September 22, 2007

One-Party Probe

One-Party Probe

The Post Editorial asks, "So what was the point of the probe?" ("SOARES
WIMPS OUT," Editorial, New York Post, September 21, 2007) In a one party
government it is for show business, to make it appear as if there is
accountability.
If there ever was an argument for at least two strong political parties
here it is. A one-party system exhibits Lord Acton's observation that "Absolute
power corrupts absolutely."
A Democrat saying "This office found no illegal conduct," (KENNETH
LOVETT, "'DIRTY TRICKS' PROBE COMES UP CLEAN," New York Post, September 21,
2007) is not believable. Soares should have appointed a special prosecutor to do
the investigation. Why do only D.C. Democrats recognize the need for two strong
parties which have an interest in exposing abuses of power?

Roy Bercaw, Editor ENOUGH ROOM

'DIRTY TRICKS' PROBE COMES UP CLEAN
By KENNETH LOVETT Post Correspondent
New York Post

September 21, 2007 -- ALBANY - Albany County District Attorney David Soares
yesterday cleared the Spitzer administration of any wrongdoing in the
dirty-tricks scandal.

"This office has found no illegal conduct," Soares said in a statement
announcing the conclusion of the seven-week investigation.

"To the contrary, we found that the governor, his staff and the New York State
Police were acting within their authority in compiling and releasing documents
to the media concerning the use of state aircraft," Soares added.

Soares - who closed the investigation after probers interviewed Gov. Spitzer
Wednesday - said he will release a detailed report today.

"The governor is gratified by the conclusions reached by [Soares] and looks
forward to reading the report," said Spitzer spokeswoman Christine Anderson.

Republicans and other critics of the scandal yesterday questioned how Soares
could find no criminal wrongdoing when his investigators did not subpoena
records or place anyone interviewed - including the governor - under oath.

They say one reason they wanted Soares, who like Spitzer is a Democrat with
strong support from the minor Working Families Party, to conduct the probe is
because he had subpoena power that Attorney General Andrew Cuomo lacked in his
investigation.

While Cuomo also found no criminality, he concluded that top Spitzer aides acted
improperly in using the State Police to compile damaging information for the
press on the use of the state air fleet by Spitzer's top political foe, Senate
Majority Leader Joseph Bruno.
[...]
kenneth.lovett@nypost.com


SOARES WIMPS OUT
Editorial
New York Post

September 21, 2007 -- Albany County DA David Soares seems set to throw Eliot
Spitzer a life raft: Soares will release a report today claiming that the
governor and his staff engaged in "no illegal conduct" in their Dirty Tricks
campaign.

But if Spitzer, Soares or anyone else thinks such a report will absolve the
governor in the minds of the public and restore confidence in him, they're badly
mistaken.

Instead, the report may be seen for exactly what it was no doubt intended to be:
a whitewash of the governor's office's Dirty Tricks campaign.

In a statement late yesterday, Soares hinted at what he'll likely say today.

"This office has found no illegal conduct," it said. "To the contrary, we found
that the governor, his staff, and the New York State Police were acting within
their authority in compiling and releasing documents to the media concerning the
use of state aircraft."

The statement is bizarre on its face.

Soares apparently placed no one under oath - even though he clearly had the
power to do so. And his statement fell well short of what Attorney General
Andrew Cuomo's report found in July:

* That the governor's staff directed State Police to manufacture documents
smearing state Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno.

* That the staff used the rationale that a newspaper asked for the documents in
a Freedom of Information Law request - but the only such requests, from The
Albany Times-Union, came long after document-gathering had begun.

* That the governor's staff had engaged in, at the least, unethical conduct that
warranted disciplinary or other action.

The real story seemed even worse - because Spitzer and his staff refused to
cooperate with Cuomo. And Cuomo lacked subpoena power to compel them to testify
and hand over documents.
[...]
So what was the point of the probe?

No comments: