NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio Will Not Be Prosecuted For Campaign Fraud, Says Interim Acting U.S. Attorney Joon Kim

The timing of the firing of Preet Bharara in President Trump's home turf, New York City, and the announcement that NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio will not be prosecuted for campaign fraud, smells of something like a deal Trump made with someone being invessstigated by Preet. Doesn't it?

Many people believe that Mayor Bill is guilty of what he was accused of. We still have our vote, so let's make sure that he does not get a second term.

Betsy Combier
betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

No Charges for De Blasio in Fundraising Probe, Prosecutors Say

Mayor Bill de Blasio

NEW YORK CITY — The federal and local prosecutors will not bring criminal charges against Mayor Bill de Blasio or his team in connection to a campaign probe, the acting U.S. Attorney and Manhattan District Attorney announced Thursday.

"After careful deliberation, given the totality of the circumstances here and absent additional evidence, we do not intend to bring federal criminal charges against the Mayor or those acting on his behalf relating to the fundraising efforts in question," Acting U.S. Attorney Joon Kim, the former deputy for Preet Bharara who took over the top seat after Bharara was fired by President Donald Trump on Saturday, said in a statement.

"Although it is rare that we issue a public statement about the status of an investigation, we believe it appropriate in this case at this time, in order not to unduly influence the upcoming campaign and Mayoral election.”

The Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance released a letter to the New York State Board of Elections that explained that the mayor's conduct appears to have violated "the intent and spirit of the laws" the would not be seeking criminal charges because was following his lawyer's advice.

"After extensive investigation, not withstanding the [Board of Election's] view that the conduct here may have violated the Election Law, this office has determined that the parties involved cannot be appropriately prosecuted, given their reliance on the advice of counsel."

The U.S. Attorney's office, in conjunction with the FBI, had been investigating the mayor's fundraising for his 2013 election campaign, an effort to get democrats elected to seats upstate during the 2014 State Senate race, as well as his Campaign for One New York — the mayor's nonprofit that came under fire for steering money from donors into pet projects such as his Universal Pre-K initiative and others.

During the course of the investigation, investigators "conducted a thorough investigation into several circumstances in which Mayor de Blasio and others acting on his behalf solicited donations from individuals who sought official favors from the City, after which the Mayor made or directed inquiries to relevant City agencies on behalf of those donors," Kim said.

"In considering whether to charge individuals with serious public corruption crimes, we take into account, among other things, the high burden of proof, the clarity of existing law, any recent changes in the law, and the particular difficulty in proving criminal intent in corruption schemes where there is no evidence of personal profit," Kim added.

The Campaign for One New York also steered money toward state senate races in an attempt to win a Democratic majority, according to Vance's letter to the BOE.

On WNYC's Brian Lehrer show, the mayor defended his conduct.

"I've said consistently that we acted appropriately. We acted lawfully," he said. "We held ourselves to a very high standard and we will continue to."

He denied the Manhattan District Attorney's assertion that his fundraising violated state fundraising statutes.

"The law was quite clear and we have respected that law throughout," de Blasio said.

Check back for updates.

Preet Bharara

You’re fired!Why did Donald Trump sack Preet Bharara after saying he could keep his job?

The US attorney hints that the president may have dismissed him to obstruct an investigation

The Economist;Democracy in America

IN HIS fourteen seasons on “The Apprentice”, a television show testing contestants’ business acumen and mettle, Donald Trump developed a signature line for dismissing hapless aspirants. Every time he let somebody go with his trademark "you're fired!", Mr Trump offered at least a few words of critique. “I just don’t want somebody running one of my companies that’s going to be beaten up so badly”, he told one contestant. “You’ve been lazy”, he barked at another, “you’ve been nothing but trouble”.

But on March 11th, when Mr Trump requested resignation letters from 46 US attorneys, he offered no explanation for dumping Preet Bharara, a seven-year veteran of the southern district of New York. It is hardly unusual for presidents to replace US attorneys, lawyers tasked with ensuring “that the laws be faithfully executed” in the 94 federal districts they oversee. A change of party in the White House typically inspires federal prosecutors to issue letters of resignation. In 1993, Bill Clinton fired them all in one day.

But Mr Bharara was a unique case: the Indian-born prosecutor known for his toughness and for remaining untethered to politics or party had been assured by the president-elect that he could keep his job. After a meeting in Trump Tower in late November, Mr Bharara said Mr Trump had asked him “whether or not I’d be prepared to stay on as the United States attorney to do the work as we have done it, independently, without fear or favour for the last seven years”. Mr Bharara’s answer was yes: “I said I would absolutely consider staying on. I agreed to stay on.” The president-elect’s request was echoed, he said, by the man who would soon be his new boss: Jeff Sessions, the incoming attorney-general and head of the Justice department.

When Mr Trump demanded Mr Bharara’s resignation three months later, without indicating why he had undergone a change of heart, the jilted prosecutor did not go quietly. Mr Bharara refused the order to tender his resignation, and a few hours later Mr Trump stepped back into his familiar role as firer-in-chief. “I did not resign”, Mr Bharara wrote on Twitter. “Moments ago I was fired.” Serving as US attorney in New York, he said, “will forever be the greatest honour of my professional life”. Why did Mr Trump renege on his promise to Mr Bharara? There seem to be three possibilities, none of them offering encouraging signs about the Trump administration.

One reason for the abrupt about-face may have been Mr Trump’s favourite source of political edification: Fox News. On March 9th, Fox’s Sean Hannity said holdover lawyers from the Obama era may be “saboteurs” who are leaking damaging information about the administration. He encouraged Mr Trump to clear US attorneys’ offices of Obama appointees who had not already offered their resignations. Two days later, Mr Trump did just that. Spokespersons for the administration insist the plea from Mr Hannity—whose network happened to be under investigation by Mr Bharara for sexual harassment allegations—played no role in inspiring the president’s act; one source told Politico’s Josh Dawsey that the purge had been in the works “for a while”.

Whether or not Mr Hannity’s appeal caught Mr Trump’s eye, Mr Bharara’s reputation as an equal-opportunity prosecutor—sniffing out corruption and pursuing it no matter where it may be or who might be engaging in it—may have begun to worry the new president. Just days after beginning his position in 2009, Mr Bharara did not flinch when presented with evidence that a donor to Senator Chuck Schumer—his former boss and recommender—may have been engaged in bank fraud. The 41-year-old attorney went forward with the investigation. Mr Bharara’s office later successfully prosecuted cases involving Wall Street, organised crime, civil rights and terrorism—as well as high-profile corruption cases against Republican and Democratic politicians. Mr Trump may have reconsidered leaving such a dogged US attorney in place who pays no homage to party. In the event of potential legal trouble, he may have judged it wise to have a friendly, loyal appointee in place.

Or Mr Trump’s concern may have been a good deal more specific and immediate. In a cryptic statement seemingly crafted to provoke speculation and raise questions about the man who fired him, Mr Bharara tweeted this on March 12: “By the way, now I know what the Moreland Commission must have felt like.” The reference was lost on no one who has watched New York state politics over the past several years. In 2014, New York’s Democratic governor, Andrew Cuomo, disbanded the Moreland Commission, the very ethics watchdog he had set up nine months earlier and which had begun investigating Democratic Party fundraising lapses. Mr Cuomo’s move provoked wide consternation and an investigation from Mr Bharara’s office, though no charges were filed.

For Mr Bharara to analogise his own firing to the dismantling of the Moreland Commission is to hint that he may have begun an investigation into activity of interest to the president—perhaps even of something the president himself may have done. A congressman from Michigan, John Conyers, said Mr Bharara’s tweet could be a sign he had been looking into “a range of potential improper activity emanating from Trump Tower and the Trump campaign, as well as entities with financial ties to the president or the Trump organisation”. The puzzling firing, in other words, may have been designed to cut an inquiry by Mr Bharara off at the pass. 

Two More Top NYPD Officials Retire Amid Cloud of Federal Probe: Sources

When public servants are corrupt, that is the worst corruption.

Betsy Combier

betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice

Editor, The NYC Public Voice

Bill Bratton and Preet Bharara

LINK

NEW YORK CITY — Two more high-ranking police officials under a federal NYPD corruption probe have filed for retirement, sources told DNAinfo New York.

Deputy Chief Eric Rodriguez and Deputy Chief Andrew Capul handed in their papers, making them the latest high-ranking NYPD supervisors to retire since the scandal broke two months ago.

Last week, Deputy Chief Michael Harrington, Chief David Colon and Deputy Inspector James Grant jumped from the NYPD ship after Police Commissioner Bill Bratton predicted that arrests were likely to stem from the sprawling federal investigation that includes pay-for-favors activities at the NYPD and Mayor Bill de Blasio’s various fundraising practices.

READ MORE: Who’s Who in the Federal NYPD/City Hall Corruption Probe

Rodriguez was the executive officer of Patrol Borough Brooklyn South when he was reassigned to desk duty as part of the FBI investigation. He had recently been honored by the NYPD’s Desi Society for his community service work.

Capul was the executive officer of the NYPD's Patrol Borough Manhattan North before he was placed on administrative desk duty in April.

He was previously the commanding officer of the 34th Precinct until 2010 when he was reassigned because of rising crime rates. He was also punched in the face during an Eric Garner protest march back in 2014.

Rodriguez served on the NYPD for more than 25 years, while Capul is a veteran with 32 years on the job.

Their retirement will become official if no department charges are brought against them during the next 30 days, which will then protect their pensions even if they are later arrested and convicted of a felony.

"No one has filed for service retirement with administrative charges pending or has been identified by federal investigators as a target of their investigation," Roy Richter, the president of the Captain Endowment Association, pointed out.

Grant, the former commander of the 19th Precinct, has also filed for retirement amid allegations he accepted discounted earrings and a free trip to Las Vegas from two businessmen with close ties to de Blasio and former NYPD Chief of Department Philip Banks.

The two-year federal probe started with a corruption tip involving Banks and eventually snared numerous police officials taking free meals, gifts and even trips from businessmen Jona Rechnitz and Jeremy Reichberg, who were members of de Blasio’s Inauguration Committee.

Two other officers from the NYPD License Division have also been stripped of their guns and badges during the probe for allegedly taking bribes from a Borough Park-based businessman, who was arrested for allegedly arranging gun permits for friends and clients for up to $18,000 each.

US Attorney Preet Bharara Decides Not To Indict NY State Governor Andrew Cuomo For Judicial Corruption

US Attorney Preet Bharara

No one is happy with Mr. Bharara's decision not to indict Governor Cuomo for closing down the Moreland Commission. no one.

Betsy Combier

Editor, New York Court Corruption

Bharara ends probe of Cuomo’s Moreland Commission shutdown

LINK

After more than 17 months, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara has ended his investigation into Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s abrupt shuttering of a Moreland Commission probe in Albany.

In a statement, Bharara said that while the closing of the commission was “premature,” “absent any additional proof that may develop, there is insufficient evidence to prove a federal crime.”

“We continue to have active investigations related to substantive inquiries that were being conducted by the Moreland Commission at the time of its closure,” Bharara said.

The announcement, coming on the heels of a high-profile visit to discuss corruption issues with Kentucky lawmakers and the recent convictions of two of the state’s top legislative leaders, came seemingly without warning from Bharara’s office. The news effectively blows away a cloud of suspicion hanging over the state Capitol since Bharara’s office announced it was investigating the shutdown of the Moreland Commission in July, 2014.

Investigation Into Closing of N.Y.’s Moreland Commission Finds ‘Insufficient Evidence’ of Crime

Gov. Andrew Cuomo disbanded the anticorruption panel in 2014, although it hadn’t completed its investigations

ERICA ORDEN

Jan. 11, 2016 1:28 p.m. ETLINK

ALBANY, N.Y.—A 20-month investigation into the Cuomo administration’s handling of an anticorruption commission found “insufficient evidence to prove a federal crime,” Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said Monday.

The determination, announced in a statement by the federal prosecutor, brings an end to an episode that has dogged Gov. Andrew Cuomo for nearly two years.

Mr. Bharara said the calculation had been made “after a thorough investigation of interference with the operation of the Moreland Commission and its premature closing.” Among other issues, the U.S. attorney’s office had been exploring whether actions taken by the governor’s office constituted witness tampering or obstruction of justice.

Elkan Abramowitz, an attorney for Mr. Cuomo and the executive chamber, said Monday “we were always confident there was no illegality here, and we appreciate the U.S. attorney clarifying this for the public record.”

Mr. Bharara’s statement was in part a response to speculation by lawmakers and the media about possible imminent charges against Mr. Cuomo in the Moreland matter, a person familiar with the matter said.

The Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office, however, has rarely issued such statements.

In November 2008, then-U.S. Attorney Michael Garcia said the office wouldn’t seek criminal charges against former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who left office earlier that year amid a prostitution scandal.

Prosecutors’ decision to publicly absolve Mr. Cuomo concludes a chapter of his political career that threatened to overshadow much of his legislative work.

Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, abruptly disbanded the anticorruption panel in April 2014, after nine months, in a deal with legislative leaders that resulted in additional ethics rules in Albany.

At the time, the commission hadn’t completed its investigations—its findings turned up evidence of criminal wrongdoing by at least 10 to 12 lawmakers, The Wall Street Journal reported—and Mr. Cuomo and his top aides had been accused of interfering in its efforts.

In the days following its disbanding, Mr. Bharara criticized the commission’s demise, saying it appeared as though “investigations potentially significant to the public interest have been bargained away.” He dispatched trucks to pick up investigative files from the commission so federal prosecutors could determine whether and how to pursue any matters that had been under examination.

His office quickly expanded its sights, issuing subpoenas to the state’s ethics-enforcement agency, the Joint Commission on Public Ethics, as well as to the Moreland’s former chief counsel, among others. It also instructed state legislators to preserve all records and documents related to the panel.

Over that summer, several of Mr. Cuomo’s highest ranking aides at the time, including then-Secretary to the Governor Larry Schwartz and Counsel Mylan Denerstein, spoke to federal investigators. Months later, investigators also interviewed Mr. Cuomo’s longtime political enforcer Joseph Percoco, according to people familiar with the matter.

Mr. Cuomo promised his office would cooperate with the investigation and defended the commission’s work, saying his aides offered advice to investigators but the panel operated with “total independence.”

Still, the matter became a significant political crisis for Mr. Cuomo, putting him on the defensive as he sought re-election and undermining claims he had made, even before he took office, that he would clean up Albany.

Meanwhile, the U.S. attorney’s other public-corruption prosecutions have prompted the ouster and conviction of two of the most powerful men in state politics: one-time legislative leaders Sheldon Silver and Dean Skelos.

Those convictions have spurred Mr. Cuomo to declare that he will, once again, propose ethics overhauls in his State of the State address on Wednesday.

On Monday, Mr. Bharara added that his office is continuing to pursue investigations of Albany lawmakers that it launched as a result of the files it picked up when it took over the Moreland Commission’s work.

And despite a sense of relief regarding the end of the Moreland matter, Mr. Cuomo’s administration can’t close the book on Mr. Bharara’s probes quite yet: Federal prosecutors are investigating the bidding process in an upstate revitalization projectchampioned by the governor.

—Rebecca Davis O’Brien contributed to this article.