US Ambassador to South Africa meddling in New York politics -- again

Patrick Gaspard is back to his old political tricks, with more possible violations of the Hatch Act

The unrelenting political activities of a U.S. State Department ambassador to prop up the Democratic Party's political machine in New York America's ambassador to the nation of South Africa, Patrick Gaspard, is once again engaging is political activities that some critics say may violate a federal law that prohibits such involvement by federal government employees. Ambassador Gaspard has been engaged in behind-the-scenes political machinations to support the candidacy of Michael Blake, who is campaigning to seek the New York State Assembly seat vacated by Eric Stevenson after he was convicted of bribery in January, The New York Post reports, adding that, Mr. Blake is a "protégé" of Mr. Gaspard. The federal Hatch Act aims to limit the ability of U.S. politicians to use federal employees for activities of political parties. This reform stemmed from allegations that Democratic Party officials exploited government employees for political gain during the New Deal, but the electioneering regulation restricts federal employees, with few exceptions, from all political parties from engaging in political activities. This isn't the first time that Ambassador Gaspard has flouted Hatch Act regulations. Today's article in The New York Post mentions that prior to reportedly lobbying the healthcare union SEIU 1199 into endorsing Mr. Blake, Ambassador Gaspard was engaged in political activities in support of the reelection campaign for Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY). Prior to that, a New York Republican Party political operative, E. O'Brien Murray, lodged a Hatch Act complaint with the State Department, accusing Ambassador Gaspard, a former top White House aide and the former top political operative with SEIU 1199, of violating restrictions on political activities by getting involved last year in Bill de Blasio's mayoral campaign. Ambassador Gaspard appeared to further flout the Hatch Act by reportedly lobbying in favor of City Councilmember Melissa Mark-Viverito's selection as the new Council speaker. All of Ambassador Gaspard's electioneering activities were conducted while serving as an ambassador under the U.S. State Department. How many times will prosecutors, intent on cleaning up corruption in New York politics, keep allowing Ambassador Gaspard a green light to exploit his office, position of influence, and federal resources accorded to him in relation to his position in the U.S. State Department, if any, for electioneering activities to benefit Democratic Party candidates for public office ?

RELATED State assembly candidate Michael Blake’s ‘ragged’ efforts for ‘hope and change’ (The New York Post) GOP Operative Files Hatch Act Complaint Against U.S. Ambassador Patrick Gaspard (The New York Daily News)

There's More Left, If You're Hungry (For Change)

PUBLISHED : SAT, 12 JUL 2014, 06:25 PM
UPDATED : MON, 14 JUL 2014, 07:45 PM

Response to "Nothing Left" by Adolph Reed, Jr.

There's a way forward, to break through the stranglehold that neoliberals have over the Democratic Party, but, to do it, leftists need to leave the Democratic Party. In "Nothing Left," an essay by Adolph Reed, Jr., in the March issue of Harper's, Mr. Reed, described how the Democratic Party fails leftists in American politics. More or less, he described a Democratic Party that believed in working within a broken political system that affirms neoliberalism over the party's former New Deal politics. There are too many payoffs in the current broken political system for the Democrats to want reforms. Following is a response and commentary to Mr. Reed's essay. For years, activists in New York City have been trying to fight back against the influences of Big Business interests in local politics, but activists are stopped by party politics that want to see the correct Democrat elected into public office. Activists play a greater role in trying to bring about reforms, precisely because most voters do not participate in government, much less vote. In the mayoral election won by Bill de Blasio, only 24 percent of registered voters turned out to cast ballots, a rate of participation described as a record low by The New York Times. This compares with a 25 percent voter turnout in Detroit, a city in bankruptcy. A sense of voter powerlessness to fight back against the corruptive influence of money and lobbyists in politics is succeeding in suppressing voter turnout. "Three other cities showed an even deeper level of apathy. Atlanta had 17.2 percent turnout, Houston only 13.2 percent and Miami just 11 percent,” according to one report. This compares with an incredible recent peak in voter turnout of 93 percent in the 1953 New York City mayoral election. Voters have come to believe that their participation doesn’t make a difference, and in the age of the corrupt Supreme Court decision in Citizens United, they are almost right. The lack of voter participation means that activists play a larger than normal role in how political, legal, and economic issues get put on the social agenda. We know that activists are passionate, because they are driven by motivations to change the system when they take up causes. One consequence to how how we compensate for the lack of voter participation is that the same activists keep showing up over and over again for a variety of issues. In the face of such great voter apathy, some activists speak of inactive voters as uneducated, because if voters truly appreciated what was at stake in the broken political system, voters would get involved. Voters need to become activated, so that they can claim their rightful role in overhauling the broken political system. Otherwise, going forward, as in for the past decades, some activists (or, some political operatives is more like it) will take for granted that only activists or political operatives will know what reforms are needed, because only activists and political operatives know the lay of the corrupt political landscape. A huge contributing factor that keeps such super-majority percentages of voters inactive is the failure of mainstream media to fully report the truth about the depths of corruption in how elected officials run the business of government. And activists and political operatives know the truth about how corrupt the system is, but they don't do much of anything to challenge the press to fully report the truth about corruption. Somehow, the same small numbers of activists and political operatives have yet to overcome the limitations imposed by the failed mainstream media, and this keeps inactive voters in the dark. Compounding this dysfunction is the fact that some activists readily accept some aspects of the corrupt political landscape, and these activists adjust themselves accordingly to the corruption, as opposed to fighting it. Once they play by the rules of the broken political system, some activists adopt downsized scopes of reforms to make nice-nice with the power players of the broken political system. To varying degrees, Mr. Reed and others have previously described this phenomenon. Where is the Democratic Party in all this ? Democrats only care about winning elections, not rolling out fundamental reforms to overhaul the broken political system. Brining back online the inactive voters doesn't matter to Democrats, because elections can be still be won without the participation of inactive voters. Making matters worse, the Democratic Party uses what Jane Hamsher describes as "veal pens" to proverbially lock-up activists and nonprofit organizations in a state of atrophy to deescalate demands for political reforms from the political left. Except for a few brave souls, the mainstream media buys into these and other deceptions of the Democratic Party for several reasons. Some politicians, their political operatives, and their lobbyists employ teams of people to feed the media only approved talking points. Some reporters make the mistake of thinking that they have become "friends" with politicians and their enablers, losing their objectivity in the process. The influence of of corporate owners and editors slant reporting coverage according to suitable idealogical packaging. The media has often been describe to move with a pack mentality, they themselves not wanting to appear to be dissenting from their peers. And sometimes, the few brave souls, who do report the truth about government and political corruption, face a loss of access to each of sources, political gossip, or other professional privileges. Many times, this retaliation plays out privately, as the spurned reporter tries to do damage control out of the view and judgement of their peers and possible future employers. Given that Democratic Party insiders and political operatives know this, it is not difficult for Democrats to try to control the media. In respect of the media, several important things have happened in the time leading up to, and since, Mr. de Blasio was elected as mayor that can act as reality checks on the City Hall press corps. First, while LGBT activists were rejecting the "identity politics" of former City Council Speaker Christine Quinn in favor of substance, Mr. de Blasio rolled out his family, offering a "biographical narrative" to take center stage in his cornerstone promise to "end the stop-and-frisk era," a promise that was devoid of truth, in turns out, when Mr. de Blasio move the goal posts to "stop the over-use of stop-and-frisk" with the subsequent appointment of William Bratton as police commissioner, a move which the media largely did not challenge as being incongruent with Mr. de Blasio's campaign promises. At a lengthy public forum of some of the city's top political reporters held after last year's Democratic mayoral primary election, some reporters openly disavowed any duty to vet candidates for public office. As a consequence of this attitude, many reporters admitted that they had failed to scrutinize Mr. de Blasio before last year's Democratic primary race. For those few New Yorkers planning to vote, relying on the press for information was a dangerous proposition, because the city's top political reporters were saying that voters were on their own to make sense of the broken political system. Resistance to reforms that borders on needing to keep the system corruptible Who can forget Rep. Nancy Pelosi's three-part interview (Part 1 ; Part 2 ; Part 3) revealing interview on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, in which Rep. Pelosi refused to come clean about the Democratic Party's reliance on Big Money campaign contributions, amongst other controversies. Gov. Andrew Cuomo promised to clean up Albany of corruption, but he refused to close a gaping loophole through which Big Money campaign donors funnel campaign contributions to elected officials as a way to control the government's agenda. One of Mayor de Blasio's closest political operatives, Scott Levenson, faces what has been described as multiple possible investigations due to allegations of campaign finance violations, but the mayor refuses to update the city's campaign finance laws, as he promised he would during last year's mayoral campaign. Councilmember Melissa Mark-Viverito hired lobbyists in a shady campaign to become the City Council speaker, pledging to turn the page from the corrupt record of her predecessor, but, now that she's in power, she's waging an effort to take control over the city's Board of Elections, "giving her power and control of a host of patronage jobs," according to The New York Daily News. Other issues, like how Gov. Cuomo was carrying out a state-sponsored plan to close hospitals across New York City, were never reported in the mainstream media with the full truth about what was truly happening. Even when Mr. de Blasio was reportedly described as trying to save Long Island College Hospital when he was only a candidate for mayor, he never fully tied the wave of hospital closings back to Gov. Cuomo's Medicaid Redesign Team. When the media did work itself up into a frenzy, like when one of the mayor's political supporters, Bishop Orlando Findlayter, was let out of jail on account of alleged intervention from City Hall, the mayor blocked the release of possibly damaging (or incriminating) evidence. At the conclusion of last year, The New York Times opined that no matter the real reason former Council Speaker Quinn lost the mayoral race, it wasn't because of any "major ethical lapses," contrary to the multiple examples of ethical lapses chronicled in Roots of Betrayal : The Ethics of Christine Quinn. One way or another, the corrupt system finds a way to keep the truth from being reported. Whenever the media is interested in covering a story, like with Bishop Findlayter's arrest, the government denies requests made under freedom of information laws. Some political bloggers and government reform advocates believe that Mayor de Blasio's denial of freedom of information law requests for Bishop Findlayter's arrest report, for example, is in keeping with the Obama administration's pattern of denying requests made under the federal Freedom of Information Act. Amongst the many outstanding FOIA requests pending before the Obama administration is a request for records about the government's vindictive prosecution of activists, including the prosecution of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal hero, Lt. Daniel Choi. It's easier for the press to politically report that the Obama administration is denying FOIA requests than it is to show how the Obama administration has been targeting activists for vindictive prosecution. The political climate facing government reform activists within the Democratic Party is so severe, that pressuring the Democratic Party for reforms routinely involves backlash, sometimes in the form of political retaliation. This environment of hostility is indicative that the Democratic Party doesn't stand for reforms. That is why you see political operatives, a/k/a "Yes Men," ring fence Democratic Party politicians from criticism. When grassroots activists make demands for reforms, the Yes Men deceptively water-down those demands for reform into downsized requests that can be easily met with empty rhetoric. Given this reality, how can voters mobilize to overhaul the broken political system, if some political operatives downsize their demands for reform -- at the same time when the press refuses to report the whole truth about corrupt elected officials ? The fairytale life of elected officials Part of the never-ending election strategy for the Democratic Party, indeed for any political party, is to establish and then maintain their leaders as likable characters. And so begins the requirement that followers can never question leaders, for, if one makes this irreconcilable error of questing a leader, then one gets shown the door. The Democratic Party spends millions on campaign consultants, lobbyists, focus groups, opinion polls, other messaging, and public relations that the party will not tolerate insiders, who undo these expensive media machinations. This is why voters get duped into buying the party line. Activists, who think they can operate an inside strategy, must first pledge to operate from a place of compromise -- there can be no criticisms of elected officials. This is why there is no room for dissent in expensive modern-day politics. Even when most progressives support immigration reform, for example, the Democrats, under Mayor de Blasio, go to such extremes as only allowing supporters of the city's new identification cards speak at official City Council hearings. Free speech and open debate go out the window. Regrettably, whole classes of nonprofit executives and activists sell-out their communities in exchange for insider access privileges. Even before Mayor de Blasio took office, former Council Speaker Quinn had established new norms of what it meant to be a neoliberal Democrat in New York City. Her relationship with real estate developers, chambers of commerce-like groups like the Partnership for New York City, and big money campaign donors like Rudin Management Company, have served as a pattern for Mayor de Blasio to follow as he seeks constant approval from Big Business interests. Moving in the same Big Business interest circles of former Speaker Quinn, Mayor de Blasio perpetuates the corrupt nexus of insider access and and a culture of backroom power deals for which activists once criticized former Speaker Quinn for having embraced, but the press doesn’t report things this way. Having made his Black family the core of Mayor de Blasio's identity prevents critics from raising race as an issue, even as some of Mayor de Blasio's policies have unfair racial overtones. Look at how easily Mayor de Blasio sold out on his pledge to reform policing in New York City when he authorized the police to undertake military-style invasions of public housing projects -- public housing projects -- and blaming some of the poor for the desperate lives that some of them live on account of the broken political system that never addresses the underlying conditions, which cause that desperation, a broken political system which Mayor de Blasio so very well represents. Police raids are sinister forms of behavior modification that blames victims for being poor, and that the targets of these policing actions are largely people of color goes unexamined by the media and by long-time activists, who have, by now, adapted to the new political realities of no expectations of reforms under the Democratic mayor. That the new police commissioner has promised to keep using the racist and classist "broken windows theory" of policing means that the mayor was all talk about police reform. Now that race is not a safe subject for examination, the media fails to look at how political operatives undertook efforts last year to manufacture a spike in voter turn-out in Black voting districts as a way to help elect the next mayor. Whenever the mayor does find himself under criticism from his political left, he relieves the pressure by spouting the right buzzwords, talking points about how he's a "progressive." Mayor de Blasio likes to tout his record of having signed new labor contracts with the municipal unions. NEWSFLASH : Any Democratic mayor had to give the unions new contracts. It's not rocket science to do what the unions, which elected you, tell you to do. The left, whom Mayor de Blasio will not accommodate, gets "trashed" the way activists in other social movements were once rolled over for not adapting to the corrupt status quo. Seeing the political landscape for what it is, first ; and then organizing for reforms, second One can most visibly see this dysfunctional dynamic play out between the Democratic Party, the mayor, nonprofit groups, political operatives, lobbyists, and activists in the police reform movement. Inside this dysfunction, nonprofit organizations and their executives play by the rules of the broken political system. They lock themselves -- and others -- up in "veal pens," where the goal of the broken political system goal is for activists to atrophy and waste away. If one tries to expose how some nonprofit groups are duplicitous in this dysfunction, then it is as if one has kicked a proverbial hornets' next -- one is going to get stung for pulling back the curtain on this political charade. And the veal pens and the stingings are very effective to condition activists to obey the rules of the broken political system. The totality of this dysfunctional political dynamic is given to us by a broken political system in which Democrats fully participate, that goes to great lengths -- indeed, any length -- to avoid reforms. Besides Big Business interests, the Democratic Party has become beholden to a class of "professional" political operatives, campaign consultants, and lobbyists, such as Patrick Gaspard, Scott Levenson, George Arzt, Jonathan Rosen, Dan Levitan, and others, making it impossible to enact reforms within the Democratic Party given these co-opting political gatekeepers. Matters are so corrupt that this class of consultants and lobbyists become entrenched and form a permanent, unaccountable form of backroom government insiders. Helping these permanent government insiders stay in power is the fact that that they have learned to exploit the campaign regulations that are meant to make electoral contests open and fair. When one accounts for the added role of fundraising and bundling of campaign donations by these permanent government insiders, one can see how figures with significant political power operate in backrooms, with no accountability to voters. These permanent government insiders are also largely responsible for removing the ethic of public service from those serving in public office. And those activists, who blog or write about these truths, are labeled fringe activists as a way to marginalize and disenfranchise muckraking bloggers. At every point, the broken political system tries to discredit critics, who are only calling for an overhaul to end government and political corruption. One of the major reasons why leftists cannot reform the broken political system is that the Democratic Party has instituted a culture that prevents leftists from holding Democratic officials accountable for reforms. Activists are marginalized by the Democratic Party, a viewpoint more or less shared by Mr. Reed, forced into the political fringes, then accused of running outside pressure political tactics against corrupt or inept Democrats -- when an outside pressure politics strategy is the only approach that the broken political system leaves activists. The system blames activists for exhibiting disenfranchised behavior when it is the broken political system that causes this disenfranchisement in the first place ! The only hope for overhauling the broken political system, in my opinion, is for all of the inactive voters to become activated. The current system, where the same small pool of activists, some of whom organize from a place of privilege, move from one issue to another, in "solidarity," after each "crisis moment," as Mr. Reed pointed out, isn't enough to overhaul this system. It's not just the numbers that a successful overhaul needs, but new ideas, new voices, and enough of them -- so that the people represent themselves in the process to bring about necessary reforms. If activists need to come in out of the fringes, then voters, too, need to come in out of dormancy. People need to dial-up their civic engagement. Contrary to what Democrats, Big Business interests, and permanent government insiders would have voters believe, it will be O.K. if voters participate in their own reform movement. And there's more to civic engagement than just voting, as it should be. People need to find more and more ways to have a say in how the government conducts business on our behalf. Voters need to create new groups, new organizations, through which they can exert new pressures on the system for reform. These groups must be new, in order to circumvent the stranglehold that Democrats have on unions, nonprofit organizations, and other political clubs or groups. The first step to start organizing is to vote out the highest figurehead neoliberal Democrat, which would be New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, and vote in a Green Party candidate, Howie Hawkins, who can break the corrupt two-party hegemony in American politics. Voting in a Green Party governor would demonstrate that the government can survive the loss of a center-right Democrat to a true leftist. Considering the corrupt political landscape, this is actually the only way our government can survive. The second step to start organizing is for voters to establish a new relationship with how they get the real truth about government and political corruption. This either means challenging reporters to fully report the truth, or else it means supporting new platforms or structures of muckraking-reporting that can come in out of the fringes and fully go mainstream.

RELATED Nothing Left : The long, slow surrender of American liberals By : Adolph Reed, Jr. (Harper's)

Obama's obsession with NSA spying costing US corporations contracts, profits, and jobs

Are we watching the sunset of the U.S. technology industry ?

RELATED Citing Security Concerns Amid U.S. Spying Disclosures, German Government Ends Verizon Contract (The Wall Street Journal)

FOLLOWING REPORTS THAT the U.S. technology giant and National Security Agency partner Verizon was providing Internet services to the German Parliament, the German public exploded in outrage at the possibly of having their government's national security and privacy rights further violated by the U.S. government and by its technology partners. After NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden exposed the corrupt and unconstitutional spying programs of the United States, including by U.S. technology partners such as Verizon, the German government was forced to terminate its technology contract with Verizon. It's not yet known the size of the financial loss to Verizon, or how many jobs will be lost as a result of the canceled German government technology contract. Many U.S. technology firms are having to privately grapple with the economic and political backlash to the on-going cooperation between U.S. technology firms and the U.S. spy agency. "Microsoft Corp. General Counsel Brad Smith said last week the business troubles stemming from the Snowden leaks were "getting worse, not better." Cisco Systems Inc. Chief Executive John Chambers has said the disclosures have hurt sales in China. AT&T Inc. executives have said some of their international customers were being urged by overseas competitors to use non-American service providers." -- WSJ Last winter, Facebook head Mark Zuckerberg called President Barack Obama to complain about the NSA spying programs. Mr. Zuckerberg's leaked his displeasure to the public as a growing movement of activists are exposing Facebook for its corrupt ''like'' advertising programs and for the creepy cyberstalking policies it carries out against its members, in addition to Facebook's role in being a core source for NSA surveillance activities. Although the obstacles facing Facebook may be unique to its own troubled business premise, the reality is that many U.S. technology giants, including social media companies, are facing real political and economic blowback as a result of questions being raised by each of foreign governments and foreign businesses about the trustworthiness of U.S.-based sources for NSA spying and hacking, such as Verizon and Facebook. Not only are the NSA spying programs unconstitutional and are going to lead to serious costs to the U.S. legal system, as civil rights and civil liberties activists clog the system with their noble efforts to rightly restore basic Constitutional principles to the wayward American spying framework, but now the NSA spying programs are going to have a financial cost to the economy, too. And all, on President Obama's watch.

Chelsea Manning exposes U.S. military role in restricting freedom of the press

Chelsea Manning on the Obama administration's police of making the U.S. Military control and restrict Media Freedom

RELATED If a reporter’s embed status is terminated, typically she or he is blacklisted. (The Fog Machine of War : Chelsea Manning on the U.S. Military and Media Freedom * The New York Times) Mushroom clouds, duct tape, Judy Miller, Curveball. Recalling how Americans were sold a bogus case for invasion. (Lie by Lie : A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq * Mother Jones) "The Justice Department has completely lost sight of the First Amendment." (A Radical Departure on Press Freedom * The Wall Street Journal)

From her prison confines in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, former United States Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning has written a scathing editorial, published in today's Sunday edition of The New York Times. "WHEN I chose to disclose classified information in 2010, I did so out of a love for my country and a sense of duty to others. I’m now serving a sentence of 35 years in prison for these unauthorized disclosures. I understand that my actions violated the law. "However, the concerns that motivated me have not been resolved. As Iraq erupts in civil war and America again contemplates intervention, that unfinished business should give new urgency to the question of how the United States military controlled the media coverage of its long involvement there and in Afghanistan. I believe that the current limits on press freedom and excessive government secrecy make it impossible for Americans to grasp fully what is happening in the wars we finance." Fromer PFC Manning, now jailed by the Obama administration as part of the White House crackdown against government corruption whistleblowers, provides a needed reality check -- really really REAL TALK -- on how the government bullies journalists into reporting government propaganda in the mainstream media, deceiving the public about the government's actions. Her editorial is a must-read for any First Amendment activist, blogger, and voter.

National Park Service calls for study to landmark LGBT historical sites. Truck stop tea rooms, anyone ?

PUBLISHED : FRI, 06 JUN 2014, 07:28 PM
UPDATED : SAT, 07 JUN 2014, 10:20 AM

LGBT civil rights activists keep demanding full federal equality of the Obama administration, and all Obama can do is to keep blowing a lot of hot air.

RELATED Pelosi Photo-op at Interior Department's Gay Panel ; Historians Named (The Petrelis Files) No Drag Queens, People of Color, Stonewall Riot Vets at Federal Photo-op (The Petrelis Files)

ON TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 2014, Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell and National Park Service Director Jonathan Jarvis will host a panel discussion including leading historians and scholars to discuss ways to sweep President Barack Obama's failed LGBT agenda under the rug. Before lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender historians and academics interpret and denounce the president's many broken campaign promises to the LGBT community in the context of the broader Obama administration's failures, U.S. House of Representatives Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi and U.S. Ambassador to Australia John Berry will deliver kick-off remarks at the Interior Department's panel discussion to give the administration's limp efforts some shallow liberal optics. This panel discussion is the first step in the LGBT Heritage Theme Study that Secretary Jewell announced on May 30th at the Stonewall Inn in New York City to identify places and events associated with the story of LGBT Americans for inclusion in the parks and programs of the National Park Service. While landmarking places of historical LGBT significance is noble, the real reason behind this latest initiative is to ensure that historians and academics desperate to appear on official Obama administration press releases are seduced into writing some empty and meaningless "inspirational" Obama administration talking points. The LGBT Heritage Theme Study is timed to drag on through the 2016 election cycle, so that LGBT historians and academics can placate more militant LGBT activists to prevent any dust up as Hillary Clinton contemplates another run for the White House. During her term as the Secretary of State, she basically allowed fundamental radical American evangelists and their political enablers to spread a private foreign policy of hate and discrimination around the globe, with many nations introducing, debating, and enacting laws that persecute and even execute people for being LGBT. As President Obama completes his transition from the hope and change president to a massive disappointment to a lame duck to history, his administration officials are desperately trying to fluff their credentials with the LGBT community after so many years of impotence. At a time when LGBT activists are taking a harsher look at the failed Obama's record, including Obama's tortured support for the Employment Non-Discriminatin Act (ENDA), in spite of its unacceptable religious exemption loopholes, all the Obama administration can muster in response is an offer to not only blow some more hot air about his LGBT dedication, but to gather some more people to join him in blowing even more hot air. With all this blowing, let's hope the Interior Department landmarks a few token truck stop tea rooms. Indeed, according to the Department of Interior's official media advisory, "The goals of the heritage initiative include : engaging scholars, preservationists and community members to identify, research, and tell the stories of LGBT associated properties ; encouraging national parks, national heritage areas, and other affiliated areas to interpret LGBT stories associated with them ; identifying, documenting, and nominating LGBT-associated sites as national historic landmarks ; and increasing the number of listings of LGBT-associated properties in the National Register of Historic Places." The deep-seated resentment by LGBT activists of the Obama administration's empty-suit machinations has been building up for many years. After promising to repeal the military's former discriminatory policy known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" during the 2008 presidential campaign, President Obama dragged his feet. Not until Lt. Daniel Choi, Capt. James Pietrangelo, other service members, and other activists, including members of the direct action group, GetEQUAL, mounted a direct action campaign targeting members of Congress and the White House itself did the Obama administration finally sign into law a repeat of DADT in 2010. Similarly, activists from GetEQUAL have routinely pressed the Obama administration to enact federal laws to end legally-sanctioned discrimination against the LGBT community. In 2011, members of the LGBT activist groups GetEQUAL, Queer Rising, Join The Impact, and others protested outside an Obama administration fundraiser at Sheraton Midtown in Manhattan. The activists were demanding full federal LGBT equality. Members of GetEQUAL and Code Pink have subsequently continued to birddog the president to deliver on the community's demands for full federal LGBT equality. LGBT activists have for years communicated to the White House that the LGBT community demands full federal LGBT equality, but the Obama administration only throws the crumbs of incrementalism, or worse, more hot air in our direction. Speaking of truck stop tea rooms, I would love to see the LGBT community call out the Obama administration's LGBT Heritage Theme Study for what it is : a sham. Instead of validating the landmarking process, I wish LGBT activists would flood the White House with nominations of their favorite adult bookstores, porn theatres, and gay bathhouses. Since many of these places may have been run out of business by free Interent porn, their dwindling numbers may make them "historically" significant. Besides, places where the LGBT community used to cruise each other or meet up for sex actually do have significance in our history. Besides the larger march for equal civil rights, our history includes the long struggle for cultural and social changes that have to do with our sexual liberation -- our freedom from oppression. If you would like to nominate your favorite glory hole, please send an e-mail to Gautam Raghavan, the White House's LGBT liaison, at : LGBT@who.eop.gov -- making sure you use the subject, "LGBT Heritage Theme Study." The LGBT Heritage Theme Study was kicked-off with a press event last week outside New York's landmark Stonewall Inn, the site for the 1969 riots that marked the beginning of the modern LGBT civil rights movement. At that kick-off media event, protesters once again demanded that the Obama administration do more than just talk -- "to create a roadmap to end what they call legal discrimination against the LGBT community," according to NY1. Activists from GetEQUAL and Queer Nation NY were among a number of protesters demanding "full federal equality." Many LGBT civil rights activists were surprised by these sudden machinations of the Obama administration. New York is home to many radical LGBT activists, and none were invited to take part in the media event at the Stonewall Inn. Some national LGBT civil rights activists, such as Michael Petrelis from San Francisco, criticized the media event for its lack of inclusion. No person of color, drag queen, or veteran of the Stonewall riots were invited to speak on behalf of the broader and diverse LGBT community. The Interior Department's study, hastily timed to coincide with LGBT Pride Month, is being funded with the help of Tim Gill from the Gill Foundation. Mr. Gill contributed $250,000 to help fund this study. Mr. Petrelis, the blogger and activist, has listed the names on his blog of the historians and academics taking part in the study.

Sen. Bernie Sanders Message About Veterans

Register for the Left Forum to attend the police reform "Veal Pen" Workshop

How Can NYC Police Reform Activists Break Free from the Veal Pen ?

Workshop : How Can NYC Police Reform Activists Break Free from the Veal Pen ?
Date : Saturday, May 31, 2014
Time : 03:20 p.m. - 04:50 p.m.
Place : Session 3, Room 1.92, 540 West 59 Street, New York, NY 10019

Registration is required to attend the Left Forum 2014 : Register here.

Jane Hamsher appropriated the term “veal pen” to describe how the Obama administration subjugates liberal groups and activists in order to demobilize political pressure for reform from the Democratic left. Join us for an intensive workshop designed to challenge groups and activists, who have voluntarily de-escalated political pressure for police reform following the election of New York Mayor Bill de Blasio. To demobilize some police reform groups, lobbyists loyal to the mayor now control the media relations for these reform groups. What has been removed from the messaging from these groups has been the urgency for reform that was present before the mayor won last year’s election. In this workshop, designed for experienced activists, we will undertake a specific action and then strategize about how to create new opportunities for organizing in the area of police reform against a backdrop of this new political landscape. In a real "Veal Pen," the bodies of calves atrophy by design. Under the de Blasio administration, which is sensitive to political pressure from the Democratic left as is President Obama, activists’ ideas for police reform are meant to atrophy by design. Since this workshop is designed to overcome frustrations faced by activists, who refuse to be demobilized, the rigorous activities are intended to stretch participants’ ideas and to draw attention to the Veal Pen.

If U.S. Fracks Gas For Europe, How Much Sooner Will We Poison Our Water Supply ?

The foolish drive to export liquefied natural gas to Europe overlooks the environmental hazards to the United States

Congressional pressure is building on the Obama administration to "quicken gas exports to Europe," The New York Times is reporting, in order to reduce the continent's dependence on dirty fossil fuels from Russia. Instead, U.S. oil companies want Europe to increase their dependence on dirty fossil fuels from the U.S.

• RELATED : U.S. Gas Tantalizes Europe, but It’s Not a Quick Fix (The New York Times)

For the U.S. to ship its gas to Europe won't solve the fossil fuel dependency problem in any permanent sense, but it will hasten the day when the U.S. poisons its groundwater supply as a result of fracking and may foreseeably force the U.S. to, as a consequence, import clean drinking water from Europe, if European nations are willing to sell it that precious commodity to us in the future.

This Week in Carolyn Ryan Journalism Realness

Is Carolyn Ryan engaged in a smear campaign against President Barack Obama, or is she only reporting the truth ? Public Editor's "AnonyWatch Review" weighs in.

Before we delve into the latest chapter of Carolyn Ryan's media bias, let's begin by first examining the obsession with "polish" by readers of mainstream journalism. By polish, we mean the fetish with exacting spelling, grammar, syntax, and punctuation on big-name news Web sites.

• RELATED : AnonyWatch, Chapter 2: A ‘Poisonous’ President and a Banker’s Secret Yogurt (The New York Times)

Earlier today on Facebook, a social media network friend of mine shared a status update in which she made the observation that typographical errors in mainstream media Web sites were distracting, and they degraded her perception of the quality of news being published on said Web sites. This led to a back-and-forth discussion of this topic. At the end, I raised some concerns about how an obsession with typos may distract from the fact that very few journalists (either mainstream or alternative bloggers) very rarely tell the whole truth, that the real quality of journalism may transcend typos and should be judged, instead, on the larger quality of reporting the truth. For example, Anemona Hartocollis, the metropolitan healthcare reporter at The New York Times, gets her copy published in a form that is generally free of copy errors, but her journalism is biased as all get out. Ms. Hartocollis's reporting is emblematic of the corporate agenda in mainstream journalism. Whenever Ms. Hartocollis reports about another community hospital closing in New York City, her reporting only represents the corporate speak of profits-and-losses, and she makes no attempt to humanize the healthcare cuts' impact on real people's lives. Because corporate public relations spin is devoid of any moral obligation, Ms. Hartocollis reduces all her healthcare reporting to be about dollars and cents, siding with Gov. Andrew Cuomo's and his budget axman, Stephen Berger's, desire to make scorched earth cuts to healthcare. As far as Ms. Hartocollis's reporting is concerned, she's never attempted to ever report about the human right to healthcare. Just because Ms. Hartocollis's copy is clean of typos, it doesn't mean it's anymore truthful than a Medicaid Redesign Team press release.

Another example I noted in the back-and-forth on Facebook today was that of a blogger, with whom I'm on the outs. She butchers the presentation of information on her blog like nobody's business. Sometimes, her stream of consciousness blog postings contain incomplete sentences, but more often than not she gets it right when it comes to exposing government and real estate corruption. Her reporting delves deeper than the reporting of some reporters published in The New York Times, for example. Another blogger I know makes big-time typos, too, and sometimes his text "disappears" because of slip-shod copying-and-pasting, but from his blog his readers can learn how to see the corrupt political chess pieces move on big social issues. I acknowledge that it is important to present information, especially journalism, in a way that is accessible to readers, but mainstream journalism, even factoring into account all the waves of "corporate layoffs," still have access to resources like copy editors, interns, other editors, and webmasters that can proof writing after it's been submitted. But, as have been noted time and again, mainstream journalism has come to reflect a corporate agenda that distorts the ability of mainstream journalists to report the whole truth.

Over time, astute readers of political reporting learn that to discover the truth, once must read multiple sources of the same story in order to "average," "balance," and/or "correct" the news. If readers were to solely judge writing on cosmetics, that criteria will short change readers on the truth. Obvious mistakes should be corrected, but some bloggers don't even have editors. So, I'll always defend bloggers before mainstream reporters. But even then, I don't look at polish as being the only criteria for realness.

Carolyn Ryan's use of anonymous sources to report about President Obama's political backlash in the final midterm Congressional elections

Two weeks ago, Washington bureau chief Carolyn Ryan oversaw a report published in The New York Times about Democrats's fears about "their midterm election fortunes amid President Obama’s sinking approval ratings." The article contained a passage with a shady anonymous attribution :

“One Democratic lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said Mr. Obama was becoming ‘poisonous’ to the party’s candidates. At the same time, Democrats are pressing senior aides to Mr. Obama for help from the political network.”

Public editor Margaret Sullivan chastised Ms. Ryan for the use of an anonymous quote, an issue of recent concern to the public editor and the readers of The New York Times. In her defense, Ms. Ryan pieced together a weak defense in which she denied engaging in an hominem attack on the president. It's difficult to believe that Ms. Ryan, as editor, or Jonathan Martin and Ashley Parker, as the reporters of the subject article, would go out of their way to wrongly roll up responsibility for the flagging fortunes of the national Democratic Party on the president. But the larger political reality that Ms. Ryan and Ms. Sullivan ignored is how the Obama administration silences dissent through political machinations, maneuvering that every high-level elected official uses to control his or her own political narrative. Ms. Ryan was famous for espousing the political narrative propagated by former New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn when Ms. Ryan used to serve as the metropolitan editor for the newspaper. But now, Ms. Ryan has perhaps learned to challenge power holders, and, by relying on the sentiments of an anonymous source, Ms. Ryan may actually be expanding the political reporting in The New York Times rather than just repeating the official party line of the politicians she's tasked to cover.

No doubt that Ms. Ryan's anonymous sources for the subject article really exist, because many Democrats are plainly fed up by President Obama's corruption scandals involving the National Security Administration, the Monsanto Protection Act, and other political controversies. The public editor was critical of Ms. Ryan's use of an anonymous source, but if Ms. Sullivan would like to further examine why Democrats are afraid to speak out against President Obama, perhaps the editors of The New York Times should examine President Obama's political persecution of liberal advocates and institutions he locks up in the veal pen ? In her further defense, after Ms. Ryan endured so much criticism about her biased reporting that benefitted Ms. Quinn, Ms. Ryan may finally be learning the truth about how journalism really works when one is fully reporting uncomfortable truths about the corrupt political machinations of an elected official. Some sources may not want to go on the record for fear of political retribution. Like a typo hear or their, sometimes journalism realness doesn't always come neatly packaged and wrapped. After President Obama's veal pen gets examined, maybe editors can turn their attention to Ms. Hartocollis's media bias ?

Morbid Internet Memes of Missing Malaysia Airlines Flt. MH370

PUBLISHED : MON, 17 MAR 2014, 05:23 PM
UPDATED : WED, 26 MAR 2014, 9:00 AM

• RELATED : Satellite locates debris field of 122 objects possibly of missing MH370 jet (The New York Post | March 26, 2014 | 12:22 AM)

Did Missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 Land On Gilligan's Island ?

"Are we desensitized to the point of not being able to truly empathize, or is this our way of coping with tragedies since we’ve had to endure them in different ways than have previous generations ?" asked the Web site Elite Daily in a post trying to make sense of the morbid Internet memes about the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370.

Jokes about the missing airplane could be a way for people to cope with the outrageousness that the U.S. government can be so incompetent and impotent, given how much technology exists today, given how the limited computer power of a smartphone can now power record-breaking robots, but seemingly, by comparison, the U.S. government could still be blind-sided by the inadequate technology aboard jet airplanes over a decade after terrorists used airplanes as weapons of mass destruction during the attacks of 9/11.

These Internet memes are funny, when you think of the irony, but then they become tragic, when you think of the missing people and the pain and agony of their surviving friends and families. The government's continuing negligence in failing to update airline black box technology could be one of those concerns that Edward Snowden was warning us about : the danger that the U.S. government's dragnet surveillance program would inundate the government with so much useless information in such large quantities that the government would lose focus of more important issues, like finding missing airplanes, improving airplane black box technology, or being able to predict that Russia would pounce on Crimea, and, more importantly, when.

Internet Memes : When the implied butt of the joke is the impotent government

As the public's imagination has turned from the missing Malaysia Airlines Flt. 370 to morbid memes that the flight has accidentally landed on Gilligan's Island, or when the public imagines that Tattoo from Fantasy Island, who was famous for announcing the arrival of "The plane ! The plane !" would probably do a better job of locating the missing flight than the government, you know that the public's perception of government competence is in the gutter.

How soon before Republicans seize on the missing Malaysia Airlines flight as a flashpoint to demonstrate that President Barack Obama failed to improve world-wide aviation safety in the post-9/11 world ?

When is the U.S. government going to wise up, stop gutting the U.S. Constitution with its dragnet surveillance programs, and, instead, focus on the things the government should be addressing : like ensuring adequate safety technology being deployed and functional aboard every airplane ?

---

• RELATED : Nobody is asking why Boeing, the manufacturer of the missing aircraft, cannot explain or is not being asked to explain why the tracking systems failed on a plane believed to have continued its flight for several hours after last contact. (FAA, clueless to help, grateful it was neither an American flight that disappeared, nor that the disappearance took place near America * NYC : News & Analysis)
• RELATED : If the transponders had not gone silent on 9/11, air traffic controllers would have quickly realized that two jetliners en route to Los Angeles had made dramatic course changes and were bound straight for Manhattan. (Out of Control : Why Does the FAA Allow Pilots To Turn Off Transponders ? * The New York Times)

---

A lingering, yet compelling, question facing investigators is whether Malaysia Airlines offered its passengers Wi-Fi service. If so, did the Wi-Fi signal remain available, even though other communication services aboard the flight seem to have been deliberately disabled ? Because some airlines place Wi-Fi service behind a paywall, how many passengers on the flight had paid to access any available Wi-Fi service ? Since the Federal Aviation Administration and other airline agencies heavily regulate passenger use of cellphones, PDA's, digital tablets, and laptops aboard commercial aircraft, do airline regulators inadvertently cut-off communication technology that is undoubtedly "smarter" than black boxes and deactivation-prone transponders ?

Obama Administration Is “Greatest Enemy" of Freedom of the Press

NYTimes Reporter : Obama White House Is ‘‘Greatest Enemy of Press Freedom’’ Today

From Poynter :

New York Times reporter James Risen, who is fighting an order that he testify in the trial of Jeffrey Sterling, a former CIA officer accused of leaking information to him, opened the conference earlier by saying the Obama administration is “the greatest enemy of press freedom that we have encountered in at least a generation.” The administration wants to “narrow the field of national security reporting,” Risen said, to “create a path for accepted reporting.” Anyone journalist who exceeds those parameters, Risen said, “will be punished.”

Exactly. @JoeNYLaw

— Louis Flores (@maslowsneeds) March 25, 2014

• RELATED : NYTimes Reporter : Obama White House Is ‘‘Greatest Enemy of Press Freedom’’ Today (Mediaite)

It's not known, though, if staff reporters at The New York Times are able to give voice to the serious constitutional violations by the Obama administration, then why won't the newspaper's political editor allow reporters to fully report the truth as news ?

DNC chair blocked support for ENDA directive : sources tell The Washington Blade

Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) has discouraged House members from asking President Obama to take administrative action to protect LGBT workers from discrimination, a gay Democratic activist claims.

Whoa. @PaulYandura: DNC chair @DWStweets allegedly discouraged support for #ENDA directive. @WashBlade http://t.co/zBOFJ396Fh #lgbt

— Pam Spaulding (@pamspaulding) March 14, 2014

• RELATED : Why President Obama Must Issue ENDA Executive Order Barring LGBT Discrimination by Federal Contractors (Slate)

Paid Gay Inc. Political Operatives Counsel White House To Remain Silent As Supremacist Laws Spread Across United States

Despite Spree of De Jure Discrimination, No Gay Inc. Group Calls on President Obama to Publicly Condemn Them

All these people who espouse that the president should remain silent while supremacist laws get passed across America remind me of when folks went around silencing critics when Germany was passing supremacist laws in its own country during the last century. There are some, who say we should not enfeeble President Barack Obama by making him take sides in the spread of anti-LGBT laws, that we need the president to remain a "man of iron," figuratively speaking, to guide the nation on more important issues. On Facebook, somebody posted, in part, on my wall, "The 2 Senators have already stated their views. Do you have doubt as to where the President stands ?"

Actually, I do have doubts about President Obama. He promised to sign the employment non-discrimination executive order referred to as ENDA, but six years into his administration, we are still waiting. But yet here come folks, who appear to be paid Gay Inc. political operatives, counseling us to keep on waiting, wait more, and I ask : wait for what ? Wait for how much longer ? What does President Obama stand for ? What does he believe in ?

Whenever other oppressive regimes in other nations are carrying out violent crackdows against freedoms and liberties, the Obama administration always seems to come to the rescue of the violent dictators, who are running their respective nations into the ground. Here he is, the highest elected leader of our nation, and yet he wants to stay silent as de jure discrimination spreads from one American state to another. The false counsel that some shameful LGBT operatives are giving the White House, to remain silent as Gov. Jan Brewer (R-Ariz.) considers S.B. 1062, legislation that would legalize LGBT discrimination, is a perfect example of that old adage : the chicken coop is guarded from the inside.

• RELATED : Arizona’s ‘turn away the gay’ bill part of national trend (Washington Blade)

Uganda To Sign Anti-Homosexuality Law ; Justifies Discrimination On Obama Silence On Arizona's Discrimination Bill

Ofwono Opondo, the Executive Director of the Uganda Media Centre and the Spokesperson of the Government of Uganda, authored a series of tweets, confirming the signing of Uganda's anti-homosexuality law today. Among his tweets was an attack on U.S. President Barack Obama for not speaking out to denounce the law allowing "businesses to deny services to gays on religious grounds."

• NEWS : Uganda's President Museveni signs controversial anti-gay bill into law (CNN)

While it seems that Mr. Opondo was trying to justify Uganda's sexual orientation discrimination on the GOP's sexual orientation discrimination in Arizona, Mr. Opondo does make a point : the Obama administration can't really denounce discrimination against the LGBT community in a foreign country if it does nothing to denounce similar discrimination right here at home.

Ugandan gov't spox confirms signing, references Arizona religious disc rim bill & asks what Obama has said about it: pic.twitter.com/pwUuq7HTJC

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner) February 24, 2014

The Obama administration hasn't done much to stand up against anti-LGBT human rights abuses around the world. President Obama hasn't been able to bring to a stop the violent anti-LGBT crackdown taking place in Russia, Uganda, or Nigeria. Here at home, LGBT activists are still waiting for President Obama to sign the employment non-discrimination executive order referred to as ENDA.

Obama's America: Arizona passes 'anti-gay' bill allowing business owners to refuse service on religious grounds http://t.co/8nLrpT9hvr

— Stacy Herbert (@stacyherbert) February 22, 2014

NSA Spy Programs : French President Got Paid Off, German Chancellor's Worries Continue

Just days after French President François Hollande declared that France had "restored" its trust with the Obama White House after the growing N.S.A. spying scandal, German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced a proposal to create a Europe-only Internet apparatus that would circumvent the N.S.A. backdoor taps, almost universal decryption, and data collection.

During his state visit to the United States, French President François Hollande declared that the U.S. and France had restored mutual respect between the countries, because both nations are committed to respecting the right to privacy. President Hollande's remarks appeared to contradict the N.S.A. relentless spying program on French citizens in apparent violation of Article 9 and 1382 of the French Civil Code and Articles 226-1 and following of the French Penal Code. It's unclear what side deals President Barack Obama might have made with France to induce the French president to announce a reconciliation with the U.S. government. When the data collection of the N.S.A. spy program was first reported to include the private information of millions of French, German, and Spanish citizens, amongst others, popular outrage erupted in Europe to the growing corruption of the Internet by the N.S.A.

• RELATED : Ecoutes de la NSA: la "confiance mutuelle a été restaurée", affirme Hollande (Le Parisien)
• RELATED : Data protection : Angela Merkel proposes Europe network (BBC)
• RELATED : La N.S.A. Espionnait Les Françaises (Daily Motion)
• RELATED : Quelle vie privée ? François Hollande, la N.S.A., et l'Article 13 (YouTube)

Meanwhile, German Chanchellor Angela Merkel made an announcement after the conclusion of President Hollande's state visit to the U.S. that she would propose to France the creation of a new Web network to ensure secure communications in Europe.

No word, yet, on how the Obama administration will respond to Chancellor Merkel's proposal.

Conspicuously absent from President Hollande's agenda during his state visit was any addressing of the latest General Motors TV commercial, which engages in French-bashing.

What Rep. Grimm's Threats of Violence Against NY1 Reporter Teaches Us About Media Intimidation

If Reporters or Bloggers Dare To Report Truth About Political Corruption, Politicians and Lobbyists Become Enraged

Rep. Michael Grimm's violent outburst and threats of bodily harm to NY1 Capital Hill reporter Michael Scotto revealed how elected officials keep political reporters and bloggers on a tight leash. “I verbally took the reporter to task and told him off, because I expect a certain level of professionalism and respect, especially when I go out of my way to do that reporter a favor. I doubt that I am the first Member of Congress to tell off a reporter, and I am sure I won’t be the last,” Rep. Grimm said, in part, in a statement published by Politicker.

• RELATED : Rep. Michael Grimm Assaults Michael Scotto, Threatens NY1 Reporter With Battery (NYC : News & Analysis)

What is more, a former staffer for Rep. Grimm told The New York Post that, “This is not the first time he’s tried to intimidate a reporter.”

In other words, elected officials have a sense of entitlement when it comes to giving reporters access to interviews. Elected officials do not believe that political reporters have a duty to fully inform voters about the government's work. Rather, politicians have come to believe that they can trade "favors" with representatives of the media. But when reporters or bloggers do not subjugate themselves to politicians, violence or rage can ensue, as was captured by NY1's camera.

Mike Scotto is putting together a full story, with captioning, on his Grimm encounter.

— Dan Jacobson (@DJNY1News) January 29, 2014

After a series of blog postings published last year about allegations of campaign finance irregularities involving the political lobbying firm The Advance Group, the firm's head lobbyist Scott Levenson called me in a fit of rage. His tone was confrontational, similar to the anger Rep. Grimm expressed to Mr. Scotto. I believed that Mr. Levenson was trying to intimidate me into silence, the way that Rep. Grimm had tried to intimidate Mr. Scotto.

• RELATED : The Advance Group Federal Complaint Referred To Moreland Commission (NYC : News & Analysis)

Many bloggers believe that one of the main reasons that political reporters do not fully report the truth about political corruption is that politicians and their army of lobbyists trade "favors," provide insider "tips," set up "interviews," or act as "sounding boards" for reporters. According to this cozy relationship, politicians and their lobbyists expect that reporters will never ask tough questions that are "off-script." You especially see the kind of soft-balling on local TV news programs, where hosts never fully confront powerholders for the truth the way Mr. Scotto and I had, recently.

How obvious that media targets Republicans @GovChristie and @repmichaelgrimm, but equally corrupt Democrats get no scrutiny. @joshrobin

— Louis Flores (@maslowsneeds) January 29, 2014

The instance of Mr. Scotto actually confronting Rep. Grimm on camera about allegations of corruption is rare for TV news. Very few reporters dare to actually embrace the discomfort of approaching politicians or lobbyists on camera with questions about political corruption. Because of this rarity, it's all the more evident that the media's two most recent "shake downs" have been of Republican politicians : New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Rep. Grimm. No TV news program dares to go after the Democrats, who now oversee the corrupt city Board of Elections, for example. Are behind-the-scenes expressions of anger and rage, like this but never caught on tape, the reason why Democrats have been able to slay the news media from investigating political corruption ?

Rep. Michael Grimm Assaults Michael Scotto, Threatens NY1 Reporter With Battery

Federal prosecutor crackdown on campaign finance corruption said to ensnare Rep. Michael Grimm http://t.co/8DiId2wbiO

— Informed Voting (@informedvoting) April 25, 2014

PUBLISHED : WED, 29 JAN 2014, 03:46 AM
UPDATED : FRI, 25 APR 2014, 05:40 PM

---

Rep. Grimm Threatened Bodily Harm to Mr. Scotto by Breaking Him in Half and Throwing Him Off a Balcony.

NY1 Capitol Hill reporter Michael Scotto interviewed Staten Island Republican Rep. Michael Grimm following President Barack Obama's State of the Union address, and Rep. Grimm became enraged after Mr. Scotto pressed the Congressman on camera about the Congressman's growing campaign finance scandal.

After Mr. Scotto had asked the Congressman questions about allegations of campaign finance crimes, Mr. Grimm told Mr. Scotto, "I’ll break you in half," according to a report of the attack published in The New York Times. Rep. Grimm also threatened to throw Mr. Scotto off a balcony, according to a transcript of Rep. Grimm's threats reviewed by The New York Times. "The confrontation occurred in the rotunda of the Cannon House Office Building, part of the Capitol complex," The New York Daily News noted.

• RELATED : Michael Grimm Threatens Reporter During Interview (Politicker)

Rep. Grimm is a solidly-built, 43-year-old former U.S. Marine and ex-undercover FBI agent. According to The New York Post, Rep. Grimm's threats to Mr. Scotto suggested that Rep. Grimm was physically intimidating Mr. Scotto as a way to control Mr. Scotto with fear. “Let me be clear to you, you ever do that to me again, I’ll throw you off this f–--king balcony,” Rep. Grimm said, adding, “You’re not man enough. I’ll break you in half. Like a boy.”

• RELATED : "I'll throw you off this f-----g balcony" : Rep. Michael Grimm threatens to break NY1 reporter in half following Obama's State of the Union address — SEE THE VIDEO (The New York Daily News)
• RELATED : Rep. Michael Grimm Threatens an NY1 Reporter (The New York Times)

Sadly, you know you are doing something right when politicians attack you. Good work, Michael Scotto. @NY1headlines @mikescotto

— Louis Flores (@maslowsneeds) January 29, 2014

"A two-year federal investigation of fundraising for Grimm’s 2010 campaign led to the arrest this month of a former girlfriend, Diana Durand. She was accused of using so-called straw donors so she could exceed the $4,800 maximum allowable contribution to his campaign," reported The New York Daily News, adding that, "According to the criminal complaint, once she reached the donation limit, she gave money to at least two other people so they could contribute to Grimm. Durand was the second person arrested in connection with the case. Ofer Biton, an Israeli citizen who helped Grimm raise campaign money four years ago, pleaded guilty on Aug. 18 to visa fraud as a result of the investigation."

Rep. Grimm has reportedly denied any wrongdoing in the crimes involving the campaign finance scandal, and he himself has not been charged with any crimes, yet.

"It is extremely disturbing when anyone threatens one of our reporters – let alone a U.S. Congressman," NY1’s political director, Bob Hardt, said in a series of messages on Twitter, adding, "The NY1 family is certainly alarmed and disappointed by the behavior of Representative Grimm and demands a full apology from him. This behavior is unacceptable."

If Reporters or Bloggers Dare To Report Truth About Political Corruption, Politicians and Lobbyists Become Enraged

Rep. Michael Grimm's violent outburst and threats of bodily harm to NY1 Capital Hill reporter Michael Scotto revealed how elected officials keep political reporters and bloggers on a tight leash. “I verbally took the reporter to task and told him off, because I expect a certain level of professionalism and respect, especially when I go out of my way to do that reporter a favor. I doubt that I am the first Member of Congress to tell off a reporter, and I am sure I won’t be the last,” Rep. Grimm said, in part, in a statement published by Politicker.

What is more, a former staffer for Rep. Grimm told The New York Post that, “This is not the first time he’s tried to intimidate a reporter.”

In other words, elected officials have a sense of entitlement when it comes to giving reporters access to interviews. Elected officials do not believe that political reporters have a duty to fully inform voters about the government's work. Rather, politicians have come to believe that they can trade "favors" with representatives of the media. But when reporters or bloggers do not subjugate themselves to politicians, violence or rage can ensue, as was captured by NY1's camera.

Mike Scotto is putting together a full story, with captioning, on his Grimm encounter.

— Dan Jacobson (@DJNY1News) January 29, 2014

After a series of blog postings published last year about allegations of campaign finance irregularities involving the political lobbying firm The Advance Group, the firm's head lobbyist Scott Levenson called me in a fit of rage. His tone was confrontational, similar to the anger Rep. Grimm expressed to Mr. Scotto. I believed that Mr. Levenson was trying to intimidate me into silence, the way that Rep. Grimm had tried to intimidate Mr. Scotto.

• RELATED : The Advance Group Federal Complaint Referred To Moreland Commission (NYC : News & Analysis)

Many bloggers believe that one of the main reasons that political reporters do not fully report the truth about political corruption is that politicians and their army of lobbyists trade "favors," provide insider "tips," set up "interviews," or act as "sounding boards" for reporters. According to this cozy relationship, politicians and their lobbyists expect that reporters will never ask tough questions that are "off-script." You especially see the kind of soft-balling on local TV news programs, where hosts never fully confront powerholders for the truth the way Mr. Scotto and I had, recently.

How obvious that media targets Republicans @GovChristie and @repmichaelgrimm, but equally corrupt Democrats get no scrutiny. @joshrobin

— Louis Flores (@maslowsneeds) January 29, 2014

The instance of Mr. Scotto actually confronting Rep. Grimm on camera about allegations of corruption is rare for TV news. Very few reporters dare to actually embrace the discomfort of approaching politicians or lobbyists on camera with questions about political corruption. Because of this rarity, it's all the more evident that the media's two most recent "shake downs" have been of Republican politicians : New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Rep. Grimm. No TV news program dares to go after the Democrats, who now oversee the corrupt city Board of Elections, for example. Are behind-the-scenes expressions of anger and rage, like this but never caught on tape, the reason why Democrats have been able to slay the news media from investigating political corruption ?