BUSH APPOINTEE in Northern District of New York, Deals Right to Dissent a Death Blow! Options

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS DAILY POLITICS BLOG:

And as far as I am concerned, Mike, this TROOPERGATE FIASCO now belongs before a non-partisan citizen GRAND JURY, where common citizens like us are the exclusive judges of the facts ...

And to me, the TRIGGER for having this TROOPERGATE FIASCO brought before a citizen GRAND JURY right now is easily found in the news item "Prosecutor says travel scandal report still incomplete" by MICHAEL VIRTANEN, Associated Press, last updated 1:32 p.m., Tuesday, August 21, 2007, wherein is stated:

In Tuesday's editions, the Times Union of Albany cited "a person familiar with the investigation" in reporting that Soares "has found no criminality" in his review of the scandal.

State Inspector General Kristine Hamann, a Spitzer appointee, also investigated and reached a similar conclusion without issuing a report.

Spokesman Steven DelGiacco said it would have been "redundant" and they also concluded "that two officials of the governor's office had engaged in serious misconduct."

end quotes

TWO OFFICIALS OF THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE HAD ENGAGED IN SERIOUS MISCONDUCT ...

If I were a member of a GRAND JURY right now, Mike, I would be moving for subpoenas of Dopp and the Howard dude based upon this statement by the DelGiacco dude right above here about serious misconduct ....

And that is not a process that a DA like P. David Soares can short-stop, Mike ..

If the GRAND JURY wants subpoenas issued for Dopp and Howard to make an inquiry into misconduct in office by public servants, David Soares as DA would have to comply as a matter of law spelled out in ARTICLE 190 of the NYS CPL .....

And so ...

When I read THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS article "Spitz scandal prober 'close' - Albany DA vows to uncover truth in Troopergate" by JOE MAHONEY, ALBANY BUREAU CHIEF, Tuesday, August 21st 2007, 4:00 AM wherein is stated:

ALBANY - Investigators are "getting closer" to determining whether any laws were broken in the scheme by Gov. Spitzer's aides to discredit his top Republican rival, Albany County District Attorney David Soares told the Daily News yesterday.

Soares, interviewed outside his office, said he had not decided yet whether to place the matter before a grand jury, suggesting he would first have to determine whether a crime was committed.

end quotes

I have to wonder what game DA David Soares is playing at here, since the matter does not have to be criminal for the GRAND JURY to make inquiry into it, now that a finding of MISCONDUCT has been made by the SPITZER-ITE Inspector General ...

And so ....

Posted by: John Galt | August 22, 2007 5:23 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypoli...3.html#comments

[Livyjr]

"Enough, Mr. Gonzales"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Tuesday, August 21, 2007

How can anyone believe Attorney General Alberto Gonzales now?

He continues to deny that a surreal meeting in the hospital room of then-Attorney General John Ashcroft three years ago was about the Bush administration's determination to engage in domestic spying without warrants.

Mr. Gonzales' version of events are more dubious than ever, thanks to the release of notes taken by FBI Director Robert Mueller.

Those notes describe how Mr. Gonzales, then the White House counsel, and Andrew Card, then the chief of staff, tried to prevail upon a "feeble" and "barely articulate" Mr. Ashcroft to reauthorize spying tactics that had others in the Justice Department and FBI threatening to resign.

The notes back up both Mr. Mueller's earlier congressional testimony as well as the account of former Deputy Attorney General James Comey, given last May, of a harried and bizarre conversation in March 2004 that Mr. Gonzales says never took place.

Someone isn't telling the truth, it seems, and indications are that it isn't Mr. Mueller and Mr. Comey.

The release of evidence, albeit with heavy redactions, to support Mr. Mueller's version of events offers context for an assertion first raised last month by Sen. Charles Schumer.

Ever so bluntly, Mr. Schumer had said that Mr. Gonzales "tells the half-truth, the partial truth and anything but the truth."

Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, another Democrat serving on the Judiciary Committee, wants the Justice Department's inspector general to investigate Mr. Gonzales' apparent misstatements.

They include not only his account of the trip to Mr. Ashcroft's hospital room, but also sworn testimony about the firings of nine U.S. attorneys last year.

Other Democrats, meanwhile, are demanding a perjury investigation.

Compliance with the demand for such inquiries should come at once, even if leads to yet more evidence of Mr. Gonzales' utter lack of fitness to serve in a position that demands integrity above all.

[Livyjr]

"Enough, Mr. Gonzales"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Tuesday, August 21, 2007

How can anyone believe Attorney General Alberto Gonzales now?

He continues to deny that a surreal meeting in the hospital room of then-Attorney General John Ashcroft three years ago was about the Bush administration's determination to engage in domestic spying without warrants.

Mr. Gonzales' version of events are more dubious than ever, thanks to the release of notes taken by FBI Director Robert Mueller.

Those notes describe how Mr. Gonzales, then the White House counsel, and Andrew Card, then the chief of staff, tried to prevail upon a "feeble" and "barely articulate" Mr. Ashcroft to reauthorize spying tactics that had others in the Justice Department and FBI threatening to resign.

The notes back up both Mr. Mueller's earlier congressional testimony as well as the account of former Deputy Attorney General James Comey, given last May, of a harried and bizarre conversation in March 2004 that Mr. Gonzales says never took place.

Someone isn't telling the truth, it seems, and indications are that it isn't Mr. Mueller and Mr. Comey.

Ever so bluntly, Mr. Schumer had said that Mr. Gonzales "tells the half-truth, the partial truth and anything but the truth."

"Gonzales departure won't end probes"

By DAVID ESPO, Associated Press

Last updated: 6:42 p.m., Monday, August 27, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' resignation Monday after months of draining controversy drew expressions of relief from Republicans and a vow from Democrats to pursue their investigation into fired federal prosecutors.

President Bush, Gonzales' most dogged defender, told reporters he had accepted the resignation reluctantly.

"His good name was dragged through the mud for political reasons," Bush said.

The president named Paul Clement, the solicitor general, as a temporary replacement.

With less than 18 months remaining in office, there was no indication when Bush would name a successor -- or how quickly or easily the Senate might confirm one.

Apart from the president, there were few Republican expressions of regret following the departure of the nation's first Hispanic attorney general, a man once hailed as the embodiment of the American Dream.

"Our country needs a credible, effective attorney general who can work with Congress on critical issues," said Sen. John Sununu of New Hampshire, who last March was the first GOP lawmaker to call on Gonzales to step down.

"Alberto Gonzales' resignation will finally allow a new attorney general to take on this task."

Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, added, "Even after all the scrutiny, it doesn't appear that Attorney General Gonzales committed any crimes, but he did make management missteps and didn't handle the spotlight well when they were exposed."

Democrats were less charitable.

Under Gonzales and Bush, "the Department of Justice suffered a severe crisis of leadership that allowed our justice system to be corrupted by political influence," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who has presided over the investigation into the firings of eight prosecutors whom Democrats say were axed for political reasons.

Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the investigation would not end with Gonzales' leaving.

"Congress must get to the bottom of this mess and follow the facts where they lead, into the White House," said the Nevada Democrat.

Gonzales also has struggled in recent months to explain his involvement in a 2004 meeting at the hospital bedside of then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, who had refused to certify the legality of Bush's no-warrant wiretapping program.

Ashcroft was in intensive care at the time.

More broadly, the attorney general's personal credibility has been a casualty of the multiple controversies.

So much so that Sen. Arlen Specter, senior GOP member of the Judiciary Committee, told him at a hearing on the prosecutors that his testimony was "significantly if not totally at variance with the facts."

Gonzales made a brief appearance before reporters at the Justice Department to announce his resignation.

"Even my worst days as attorney general have been better than my father's best days," said the son of migrants.

Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee as recently as July 24 that he had decided to stay in his post despite numerous calls for his resignation.

Gonzales was one of the longest-serving members of a group of Texans who came to Washington with Bush more than six years ago at the dawn of a new administration.

Karl Rove, the president's chief political strategist, announced his resignation last week.

Presidential counselor Dan Bartlett and Harriet Miers, the former White House counsel who was forced to withdraw her nomination for the Supreme Court, left earlier in the year.

Gonzales, too, was once considered for the high court, but conservatives never warmed to the idea and he was passed over.

His appointment as attorney general more than three years ago marked the latest in a series of increasingly high-profile positions that Bush entrusted him with.

A Harvard-educated lawyer, Gonzales signed on with Bush in the mid 1990s.

He served as general counsel and secretary of state when his patron was governor of Texas, then won an appointment to the state Supreme Court.

Gonzales was White House counsel during the president's first term, then replaced Ashcroft as attorney general soon after the beginning of the second.

Both jobs gave him key responsibilities in the administration's global war on terror that followed the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

In a legal memo in 2002, he contended that Bush had the right to waive anti-torture laws and international treaties that protected prisoners of war.

The memo said some of the prisoner-of-war protections contained in the Geneva Conventions were "quaint" and that in any event, the treaty did not apply to enemy combatants in the war on terror.

Human rights groups later contended his memo led directly to the abuses exposed in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in Iraq.

Of greater political concern was the Democratic majority that took office in Congress earlier this year.

Leahy soon began investigating the firing of federal prosecutors.

Testifying on April 19 before the Judiciary Committee, Gonzales answered "I don't know" and "I can't recall" scores of times when asked about events surrounding the firings.

His support among Republicans in Congress, already weak, eroded markedly, then suffered further with word of the bedside meeting in the intensive care unit of George Washington University Hospital three years earlier.

Former Deputy Attorney General James Comey testified that Ashcroft had refused to reauthorize the wiretapping program.

Appearing before the Judiciary Committee, he described a confrontation in which Gonzales -- White House counsel at the time -- and White House Chief of Staff Andy Card had appealed to Ashcroft to overrule his deputy.

The ill Ashcroft refused, saying he had transferred power to Comey.

Comey described the events as "an effort to take advantage of a very sick man who did not have the powers of the attorney general."

Gonzales subsequently denied that the dispute was about the terrorist surveillance program, but his credibility was undercut when FBI Director Robert S. Mueller contradicted him.

Several Democrats called for a perjury investigation, but no further action has been taken.

------

Associated Press writers Lara Jakes Jordan, Jennifer Loven, Matt Apuzzo and Terence Hunt contributed to this story

[cutecat]

I am tired of Bush claiming because of politics he can't, couldn't or can't be held responsible for...

The man thinks we fail to remember his first four years with a republican house and senate.

The man acts more like an arrant boy stopping his feet because he suddenly realized no one likes him!

[Livyjr]

The man acts more like an errant boy stopping his feet because he suddenly realized no one likes him!

"We may never have the opportunity to empower an enlightened or even wise being in the modern American political arena."

"We may always be stuck with choosing the less deluded of two deluded beings."

"It may be that all we can do is make wise choices as to who we think will bring about less suffering and confusion to the world."

~Noah Levine

"Sharp questions await Gonzales successor"

By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer

1 minute ago

WASHINGTON - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' replacement — whoever that may be — faces a potentially nasty Senate confirmation and a beleaguered Justice Department badly in need of leadership.

Gonzales' resignation, announced Monday, cheered his critics who for months had demanded the attorney general quit over questions about his credibility.

Filling his job could lead to a new standoff between White House Republicans and the Democratic-led Congress, experts said, even as names of possible successors began to surface.

"Selecting a successor to Gonzales will be a challenge because the Senate is unlikely to confirm anyone as aggressive as Gonzales in the defense of executive power and the practice of secrecy," said Peter Shane, professor at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law.

But the White House is unlikely to let Congress dictate who gets the job.

Someone like former Sen. Jack Danforth, R-Mo., for example, "might be too liberal for the base," said Hunter College political scientist Kenneth Sherrill, referring to Republican conservatives who make up President Bush's core supporters.

A more intriguing pick, Sherrill said, would be Sen. Joe Lieberman, the hawkish Connecticut Democrat whose nomination would allow his state's Republican governor to appoint his replacement — wresting control of the Senate from Democrats to a tie between the two parties.

For now, Solicitor General Paul Clement will head the Justice Department until a replacement is found.

Among the possible successors whose names were floated Monday:

_Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, a former assistant attorney general and federal judge who commands the legal expertise that Gonzales lacked.

However, Chertoff faced intense criticism and calls for his own resignation after Homeland Security's sluggish response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

_Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee for a decade before relinquishing that standing in 2005.

In April, Hatch said "it would be really tough for me to get confirmed" but that "I would serve this country in any way I could."

_Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, a conservative former U.S. attorney, congressman, Drug Enforcement Administration chief and border security director at the Homeland Security Department.

Hutchinson, whom an aide said was on his way to Washington on Monday afternoon, could run afoul of Democrats for his role in the impeachment of former President Clinton.

_Acting Deputy Attorney General Craig Morford, a 20-year federal prosecutor.

Morford sent former Rep. Jim Traficant, D-Ohio, to jail and recommended that a federal judge toss out verdicts against two defendants in the nation's first major post-9/11 terrorism case after finding the Justice Department failed to turn over documents to defense lawyers.

_Former Solicitor General Ted Olson, a courtly conservative whose wife, Barbara, was killed in the Sept. 11 flight that crashed into the Pentagon.

Olson is now a partner at law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher in Washington.

_Former Deputy Attorney General George Terwilliger, who served during the administration of President George H.W. Bush and is now a partner at White & Case in Washington.

• Former Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson, who held the post during the current President Bush's first two years in office and is now general counsel at Pepsi Co.

• Former Deputy Attorney General James Comey, general counsel at Lockheed Martin Co.

He is considered a longshot at best after defying the White House's orders to continue a domestic spying program when he was the Justice Department's No. 2 in 2004.

_4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge William Wilkins, a South Carolina jurist who has defended the Bush administration's treatment of enemy combatants and reinstated a libel lawsuit against The New York Times over opinion columns linking a former Army scientist to the 2001 anthrax killings.

[Livyjr]

"Upstate NY sheriff and 5 underlings accused of misconduct"

By BEN DOBBIN, Associated Press

Last updated: 5:33 p.m., Tuesday, August 28, 2007

WATERLOO, N.Y. -- A sheriff and his former top deputy in a rural upstate county tried to pin crimes on at least four people who criticized them in an Internet forum, a prosecutor said Tuesday as six officers were charged with misconduct ranging from theft to falsifying business records.

Leo Connolly, 65, who took over as sheriff of Seneca County in 2004, told his undersheriff, James Larson, to slap the private residents "with whatever violation of law he could" in retaliation for their political attacks on a popular Web site in the Finger Lakes region, prosecutor R. Michael Tantillo said.

Nobody was ever ticketed or arrested, however, because sheriff's deputies "directed to target these individuals took it upon themselves not to follow those orders," Tantillo said.

After a seven-month grand jury investigation, Connolly, Larson, three sheriff's deputies and a former deputy appeared in Seneca County Court to plead not guilty to misconduct complaints dating to January 2005.

Connolly, a former FBI agent who is not seeking re-election in the fall, was accused of official misconduct for targeting his Internet critics with "selective enforcement" and offering a sheriff's deputy overtime pay to carry out his orders.

He was also charged with lying to the grand jury about a drug investigation and defrauding the county by claiming four officers attended a diver-training program in Florida when they were actually on vacation.

After his arraignment, Connolly took a "personal leave" from his job, the sheriff's department said without elaborating.

If convicted, he could draw a maximum 28 months to seven years in prison.

"Obviously, it's improper for any law enforcement or public official to target for retaliation someone else who is doing nothing more than exercising a protected right, that being a right of speech," said Tantillo, a district attorney brought in as a special prosecutor from adjoining Ontario County.

Larson, who resigned in March 2006 a few months after misconduct complaints surfaced, was accused of stealing a colleague's shotgun along with thousands of dollars worth of sheriff's department equipment, ranging from uniforms, handcuffs and ammunition to a soft drink machine, Tantillo said.

Most of the items were recovered in a raid on Larson's home, he added.

Larson was also charged with official misconduct for targeting the Internet critics and using official diving equipment to carry out paying jobs for two lakeside homeowners.

If convicted, he could be sentenced to as much as 16 months to four years.

In addition, four sheriff's deputies -- one a part-time employee who was fired last year and three suspended without pay Tuesday -- were charged with misdemeanors for stealing either tires, boats or other official equipment.

Charges against two of them, Christopher Constable and Scott Buck, are expected to be dropped because they cooperated with authorities.

"There are a lot of good officers in this county who take their job very seriously and try very hard to do a good job, and in fact are as chagrined as anybody else in this county," Tantillo said.

Connolly's attorney, Robert Napier, blamed Larson for the debacle.

"Sheriff Connolly was the victim of a systematic effort on the part of a rogue and now disgraced undersheriff to prevent the free flow of information from members of the department to the sheriff himself for the purpose of attempting to conceal the criminal and immoral activity of the undersheriff," he said.

"Once Sheriff Connolly became aware of this conduct, he acted swiftly and decisively to restore discipline and integrity within the sheriff's department," he said.

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS DAILY POLITICS BLOG:

In 1969, Student, the PEOPLE of NYS, myself included, voted to amend OUR NYS Constitution to add section 4 to ARTICLE XIV, entitled Conservation ...

Section 4 states in relevant part as follows:

§ 4. The policy of the state shall be to conserve and protect its natural resources and scenic beauty and encourage the development and improvement of its agricultural lands for the production of food and other agricultural products.

The legislature, in implementing this policy, shall include adequate provision for the abatement of air and water pollution and of excessive and unnecessary noise, the protection of agricultural lands, wetlands and shorelines, and the development and regulation of water resources.

end quotes

There, Student, better than 30 years ago, now, is the BIRTH of the "green" movement in NYS, long before SILDA and her witless yammering on the subject today, as if we were all sitting out here in a benighted state of ignorance about environmental concerns, waiting for SILDA to come and enlighten us ....

That constitutional amendment then led to the adoption of TITLE 1 of the NYS Environmental Conservation Law, DECLARATION OF POLICY, which is stated as follows:

Section 1-0101. Declaration of policy.

S 1-0101. Declaration of policy.

1. The quality of our environment is fundamental to our concern for the quality of life.

It is hereby declared to be the policy of the State of New York to conserve, improve and protect its natural resources and environment and control water, land and air pollution, in order to enhance the health, safety and welfare of the people of the state and their overall economic and social well being.

end quotes

There, Student, is the "teeth" of the "green" movement in NYS, and that, Student, is in 1970!

S 1-0101(2) of the NYSECL further states:

It shall further be the policy of the state to improve and coordinate the environmental plans, functions, powers and programs of the state, in cooperation with the federal government, regions, local governments, other public and private organizations and the concerned individual, and to develop and manage the basic resources of water, land, and air to the end that the state may fulfill its responsibility as trustee of the environment for the present and future generations.

end quotes

1970, Student ...

37 years ago, now ...

THAT THE STATE MAY FULFILL ITS RESPONSIBILITY AS TRUSTEE OF THE ENVIRONMENT FOR THE PRESENT AND FUTURE GENERATIONS ...

Why is SILDA just picking up on this now, do you think, Student?

And more to the point, perhaps, why aren't you aware of this vital NYS history?

What kinds of teachers did you have, anyway, Student?

Why did they deprive you of a sound education, especially in light of NYSECL Article 8, which states:

S 8-0101. Purpose.

It is the purpose of this act to declare a state policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment; to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and enhance human and community resources; and to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems, natural, human and community resources important to the people of the state.

S 8-0103. Legislative findings and declaration.

The legislature finds and declares that:

1. The maintenance of a quality environment for the people of this state that at all times is healthful and pleasing to the senses and intellect of man now and in the future is a matter of statewide concern.

2. Every citizen has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the quality of the environment.

end quotes

EVERY CITIZEN HAS A RESPONSIBILITY, Student, according to OUR NYS laws ...

But if you check up on the record of SILDA's husband the "STEAMROLLER", while he was state AG, you will find that he spit on this section of law and made a mockery of it ....

Which makes SILDA's words today on the subject ring hollow ...

And so ...

Posted by: John Galt | August 29, 2007 7:31 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypoli...nd_ends_77.html

[Livyjr]

"Justice examining Gonzales' honesty"

By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer

30 August 2007

WASHINGTON - The Justice Department said Thursday it is investigating whether Attorney General Alberto Gonzales lied or otherwise misled Congress last month in sworn testimony about the Bush administration's domestic terrorist spying program.

Details of the inquiry by Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine were released three days after Gonzales abruptly announced he was stepping down despite months of vowing to remain on the job.

In a letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, who two weeks ago asked for the inquiry, Fine said his investigators believe they "will be able to assess most of the issues that you raise in your letter."

Leahy had asked Fine to look into whether Gonzales gave inaccurate testimony about the firings of several U.S. attorneys last year.

"You identified five issues and asked that we investigate whether the statements made by the attorney general were intentionally false, misleading, or inappropriate," Fine wrote in his four-paragraph response to Leahy in the letter dated Thursday.

"The OIG has ongoing investigations that relate to most of the subjects addressed by the attorney general's testimony that you identified," Fine told Leahy.

Spokesmen for Gonzales had no immediate comment.

Senate and House lawmakers have said they will continue congressional investigations of Gonzales' leadership and management at the Justice Department, despite the attorney general's announcement Monday that he has resigned, effective Sept. 17.

Gonzales' resignation left the White House scrambling to find a replacement.

So far, no single candidate has emerged from a list of more than two dozen lawyers, judges, GOP politicians and current and former Justice Department officials being discussed.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Thursday it was unlikely that Gonzales' successor will be named until President Bush returns Sept. 9 from the annual Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Australia.

"We would expect to do it shortly after returning from APEC," Perino said.

"This is something we want to do in an expeditious manner."

She would not discuss any potential candidates.

Gonzales announced his departure a month after his truthfulness was challenged during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

At the bitter hearing, Gonzales denied that he tried in 2004, as White House counsel, to push the Justice Department into approving the administration's Terrorist Surveillance Program — despite concerns that it was illegal.

Gonzales said the March 2004 dispute — which played out in part at the hospital bedside of a groggy Attorney General John Ashcroft — focused on "other intelligence activities."

Ashcroft was recovering from surgery at the time.

Gonzales succeeded him in 2005.

Gonzales' testimony to Congress was contradicted two days later by FBI Director Robert S. Mueller, who said the dispute was about the program that then allowed the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on domestic terror suspects without court review.

Leahy, in a statement, said the internal probe "can help restore independence and accountability, which have been sorely lacking at the Justice Department."

"These actions have eroded the public's trust and undermined morale within our justice system, from the top ranks to the cop on the beat," Leahy said.

"The current attorney general is leaving, but these questions remain."

Fine and H. Marshall Jarrett, counsel to the department's Office of Professional Responsibility, launched a joint internal Justice review last March into whether the prosecutor firings were politically motivated.

The inquiry was later expanded to include whether Gonzales inappropriately discussed the ousters in a meeting that former aide Monica Goodling later said made her feel "uncomfortable."

Investigators also are looking into allegations that Goodling, and possibly other aides, let politics play a part in hiring career prosecutors — a violation of federal law.

The investigation is not expected to be finished for several more months, and possibly not until early 2008.

Fine's office already is investigating the Justice Department's role and use of information gathered as part of the domestic spying program.

A follow-up audit, expected by late December, is being conducted into on whether the FBI has taken steps to end its mishandling of administrative subpoenas — known as national security letters — that allowed agents to improperly obtain personal information about people in the United States.

Leahy also asked Fine, in his Aug. 16 request, to look into whether Gonzales was not telling the truth when he testified in 2005 that there "has not been one verified case of civil liberties abuse" involving the NSLs.

"It is appropriate that the Inspector General will examine whether the Attorney General was honest with this and other congressional committees about these crucial issues," Leahy wrote.

[Livyjr]

"Troopergate called unethical but not criminal - Cuomo calls probe of scandal involving Spitzer aides adequate despite limitations"

By RICK KARLIN, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, August 31, 2007

COLONIE -- Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said Thursday that even if his office had subpoena power in its investigation of the Troopergate scandal, and even if all of Gov. Eliot Spitzer's top aides had testified under oath, no criminal behavior would likely have been found.

And Cuomo does not expect ongoing investigations by Albany County District Attorney David Soares or the State Ethics Commission to find criminal behavior, either.

Cuomo however, reiterated his office's findings that the aides' behavior was "improper, unethical," and said that the use of State Police by both Spitzer's office and Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno raised concerns in people's minds, and are part of Albany's reputation for dysfunction.

Cuomo stressed that, hypothetically speaking, the ability to subpoena witnesses or documents could reveal information that he's unaware of.

But, based on what he knows now, Cuomo said he does not expect any finding of illegality.

Animosity between Bruno and Spitzer -- already fierce political rivals who are fighting for control of the state Senate, the Republicans' last stronghold in state government -- exploded last month following revelations that Spitzer's communications director, Darren Dopp, and homeland security deputy official, William Howard, had the State Police create travel records detailing Bruno's trips to New York City using a state helicopter and State Police drivers.

On three of those trips, the Brunswick Republican attended political fundraisers, but also said he conducted legitimate state business.

The trips were the subject of a Times Union story earlier this summer.

Following that story, Bruno charged that Spitzer's top aides were engaging in "political espionage," prompting Cuomo to investigate.

Cuomo's report July 23 concluded that there was no real surveillance or criminality, but that Dopp and Howard had acted improperly by having police create the records on Bruno's movements and involving them in a political matter.

After Cuomo's report was released, it was revealed that Dopp and Spitzer's secretary, Richard Baum, refused to be interviewed by the attorney general's office, instead sending in written statements.

But Thursday, Cuomo stressed that even if Dopp and Baum had testified, he's confident his investigation would have still found no criminal violations, either in Troopergate or in Bruno's use of state helicopters and police drivers, which triggered the whole affair.

"I don't think it changes the ultimate outcome of criminality," said Cuomo.

Since Cuomo's report, which led to Howard's demotion and a monthlong unpaid suspension for Dopp, the Senate Investigations Committee, State Ethics Commission, and Soares have started their own inquiries.

The State Commission on Investigation is also weighing an investigation.

Cuomo added that the itineraries State Police created after-the-fact for Bruno's trips contained errors regarding details of the senator's travels.

"Because they were done from memory ... the information in some instances was wrong," said Cuomo.

Those itineraries outlined the meeting places, including a Sheraton Hotel, various restaurants in New York City, and Aqueduct Racetrack in Queens.

Troopergate has dominated much of the political discussion this summer in Albany, which Cuomo said is probably for the best, despite the slings and arrows that seem to be flying in all directions.

"The use of police is an issue that troubles people," Cuomo said.

In addition to Dopp and Howard's misuse of State Police to create the travel records, Troopergate also highlighted what Cuomo has described as vague, lax rules about the use of state aircraft and cars to transport politicians.

He said the rules were so loose, allowing any amount of public business to justify the entire trip on taxpayer-funded aircraft, that it would be all but impossible to violate them.

"It's all about the Albany dysfunction," he said.

"This is a conversation that we should have had 15 years ago."

Karlin can be reached at 454-5758 or by e-mail at rkarlin@timesunion.com.

[Livyjr]

"Cuomo is right about keeping Troopergate debate going"

By FRED LeBRUN, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, August 31, 2007

Not surprisingly, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is one prominent state Democrat who wants the hoopla over Troopergate to continue, not calm down as others in his party would prefer.

"This is an important conversation to have, and to continue to have ..."

"It's all about the dysfunction of Albany that you guys have been writing about for years."

"It's about public integrity ..."

"Now, that doesn't mean you can't walk and chew gum at the same time and do other things ...," he said during a visit to the Times Union editorial board Thursday that was dominated by one topic.

After all, it was the attorney general's unexpected and incendiary report on misconduct by Gov. Eliot Spitzer's staffers primarily and the inappropriate use of state aircraft by Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno secondarily that got us in the pickle jar we're in.

Namely, an administration spinning its wheels, trying to get traction again.

Fending off a blizzard of investigators and critics ranging from silly to serious.

That report did more by far to humble the Spitzer administration than anything the Republicans have been able to muster, either on the campaign trail or since Spitzer's been governor.

"It's been an unpleasant situation for all concerned," Cuomo acknowledged.

"But I said we would be focusing on public integrity when I was campaigning ..."

"We're going to stay on that."

Cuomo was asked but didn't really talk about what the governor had to say to him about the politically devastating report.

That conversation must have had a brick in it.

Presumably they were not kind words of sympathy and understanding that Andrew was just doing his job.

"From the governor's point of view what matters the most is that he accepted the report ..."

"That is the tell-tale moment." Cuomo said.

The governor, he noted, could have questioned its conclusions and methods, could have demanded a more thorough investigation, or somehow deflected or pooh-poohed it.

But he didn't.

He accepted it whole cloth and so did his inspector general.

"Then the governor made personnel decisions" based on accepting the report.

"I didn't do that, he did."

"But Spitzer accepting this report affirms its validity."

If that seems a little defensive despite Cuomo's solid logic, high road standards and total defense of the investigators who created the report, well that's the way it struck me as well.

But it was also understandable, given the report's destabilizing effect and the rare skewering of a governor's staff, and by extension the governor himself, by a statewide elected official of the same party.

Eyebrows have been inevitably raised.

Cuomo's methods and motives have been questioned and continue to be.

Editorial pages are getting around to attacking the initial investigation, and wondering if Troopergate hasn't been completely blown out of proportion, in large measure by the political standing of its source.

It also struck me that Andrew Cuomo is back on the offensive around the same time investigations by the state Ethics Commission and the Albany County district attorney are logically about to go public.

This was a chance for Cuomo to pre-empt any criticism of him that might emerge from either of those investigations.

So what should we think about Attorney General Andrew Cuomo in terms of Troopergate?

Did his office perform a great and admirable service to the people of the state, rising above partisan politics?

Or is he playing another game that we can't quite figure out but suspect has something to do with seeking higher office?

Part of us will always reserve judgment, not just because it's Andrew Cuomo who in the past has invited such reservations, but because it's human nature.

We'll wait for the rest of the hand to be played.

But on its face, there is no reason to doubt that Andrew Cuomo has indeed performed a worthy service, and done the office proud, without fear or favor.

Cuomo's right.

It's about public integrity, no matter what else, and deserves to stay in the limelight.

It's about looking painfully hard at conduct and the need to change processes, from permitting use of state aircraft by senior elected officials, to the role of the State Police in a political world, from who should have subpoena powers to establishing who truly is the watch dog.

It's the height of irony that we're having this soul search during the fledgling year of an administration that rode into town on the white horse of changing a corrupt system.

But the AG's office doesn't do irony, only prosecutorial investigations, and that's fine.

We'll handle the irony.

LeBrun can be reached at 454-5453 or by e-mail at flebrun@timesunion.com.

[Livyjr]

"Troopergate called unethical but not criminal - Cuomo calls probe of scandal involving Spitzer aides adequate despite limitations"

By RICK KARLIN, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, August 31, 2007

COLONIE -- Troopergate has dominated much of the political discussion this summer in Albany, which Cuomo said is probably for the best, despite the slings and arrows that seem to be flying in all directions.

"The use of police is an issue that troubles people," Cuomo said.

"It's all about the Albany dysfunction," he said.

"This is a conversation that we should have had 15 years ago."

"Cuomo is right about keeping Troopergate debate going"

By FRED LeBRUN, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, August 31, 2007

Not surprisingly, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is one prominent state Democrat who wants the hoopla over Troopergate to continue, not calm down as others in his party would prefer.

"This is an important conversation to have, and to continue to have ..."

"It's all about the dysfunction of Albany that you guys have been writing about for years."

"It's about public integrity ..."

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS DAILY POLITICS BLOG:

Comment by platypusrex: John Galt, with regard to Andy’s finding of misconduct by Dopp, Howard, and Felton that warrants discipline, does Mr. Cuomo have authority to impose discipline?

Being a non-criminal matter, I would think that authority is Spitzer’s.

Whether or not you believe the punishment fits the crime, Spitzer did impose discipline on these 3.

JOHN GALT RESPONDS: platypusrex, obviously, I am not expressing myself well here, because you are totally missing the point which I am trying to make ....

The issue is not discipline by Spitzer ....

The fact that Spitzer did discipline Dopp and Howard, but not Felton is presently a non-issue here ....

THE ISSUE IS: with the finding of misconduct by young Andy Cuomo, REGARDLESS OF WHAT SPITZER DID OR DID NOT DO WITH REGARD TO ACTUAL DISCIPLINE, this is now a matter for a citizen GRAND JURY pursuant to OUR NYS BILL OF RIGHTS and ARTICLE 190 of the New York State Criminal Procedure Law, if either of them is ever to have meaning again here in NYS ....

Section 190.05 of the NYSCPL, entitled "Grand jury; definition and general functions", provides, as stated above, that:

A grand jury is a body consisting of not less than sixteen nor more than twenty-three persons, impaneled by a superior court and constituting a part of such court, the functions of which are to hear and examine evidence concerning offenses and concerning misconduct, nonfeasance and neglect in public office, whether criminal or otherwise, and to take action with respect to such evidence as provided in section 190.60.

end quotes

There, platypusrex, is OUR only hope as citizens for a truly independent investigation of this SPITZER-GATE FIASCO now ..

Not with the Senate, and not with young Andy cuomo, and not with David Soares and not with the Ethics Commission ....

But with a GRAND JURY made up of citizens just like us in here ....

The FUNCTION of a citizen GRAND JURY in NYS, platypusrex, is to hear and examine evidence concerning misconduct, nonfeasance and neglect in public office, whether criminal or otherwise, and to take action with respect to such evidence as provided in section 190.60.

That is what I am for in here, that in this matter, now that young Andy Cuomo has confirmed misconduct, is that a citizen GRAND JURY in NYS now hear and examine evidence concerning misconduct, nonfeasance and neglect in public office by the SPITZER-ITES, whether criminal or otherwise, and that it take action with respect to such evidence as provided in section 190.60 ....

Sectiion 190.60, entitled "Grand jury; action to be taken", provides in relevant part as follows:

After hearing and examining evidence as prescribed in section 190.55, a grand jury may:

1. Indict a person for an offense, as provided in section 190.65;

2. Direct the district attorney to file a prosecutor`s information with a local criminal court, as provided in section 190.70;

3. Direct the district attorney to file a request for removal to the family court, as provided in section 190.71 of this article.

4. Dismiss the charge before it, as provided in section 190.75;

5. Submit a grand jury report, as provided in section 190.85.

end quotes

And what we are interested in, platypusrex, is the GRAND JURY REPORT, itself pursuant to NYSCPL 190.85, to wit:

S 190.85 Grand jury; grand jury reports.

1. The grand jury may submit to the court by which it was impaneled, a report:

(a) Concerning misconduct, non-feasance or neglect in public office by a public servant as the basis for a recommendation of removal or disciplinary action; or

(b) Stating that after investigation of a public servant it finds no misconduct, non-feasance or neglect in office by him provided that such public servant has requested the submission of such report; or

© Proposing recommendations for legislative, executive or administrative action in the public interest based upon stated findings.

end quotes

Clearly, platypusrex, in this case where young Andy Cuomo has found misconduct on the part of Dopp, Howard and Felton, with possible involvement in the misconduct by Baum and Spitzer, the issue of discipline seems to belong with the citizen GRAND JURY, independent of what Eliot Spitzer himself might want ....

Since a citizen GRAND JURY, based upon an examination of the evidence, could recommend removing Eliot Spitzer himself from office for non-feasance and neglect in office ...

And the ability of the citizen GRAND JURY to propose recommendations for legislative, executive or administrative action in the public interest based upon stated findings takes us a lot further down the road to true GOVERNMENT REFORM here in NYS than Eliot "STEAMROLLER" Spitzer ever will ...

And so ....

I trust this makes my position in this matter more clear ....

And so ...

Posted by: John Galt | August 31, 2007 7:14 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypoli...nd_ends_80.html

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS DAILY POLITICS BLOG:

And speaking of the SAME OLD SAME OLD up here in Albany ....

I am reminded of some recent quotes by young Andy Cuomo in the Albany Times Union story "Troopergate called unethical but not criminal - Cuomo calls probe of scandal involving Spitzer aides adequate despite limitations" By RICK KARLIN, Capitol bureau, first published Friday, August 31, 2007, and the Fred LeBrun piece "Cuomo is right about keeping Troopergate debate going" by FRED LeBRUN, first published: Friday, August 31, 2007, wherein was stated as follows:

Not surprisingly, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is one prominent state Democrat who wants the hoopla over Troopergate to continue, not calm down as others in his party would prefer.

"This is an important conversation to have, and to continue to have ..."

"It's all about the dysfunction of Albany that you guys have been writing about for years."

"It's about public integrity ..."

end quotes

DYSFUNCTION and a disturbing lack of public integrity in NYS government which goes back to at least in or about 1977, according to official records of the State of New York itself ....

Which brings us to young Andy's timely quotes in the Friday, August 31, 2007 RICK KARLIN story in the TU entitled "Troopergate called unethical but not criminal - Cuomo calls probe of scandal involving Spitzer aides adequate despite limitations", to wit:

Troopergate has dominated much of the political discussion this summer in Albany, which Cuomo said is probably for the best, despite the slings and arrows that seem to be flying in all directions.

"The use of police is an issue that troubles people," Cuomo said.

"It's all about the Albany dysfunction," he said.

"This is a conversation that we should have had 15 years ago."

end quotes

THE USE OF THE POLICE IS AN ISSUE THAT TROUBLES PEOPLE!

THIS IS A CONVERSATION WE SHOULD HAVE HAD AT LEAST FIFTEEN YEARS AGO!

And so ....

Young Andy Cuomo is dead on the money with those quotes ....

And it is OUR duty as concerned citizens to see that these outstanding questions about what "STEAMROLLER" Spitzer knew about TROOPERGATE and when he knew it do finally get answered ....

And that the conversation doesn't get buried as the SPITZER-ITES intend ....

And so ...

Posted by: John Galt | September 3, 2007 6:01 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypoli...1.html#comments

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS DAILY POLITICS BLOG:

And it is indeed interesting that in his quotes in the Friday, August 31, 2007 RICK KARLIN story in the TU entitled "Troopergate called unethical but not criminal - Cuomo calls probe of scandal involving Spitzer aides adequate despite limitations", young Andy Cuomo states clearly and unequivocally that:

"The use of police is an issue that troubles people," Cuomo said.

"This is a conversation that we should have had 15 years ago."

end quotes

Fifteen years ago from now would be the year 1992, and on November 30, 1992, Assistant Rensselaer County District Attorney Richard McNally was standing before then-Rensselaer County Criminal Court Judge M. Andrew Dwyer in the Rensselaer County Court House, being forced to admit before all the people in that courtroom that day that he had no evidence whatsoever to substantiate his malicious prosecution of former Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer Paul R. Plante, P.E. in the various town courts of Rensselaer County from January of 1990 to that time ...

After Plante was the victim of a hit-and-run driver on Liberty Lane in the Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County on December 29, 1989 ....

A politically-connected hit-and-run driver who was PROTECTED by the New York State Police ...

And who was then allowed to bring false criminal charges in Poestenkill Town Court against Plante to cover up the hit-and-run, which false charges McNally then prosecuted for him:

JUDGE: There is a MOTION on, that I might as well dispose of first.

That is PEOPLE v. PLANTE.

Apparently, it is pro se.

Mr. McNally, are you here for the PEOPLE?

This is a legal question.

I don’t see that argument is necessary!

MCNALLY: This is a Motion to Dismiss!

JUDGE: A Motion to Reargue a Motion to Dismiss!

MCNALLY: I have no position, other than to say, the Court, in its previous position, left me without any recourse other than to not oppose a Motion to Dismiss, in my opinion!

JUDGE: That is your position?

MCNALLY: That is my position!

JUDGE: THEN YOU CONSENT TO THE DISMISSAL?

MCNALLY: I do, Judge, based upon the fact that the Court, in its previous Decision, left me with an untenable position at trial!

JUDGE: How closely did you read the decision?

MCNALLY: Very!

JUDGE: The District Attorney consented?

MCNALLY: It was the Court’s opinion at trial that there was other evidence out there, and I can affirm that there IS NOT OTHER EVIDENCE ON WHICH TO BASE A PROSECUTION AND THE COURT RULED THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS PRESENTED INSUFFICIENT, AND I HAVE NO OTHER EVIDENCE!

JUDGE: And you take the position that you have no further evidence, at all?

MCNALLY: No further evidence, Judge!

JUDGE: Then it is dismissed!

(Whereupon, matter concluded)

- EXCERPTED from pages 121-124 of the O’Connor BIBLE submitted to the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City on behalf of defendant REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive Kathleen Jimino and her co-defendants, in or about November of 2005

http://blogs.timesunion.com/localpolitics/?p=193#comments

And so ....

Posted by: John Galt | September 3, 2007 6:39 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypoli...1.html#comments

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK POST

"JOE SET TO SIC PROBERS ON GOV"

September 3, 2007 -- SENATE Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, convinced current investigations of the dirty-tricks scandal will "cover up criminal conduct" by aides to Gov. Spitzer, will authorize three special-committee probes of what he calls questionable or "illegal" activities linked to Spitzer, The Post has learned.

Bruno decided to authorize the broad probes - by the Investigations, Elections, and Racing and Wagering committees - after concluding that two investigations of the dirty-tricks scandal will "whitewash" the plot by top Spitzer aides to use the State Police to gather information designed to damage or destroy his political career, sources said.

The probes are being conducted by Albany District Attorney David Soares, a Democrat widely described even by aides to Spitzer as "in the tank" for the governor, and the Spitzer-controlled state Ethics Committee, whose chairman, former Fordham Law School Dean John Feerick, is a longtime Spitzer friend.

"Our take on Soares is that he's going to do a whitewash," a senior official of the Republican-controlled Senate told The Post.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09032007/news/...bers_on_gov.htm

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS DAILY POLITICS BLOG:

And this business with former Assistant Rensselaer County District Attorney Richard McNally ....

Who did Joe Bruno a big political favor by falsely and maliciously prosecuting Plante to protect the BRUNO-ITE GOON who had run Plante down in December of 1989 ...

Is relevant to what is taking place on the political stage here in NYS right now ....

Because the Working Families Party has endorsed McNally to be the next District Attorney up here in Joe Bruno's Rensselaer County ...

And there is a real good chance that with that WFP endorsement, McNally is going to win, and become OUR next Rensselaer County District Attorney ....

As P. David Soares is DA over there in Albany County ...

With a similar endoresement by the WFP ....

And it is our information and belief ...

That the WFP endorsed McNally precisely BECAUSE McNally could demonstrate, through his false and malicious prosecution of Plante, that McNally will and has bent and twisted the law for political purposes ....

To protect political friends ....

And to punish political enemies ....

Which would make the WFP a "PLAYER" up here, having someone like McNally in its stable of politicians ...

Along with P. David Soares ....

Who is said to be giving Eliot Spitzer aid and comfort in connection with this TROOPERGATE FIASCO ...

And so ...

Posted by: John Galt | September 3, 2007 7:02 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypoli...101.html?page=2

[Livyjr]

THE ITHACA JOURNAL

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 8:22 am

Post subject: Your comments are misleading!

As an older citizen of NYS who is for our state Constitution and the laws of the state which emanate from our Constitution, I found myself somewhat disappointed by the following statements in your article "Ethics Commission needs to let in some sunshine" by Jay Gallagher:

The other two panels looking at the situation, the Senate Investigations Committee and the Albany County district attorney's office, have built-in limitations.

The panel is run by Republicans, who have a partisan viewpoint, and its members only have the authority to consider legislative responses to Troopergate.

The D.A. can only find criminal wrongdoing, or nothing.

end quotes

I am disappointed because these statements are either intentionally misleading, or worse, they demonstrate an ignorance of our form of government here in NYS by your staff, specifically, Mr. Gallagher.

First off, section 6 of ARTICLE I of the NYS Constitution, the NYS Bill of Rights, states in clear and unambiguous language that:

The power of grand juries to inquire into the wilful misconduct in office of public officers, and to find indictments or to direct the filing of informations in connection with such inquiries, shall never be suspended or impaired by law.

end quotes

Which constitutional language in NYS brings us to ARTICLE 190 of the NYS Criminal Procedure Law, entitled "THE GRAND JURY AND ITS PROCEEDINGS".

Section 190.05 of ARTICLE 190, entitled "Grand jury; definition and general functions" provides as follows:

A grand jury is a body consisting of not less than sixteen nor more than twenty-three persons, impaneled by a superior court and constituting a part of such court, the functions of which are to hear and examine evidence concerning offenses and concerning misconduct, nonfeasance and neglect in public office, whether criminal or otherwise, and to take action with respect to such evidence as provided in section 190.60.

end quotes

So, clearly in the state of NY, according to our state law, it is the function of the GRAND JURY to "hear and examine evidence concerning misconduct, nonfeasance and neglect in public office, whether criminal or otherwise", and nowhere in our state laws is Albany County DA P. David Soares given the authority to block a GRAND JURY from fulfilling its function, just because DA P. David Soares might be interested in scoring political points in this TROOPERGATE FIASCO by protecting Eliot Spitzer.

This point is re-iterated in sub-section 1 of section 190.55 of ARTICLE 190, entitled "Grand jury; matters to be heard and examined; duties and authority of district attorney", as follows:

1. A grand jury may hear and examine evidence concerning the alleged commission of any offense prosecutable in the courts of the county, and concerning any misconduct, nonfeasance or neglect in public office by a public servant, whether criminal or otherwise.

end quotes

As to the specific role of Albany County DA P. David Soares in that examination, sub-section 3 of section 190.50 of ARTICLE 190, entitled "Grand jury; who may call witnesses; defendant as witness", provides:

3. The grand jury may cause to be called as a witness any person believed by it to possess relevant information or knowledge.

If the grand jury desires to hear any such witness who was not called by the people, it may direct the district attorney to issue and serve a subpoena upon such witness, and the district attorney must comply with such direction.

end quotes

So, clearly, in the case of an examination by a GRAND JURY here in NYS concerning any misconduct, nonfeasance or neglect in public office by a public servant, whether criminal or otherwise, it is the GRAND JURY which directs the actions of Albany County DA P. David Soares, and not the other way around.

Sub-section 6 of section 190.25 of ARTICLE 190, entitled "Grand jury; proceedings and operation in general" provides that:

6. The legal advisors of the grand jury are the court and the district attorney, and the grand jury may not seek or receive legal advice from any other source.

Where necessary or appropriate, the court or the district attorney, or both, must instruct the grand jury concerning the law with respect to its duties or any matter before it, and such instructions must be recorded in the minutes.

end quotes

So, again, in the in the case of an examination by a GRAND JURY here in NYS concerning any misconduct, nonfeasance or neglect in public office by a public servant, whether criminal or otherwise, Albany County DA P. David Soares is the legal advisor to the GRAND JURY, but he is not in charge of the GRAND JURY, as is reflected in sub-section 5 of section 190.25 of ARTICLE 190 as follows:

5. The grand jury is the exclusive judge of the facts with respect to any matter before it.

end quotes

And as to why we citizens out here are interested in having the facts correctly stated by your publication in connection with a truly non-partisan examination of this TROOPERGATE FIASCO, I refer you to sub-section 5 of section 190.60 of ARTICLE 190, "Grand jury; action to be taken", which states as follows:

After hearing and examining evidence as prescribed in section 190.55, a grand jury may:

5. Submit a grand jury report, as provided in section 190.85.

end quotes

We citizens out here are interested in this GRAND JURY report because of what it can provide us pursuant to section 190.85 of ARTICLE 190, "Grand jury; grand jury reports", as follows:

1. The grand jury may submit to the court by which it was impaneled, a report:

(a) Concerning misconduct, non-feasance or neglect in public office by a public servant as the basis for a recommendation of removal or disciplinary action; or

(b) Stating that after investigation of a public servant it finds no misconduct, non-feasance or neglect in office by him provided that such public servant has requested the submission of such report; or

© Proposing recommendations for legislative, executive or administrative action in the public interest based upon stated findings.

end quotes

There is the heart of what your Mr. Gallagher failed to state in his recent article above here, which we older citizens out here feel was a disservice to your readers.

And so ....

http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps/pbcs....ION02/709040309

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Michael Goodwin

"Cleaning up a cover up - Gov narrows his denials about what he knew and when he knew it"

Wednesday, September 5th 2007, 4:00 AM

If you think Gov. Spitzer had no knowledge of the plot to smear a rival Republican, you are wrong.

If you think Spitzer had no knowledge the plot involved the state police, you are wrong again.

And if you think Spitzer had no knowledge the plot would use the media to spread dirt, strike three, you're out.

Take heart - you're not alone.

I believed Spitzer had sweepingly denied any knowledge of those three issues.

But the governor's office now says it wants to "clarify" for me what the governor knew about the plot to smear Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno.

It is a surprising turn, one that suggests to lawyers I consulted that Spitzer is following legal advice to sharply narrow the scope of earlier denials.

The move could mean Spitzer is, one Albany insider said, "creating a record" in case evidence or testimony contradicts his earlier denials, which were usually far more sweeping.

I think of it as cleaning up the coverup.

The "clarification" came in a response to my scoffing at Spitzer's claim that "he had no knowledge of the plot to use the state police for a political smear job."

Spitzer's spokeswoman called those words "misleading."

"Eliot has never asserted that he had 'no knowledge' of the situation," Christine Anderson wrote in an e-mail.

"To the contrary, the governor has repeatedly and publicly said that:

1. He believed there was a media request for documents relating to Bruno's travel (and, he has added, his own travel as well);

2. He knew that Darren [Dopp] was collecting documents relating to that travel, which showed travel on days of political events, and

3. He knew that when those documents were provided to the media, there would be a news story about it."

After repeating the points, Anderson tackled what Spitzer didn't know.

"What the governor was NOT aware of was HOW the documents were being collected - i.e., that the state police was re-creating records, that the superintendent was handling the requests personally, or that standard operating procedures were not being followed in every way."

Like fireworks, Anderson's claims drew oohs and aahs from my legal sources, three of whom are familiar with the details of "Troopergate."

All said they had never heard Spitzer restrict his denials to the state police actions.

And two focused on Anderson's references to a "media request" instead of to requests under the Freedom Of Information Law.

The distinction could matter because, according to the damning report by Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, the FOIL request at the heart of the case came after Spitzer aides used one as a false pretext to order the state police to produce documents.

If Spitzer knew about the info gathering before the actual FOIL was filed, he is admitting to far earlier knowledge of the plot.

In a phone conversation yesterday, Anderson insisted her e-mail was consistent with Spitzer's prior statements.

When I noted that many press reports had used variations of "Spitzer said he knew nothing," she said she had been unable to correct them all.

She added of Spitzer, "He's not a robot."

"He's not going to use the same phraseology every time."

That's a fact.

For example, talking to the Daily News Editorial Board on July 26, Spitzer was asked whether he was aware, as Cuomo found, that the plan to use the media to damage Bruno started last May.

"I was only aware that when there were media inquiries they were gathering information to respond to it," Spitzer answered.

Pressed about the charge of an early targeted, systematic attempt, Spitzer insisted: "I was not aware of that."

He also said "I know nothing" about damaging e-mails that described the plan.

We'll see.

If my guess and my sources are right, Spitzer is preparing to testify, and he knows that what he will have to say under oath to avoid perjury will contradict what most people have heard him say publicly.

mgoodwin@nydailynews.com

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/0...a_cover_up.html

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS DAILY POLITICS BLOG:

I just finished reading the NEW YORK DAILY NEWS story by Michael Goodwin entitled "Cleaning up a cover up - Gov narrows his denials about what he knew and when he knew it", Wednesday, September 5th 2007, 4:00 AM ...

And perhaps that story carries within it some clues as to why the "STEAMROLLER" is so testy lately ....

And I have to say that the title of that article, "Cleaning up a cover up", made me think of none other than Nelson Sheingold!

Eliot Spitzer’s former MASTER OF THE ART OF THE GOVERNMENT COVER-UP from Eliot’ days as NYS AG ….

The MASTER OF THE ART OF THE GOVERNMENT COVER-UP, indeed!

This Nelson Sheingold dude is the KING OF THE GOVERNMENT COVER-UP!

In federal District Court for the Northern District of New York in 2005, in the matter of former Rensselaer County Associate Public Health engineer Paul R. Plante, P.E. v. Rensselaer County Executive Kathleen Jimino et al, "COVER-UP ARTISTE" Nelson Sheingold got Plante’s federal civil rights lawsuit stemming from Plante’s unlawful incarceration in the Stratton VA Hospital based on a fraudulent involuntary psychiatric commitment order thrown out of federal court by the simple expedient of burying an August 16, 2002 AFFIRMATION of Assistant New York State Attorney General LISA ULLMAN wherein Ullman had confirmed while under oath that Plante had been involuntarily committed to the Stratton VA Hospital PURSUANT TO MENTAL HYGIENE LAW 9.45 FOR SEVERAL HOURS ON AUGUST 22, 2001, so that "COVER-UP ARTISTE" Sheingold could then testify to an alternate story that was totally false ....

Which false story required Sheingold to also bury the sworn affidavit of an Albany, New York Police Officer who was an eye-witness to Plante’s unlawful incarceration, and who was able to finally secure Plante’s release by demonstrating to VA Hospital officials the fact that they were holding Plante unlawfully, and in violation of his civil rights, to boot …

And then, Nelson Sheingold also had to bury the statements of a NYSP BCI Investigator in the office of Rensselaer County District Attorney Kenneth Bruno who was himself a witness to the commission of crimes in the matter of Plante’s unlawful incarceration by Rensselaer County and New York State public officials …

And of course, Nelson Sheingold had to lie under oath to the federal court ….

AND HE DID IT LIKE A PRO!

And so ….

It's no wonder that Eliot Spitzer has an un-clear conscience today ...

And I wonder what Niebuhr would have to say to the "STEAMROLLER" about that ...

Especially after the "STEAMROLLER" quoted Niebuhr as saying, "we need a sense of contrition about the common human frailties and foibles which lie at the foundation of both the enemy's demonry and our vanities ...."

We upstate countryfolks would say, in the absence of Niebuhr, that Eliot "STEAMROLLER" Spitzer does indeed need a massive dose of contrition after what he had Nelson Sheingold do to bury Plante's federal civil rights lawsuit ...

Which civil rights lawsuit, like TROOPERGATE, involved the use of the State Police to advance Eliot Spitzer's political agenda ....

And so ...

A small world it is ...

And so ...

Posted by: John Galt | September 5, 2007 7:38 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypoli...buhr_think.html

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK TIMES

"11 Arrested in N.J. Corruption Inquiry"

By JOHN SULLIVAN

Published: September 7, 2007

Federal agents used a phony insurance brokerage as part of a sting operation that resulted in the arrests of 11 public officials in New Jersey this morning, including two state assemblymen and the mayor of Passaic.

The officials, arrested in a sweep by F.B.I agents early today were scheduled to appear in federal District Court in Trenton this afternoon to face charges of accepting cash bribes to influence the award of contracts, according to a written statement from the office of Christopher J. Christie, the United States Attorney for New Jersey.

The investigation started in mid-2006 after the F.B.I. received evidence of corruption in contracts issued by the Pleasantville School District, federal prosecutors said.

The school district, located just east of Atlantic City, is one of the state’s poorest; in July, a state monitor was appointed to oversee its finances.

Federal agents set up the insurance brokerage and used two cooperating witnesses as well as undercover agents to investigate contracts issued by the district, prosecutors said in the statement.

The investigation is the most recent of a series of corruption probes Mr. Christie and the F.B.I. have conducted across the state.

Mayors in several of the state’s largest cities, as well as members of city councils and county boards have been charged in the past few years.

The statement said that several members of the Pleasantville School Board took thousands of dollars in bribes from the cooperating witnesses, and that they referred the undercover agents to public officials in other parts of the state who would also be willing to take the payments.

As the agents followed those leads, the investigation quickly expanded beyond Pleasantville to include officials in Essex and Passaic Counties, in northern New Jersey, prosecutors said.

As part of the sweep this morning, federal agents arrested Mayor Samuel Rivera of Passaic; Assemblyman Mims Hackett Jr., a prominent Democrat who is also the mayor of Orange; and Assemblyman Alfred E. Steele, a Democrat from Paterson who is also the Passaic County Undersheriff.

Federal agents also arrested five current or former Pleasantville school board members, two Passaic city council members and the chief of staff to the president of the Newark City Council, prosecutors said.

A series of criminal complaints filed today in District Court by the F.B.I. describes covert meetings in restaurants, cash payments in cars, and officials who bargained for inside access to public contracts.

Passaic Mayor Samuel Rivera is charged in one complaint with taking $5,000 in cash while sitting in a parked car in Passaic.

The complaint says he told a confidential witness that he could help him secure insurance contracts for the city of Passaic and the nearby Passaic Valley Water Commission.

“We can get you that, easy, easy,” Mayor Rivera said, according to the complaint.

The officials took bribes ranging from $1,500 to $17,500.

In most cases, prosecutors say, they tried to keep in touch with the undercover witnesses in order to continue receiving the bribes.

“Moving forward, I have other friends in other municipalities, and I am all for getting my feet wet as well,” Jonathan Soto, a Passaic city councilman, told a confidential witness, according to a complaint.

“I am very appreciative that, you know, you guys have counted me as part of the team.”

Prosecutors said Mr. Soto referred to bribes as “cake” and “green broccoli” in text messages with the witness and accepted $5,000 in cash while sitting in a car in a shopping center parking lot.

Another Passaic councilman, Marcellus Jackson, took $6,000 in cash while sitting in a car in Newark, according to a complaint.

The complaint said Mr. Jackson told the confidential witness that he “laid the law” on a city employee to in favor of the witness’s insurance company.

“I appreciate it, baby,” Mr. Jackson said after taking the cash, according to the complaint.

“Good things is gonna happen.”

In one case, an official warned the undercover operative to be careful of law enforcement, the complaint says.

The official, Keith O. Reid, chief of staff to the president of the Newark City Council, told the witness that “under federal and state law, it is not only illegal to accept cash payments, it is illegal to offer them.”

“That’s the law’s attempt to keep everything above board,” he said, according to the complaint.

[Livyjr]

"NYRA still owes $1 million promised to avoid prosecution"

By MICHAEL GORMLEY, Associated Press

Last updated: 1:05 p.m., Tuesday, September 11, 2007

ALBANY -- The New York Racing Association hasn't paid $1 million it promised federal prosecutors in a 2004 deal that deferred and ultimately avoided a criminal prosecution, a spokesman for U.S. Attorney Roslynn R. Mauskopf said Tuesday.

The news comes a week after NYRA gained the support of Gov. Eliot Spitzer to hold onto the lucrative state franchise to run the Aqueduct, Belmont and Saratoga thoroughbred tracks for up to 30 years.

Spitzer also proposes a state bailout of NYRA's debts that could exceed $200 million.

A state Senate committee is scheduled to consider Spitzer's recommendation in a hearing on Wednesday. The franchise, which NYRA has held since 1955, expires Dec. 31.

"They still owe $1 million, but they did declare bankruptcy," said Robert Nardoza, spokesman for the federal attorney for the Eastern District of New York.

The debt was first reported in the New York Daily News Tuesday.

Nardoza said the federal prosecution couldn't be reopened even if the total $3 million in restitution isn't fully paid because the indictment was dismissed as part of a deal that included management and other reforms at NYRA.

Now, the federal government is one of NYRA's creditors awaiting payment or partial payment of debts.

Nardoza said about $2 million was paid before NYRA sought U.S. Bankruptcy Court protection from its creditors as it reorganized under new management.

NYRA that had been dogged for years by state and federal investigations into its management and compensation of top officers.

A federal conviction could have dissolved NYRA.

The $3 million restitution was to cover fines and the cost of the investigation.

Federal and state officials -- including Spitzer as attorney general -- were investigating corruption, mismanagement, tax evasion, money laundering and other allegations.

There was no immediate comment from NYRA or Neil Getnick, the court-appointed federal monitor who helped secure the agreement for NYRA to avoid prosecution.

His law firm, Getnick & Getnick, has been hired by NYRA as its counsel to assure business integrity, a major factor considered by Spitzer in evaluating NYRA and three other competitors for the franchise.

NYRA has said its fiscal problems were mostly the result of its failure to compete with rising forms of gambling including casinos and lotteries.

The new franchise, however, will include revenue from video slot machines.

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS DAILY POLITICS BLOG:

AND WHAT ON EARTH IS UP WITH THIS, PRAY TELL?

"Relieving One Fear"

September 10, 2007 at 6:40 pm by Jay Jochnowitz, State Editor

If you’ve been hesitant to report a terrorist plot because you’re afraid of a lawsuit if you’re wrong, worry no more.

Gov. Eliot Spitzer signed a “Freedom to Report Terrorism Act,” which shields people from civil and criminal liability if they report someone who they believe is involved in a criminal or terrorist act.

Malicious acts of false reporting aren’t covered.

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=5378#comments

Posted by: John Galt | September 12, 2007 8:32 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypoli...he_day_107.html

THE ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION CAPITAL CONFIDENTIAL BLOG:

I have to say truthfully that when I read these words above here describing this thread, I was so taken aback that I was speechless!

From the bowels of what hell did this “Freedom to Report Terrorism Act” come from, I wonder ….

And where are the contents of the BILL JACKET, pray tell, which supports this “Freedom to Report Terrorism Act”?

CAN WE HOPE TO SEE THEM ON-LINE WITH A LINK IN HERE?

AND HOW IS IT THAT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT WE ARE HEARING A WORD ABOUT THIS “Freedom to Report Terrorism Act”?

WHO in New York State has been hesitant to report a terrorist plot because they’re afraid of a lawsuit if they’re wrong?

WHERE IS THE SUPPORTING DATA HERE?

WHO is it that these people are reporting “terrorist plots” to, in the first place, so that such reporting is going to expose the reporters to a lawsuit if they are wrong?

SOMETHING SOUNDS OUTLANDISH HERE?

If these people are wrong, then there should be no problems for them, BECAUSE THE INVESTIGATIVE AGENCIES WOULD TAKE NO FURTHER ACTION!

OR WOULD THEY?

What exactly is going on here?

Gov. Eliot Spitzer signed a “Freedom to Report Terrorism Act,” which shields people from civil and criminal liability if they report someone who they believe is involved in a criminal or terrorist act …

IF THEY REPORT SOMEONE TO WHOM?

And so …

Comment by John Galt — September 11, 2007 @ 7:16 pm

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=5378#comments