plea deal that didn’t include at least tacit agreement from prosecutors to no longer pursue such charges.

Grimm now faces a federal prison sentence of up to thirty-six months. Whether he ends up alongside the convicts he once took great pride in cornering will be left to U.S. District Court Judge Pamela Chen. What we do know is that Michael Grimm is a man who betrayed the laws he once made such a show of upholding.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 2591 2592 2593 2594 2595 2596 2597 2598 2599 2600 Next > End >>

Page 2600 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN