RUDY VERITAS

All The News...

I came to the Giuliani campaign late for round two.  I arrived at the end of July, 1993.  I was working prior to that as Director of Corporate Communications for EMI Records.  Anyone who thinks politics is a jungle should try working in the recording industry.  Once again I took the job of heading up the Surrogate Speakers Bureau, as I had done in 1989 and as my brother had done for candidate Cuomo in 1982.  It required good organizational skills and a cool head.  Attributes my brother had in measure and I like to think I possessed.

From the day I started there was grumbling about the New York Times.  While it's true that the major newspaper in any city can make or break a candidate if it wants, there is, as I have said, nothing like the New York Times.  Its influence has been waning and it is not quite the oracle it once was, but it can still command an audience or create conversation like no other media outlet in this country.

The Times could create candidates or destroy them on their editorial page.  Highly unusual, however,  was for the Times to take a position in its news coverage.  There were no Rudy lovers on the news staff or editorial board of the Times.  To the contrary, most were Giuliani haters.  No news, of course, in any of this to the RWG campaign.  As the city's first black mayor, David Dinkins could have tortured cats during his daily press avails and the Times would have found some healing message in it.  We had the NY Post on our side, which was some consolation, and we knew we could never get the Times' endorsement, but it became increasingly clear that the feelings of the editorial page were spilling over with ever increasing fervor onto the news pages.  And that for us was dangerous.  The Times not endorsing you, fine.  It would help and be a game changer if they did, but nothing was predicated on it.  The Times actively trying to fuck you on the front page, however, that was something that would kill your campaign.

I am usually slow to come to the charge of "the liberal media."  There was a liberal media bias in news coverage prior to the advent of conservative talk radio.  Yea, I believe that.  But nothing that affected seriously one's understanding of events.  For every few Eric Sevareid we had a Howard K. Smith.  And that was fine.  We were always outnumbered but it was never about parity it was about the quality of the ideas.  And on that front we were always ahead.

But again, it's different when it's the NY Times.  You can't have the Times knifing you day in and day out.  Only Richard Nixon could withstand something like that.  So it was, that it became increasingly clear that Summer and Fall that the Times' reporter covering the Giuliani campaign really had it out for us.  It wasn't just that Catherine S. Manegold wanted Rudy to lose, she very much wanted Dinkins to win.  And every day it was becoming clearer that her coverage of our campaign was less news and more opinion.  Again, fine, give her an analysis slot like Sam Roberts had, but not the daily beat reporter of our campaign.  That's just death to a candidate.  As a candidate or press secretary you want to have as good a relationship with the press as possible.  It's popular now to think Rudy always had a bad press relationship.  Not true.  Ask those reporters who covered him in 93 if they thought he and the campaign were open and accessible.  You would get a very different impression from the bunker mentality that I hear existed in 2007 & 08. 

So every day we would read Catherine S. Manegold and shake our heads.  I had no role in any of this but her pieces got me pissed just the same for their bias.  As for the people who did have a role in this - the press operation - they were increasingly unsure what to do about it.  There was a faction that early on said confront Oreskes - Michael Oreskes, the City Editor and Manegold's boss.  There were those who said, screw it; we just keep plugging away and responding hard to her attacks and misstatements in the paper.  Those who wanted to just keep going won out for awhile.  Finally, it became intolerable.  A meeting was held where Peter Powers, Ray Harding, David Garth, Richard Bryers (the campaign press secretary) and maybe one or two others decided that they had no choice but to confront Oreskes. 

It's an extremely uncommon thing for a campaign to ask a newspaper to remove its reporter.  Yea, lots of campaigns grouse about the coverage they receive but almost none go to the next step and seek a reporter's removal.  Well Oreskes was contacted and a meeting set-up. 

You might think meetings like this are easy to obtain.  You'd be wrong.  Editors know that campaigns are always pissed about something their reporter has written and are generally loathe to have this type of meeting.  It gives the appearance that they're not backing up their reporters to even consent to hear the complaints.  Oreskes was very concerned that as few people know about this meeting as possible.  He said that if he ended up having to take some action he did not want a lot of people to know the meeting had taken place. 

That was a condition for the meeting; that the campaign treat this as a major confidence and withhold knowledge of it to as few as possible.  I would never have known about this meeting were it not for Ray.  The mere fact that he had consented to the meeting at all lead people in the campaign to believe that he knew there was a problem with Catherine Manegold's reporting. 

I knew all these facts at the time from Ray, but I am not clear on the details now.  I know Ray was at the meeting.  I don't think Garth was.  After that, could have been Peter, Fran Reiter, Rich Bryers or others.  I just don't remember.  It could have been Ray alone, I just don't remember.  Ray had asked Bryers and Ken Frydman, a press aide, to compile a folder with Manegold's most egregious articles, which they did.  That folder served as the basis of the meeting. 

Ray told me that he made his case to Oreskes that these articles went beyond mere disagreement or interpretation of style.  He pointed out example after example of bias and clear misstatement.  He had them highlighted and refutations prepared as to their inaccuracy or bad faith.  I saw the articles at the time that made up that file.  I was not a neutral observer, but I found it a pretty compelling case.  Looking at the offending articles one might be mislead by the headlines which were often straight or even friendly.  But of course reporters don't ordinarily write their story's headlines so that was not dispositive of the article's content.  

In any case, Oreskes said he'd think about it, talk to Manegold  and get back to them.  Within a week he called back to say that, yes, one or two things may not have been to the standards of the Times, but on the whole he saw no pattern of bias.  We were dejected.  Ray was not.  He said he saw or heard something in Oreskes' answer that gave him hope.  Ray explained to me that there was very little chance he would just pull her after we complained even if Oreskes had completely agreed with us.  He said let's wait and see what happens.  Ray further thought he had made a very convincing case and he wasn't buying that Oreskes saw no merit in it.

Sure enough other City Room reporters started covering Rudy and Catherine Manegold started doing more analysis and wrap-up pieces.  Ray had been right.  Oreskes did see merit in the case that had been presented.  He, being the face of the Times, couldn't just capitulate.  It had to be gradual.  Finally we started to get a fair shake in how the campaign was portrayed on a daily basis.  The Times of course endorsed Dinkins.  I had reason to reread that endorsement recently.  It's pretty pathetic.  Rudy is dangerous and unstable.  Dinkins is inept but a healer.  There was a tiny hope after Koch and Wagner endorsed Rudy that the Times might come around.  But in the end, black mayor, liberal Jewish paper - not gonna happen.

As for Catherine Manegold?  The Times didn't want to do anything to her during the election that would appear to validate our complaints.  Immediately after the election Catherine Manegold was reassigned to the national desk.  The New York Times is not stupid. They knew there wasn't much of a chance of her having any access in Rudy Giuliani's City Hall.  Leaving her on the City Desk, even as a non-City Hall reporter would not have been viewed favorably by the new administration.  I have no idea why they told her she was being reassigned.  But from our end, we took credit for that.

GOV'T SHUTDOWN - Conclusion

Just as I didn’t know that a meeting in the COW had launched this crisis for me, so it was that I was unaware when I sat down for another meeting in the COW that I was about to hasten its end.

This was a routine meeting with Peter Powers, Gordon Campbell, Seth Kaye and a few others. The subject of mayoral disinterest was never far from the surface of any discussion during those days. We were still all at a loss as to how to get issues before him. Beth had been trying every day to get Peter into Rudy’s office. Every time Cristyne would leave for a few minutes and Rudy would come upstairs, Beth would buzz Peter. He would go in alone or with Denny. Maybe he would get in a minute or two before Cristyne would get wind of it and would come running - actually running- from her office and shut it down. It was the craziest thing you’d ever seen. Peter would tell me about it at our weekly one-on-ones. I heard about it from Beth and Kate and Gordon too. And I actually witnessed her once running from her office to the mayor's only to find out later it was for this reason.

The scariest part of all this and I mean scary was how he had just completely lost interest in the issues and the running of the government. He loved that part of it. And with the snap of your fingers - or hers - it just stops. How could he be so easily and quickly manipulated and diverted by a woman, from so fundamentally held a conviction. Peter Powers, the best friend, the loyal lieutenant, was stoic but really crestfallen at this turn. But here we were in the COW talking over the agenda for our meeting. Suddenly Seth said, “What does it matter, we can’t get the Mayor to make a call on this.”

Peter and Gordon shot him a look as one person at the table was not cleared for this subject but Seth was short tempered and everyone knew it. Whoever the person was, Gordon sent them away. I had a folder with me of legislative items that was growing and growing from mayoral inaction. I had been bugging Peter directly and through Gordon to try and sneak these on to a one minute agenda if he could get in there. But then again so had everyone else, I wasn’t stupid. I knew everyone was stopping by Peter’s office begging him, literally begging him, to ask the Mayor this or that.

They assumed that best friend Peter Powers must still have access. But I knew better. No one had access. Cristyne had closed all doors. She held the key and let no one in. 

As I stared at the City Council issues section of the legislative folder before me things started to click in my head. My eyes zeroed in on the name Peter Vallone in some sentence. I looked up quickly and said to no in particular, “We’ve been going about this all wrong."  People turned to me. "The only meeting he’s actually kept so far is the weekly Vallone meeting, right?” Peter ignored me but I got agreement from Seth and Gordon. “Today is Thursday. Peter (meaning Powers) is always in that meeting. She is never in that meeting. What if we send him in with an agenda and pray Rudy sticks around. Just kick out Vallone and McCabe (Vallone's Chief of Staff) quickly afterward.  Pray Rudy hangs out for awhile and does some business. Our mistake last week was not being prepared for this opportunity. Lets not be caught off guard again.” Gordon beamed. Peter looked like he wanted to find fault with this and I was quickly thinking if there were any as I had just made it up, but it was a good solution. I had to admit it.

We all looked at Peter. “Gordon, come up with an agenda,” Peter instructed. “Seven or eight items. The things that I didn’t get to from my last meeting plus a few others we discussed here.” Seth mentioned something urgent from one of his agencies and Peter relented. As we walked out Gordon took me aside and said, “That was brilliant.”  "Thanks," I said, "it was an accident.  I'm not that clever."  I felt the tension break for the first time in days.

It’s cliche but the next morning we waited with baited breath to see how long after Vallone and his Chief of Staff left the Mayor’s Office would Peter Powers manage to stay in there.  I stayed in my office but asked Kathy Reilly, Peter’s secretary, to call me immediately after Peter got out. The week before Cristyne had shot back in shortly after Vallone and McCabe had left. Would she be on her game this week? Would Peter (Powers) get an opportunity to work his agenda? We who knew what was going on in there were dying a thousand deaths. Tony was sitting on the couch outside the Mayor’s office hanging out to time Peter.

Kate Anson called to let me know that Vallone just left. I had friends everywhere. OK, we start counting.  I’m chain smoking at this point. I’m yelling at Mabel for fresh coffee.  If this works we could end the crisis and maybe re-interest him in his own administration. Crazy as that is. Mabel buzzes me and tells me that Kathy’s on the phone.   I look at the clock. “He just left,” Kathy says in perfect Brooklyn. “I make it out to be 25 minutes,” I say. “Right,” she says. “She broke it up?” I asked.  “Oh yea! She ran in there,” Kathy emphasized. I shook my head. She showed up. But we took it as major triumph. Peter told me later that Rudy was engaged and interested, focused and attentive - the old Rudy. He wasn’t prepared to say, “He was back,” but this was a good sign.

In fact it turned out to be the turning point in the crisis. No one will ever know what her plan was in all this. Was it to keep him down there forever and destroy his mayoralty? Doubtful. Maybe it was to cast the spell that would last the next four years and bring-on the Cristyne Lategano reign of terror over City Hall and the agencies. If that was the goal then she achieved it. I was on the receiving end of her craziness many a time; of turning his head around on a dime. He looked like a complete fool doing it but she controlled him totally.

Whether hiring, firing or issues she could turn him around 180 degrees with a whisper. It was a sickening sight. You would wince that this man who could lead a mighty city so strongly could be felled by this shrewish wench with a wagging finger under the chin or a cupped hand behind the ear. And he would show not the slightest sign of embarrassment that he would change his mind from three minutes earlier after hours - sometimes days or even weeks - of considered deliberation with the only changed variable being “Cristyne thinks.”  It would be a dark four and a half years. We all commiserated: Beth, Kate,Tony, Marcia, Therese, Vinny, Todd, Denny, Richard, Jackie, Peter, Mastro, with how much more and how much faster things could have gotten done had she not been around. And how Bad Rudy could have been Happy Rudy.

After the Vallone meeting and that weekend we waited for the Monday and hoped it was over. But no, they went back to the basement on Monday morning and we were crestfallen. I sat on the bench outside the Blue Room that morning nearly in tears that this wasn't over. 

But the Vallone meeting and Peter’s follow-up had changed something, somehow. The crisis was coming to an end. Within a day or two it was over and slowly life returned to normal. Except we were now under new management. Everything had to be cleared through Cristyne. This was new and would remain this way until she left. It was a nightmare we would have to awaken from, adjust to, and wouldn’t end until she was replaced by the newer model, Judith Nathan. This is who he is.

Donna Hanover never wanted him to be this sort of man and he apparently needed a woman who wanted to mold and shape him. I always liked Donna both in the 1989 and 1993 campaigns. She was a true campaign advisor. No plotting, Machiavelli manipulator. But it became clear what he wanted and wants. When he said he would have Judith sit in on cabinet meetings in the White House and make policy, believe it.  Hillary Clinton would look like Pat Nixon compared to the outsized influence a Mrs. Giuliani would have. It would be scary. I know.  I’ve been there, it’s scary.

Postscript:

I mentioned that I worked hard to get Peter Powers to realize the damage that his Chief of Staff, Gordon Campbell, was doing to Rudy's administration.  That's true.  And Gordon knew I was doing it at the time.  But I need to say that Gordon Campbell and I became friends and developed a mutual respect.  I like to think it's because he came to realize that we were all not a bunch of right-wing homophobes (ironic in my case), which is what I think his initial impressions of us were.  I also think he came to see that Rudy's agenda was much more effective and showed more compassion for low-income constituencies and the disenfranchised than the classic democratic liberal dogma of the time.  I am also sure that Gordon would have a wholly different view.  I have great respect for the work he did as Commissioner of Homeless Services and later as CEO of Safe Horizon and I just wanted to be clear about that.  I write these posts with my head set firmly on the time and atmosphere I am writing about.  I try not to qualify every sentence with caveats or updated references.  But sometimes I need to step out and clarify where my thinking was later or now.

RAH

Update 5-18

A few things.  For those of you who thought or were hoping that with the posting of Gov't Shutdown this would be the end, well not quite yet.  Over the next three weeks I will be posting the next, possibly two, chapters in the continuing story of my case, 'J'ACCUSE.'  There will be the Cristyne Lategano piece entitled, 'CFL & What Might Have Been.'  Alternately titled, 'How Cristyne Lategano Almost Killed My Mother.'  In the next two days I will post the story of how the 93 Giuliani campaign attempted to have the reporter covering them from the NYT removed and the outcome of that effort.  Also, for no one's benefit or possibly interest, I will post a piece I've written called 'Beginnings.'  It's about my early life and how I became who I am.  It's more catharsis for me than anything else.  But some people have asked about my childhood and my father's early political life so I wrote this many months ago and have decided to finally post it.  Lastly, I will write at some length about the 89 RWG campaign.  That piece is entitled, 'The Zoo.'  A name given to the Radio City campaign offices by Ray Harding.

Lastly, once again, in order to make the Home Page less cumbersome, I have bundled old writings into a post called 'Old Musings  II'. 

OLD MUSINGS - II

Today a comment and a rant.  First the comment.  A number of you have written me at rudyveritas@gmail.com asking about the post that's coming in 66 days.  For those of you unfamiliar with what that number means in the upper right hand corner, it is a countdown until I publish the big Rudy story I have been keeping until the end.  I hope I haven't over-hyped it based on your comments.  Let me just say this.  If you're expecting something akin to discovering, finally, the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq or revealing absolute proof that Oswald didn't act alone, then you are probably going to be disappointed.  It's a post on a topic that has been of enduring interest to Rudy watchers and will shed light on a previously undisclosed episode of, I believe, significant account.  So if you are anticipating evidence that the moon launches were actually filmed in Culver City - disappointment.  If your expectations are more reasonable, I think you'll be fascinated.  

Now the rant.  Like many of you New Yorkers I have Con Edison as my electricity provider.  I live in a small one-bedroom in a complex in Westchester.  My apartment is all electric; water heater, stove, heat.  I pay for it all, the building pays for none of it.  I complained a few months ago to Con Ed about my bills, they were regularly over $200 a month.  Well it turned out in the first instance that they were metering me wrong.  This may be of interest to some of you as it turned out they were incorrectly metering 50% of the people in my complex.  If you use electric heat to heat your home, you have to be charged a different rate than those who don't; a lesser rate.  It's called S7 as opposed to S1, which is what the majority of you pay.  S7 is also the rate for religious institutions.  Well my bills have increased geometrically, even after I was switched to the correct lower rate.  I started a few months ago to turn off all the electricity at the circuit breaker every morning when I left.  I was told that things still sucked juice even when turned off. 

Well it's winter and I have to heat my home.  So for 12 hrs a day I use heat.  The thermostat is either at 65 or down to 50 overnight.  My apartment is always cold.  My latest bill was for $400.  It is unbelievable.  I have brought in the Public Service Commission to investigate.  But this rant is not about any of this.  Con Ed at some point in the last few years has accomplished the most remarkable feat.  I am charged a fee that is 100% above my electricity usage for them to 'supply' me with the electricity.  If my electric usage is $100 worth of kilowatts, I am charged another $100 for them to 'supply' me with this.  It may be the greatest scam any utility has pulled off.  Can you fathom Time Warner or Cablevision charging you $80 a month for cable and then another $80 for 'supplying' the content through their fiber optic wires?  Con Ed makes the case that they have to maintain their plants and that is what this is for.  TW could claim that they have to air condition thousands of servers and it is costing them a fortune in electricity.  But they don't.  Why?  Mainly because no one would stand for it.  How does Con Ed get away with this?  We in Westchester can't be the only ones suffering from this 'fee'.  How is it that consumers are not marching on Albany?  I remember when for $400 you could get 2 beds and 2 baths.  Maybe I am too old but it's just ridiculous.  I'd appreciate any thoughts anyone has on this.  Sorry if I am abusing the blog for petty personal matters.  But I am just fascinated by how this practice is permitted to exist and continue.  Please post any thoughts in the comment section at the bottom of the page.  Thanx.

3/5/09

First, let me say I think it's hysterical that according to the NY Post the FBI, DEA and ATF all took Monday off due to the snow.  That is thousands of personnel who didn't show up to fight "The Terrorists", as GW would say.  Clearly the average postman has more job dedication and perseverance than the tough Kevlar befitted, head shaved, goatee sporting tough guys who spend their days arresting pot dealers and pimps in the name of the federal government.  Can anyone imagine the NYPD counter-terrorism unit taking a day off because of a few inches of snow?   Clearly we should be shifting our resources in the "War on Terror" from the FBI to the USPS.  At least we all got our mail on Monday.

Next, I have received a number of e-mails regarding the details of Fred Sawyers and Tom Robbins' fabricated chats that appeared in J'ACCUSE IV.  I have been asked, "do I believe Fred"?  Well, it goes without saying at this point that Fred is a pathological liar and a psychopath.   But with that acknowledged, I do believe him.  There is no question that he probably engaged in some blame shifting.  I'm sure of that.  However, I could list the myriad of things that Fred could not have known on his own that would confirm his contention that he received significant help in fabricating the chats, but let me give the most slam dunk example.  In the chats Fred has me talking about my expenses in detail and my expense account in general.  In the four years I knew Fred on-line the subject of expenses or expense account never came up once.  If you accept that, then where could he have come up with the accurate examples he has me stating?  He didn't FOIL HDC, we know that.  Those specific examples were only known to Robbins since he had them as a result of his FOIL, long after I stopped speaking to Fred and after I left HDC.  Prior to them being in the Voice those expense details were known to a handful of people none of whom knew Fred Sawyers and certainly not to Fred Sawyers himself.  Fred himself says that he couldn't have written the chats on HDC expenses because he never knew them.  Does it pass the smell test that these innocuous chats would be saved for, in some cases, 2-3 years as Fred claimed back in 2002?  Who would do that?  Even if one is nuts why save random meaningless chats for years?  Since we now know I never told him any of the alleged illegal activities mentioned in the chats (i.e. bribes, prostitutes, gambling, etc.) of course he didn't save them because they never existed.

As I say, Fred may well be shifting some blame to Robbins but the sum and substance of his claims I believe are truthful.  Is the Fred origin of chats story of 2002 more credible than the Fred story of 2005?  I don't think so. Even psychopaths are capable of being truthful sometimes.  

Lastly, a lot of people have asked why I didn't sue the Voice and Robbins.  Some of you wrote me some very kind e-mails offering to help.  I will explain why I didn't sue back then and what a mistake that was.  I am just sticking to the chronological pace.  It all gets explained.

3/2/09    PLEASE SEE NEW POST:  J'ACCUSE - Part IV





2/24/09

                First, let me say I was able to block those Bloomberg ads, so no more irony.  I need to rant a little this morning.  One of the worst aspects of doing time is the feeling of injustice.   You'll read about cases similar or even much worse than your own and discover a much lighter sentence handed out or more lenient post release conditions.  It's natural and common and all inmates go through it at some point.  But it is the glaring examples of a totally corrupt and biased system that really rankles.  I know there are hundreds of inmates at Devens FMC - a prison I was at - who are doing very hard time for minor sex crimes, the vast majority 'hands off.'  This morning they are waking up to read about two cases, both federal; one in Texas and one in Connecticut.  In the CT. case a Pfizer exec was found to posses child pornography and I take it also sent some.  He was given 78 months in federal prison, ordered to pay $200,000 to a woman who has been identified as one of the girls in the images and will surely have to register for the rest of his life as a sex offender.  He was not accused of any 'hands on' crime. 

Then you have a federal judge - yes, a federal judge - who serially groped female court employees.  When questioned about it by authorities, he lied and denied doing it.  He was indicted by the feds for various sexual crimes and obstruction of justice for his lying.  He cut a deal yesterday and was sentenced.  In exchange for dropping all the sex charges he plead to the obstruction of justice.  He will get less than three years in prison - he could have been sentenced to 20 - and not have to register as a sex offender.  Has justice been served?  Is society better protected as a result of the outcome of these two cases? 

On the one hand you have a man who was never accused - and from what I can tell it was never suggested that he ever intended - of sexually assaulting anyone, minor or adult.   He is getting nearly seven years in prison, registration for life and forced to pay $200k to someone he has never met nor caused the initial harm.   On the other you have a man who was given one of the most exalted positions we can bestow in this society, that of federal jurist.  He abused that position and assaulted a number of women in the workplace; directly, not indirectly, causing much shame and suffering, I am sure.  He obviously cannot control himself.  He went that extra leap from fantasy to action.  Now he will do his modest time and when released retain his anonymity.  None of his new neighbors will know that here is a guy who cannot keep his hands to himself.  He will not be required to attend sex offender classes because those charges no longer exist.  He will go to a Camp instead of a higher security prison since those charged with even the smallest sex offense are ineligible for a Camp.  It's clearly good to be a federal judge.

If society is so morally outraged that we need to register and brand our citizens for certain crimes; if it has gone to that extraordinary step, then surely it simply cannot be that because of the old boys network so glaring an example of inequity exists.  I don't believe in registration for anyone for anything.  It is just plain wrong to do that in this country.  But if you are going to do it can you administer and respect it with a straight face when it is making those prosecutors and judges who compile the lists into such hypocrites.  I feel the pain this morning of those inmates at Devens who didn't study harder and become federal judges.

2/23/09

                Please see new post - SENATE DAYS - Part I.  Also there is an irony in that, as any regular reader to this blog knows, I do not support Mayor-for-Life Mike or his reelection.  Yet Google Ads puts up huge banners for his campaign to the left of this post.  I may have to take down the Google Ads. The irony is just a little too much for me.

Out of Touch

It's becoming way too easy to ridicule the Bloomberg Administration and Mayor-for-Life Mike himself.  This weekend gave us all fresh evidence of just how wildly out of touch he and his agencies are.  Any regular reader of this blog knows that I have said for awhile that it is a complete puzzlement to me why the electorate is so fond of a man who clearly disdains them.  You need no more proof then Saturday's Daily News story.  As Rudy did before him, Mayor-for-Life Mike likes to take his commissioners on the road to town hall meetings.  Of course the obvious difference between his town halls and Rudy's is that in the old days you'd get answers to your questions from the commissioners or feel the wrath of RWG. 

In the Bloomberg era the commissioners have no answers and the Mayor could care less that they provide any.  That's bad enough.  But Mayor-for-Life Mike, so serene in the coming plebiscite on his reign, doesn't even make the slightest effort now to hide his contempt for the citizenry.  Person after person asked him serious questions dealing with painful issues most relating to the economy and its effect on some area of their life.  Instead of, at a minimum, attempting to 'feel their pain', he mocked them and made jokes.  He mocked one woman's concern about a water issue by telling her to get a plumber and then proceeded to tell a plumber joke.  This was made worse by the fact that he ripped the joke off from Ronald Reagan who popularized it.  It's an old joke having to do with a man who pays for his Soviet car 10 years in advance as he is required to do.  When he goes to the ministry to give the money and get all his paperwork stamped he asks the official whether he should come back in the morning or afternoon.  "Morning or afternoon?"  The official exclaims.  "What difference could it make, it's 10 years from now."  The buyer responds, "It matters to me I've got the plumber coming in the morning."  Actually much funnier than they way the Mayor told it.  But the impression the audience came away with was that he isn't feeling any pain and he sure as hell can't or won't empathize with theirs.

Today's papers carry a story about a real Bloomberg Admin. boondoggle.  The Economic Development Corporation (really the IDA) used post 9/11 Liberty Bonds to finance this idiotic Sports Museum near Wall Street.  I work near that museum and can tell you that it was ill conceived and poorly planned.  Any simple marketing study would have told you that the vast majority of tourists to the Wall Street area are foreigners.  Why in the world would an Italian or a Japanese tourist  pay $27 a head to see Ben Hogan's golf club or a rodeo star's saddle?  Maybe if this thing had been located on upper or lower Fifth Avenue.  OK.  But Wall Street?

So the thing failed.  It happens.  But EDC apparently used $52 million dollars of tax-exempt bonds for this.  Now what most people don't realize is that those bonds had a dual purpose, as does the recurring federal tax-exempt bonding under the 1986 Tax Reform Act.  They can be used for either economic development or housing.  Now I know from personal experience that housing developers kill for those bonds, and would have, had HDC had $52 million dollars in extra Liberty Bond financing.  Think about the permanent middle-income housing that could have been created.  Instead this museum, open and closed in 4 months.  Those bonds are gone, cannot be reused.  In a city where a recent study pointed out how unaffordable housing has become for the vast majority of New Yorkers, was this the wisest use of these bonds?  A sports museum or permanent housing?  I worked at both EDC and HDC and can appreciate the value of each.  But prudence suggests that more care be shown in ones stewardship of this resource.  As President of HDC I would regularly fight with Charlie Millard, President of EDC, about EDC's use of those bonds.  He would hoard them hoping they would find uses for them.  And when they couldn't would grudgingly hand them over to HDC at the last minute.  That bonding authority, referred to as Volume Cap, expires annually on Dec 31.  To HDC's great credit they always used whatever allotment they received.  Even having received it from EDC one year on Dec. 23rd.  It's worth asking now that it's over why a sport museum and not housing? 

But the much larger problem is an old axiom of politics.  You can't beat something with nothing.  So far Weiner and Thompson are sadly amounting to nothing.  Even with his 52% approval rating unless there is some coalition to defeat him it looks like four more years.  I hope men and women of good faith come together to stop this man from perpetuating himself in office. I will say this though, I'm becoming more intrigued with Weiner's skillful Chuck Schumer like use of the populist weekend press conference.  He makes a nice contrast to the out of touch Mayor-for-Life Mike.  Maybe that's a start.  We'll see.

2/20/09

                As promised - a very rudimentary 'who's who' to help those having some difficulty following along.  It will improve - I promise.  CAST OF CHARACTERS

2/19/09

PAYBACK IS A BITCH

The New York Times reports today that Mayor-for-Life Mike is scrambling to repair his relations with the leaders of NY's political parties now that he has decided the plebiscite shall go forward.  It is fun to see him have to humble himself.  Eating a large plate of crow is not the usual fare served up on those gold charger plates in his mansion. 

I'll go out on a limb here and make some early predictions.  The Working Families Party will spurn him and nominate Bill Thompson.  Although I have little regard for their platform they have proven themselves to be a party of principle.  The Republican and Independence parties, however, are both for sale and will yield to his checkbook.  I cannot even imagine the figures he is promising to donate and personally raise from his accountant and others for those two parties.  To the leaders they must seem staggering.  Clearly the Republican leaders don't remember 1981 when they nominated Democrat Ed Koch and not only weakened the party but received nothing in return.  Nor do they seem to remember 2001 when they nominated Mayor-for-Life Mike and how that turned out for them.  This will be a test for both the city and state leadership of my party.  Have they learned anything from their dealings with him and from the election results.  Is the state and city party still for sale?  I predict the answer to that question will sadly be yes.

But just to show you what political putzes Mayor-for-Life Mike and his "Brain Trust" are, had he stayed a Republican he could have petitioned for a primary against whomever the county leaders put up.  With his money and targeted get out the vote effort he would have surely won.  He would have had a nice prominent spot on Column B.  In fact, had he enrolled in any party he could have done the same thing.  But as he is a registered independent, belonging to no party, he now requires a Wilson-Pakula authorization from the county leaders in order to appear on the ballot under their banner.  Nice planning ahead.  Way to go keeping your boy's options open, Kevin.

2/19/09

THANX FOR THE NOD

I want to thank Mayor-for-Life Mike and EDC President Seth Pinsky for the great compliment they paid me yesterday at the Mayor's unveiling of his new business revitalization plan.  Didn't hear my name?  Oh, it was there.  You see the plan he announced yesterday is an update of two programs I initiated 12 years ago. 

Hard to remember now but back in late 1996, early 1997, Lower Manhattan was a ghost town.  Businesses were moving out and the 75-100 year old office buildings that marked the landscape were completely inappropriate for the new, coming Internet age.  Moreover, with the exception of Battery Park City, no one actually lived in Lower Manhattan.  Office building after office building was standing empty.  Investors were buying them up for coin.

First came the Lower Manhattan Revitalization Plan drafted by Deputy Mayor Fran Reiter.  It envisioned incentives to convert many of those buildings into housing.  Then Sharon Greenberg and Anne Weisbrod from the Downtown Alliance came to see me at EDC.  At that time I was Exec Vice President for Corporate Communications at the City's Economic Development Corporation.  My department included a large marketing and creative services component.  Moreover, we had a large budget with a lot of discretionary spending.  The Alliance wasn't all that keen on remaking lower Manhattan into a new Peter Cooper Village or Stuyvesant Town (two large middle-income housing projects in mid-town Manhattan).  They wanted to keep the focus on business not housing.  I agreed with them.  I couldn't see anyone seriously wanting to live in Lower Manhattan with absolutely no amenities or services (I still can't).  So they proposed the outlines of a program that would entice landlords to invest in converting parts of their ancient Class B and Class C office stock into wired -Internet ready - office space. We take it for granted now, but back then it was very rare to find old space that had Internet access.  Only new buildings or total rehabs were being wired.

In exchange EDC and the Alliance would market this space under a unified program and create a simple lease and program requirements. I think it was EDC's marketing division that came up with the name 'Plug N' Go' but it might have been the Alliance.  The idea was to attract Internet start-ups and offer them small, wired, turn-key ready space for an attractive rent.  The program initially centered around $11 a square foot space for offices that ranged from 150-350 sq.feet.  Sharon and Anne would enlist the building owners and we would market and pay for the program. 

To make a long story short 'Plug N' Go' was a huge success.  Building after building signed up for the program and the tenants poured in.  As the program and Fran's plan started to work we had to keep upping the price per sq.ft .  Lower Manhattan was becoming a desirable address and the value of that space went up as well.  As time went on more and more landlords opted out of the program because they were now able to rent large floors of their buildings for much higher rents than the program was offering.  Additionally, many landlords who initially filed conversion plans to remake their office buildings into housing, withdrew those plans and opted instead to modernize the space for offices.  But that was OK, that was the point of the program.  We were happy to put ourselves out of business because the program had worked and achieved its objectives.  As a conservative I was very proud of the fact that we had started a government program with a clear set of goals, met them, and then ended the program.  How often do you see that happen?

'Plug N' Go' went on to win numerous awards and the Alliance would kindly credit me with co-creating it.  EDC would eventually spend less than a million on the program.  Looking back, what a great investment.  We had kept the area business focused and help spawn many future IT successes.

Simultaneous to that, although independent of the program, we at EDC began a large, multi-million dollar, multi-media, marketing outreach to 7 business sectors that we deemed most promising.  We designed a large marketing campaign, domestically and internationally, towards attracting businesses in those targeted sectors.  It was also a huge success.  Mayor-for-Life Mike and Pinsky are proposing a similar program now.  I would advise them that rather than reinventing the wheel they just dig out our materials from a decade ago.  I have no doubt they will not achieve the low cost per job or response that we did back then.  They simply don't have the team capable of doing it.  But I thank them none-the-less for the tip of the hat yesterday.  Very kind.

UPDATE 2/18 - I neglected to add a crucial component to the piece I posted yesterday, J'ACCUSE - Part III.  I have corrected that error.  For the many of you who have apparently already read it, please go back and give it a second reading.  In the next few days I will post Senate Days - Part I.  Additionally, I will post Cast of Characters, a so far rudimentary background on many of the names mentioned in the various posts.  I will work to improve and refine it in the days ahead.

2/17 - Please see the new post J'ACCUSE - Part III

           

2/13 - I have received a flood of positive reaction to the story of my case, J'ACCUSE.  Two issues seem to pop-up in the responses.  One, in a request relating to the Rudy pieces, is that I post some sort of index or biography giving background on the players and events mentioned.  Since people all over the world are apparently reading this they are clearly not as familiar with who Peter Vallone was or how Peter Powers came into the picture, as those in New York City.  In the next few days I will attempt to put up something that should help with that.

The second issue relates to the financial piece of my indictment and plea.  Some seem troubled by the $417,000 and are not sure what to make of it.  I've thought of breaking with the narrative and outlining now, in detail, what comprises that number and how unimaginable it is for me to have stolen $417,000 and why I plead to it.  Further, I would have explained the significance of that number to the prosecution.  Just as the number 11 is no accident in the number of images I was charged with - it has tremendous meaning - so the number $417,000 is no mere accounting sum. 

But I decided to let the narrative play out and talk about these things in the context of the unfolding story.  All I can say to you is this: I am not taking you on a journey only to wind up careening off a cliff at the last minute.  Moreover, there will be no late reveal of any MacGuffin, as Alfred Hitchcock might say.  There is no revelation of molestation of busloads of kids that no one has yet detected.  There won't be an admission of a secret $10 Million dollars of HDC money stashed away somewhere.  The injustices done me are total, complete and absolute.  There is no hedge.  I ask for your patience and trust, as I said on the 'WHY' page, until such time as I no longer deserve it.  Veritas, my friends, Veritas.

2/11 - Here's my question for the day.  Now that Mark Green has announced he wants his old job back, is anyone going to ask him about his affair with a member of his Intel detail the last time he was Public Advocate?  If Tony Carbonetti was correct, and there's no chance he was not, shouldn't a public official sleeping with one of his assigned cops be asked about it?  Is there possibly a judgment question at issue?  Mark Green's private life is his own - I am the first to agree to that.  But as silly as it is that the Public Advocate gets 24 hr. police protection, I think we would all agree that those cops should at least be protecting him and not shagging him instead (see original post PUBLIC LIFE).

DAILY NEWS STORY:

The NY Daily News ran a story about the issues mentioned in the 2/10 post below.  I feel the need to comment on it.  As people mistakenly tend to believe everything they read in the newspapers, there were factual errors in the piece that if I don't correct no one else will.  Further, if I don't correct them and just it let pass, as has happened with dozens of stories on me, they will be believed as fact and I will be tagged with them forever.  My policy is to always return reporters phone calls, I was in the PR business for 10 years after all.  I make exceptions to that rule.  One exception is that I generally do not deal with Daily News reporters.  Tom Robbins was a reporter there for a few years and my experience throughout this matter has been that they carry his water.  Some of the most vituperative and error filled pieces have been in the Daily News.  I did not return this reporter's call, as he said.  I found his piece to be fair and I am not complaining.  But - there were some factual errors.  I am not seeking to stop anyone from registering me.  I could not if I wished.  My issue was evidence to be used in the process, not stopping the process.  The quotes regarding fairness and equity had to do with the U.S. Attorney not informing me, as they are legally and ethically bound to do, of papers they filed. Thereby depriving me of a chance to respond to the Court.  That's it.  I just want the record to be clear.

2/10

Something happened today that I need to comment on.  As you know, if you read SORA Feelings, I am currently undergoing a registration process for sex offenders in Westchester County.  The charge against me and what I plead to was possession of 11 images of child pornography.   Unlike most court proceedings all evidence including here say and news reports can be used as evidence.  The D.A. in Westchester attempted to obtain from my federal prosecutor information on my federal case including chats that they claim were taken from a computer of mine seven years ago.  The federal prosecutor sent them along.  I contacted my federal judge who has final say in these matters seeking clarification.  I understood these chats to be sealed as they had never been proven to be authentic and had no evidentiary value since they were not part of the crime alleged.  In the course of sending him this letter I sent a copy to the Government as I am required to do.  Judge Kaplan ruled against me today stating, "he endorsed the Government's response of Feb 2".

The way you achieve fairness and equity in the justice system is everyone plays by the rules.  When one side cheats, especially the more powerful side, there can be no justice.   The Government - the federal prosecutor Dan Braun - never sent me a copy of their Feb. 2nd response as they are bound to do.  Therefore, I had no ability to respond to it.  The reason Judge Kaplan waited from Feb 2. until Feb 9th was to see if I had a response (this was an expedited matter so 7 days is in fact a long time).  Of course I had no response, I wasn't aware there was anything of which to respond.  The Government didn't send me their response and I couldn't comment.  There's was the last word.  This is not only cheating it is a serious violation of the rules of criminal procedure.  The only reason I know about this at all is because a reporter called me asking for comment.   I have another matter in Judge Kaplan's court and he appointed me a pro bono attorney.  I have not heard from that lawyer in nearly four months so I was obliged to handle this matter myself as it clearly stated in the letter.

I'll describe at length the treatment received by me in Judge Kaplan's court during my case.  As my then attorney remarked often he'd, "never seen anything like it."  As part of J'ACCUSE, the story of my case, I have written and will be posting justice as I knew it in Lewis Kaplan's courtroom.  Whether you think me a good guy or a scumbag I am fully prepared to let you be the judge as to whether or not I received a fair shake after you read my story.  Not a single person familiar with what went on in that courtroom for 2 1/2 years believes I received anything approaching justice.  But as I said, after you hear me out, I am happy to let you decide. 

People have told me, reporters included, that I am crazy if I tell the truth about my case.  I still have ongoing matters before Judge Kaplan and it would be suicidal to lay out what happened.  Well, I promised to tell the truth when I started this blog and while it is not only possible but assured that I will be harmed by it, I stand by that commitment.  I have been as frank as possible about others.  It would be self serving and cowardly to do otherwise when it comes to myself.  Veritas, friends, Veritas.

2/10/09

Today I am beginning a countdown to posting the Big Story that I have promised .  90 days from today I will post that piece.  I can promise it will be worth the wait.  You will see a number on the top right counting down daily.  In the meantime, during the coming weeks some of the pieces I will be posting include:  the '89' campaign, commonly referred to as The Zoo; including the background on the Dinkins Love Letters.  I will recount some stories of my days in the US Senate working for Al D'Amato.  I will also be describing life during the nearly seven years we had to endure Cristyne Lategano.  That piece is entitled, 'Reign of Terror'.  Plus, of course, the continuing story of my case, J'ACCUSE.  I think you'll find it all worth sticking around for.

New Post 2/9/09

Today I continue the story of my case with   J'ACCUSE - PART II

New Post:

HERE IS A PIECE I WROTE A FEW MONTHS AGO AND NEVER POSTED.  NOTHING EARTH SHATTERING BUT AS RUDY GETS MENTIONED AS A POSSIBLE CHALLENGER TO SEN. GILLIBRAND I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT FIND REVEALING HIS LEVEL OF INTEREST IN FOREIGN POLICY.  THE MAJOR & THE MAYOR.

Also don't forget to look at J'ACCUSE - Part I.  The beginning chapter in the story of my case.  Part Two will appear Monday.

Lastly, Monday I will begin the countdown to the promised piece that I mentioned awhile back.  It will surely be the most revealing piece posted on this site - or anywhere else for that matter - about Rudy Giuliani.

I lied, one more thing..I just found out that the folks at HDC are trying to pin a phony rap one me.  Comptroller DiNapoli has done an audit of HDC's Board structure and governance.  It emerged that one of the board members, Michael Kelly, had been added to the corporation's health coverage in September 2001.  Board members are not permitted to receive compensation (health coverage having a substantial value qualifies as compensation).  No question that I was president in September 2001, the corporation wouldn't have recovered so quickly after 9/11 had I not been.  But I never put Michael Kelly on HDC's insurance and moreover he never asked me to.  Frankly, had he I probably would have, but he never asked me.  He was going through tough times back then having recently lost his job.  Further, Sr. VP Luke Cusack - scapegoat number 2 - surely wouldn't have added him without talking to me.  This is as they used to say, 'a put up job'.  My guess is that he was put on after I left and for some reason, possibly health issues, was put on retroactive to 9/01.  Either that or it was done so it would appear as though I did it.  Since no one wants to fess up to having done this they're blaming me.  The corporation's leadership makes a point of saying no one from management of that era is still around to ask.  As I said to a reporter when asked about this matter, the person who knows the answer is David Brown, VP of Human Resources. I assume he's still there and if not can be easily reached.  It doesn't matter how many Exec VPs or Sr VPs have come and gone, the person who would have actually made it happen was David Brown.  His name is conveniently left out of that report.  Ask him who instructed him to do it.  Wasn't me.  

1/22/09

My father used to tell me that I preface too much.   Well for those of you not interested in my relationship and views of NY Yankees President Randy Levine and want to go straight to today's new post, you can click here - Trusting Randy Levine. It concerns the deal done by EDC & the IDA in 1997 for Bear Stearns at the behest of then Deputy Mayor Randy Levine.  Come back and read this section later if you decide to skip it now.  You might find some of it interesting.

I have known Randy Levine and his wife, Mindy Franklin, since 1989.  I met them during Rudy's 1989 campaign.  I was there the night they got engaged.  For some bizarre reason - and completely without romance - Randy proposed in one of the dusty back offices at Radio City, the campaign HQ.  For a few years I was Mindy's closest friend.  She had a lot of acquaintances in her life but very few friends.  For nearly two years we would meet nearly every weekday to work out at the gym and have lunch afterward.  Mindy is a deeply troubled soul.  Coming from a broken home following her adoption left her an emotional basket case.  She has a good heart and can demonstrate it but she is the most insecure person I have known.  Her judgment - especially on matters political - was the worst.  She had great sway over Randy.  Rudy, out of Randy earshot, would often refer to it as the "Mindy Problem."  Randy suggesting something that everyone knew had come from his wife.  It was usually some harebrained idea but Randy couldn't see that.

Most people who know them aren't aware that Mindy is actually Randy's second wife.  He was married at a young age to a girl from his hometown on Long Island.  Mindy hated this woman; she considered her white trash.  That contributed to the strange schism in her mind about her fiance/husband.  She loved Randy but she was also embarrassed by him.  He was this very outgoing, middle class, Jewish guy from L.I.  Mindy was this very outwardly appearing well brought up girl from society Milwaukee.  Hers was the kind of upbringing where you would deny your racism by citing the names of your black acquaintances, usually the maid.  Mindy saw Randy as a guy who wore see-through mesh shirts and drove a Pontiac Fiero, both of which he had owned.  For some reason that Fiero was the kiss of death for her.  It seemed to sum up all the work she had ahead of her in making him into something presentable. His parents and sister hated her for the airs she put on although she made considerable efforts to try and win them over.  However, she hated them right back for being, in her view, so low-class.  In her mind they were what contributed to Randy's lagging upbringing and would continue to do so as long as they remained in his life.  She was constantly telling him in subtle ways what a bad mother his sister was or how bad his parents were compared to hers.

But Randy hit the jackpot with Mindy.  He wanted to be molded and shaped, like a Gumby.  He was open to it and extremely protective of her.  Many don't realize it was Mindy's family connections that got Randy inside Major League Baseball.  Her family had contacts with Brewers owner Bud Selig.  It was through their efforts that Randy first landed MLB business for his law firm, Proskauer, Rose.  

At some point towards the middle of Rudy's second term Randy had come to view himself not only as a savvy political guy, but as a latter day Robert Taft - Mr. Republican.  Tony and I would often ponder what it was exactly that made Levine think he had political smarts.  He came into frequent conflict - always behind-the-scenes, never face to face - with Ray Harding over Rudy's future.  Randy believed that Rudy's future lay with the national republican party and therefore, Rudy had to position himself much further to the right in order to meet their expectations and win the base.  Randy was always working to try and bring Rudy closer to Pataki, D'Amato and later, Bush.  Randy worked very hard to maintain good relations with the Pataki people.  I mean for himself, naturally, not for Rudy. Tony and I would marvel at the schemes Levine would hatch to forge Giuliani-Pataki alliances, only to be thwarted by Ray.  What made Randy so mad, and Tony and I saw through him every time, was that these schemes, while ostensibly about Rudy, were merely ways for Randy to suck-up to the Pataki people.  What infuriated him was that he was incapable of delivering.  When the Pataki people wanted something serious, Kieran Mahoney would reach out to Ray and then Ray to Rudy.  Nobody went through Levine, though he kept trying. 

Ray believed the opposite about Rudy's prospects. He saw Rudy as a once in a generation type political leader.  It was his independence from the party that Ray believed made Rudy so potentially appealing across a wide national spectrum.  Ray and Randy went at it often, using surrogates or private Rudy meetings to make their case.  Ray won almost all those pre-9/11 battles. Ray's arguments and Rudy's natural tendency not to be a tag-along helped win the day.

There are two ironies to this.  First, is that we have now seen fully realized the Levine plan for Rudy played out nationally.  It was of course an abysmal failure.  It sucked everything out of Giuliani that made him unique and memorable.  It destroyed years and years of hard work to make him out to be America's Mayor and the man who tamed NYC.  He's now perceived as an anti-abortion, right wing zealot, who belittles the president.  The only Republican presidential candidate this year who thought the Cheney model for the Vice Presidency was worth repeating.  Randy Levine's political instincts were, as we knew then, always tone deaf.  This model helped destroy 8 years of proven success, one heroic response to the greatest terrorist attack and all the hard work that went into getting people to like Rudy even at his most cantankerous.  All shot to hell.

The greater irony was that all this jingoistic right wing rallying would be coming from a man who committed the greatest sin any Republican alive today could commit.  The great revered figure in our party is not Lincoln, of course, but Ronald Reagan.  No greater treason could be had than to publicly embarrass Reagan while in office.  But of course that's just what Levine did.  Many now forget, and he'd prefer they forget, that he made a very public display of quitting his job at the Justice Department to protest Reagan not firing Ed Meese, the then Attorney General.  It was a huge slap at Reagan.  Not the sort of behavior Republicans easily forget . 

If you've read the Levine/Bear Stearns post then you know of Randy's casual disdain for rules.  While at City Hall and because of his COB waiver, he was routinely FOILd (NYC's Freedom of Information Law) by the press for his appointment calendars  (I had this done to me regularly as well when I was at City Hall and EDC).  Reporters wanted to see if he was having baseball meetings and with whom.  Now there are a lot of ways to defeat a FOIL request within the rules.  Obviously many more outside the rules.  I have done both but I became pretty adept at finding the weakness in the language that could legitimately defeat almost any FOIL request.  But Randy Levine couldn't be bothered wasting the time.  When his appointment books were FOILd he simply had Denny Young's office - who coordinated those requests - tell the reporter that he didn't keep an appointment book.  

In all my years in government I only knew one public official who genuinely did not keep an appointment book.  That was Bill Diamond, Rudy's Commissioner of the Dept. General Services (now DCAS).  And he did that specifically to avoid FOILs.  He had his secretary use Post-Its, I believe.  Now, I know as a fact - I'd seen it - that Randy's secretary kept an appointment book.  It would be unimaginable that a deputy mayor kept no written record of his appointments.  You couldn't do that job without keeping track of your meetings, lunches, dinners and functions.  But Randy just figured that there was nothing the reporter could do.  Which was correct.  They can't barge into your office and snatch your records.  It merely reflects again his belief that the everyday rules don't apply to him.  It was a brazen claim to make; that you had no record, past or present, of your business. 

I do, in fact, believe that the FOIL process is abused.  The majority of requests I received over eight years were simply to harass me.  There was no good government purpose.  But in the Levine case there certainly was concern by the press that he was using his public office to enrich himself personally.  Not with graft, per se, but by using the power of his office to influence government decisions in ways to benefit his past and future clients.  That was certainly a concern which was, as I have demonstrated, well founded.

But if you want to see the true character of the man, you only have to look at the testimony he gave before Ass. Richard Brodsky's committee.  The personal attacks and hoodlum like behavior were classic Levine.  He demonstrated again that he truly believes he does not have to account, ever, for his actions.  He was affronted that Brodsky, or anyone apparently, should question him or the Yankees about this money and these bonds.

It's funny.  Mindy used to revel when Randy put on this sort of tough guy act.  It's supposedly every woman's fantasy - the bad boy.  What she could never comprehend was that he didn't look tough, he looked low-class.  It seems after all her work over two decades he's still the same crude, ill mannered, middle class, foul mouthed,  jewish boy from L.I. she worked so hard to remake into a goyim society gentleman. 

Some things clearly aren't worth the effort.

New Post - 'SORA Feelings'  1/12/09 

INAUGURATION 1/20/09

I have to assume that 20 or 30 or more people must have read Pres. Obama's inaugural address before he delivered it.  It cannot be that a putzy felon, like myself, was able to catch the glaring historical inaccuracy as it came out of his mouth that all his vetters missed.  We have had 44 presidents.  However, only 43 Americans have taken the oath (Grover Cleveland was 22 & 24).  It is correct to say that the oath has been given 44 times or that we have had 44 presidents. It is not correct to say, as Obama did, that he is the 44th American to take it.  It's a minor point perhaps, but you would think that the opening line of a presidential address - the first one he gives - might actually be historically accurate. It's worrisome that his staff did not catch this error before he uttered it.  It doesn't bode well for White House staff work on larger issues.  If any of you disagree with me, let's call Bill Safire and get a ruling.

The speech?  I have said before that I do not think he is a great orator.  His speeches are like cotton candy; they evaporate quickly but taste nice at the moment.  Also they are not memorable.  Can anyone remember a single line from his convention speech?  But that's OK.  Presidents don't have to be great orators.  He gave a nice address.  I thought he should have added a line after listing all the battlefields that "those soldiers didn't die in defense of the concept of a Unitary Executive."  However, if he lives up to all this 'new way of doing business' and 'return to adherence to the Constitution' rhetoric that will be a great start.  But we'll see.  It's early days yet.

Free Bernie Madoff

Let me first say I assume Bernie Madoff is guilty because he doesn't really deny it.  Did he run a giant Ponzi scheme?  Seems so.  Should he go to prison for a long stretch after a plea or conviction?  Sure, why not?  The question consuming the tabloid media at the moment, however, is should he remain free pending the resolution of this case.  The answer, thus far, is clearly yes.  The point of bail is many fold: To make sure you appear in court for your hearings and trial - basically that you do not flee;  to ensure you no longer continue the alleged criminal behavior that lead you to this moment; that you pose no danger to society; and lastly - not true in every case but certainly in this one - that your freedom does not facilitate disposition of your assets before the government can account for them.  Let's check these off.  Bernie going anywhere?  Ankle bracelet, 24 hour guards, a ravenous pack of reporters trailing his every move.  Doesn't seem likely.  Can he continue his alleged Ponzi scheme?  Is someone going to invest money with Bernie Madoff?  You really don't need me to answer this.  Does he pose a danger to society by his presence amongst us?  He has no previous criminal record and I really cannot see an argument that he poses any danger to society.  Lastly, is he systematically disposing of his assets?  What we know factually is that his wife sent some jewelery and family heirlooms to relatives.  At his direction?  Perhaps.  Was she prohibited by the Magistrate's order from doing so?  In fact, she wasn't.  It was a badly worded order that should have included her.  But it didn't.  So toughen the existing order so it is loophole free.  It pisses off the US Attorney's office that they screwed this up.  That is why they are now coming at him the way they are.  Whether or not he had $170 Million in checks prior to his arrest is immaterial to me.  I am sure he intended lots of things prior to the admission to his sons of his swindle.  The question in these matters is whether he will, would or did dispose of assets.  Did he defy the order of the court? I can see no rational reason for denying this man bail based on what we know of the jewelery episode.  One million dollars in jewelery is no big deal at this level of wealth.  It is just a few pieces. 

Andrea Peyser maintains that this man belongs in jail.  Not for the jewelery but just because lots of people were swindled and it affronts her that he is free and living in a penthouse.  It is a sentiment widely shared.  He may very well belong in jail for the crimes he's been arrested for.  But we have a process in this country and although it works increasingly less well, it should be followed.  There is no reason for anyone to be in jail if they meet the above requirements pending trial.  We don't believe in mob rule and that is what is taking hold in the Madoff case.  I readily admit my sympathies for his victims are limited.  Very wealthy, sophisticated people who invest money in a fund that guarantees high returns in down markets, charges no fees and prints its statements on dot matrix printers, don't get tons of tears from me.  They were as greedy as he was for being so blindly stupid.  That is no defense for him and he will almost surely plead or be convicted and get a lengthy term of imprisonment.  But why does it have to happen today?  If he's not rotting at the Metropolitan Correction Center until next fall are we somehow harmed as a society? Except to the braying pack, I cannot see how.

1/22/09

My father used to tell me that I preface too much.   Well for those of you not interested in my relationship and views of NY Yankees President Randy Levine and want to go straight to today's new post, you can click here - Trusting Randy Levine. It concerns the deal done by EDC & the IDA in 1997 for Bear Stearns at the behest of then Deputy Mayor Randy Levine.  Come back and read this section later if you decide to skip it now.  You might find some of it interesting.

I have known Randy Levine and his wife, Mindy Franklin, since 1989.  I met them during Rudy's 1989 campaign.  I was there the night they got engaged.  For some bizarre reason - and completely without romance - Randy proposed in one of the dusty back offices at Radio City, the campaign HQ.  For a few years I was Mindy's closest friend.  She had a lot of acquaintances in her life but very few friends.  For nearly two years we would meet nearly every weekday to work out at the gym and have lunch afterward.  Mindy is a deeply troubled soul.  Coming from a broken home following her adoption left her an emotional basket case.  She has a good heart and can demonstrate it but she is the most insecure person I have known.  Her judgment - especially on matters political - was the worst.  She had great sway over Randy.  Rudy, out of Randy earshot, would often refer to it as the "Mindy Problem."  Randy suggesting something that everyone knew had come from his wife.  It was usually some harebrained idea but Randy couldn't see that.

Most people who know them aren't aware that Mindy is actually Randy's second wife.  He was married at a young age to a girl from his hometown on Long Island.  Mindy hated this woman; she considered her white trash.  That contributed to the strange schism in her mind about her fiance/husband.  She loved Randy but she was also embarrassed by him.  He was this very outgoing, middle class, Jewish guy from L.I.  Mindy was this very outwardly appearing well brought up girl from society Milwaukee.  Hers was the kind of upbringing where you would deny your racism by citing the names of your black acquaintances, usually the maid.  Mindy saw Randy as a guy who wore see-through mesh shirts and drove a Pontiac Fiero, both of which he had owned.  For some reason that Fiero was the kiss of death for her.  It seemed to sum up all the work she had ahead of her in making him into something presentable. His parents and sister hated her for the airs she put on although she made considerable efforts to try and win them over.  However, she hated them right back for being, in her view, so low-class.  In her mind they were what contributed to Randy's lagging upbringing and would continue to do so as long as they remained in his life.  She was constantly telling him in subtle ways what a bad mother his sister was or how bad his parents were compared to hers.

But Randy hit the jackpot with Mindy.  He wanted to be molded and shaped, like a Gumby.  He was open to it and extremely protective of her.  Many don't realize it was Mindy's family connections that got Randy inside Major League Baseball.  Her family had contacts with Brewers owner Bud Selig.  It was through their efforts that Randy first landed MLB business for his law firm, Proskauer, Rose.  

At some point towards the middle of Rudy's second term Randy had come to view himself not only as a savvy political guy, but as a latter day Robert Taft - Mr. Republican.  Tony and I would often ponder what it was exactly that made Levine think he had political smarts.  He came into frequent conflict - always behind-the-scenes, never face to face - with Ray Harding over Rudy's future.  Randy believed that Rudy's future lay with the national republican party and therefore, Rudy had to position himself much further to the right in order to meet their expectations and win the base.  Randy was always working to try and bring Rudy closer to Pataki, D'Amato and later, Bush.  Randy worked very hard to maintain good relations with the Pataki people.  I mean for himself, naturally, not for Rudy. Tony and I would marvel at the schemes Levine would hatch to forge Giuliani-Pataki alliances, only to be thwarted by Ray.  What made Randy so mad, and Tony and I saw through him every time, was that these schemes, while ostensibly about Rudy, were merely ways for Randy to suck-up to the Pataki people.  What infuriated him was that he was incapable of delivering.  When the Pataki people wanted something serious, Kieran Mahoney would reach out to Ray and then Ray to Rudy.  Nobody went through Levine, though he kept trying. 

Ray believed the opposite about Rudy's prospects. He saw Rudy as a once in a generation type political leader.  It was his independence from the party that Ray believed made Rudy so potentially appealing across a wide national spectrum.  Ray and Randy went at it often, using surrogates or private Rudy meetings to make their case.  Ray won almost all those pre-9/11 battles. Ray's arguments and Rudy's natural tendency not to be a tag-along helped win the day.

There are two ironies to this.  First, is that we have now seen fully realized the Levine plan for Rudy played out nationally.  It was of course an abysmal failure.  It sucked everything out of Giuliani that made him unique and memorable.  It destroyed years and years of hard work to make him out to be America's Mayor and the man who tamed NYC.  He's now perceived as an anti-abortion, right wing zealot, who belittles the president.  The only Republican presidential candidate this year who thought the Cheney model for the Vice Presidency was worth repeating.  Randy Levine's political instincts were, as we knew then, always tone deaf.  This model helped destroy 8 years of proven success, one heroic response to the greatest terrorist attack and all the hard work that went into getting people to like Rudy even at his most cantankerous.  All shot to hell.

The greater irony was that all this jingoistic right wing rallying would be coming from a man who committed the greatest sin any Republican alive today could commit.  The great revered figure in our party is not Lincoln, of course, but Ronald Reagan.  No greater treason could be had than to publicly embarrass Reagan while in office.  But of course that's just what Levine did.  Many now forget, and he'd prefer they forget, that he made a very public display of quitting his job at the Justice Department to protest Reagan not firing Ed Meese, the then Attorney General.  It was a huge slap at Reagan.  Not the sort of behavior Republicans easily forget . 

If you've read the Levine/Bear Stearns post then you know of Randy's casual disdain for rules.  While at City Hall and because of his COB waiver, he was routinely FOILd (NYC's Freedom of Information Law) by the press for his appointment calendars  (I had this done to me regularly as well when I was at City Hall and EDC).  Reporters wanted to see if he was having baseball meetings and with whom.  Now there are a lot of ways to defeat a FOIL request within the rules.  Obviously many more outside the rules.  I have done both but I became pretty adept at finding the weakness in the language that could legitimately defeat almost any FOIL request.  But Randy Levine couldn't be bothered wasting the time.  When his appointment books were FOILd he simply had Denny Young's office - who coordinated those requests - tell the reporter that he didn't keep an appointment book.  

In all my years in government I only knew one public official who genuinely did not keep an appointment book.  That was Bill Diamond, Rudy's Commissioner of the Dept. General Services (now DCAS).  And he did that specifically to avoid FOILs.  He had his secretary use Post-Its, I believe.  Now, I know as a fact - I'd seen it - that Randy's secretary kept an appointment book.  It would be unimaginable that a deputy mayor kept no written record of his appointments.  You couldn't do that job without keeping track of your meetings, lunches, dinners and functions.  But Randy just figured that there was nothing the reporter could do.  Which was correct.  They can't barge into your office and snatch your records.  It merely reflects again his belief that the everyday rules don't apply to him.  It was a brazen claim to make; that you had no record, past or present, of your business. 

I do, in fact, believe that the FOIL process is abused.  The majority of requests I received over eight years were simply to harass me.  There was no good government purpose.  But in the Levine case there certainly was concern by the press that he was using his public office to enrich himself personally.  Not with graft, per se, but by using the power of his office to influence government decisions in ways to benefit his past and future clients.  That was certainly a concern which was, as I have demonstrated, well founded.

But if you want to see the true character of the man, you only have to look at the testimony he gave before Ass. Richard Brodsky's committee.  The personal attacks and hoodlum like behavior were classic Levine.  He demonstrated again that he truly believes he does not have to account, ever, for his actions.  He was affronted that Brodsky, or anyone apparently, should question him or the Yankees about this money and these bonds.

It's funny.  Mindy used to revel when Randy put on this sort of tough guy act.  It's supposedly every woman's fantasy - the bad boy.  What she could never comprehend was that he didn't look tough, he looked low-class.  It seems after all her work over two decades he's still the same crude, ill mannered, middle class, foul mouthed,  jewish boy from L.I. she worked so hard to remake into a goyim society gentleman. 

Some things clearly aren't worth the effort.

New Post - 'SORA Feelings'  1/12/09 

INAUGURATION 1/20/09

I have to assume that 20 or 30 or more people must have read Pres. Obama's inaugural address before he delivered it.  It cannot be that a putzy felon, like myself, was able to catch the glaring historical inaccuracy as it came out of his mouth that all his vetters missed.  We have had 44 presidents.  However, only 43 Americans have taken the oath (Grover Cleveland was 22 & 24).  It is correct to say that the oath has been given 44 times or that we have had 44 presidents. It is not correct to say, as Obama did, that he is the 44th American to take it.  It's a minor point perhaps, but you would think that the opening line of a presidential address - the first one he gives - might actually be historically accurate. It's worrisome that his staff did not catch this error before he uttered it.  It doesn't bode well for White House staff work on larger issues.  If any of you disagree with me, let's call Bill Safire and get a ruling.

The speech?  I have said before that I do not think he is a great orator.  His speeches are like cotton candy; they evaporate quickly but taste nice at the moment.  Also they are not memorable.  Can anyone remember a single line from his convention speech?  But that's OK.  Presidents don't have to be great orators.  He gave a nice address.  I thought he should have added a line after listing all the battlefields that "those soldiers didn't die in defense of the concept of a Unitary Executive."  However, if he lives up to all this 'new way of doing business' and 'return to adherence to the Constitution' rhetoric that will be a great start.  But we'll see.  It's early days yet.

Free Bernie Madoff

Let me first say I assume Bernie Madoff is guilty because he doesn't really deny it.  Did he run a giant Ponzi scheme?  Seems so.  Should he go to prison for a long stretch after a plea or conviction?  Sure, why not?  The question consuming the tabloid media at the moment, however, is should he remain free pending the resolution of this case.  The answer, thus far, is clearly yes.  The point of bail is many fold: To make sure you appear in court for your hearings and trial - basically that you do not flee;  to ensure you no longer continue the alleged criminal behavior that lead you to this moment; that you pose no danger to society; and lastly - not true in every case but certainly in this one - that your freedom does not facilitate disposition of your assets before the government can account for them.  Let's check these off.  Bernie going anywhere?  Ankle bracelet, 24 hour guards, a ravenous pack of reporters trailing his every move.  Doesn't seem likely.  Can he continue his alleged Ponzi scheme?  Is someone going to invest money with Bernie Madoff?  You really don't need me to answer this.  Does he pose a danger to society by his presence amongst us?  He has no previous criminal record and I really cannot see an argument that he poses any danger to society.  Lastly, is he systematically disposing of his assets?  What we know factually is that his wife sent some jewelery and family heirlooms to relatives.  At his direction?  Perhaps.  Was she prohibited by the Magistrate's order from doing so?  In fact, she wasn't.  It was a badly worded order that should have included her.  But it didn't.  So toughen the existing order so it is loophole free.  It pisses off the US Attorney's office that they screwed this up.  That is why they are now coming at him the way they are.  Whether or not he had $170 Million in checks prior to his arrest is immaterial to me.  I am sure he intended lots of things prior to the admission to his sons of his swindle.  The question in these matters is whether he will, would or did dispose of assets.  Did he defy the order of the court? I can see no rational reason for denying this man bail based on what we know of the jewelery episode.  One million dollars in jewelery is no big deal at this level of wealth.  It is just a few pieces. 

Andrea Peyser maintains that this man belongs in jail.  Not for the jewelery but just because lots of people were swindled and it affronts her that he is free and living in a penthouse.  It is a sentiment widely shared.  He may very well belong in jail for the crimes he's been arrested for.  But we have a process in this country and although it works increasingly less well, it should be followed.  There is no reason for anyone to be in jail if they meet the above requirements pending trial.  We don't believe in mob rule and that is what is taking hold in the Madoff case.  I readily admit my sympathies for his victims are limited.  Very wealthy, sophisticated people who invest money in a fund that guarantees high returns in down markets, charges no fees and prints its statements on dot matrix printers, don't get tons of tears from me.  They were as greedy as he was for being so blindly stupid.  That is no defense for him and he will almost surely plead or be convicted and get a lengthy term of imprisonment.  But why does it have to happen today?  If he's not rotting at the Metropolitan Correction Center until next fall are we somehow harmed as a society? Except to the braying pack, I cannot see how.

Smeared by the New York Times

I was going to write today about the housing crisis.  I have some insights into the matter and a non-traditional view that might surprise some of you given my previous position as President of the NYC Housing Development Corporation (HDC).  But instead, I am forced once again to respond to a scurrilous media accusation.

Since this blog has an international readership, I will have to explain some of the background and players to the New York Times' story yesterday.  To those of you from NY this might seem obvious and elemental.

Hank Morris is a political consultant.  A very successful one.  He is now under a 143 count New York State indictment.  Hank was the political guru to a NY politician named Alan Hevesi.  Hevesi was a long-time NYS Assemblyman and then NYC Comptroller during the Giuliani years.  He ran for Mayor in 2001 and lost badly in the Democratic primary.  After that he ran successfully for NYS Comptroller.  When he ran for re-election, successfully, certain facts came to light regarding fiscal impropriety involving a state driver for his wife.  He eventually resigned. 

NYC and NYS have unusual state pension funds in that the Comptroller is the sole trustee and decision maker regarding investment firms and placements.  After Hevesi left office, investigations commenced into his management of the NYS pension fund and Hank Morris's ties to certain pension activities for which he was allegedly paid millions by firms seeking business with the fund.  I won't go into whether or not what Hank Morris did was legal.  I am not entirely sure myself.  One more thing as background.  My father, Ray Harding, was a long-time Hevesi backer and friend of Hank Morris.  He too is under a criminal complaint regarding third party middlemen and the pension fund.

The New York Times ran a story yesterday by their in-house political scandal monger, Mike McIntire.  Not Michael, by the way, but Mike. I guess it gives him some street cred to use the diminutive. Maybe R.W. Apple should have used Johnny in his byline and that way people would have taken him seriously.

The story had to do with Hank Morris's many business holdings and how they inter-connected with pension placements.  One aspect of the story is that Hank Morris owned a graphic design firm called Curran&Connors.  The story suggests Bear Stearns hired Curran&Connors in order to curry favor through Morris with the then NYC Comptroller, Alan Hevesi.  On page two of the story it says, "Mr. Morris is also credited with getting annual-report contracts with the New York City Housing Development Corporation."  In case you are missing it, McIntire means me.  He's saying that I gave Hank Morris business.  Presumably to help my father or something.  He can only be referring to me since HDC never did business with Curran&Connors until I took over.

The first question I have is 'credited' by whom?  This is one of those cheap journalist tricks.  Throw in a serious, confirming sounding word like 'credited.'   You will gloss over the fact that he provides no detail to back that claim up.  And he in fact provides none.  Let me tell you how nearly a decade ago another more responsible journalist investigated this claim and found it baseless. 

In the late summer of 2001 Alan Hevesi was running for Mayor.  Ray and the Liberal Party had endorsed him.  I was President of HDC.  One day Luke Cusack, my trusted aide and Senior VP, came into my office and told me he had returned a call to me from Bob Hardt of the New York Post.  Hardt called to say he was working on a story for tomorrow regarding HDC having hired and paid tens of thousands to a Hank Morris owned firm.  I asked Luke what the fuck he was talking about.  Luke explained that Hardt was saying that Morris owned Curran&Connors, the graphic design firm that HDC used to do its annual reports, design its website and create its logo.  "You're telling me that Hank Morris owns  Curran&Connors?" I asked Luke.  "I'm not.  Bob Hardt is," Luke responded.  I asked out loud, "Why in the world would Hank Morris own a graphic design firm?  It's crazy.  Hardt must be mistaken."  I got Bob Hardt on the phone and asked him if he was sure about this.  "Yes", he told me, "Hank Morris is listed as chairman."  How did you know we were a client of Curran&Connors?"  I asked him.  "They list you in their annual report," he answered.  I explained to him that I had no idea Hank Morris owned Curran&Connors and we had used them for years.  We did not just recently hire them because of any Hevesi-Liberal Party connection, which was obviously the allegation in all this.

"Do you have any documentation?  Anything that confirms your long-standing relationship with them or any bids you may have done to hire them?"  He asked.  I told him I would check and get back to him.  Fortunately I had a great staff at HDC.  Luke returned with a thick file folder full of our history with Curran&Connors. 

HDC was not a city agency and as such we were not bound by the City's procurement rules that required that everything from bridge repairs to pencil erasers be triple bid.  But in this instance we had triple bid the contract and had all the documentation to back it up.  Including that Curran&Connors had been the low bidder.  Further, Luke had some paperwork from EDC (NYC Economic Development Corp.).  When I became Exec VP of Corporate Communications at EDC Curran&Connors was already doing work for the corporation.  I liked the work they did for us and when I went to HDC I had Luke include them in the mix of companies who were sent our RFP (Request for Proposals). 

I read the file.  It was great.  I told Luke to send him everything.  "Everything," he asked, "there are internal notes in there."  "Yes," I told him, "that's the point."  The staff member who had done the review had taken copious, contemporaneous notes.  Anyone could see that Curran&Connors was clearly the best firm.  And the lowest bidder.

I called Hardt back and told him I was having this walked over to City Hall, where he had a desk in Room 9.  There was some debate as to whether we should formally make him FOIL this, but I said fuck it.  I didn't want him writing this story since it had no foundation in fact and if this would acquit us, just give him what he wants.  So what did Bob Hardt do?  I'll tell you in a minute.

Most NYC reporters upon receiving a file like this would have responded thus: "This is great.  I am writing the story but will print your quote denying any connection and mention all the documentation."  And this fictitious NYC reporter would be absolutely convinced that he was being very fair, maybe even doing me a favor. But of course there was no story there.  Anyone looking at the file knew that.  You'll just have to trust me when I tell you that most - over 90% - of reporters today would write that story.  Figuring there's enough smoke to let the reader see fire and getting another byline in the process.

What did Bob Hardt do?  He called me back and said, "I'm not going to write the story.  This was clearly on the up and up - you didn't know."  That, my friends, is real professional journalism.  He could have written the story, maybe even a sexy story, but it wouldn't have been fair and in the main, not true.

Now what about Mike McIntire.  He could have written, "The Hank Morris owned firm had HDC as a client."  He could have even written, "The firm, owned by Hank Morris, had as one of its clients HDC, then run by Russell Harding, son of Morris's political pal and Hevesi ally Ray Harding."  He could have written that.  I believe it would have been inherently unfair but it would have all been technically true.  But he didn't do that.  Having attended the Tom Robbins School of If It's Not There Make it Up Journalism, McIntire just invented the link between me and Morris and the awarding of the contract.  He is in fact alleging something that at a minimum, I did something  unethical and at most criminal. It is outrageous behavior for a New York Times reporter. 

It is one thing when the Times prints the Andrew Cuomo allegation that Ray Harding needed the money from his alleged illegal activities to pay my legal expenses and doesn't even bother to contact me to see if I have a comment or if the allegation is true, which it is not.  That in my view is bad enough.  But when their reporters now gratuitously, out of the blue, make shit up, that is intolerable from a newspaper like the New York Times.

The reason the Times takes Jason Blair and Judith Miller seriously is that all they have at the end of the day is their credibility.  It is hard for non-New Yorkers to understand the power and prestige of the NYT.  No paper in any city in the world has what the Times has.  You may or may not believe something in any other paper, but if it's in the Times it has to be true.  I was brought up believing that as gospel.  Once they lose that then they're ordinary and no longer The Paper of Record.  So they take fabrications seriously.

I am claiming this putz McIntire is a lazy, unprofessional, dishonest journalist.  That's my opinion, you don't have to share it.  What we can all agree on is that this putz McIntire is unbelievably stupid.

I grant you the man has not been our Senator for a few years.  But he was Senator throughout all the 1980's and most of the 1990's.  He was a Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.  He was for many years a major player in shaping the state Republican Party and gave us Gov. Pataki.  So you think it would be too much to expect this putz McIntire to know how to spell Alfonse D'Amato's name?  I guess so.  Don't they have editors over at the Times who slap the kid reporters on the head and say, "Hey stupid, that's not how you spell a major player's name."  It's not like he was a Senator in the 1870's.  Although, I would still think the august New York Times would spell Roscoe Conkling's name correctly if it came up in a story.  I suppose this putz McIntire was too busy inventing his facts to take time out to check the spelling of a name even grade-schoolers can spell properly.  And remember, I used to get the man's mail so I know. 

I end where I began.  This putz McIntire claims that Morris is credited with the HDC contract.  I am not asking for an apology or a correction, although I am surely due both.  I am asking his editors to have him prove to them that he has some evidence of this statement and show it to them.  What call did he make or receive to lead him to this 'fact.'  I do not think I am asking too much.  I do not think it is too much to ask as much from the Times,if not more, than I received  from the NY Post.  Even felonious scum deserve better treatment than this at the New York Times.

GOV'T SHUTDOWN

Some people have said the greatest crisis during Rudy Giuliani's mayoralty was September 11th.  I disagree.  There was never a doubt that he would perform in the brilliant fashion that he did.  It was only Rudy detractors who were surprised by that. Or people who didn't know how effectively a properly managed government could be mobilized in a time of crisis.  I give Rudy great credit for 9/11 but it was no more than I knew him capable of and no more than he had shown the city they should expect. 

The greatest crisis in Rudy Giuliani's eight years as mayor happened and virtually no one knew or knows about it.  It happened fairly early on in his administration and effected the remainder of his two terms.  It was in many ways the turning point.  Life for him and us could have been far different had this crisis not occurred.  But it happened and here for the first time is a first-hand account of what transpired over those two weeks.

Some crises are like 9/11 or Pearl Harbor; you know right away you are involved in something epic and bad.  Others dawn slowly, like a creeping epidemic; the realization that something serious is happening may take awhile.  The greatest crisis of Rudy Giuliani's mayoralty was more the latter than the former.  It took me - us - some time to awaken to the severity of the situation.

It started with a meeting I was attending in the Committee of the Whole Room, always referred to as the "COW”.  A high ceilinged, original federalist period space that was being restored with new carpet and an enormous round mahogany table that took up almost the entire room. As the Mayor’s Counsel, Denny Young, had taken the only real conference room in City Hall for his office, this was the main meeting space for the Mayor and his staff.  Rudy was running late for the meeting. When he began running really late eyes fell on me.  In most meetings I attended, at a certain level, I would be the person to check on his whereabouts due to my longevity with the Mayor through two campaigns and my closeness to his executive assistant, Beth Petrone.

Usually, there are three answers as to where he could be: he’s running late, sit tight; he’s very, very backed up and we need to reschedule; or he had to run out to some emergency and we need to reschedule. There was almost never a fourth, except for this day.

When I dialed Beth and asked “What’s up?” she sounded nervous, which she rarely did, when she responded, “I don’t know what to tell you.” “OK,” I said, “should I wait or should I cancel?”  She repeated, ”I don’t know what to tell you.” “OK,” I said, “why don’t I cancel.” Beth Petrone had been with Rudy Giuliani through the U.S. Attorney’s Office, White & Case law firm (where she told me they actually gave out demerits to secretaries for tardiness; she loved that), Anderson, Kill (another law firm), two campaigns, and now City Hall. She conveyed his wishes better than anyone I knew and more accurately, but something was wrong this morning.

My next stop after canceling the meeting was her desk to find out what was going on. “He won’t come upstairs,” she said.  I knew she meant that he wouldn’t come up from his basement office.

Most guests to the Mayor’s private office are shocked by how small it is given the prestige of the job. They may or may not notice that off to the right side is a small cut-out through which is a kitchenette. Through that is a staircase that leads to a lower office. Very few guests are ever shown that office. Down there - mayors configure it differently - were a sofa, a small conference table, and a television. Early on in the administration we had meetings down there due to the lack of conference space, but due to reasons soon to follow, that stopped.

“Is she with him?”  I asked. Beth nodded.  "He just keeps canceling his meetings, one after the other. He won’t attend anything. No, that’s not true. SHE calls up and cancels the meetings.”  Beth then named a few internal afternoon appointments that she said he had to attend.  They were important meetings, had been on the schedule for weeks, and had been requested by Peter Powers and Denny. We both agreed this was weird but not much weirder than all that had transpired over the last many months.

His relationship with Cristyne Lategano, his recently promoted Director of Communications, was not merely fodder for gossip, inside and outside City Hall, but had become a corrosive force in the running of government. We had all experienced it.   The crisis described in this account happened a few weeks after her appointment to that job.

There were those of us who had tried in large or small measure to stem this tide. The person who tried in largest measure was Therese McManus, the Director of Scheduling and Advance, who went to Rudy's office and literally pleaded with him; broke down and tearfully pleaded with him, to come to his senses and see Cristyne as the manipulative, cunning, treacherous, scheming, incompetent that she was. Therese begged him to get rid of her.  It was a turning point moment for all of us when he said no. Therese was more or less demoted shortly after that and we all realized that the old guard, the old campaign staff who had been through thick and thin, didn’t stand a chance against Cristyne.  Cristyne knew it too. There was no stopping her after that. 

Looking back this had all been preventable and I had tried in my small way to wave a flag of the impending danger. It all went back to a confrontational meeting with Peter Powers, the First Deputy Mayor and my immediate boss, where this came up. I didn’t have a very good relationship with Peter.  I found him stiff and very taken with himself and his title. Rudy was easier to get along with in the beginning than Peter was.  But in fairness, Peter was an exceptional manager who never got proper credit for how well he ran the agencies. 

Many months earlier he had asked to see me to enlist my support in his on-going war with Randy Mastro, the Mayor’s Chief of Staff.  Few outsiders and no journalists have taken note of the intense hatred that existed and exists today between Peter Powers and Randy Mastro. I thought their feud stupid especially from Peter’s perspective.  I focused most of my enmity, at that time, toward Peter’s Chief of Staff, Gordon Campbell.

Gordon had worked in the Dinkins Administration for Harvey Robbins, the Director of Operations and Peter considered himself fortunate having Gordon to help navigate city government for him. The issue I, and a great many Giuliani people, had with Gordon was that he knew not our agenda and didn’t share it. But even that was all fine and could easily be overlooked for the sake of harmony. But the cardinal sin, and not about to be pardoned by me and certainly not by my friend the Appointments Officer, Anthony Carbonetti, was infection. Gordon Campbell through his own and through his influence on Peter was promoting and secretly staffing throughout the administration what we called “permanent government types.” Tony had a file an inch thick of Gordon’s activities. Gordon was a shrewd player of government politics and was helping his friends throughout the agencies. We all knew him to be a terrible influence on Peter. Eventually as time went on the Mayor would come to know this too. 

In order to keep his feet in both camps, the Mastro and Powers camps, Tony used me as the foil to launch at Peter. He never helped me at this time. I knew he didn’t have my back but I felt strongly on this matter and I didn’t mind operating alone against Gordon. 

In this meeting with Peter we spoke at cross purposes. I tried to get him to see the damage that Gordon was doing to the Giuliani agenda.  He was trying to enlist me to join him in seeing the dangers of Randy Mastro and to PLEASE lay off Gordon Campbell.  Peter never pleaded with me like this and it was obvious my attacks on Gordon within the administration were having an effect.

Finally I blew-up.  You don’t yell at Peter Powers unless you’re Rudy Giuliani and then you do it a lot.  I said, “While the two of you keep this battle up between yourselves she drives right down the middle. She keeps getting in closer and closer. She’s driven Therese and Todd out. I’m telling you, unless you turn your attention that way (I pointed towards her office) and away from Mastro she will take over everything. She’s already with him every goddamn minute in that van.” Peter responded in that super patronizing way of his that you can only appreciate if you’ve been on the receiving end.  “That will never happen, let me worry about Cristyne. Can I count on you with Mastro and to lay off Gordon?” He asked. “No,” I said, “I’m sorry I don’t agree with you on any of this. I can’t tell best friend Peter Powers with a straight face that he’s off-agenda (a phrase coined by Peter to mean anti-Rudy) but we just don’t agree on any of this. This feud with Mastro is only enabling her. I don’t see why you can’t see that - it feeds right into her plans.” I got up and left. Months later she was Director of Communications.

[ I do not know the exact genesis of the Powers-Mastro hatred.  If there is an originating moment, I do not know what it was.  It didn't seem to be there in the 89 campaign and I remember only a little visible tension in 93.  The apex of their war, at least from Peter's perspective, occurred in May of 1994 immediately after Randy Mastro left for his two week honeymoon.  Almost as soon as he left, there erupted what would become the biggest scandal of the Administration (until me).  It involved the Department of Youth Services (DYS) and its Commissioner, Rev. John Brandon.  I won't bore you with the details, they're not important.  The key thing for this purpose is for you to know that Brandon and DYS were viewed as Mastro's domain.  He pulled Brandon's strings and had a lot of oversight of DYS.  The minute DYS came under scrutiny Peter started blaming Mastro to anyone and everyone who would listen: on the phone, on the steps of City Hall to reporters, to the City Council, the Mayor, anyone.  Mastro was in Italy, I think, and helpless.  Peter worked tirelessly to stab Mastro in the back every chance he got during that week.  Peter also took charge of cleaning up DYS - Mastro's mess.  Mastro called in from his honeymoon and his staff informed him how Peter was hanging him out to dry. He tried to do some damage control from overseas but Peter was there on the ground, stiletto in hand.  We all had thought it crazy to take two weeks off, even for a honeymoon.  You just didn't take that kind of time off in Rudy Giuliani's City Hall.  I don't think Mastro ever forgave Peter for doing that to him while on his honeymoon.  After it was over someone, I think it was Carbonetti, coined the phrase 'Mastroed'; meaning to be knifed while you're out-of-town.  As a lesson learned, no one ever took a lengthy vacation during the rest of the two terms.]

But Beth was wrong. Those meetings Peter and Denny put on the schedule that couldn’t be canceled? They were.  And every meeting that followed, one by one struck down. He would not emerge from his basement office.  Food was sent down. Cristyne called up the order. What did it mean? Was it just for the day? Were they just going to stay down there screwing around for the day? Who knew? What about tomorrow? Beth wondered what tomorrow would be like.

I stopped by Carbonetti’s office and asked him for an update. Although I had been there at the beginning of the crisis I took it for granted he knew about it by now. “We're going out for dinner,” he said.  Tony was becoming part of Rudy’s regular dinner crew that went out nightly. “You’re going out?” I asked surprised. “Well,” he said, “I figured they’d been fucking all day they’d either be starving or exhausted. I guess they’re starving.” I laughed. I had just assumed they’d be exhausted. 

Day two of the crisis was exactly the same except we now knew we were in a crisis which made it worse. One by one the appointments fell off the schedule. We weren’t sure how to take this. Was this a lark? It was almost funny if it weren’t so incredibly serious. The Mayor of the City of New York was holed-up with his mistress below ground beneath City Hall doing God knows what not giving a damn and leaving it to his staff to worry about the consequences. More appointments fell, more lunches sent down. Another day over. Day three.

This wasn’t funny at all now because I had a meeting on day three with him. Obviously its not funny when my meetings get canceled. Sure enough, gone. Canceled. The thing is you wait and wait as though he’s going to come. You sit in the COW and stare at the phone. And finally Beth calls and tells you to cancel, as you knew she would. The watchword of Day Three has now become ‘Containment.’  There are still only a handful of us who know what’s going on. But the schedule is continuing to run as normal. The meetings are being assembled as normal and held and then they are being canceled for the usual reasons.  In this way I suppose the assembled - mostly agencies - will suspect nothing. They’ve been at City Hall, waited, been canceled, and left before. Business as usual. But what about the insiders? There are a lot of staffers at City Hall. They all don’t know. And can’t.

One of Peter Power’s staffers, Sal Uy, on Day 4 asked me why his agency’s meeting was canceled with the Mayor. I told him scheduling problems; just very backed up.  He knew I knew Beth well and I knew these answers.  I told him I would get his meeting rescheduled when things got back on track.  It was a promise. Back on track? When? We had expected this to pass by the third or fourth day but there was now no sign of this ending.  Quite to the contrary. This looked like it might become permanent.  Rudy Giuliani was giving every indication that he had lost interest in running city government - his government.

It is impossible to overestimate how much trouble we were in. City government at the very top echelon had stopped functioning. No major decisions were being made or could be made. No meetings of substance were being held. The agencies were all waiting for decisions on our major initiatives. Rudy Giuliani called the shots and he ran the show. He liked it that way and so did we and now he had lost interest in the job. Yes, trash was picked up and traffic was directed. But the things he was elected to do - those things - had ceased moving forward.  I don’t mind admitting fear gripped City Hall.  We were scared.  I know Peter was scared.  And I knew it when Beth called Jo Yagid, Peter’s scheduler, to say she was canceling his one-on-one.

By the fourth day Gordon had decided that  Peter’s staff and the agencies could get their issues onto Peter’s agenda with his weekly one-on-one with the Mayor. The Mayor rarely canceled that meeting and usually only if he had to run out of the building  for some reason.  It was as sacrosanct as those Thursday lunches that Presidents have with their Vice Presidents.

Peter didn’t love Gordon’s idea because he had a full list of his own, but it was a crisis so he pared his own items down.  Gordon added some of our items along with some agency requests and it seemed like we could maybe get business done this way. Kind of if Rudy wont go to the meetings we’ll bring the issues to him.

Well that idea came crashing down when Beth called and canceled Peter’s one-on-one. That was our last hope of getting business done.  If we couldn’t use Peter as our surrogate then things have really and completely shut down. Government at this level, at the very, very top now does not function.  Except no one knows and musn’t know it.  That was now the challenge for as long as this madness was going to last.  My own job, Inter-Governmental Affairs, which included legislative affairs, required immediate answers from him.  Albany, Washington, the City Council, all required his position on legislation. The only meeting he kept in the early days of the crisis was his regular Friday meeting with the Speaker of the City Council, Peter Vallone. We took that as a good sign but it meant nothing.

A good portion of my day was spent farming questions from people dropping by my office asking me why the Mayor canceled this meeting or that meeting. I started blaming the issue or the agency. The agency didn’t do their homework and the Mayor was pissed at the briefing material they sent over and in a rage canceled the meeting, I told them. Given Rudy’s personality anyone would believe it.  My job, first, last, and always was to defend the principal and however crazy this whole thing was, that’s what I was going to do.

I worked with Gordon on the issue of how to keep things moving and with Tony on containment. Containment proved the easier of the two. Rudy would come out for Blue Room press conferences (Cristyne ran those) and a few outside events (time alone in the van). But always back down to the basement office. Beth would try her best as he went back to his office to try and get Peter or Denny in there but no dice. Cristyne would say, “He doesn’t want to see anyone.” 

Seth Kaye, the Director of the Mayor’s Office of Transportation stopped me in Tweed one day.  We both knew what was going on but he thought I might have more current info. “Any end in sight? I got a lot of shit backed up at DOT and DEP.” “Nothing,” I said. “It’s just insane, when will it end? Why won’t he go back to work? What if this went on for a month? What would we do? What would we say? It’s like that movie ‘Nine to Five’.  Except people actually want to see Rudy.” I jokingly said if the City had a 22nd Amendment we should consider invoking it.

Day by day this kept up. I sat with Peter a few times on issues and Gordon a few times to brainstorm how to find loopholes in the law for certain things that required a mayoral signature. 

I also ran the Mayor’s Office of Grant’s Administration. Were there ways around this? Could Peter sign instead? We spent hours finding things for Peter to do in Rudy’s place. People would be surprised how many things by law require the mayor's signature for which no surrogate can be used.  But there is no substitute for a mayoral decision, mayoral action. And the voters elected Rudy Giuliani not Peter Powers, Bill Bratton, or Randy Mastro. We were all agreed on that. "Deal with the agencies the best you can." That was Peter’s directive. Keep this to ourselves. Don’t let word leak out. And so it went.

Rudy Giuliani became less a presence in our lives and more an irritant. He was causing all this. And he could end it by emerging. He was the crazy uncle in the attic we were covering up for.  Only he was in the basement.  And he was the Mayor of the Capital City of the World.  What would make it end?  It was getting harder and harder to cover with the agencies. We push them for weeks to get a project moving and then they’re ready to do it only waiting for a mayoral ‘OK’ and then no decision.

At this point in the administration most of us had stopped going to the Mayor's daily press avail in the Blue Room.  During the crisis everyone, and I mean everyone, went.  It was our only opportunity to see him.  Cristyne would brief him in the basement on what was likely to be asked.  Once or twice someone was called to his office to brief on something specific right before the avail.  I would leave a minute before it ended and stand in front of Peter's office to see his face as he passed by on his way back to his office.  I was hoping I could detect something in his face: anger, depression, mania - something.  But no.  He just looked determined.  Determined to get back to the basement.

On the evening of Day Eight or Nine I was at dinner with Tony Carbonetti at the Tramway Diner in our neighborhood. We lived one block from each other. Tony told me, “I was downstairs with Schwartz and she kept sneaking in and out of his office.” The entrance to the Mayor’s basement office was located right outside the office of Richard Schwartz, Senior Advisor to the Mayor. “God, I fucking hate that cunt; that she’s causing all this. She’s shutting down the whole government. And when she saw me she giggled. She actually fucking giggled. Jesus Christ!” 

We were all becoming a little paranoid too.  With any word or gesture we did not want to give away what was actually going on.  I remember being at City Hall and thinking whenever I passed someone, Do they Know?  I saw Paul Crotty, the City's Corporation Counsel, one day and kept trying to tell if he knew.  It was best not to say anything unless you knew the person was already in the know.  I would be on the steps of City Hall smoking, looking at all the reporters and thinking, Jesus, if they only knew what was going on.

Just as I didn’t know that a meeting in the COW had launched this crisis for me, so it was that I was unaware when I sat down for another meeting in the COW that I was about to hasten its end. 

Coming Monday - the conclusion to Gov't Shutdown.