Campaign Finance Investigation Focuses On UFT And NYSUT Donations In Buffalo

Just up in the last hour at the Buffalo News:

Erie County prosecutors are asking questions about campaign donations to a Buffalo-based State Senate race in 2014 as part of a burgeoning statewide investigation that extends to the mayor of New York City.

Acting Erie County District Attorney Michael J. Flaherty Jr. said he will not discuss details, but acknowledged his office is involved. Sources familiar with Flaherty’s effort say it revolves around the 60th District race between Republican Mark J. Grisanti and Democrat Marc C. Panepinto, which Panepinto won.

...

It is expected Bonanno’s investigation will center on whether any illegal coordination occurred between contributing committees and individual campaigns. Suggestions of such activity surfaced during the 2014 campaign, according to Erie County Republican Elections Commissioner Ralph M. Mohr.

“There were complaints that there was coordination between the teachers union and the Panepinto campaign,” Mohr said, “in the general campaign and specifically with signs.

“But there was never any formal complaint,” he added.

It is also expected that transactions The Buffalo News reported last July between the Erie County Democratic Committee and a political action committee linked to a state teachers union will be involved in the probe.

Some of the details:

The News reported that a significant donation to the Erie County Democratic Committee for Panepinto’s campaign – involving some of the same unions and consultants now under scrutiny – was never recorded. Campaign finance reports showed the United Federation of Teachers Committee on Political Education sent $100,000 on Oct. 28, 2014, to Erie County Democrats. Two months later, the local Democrats sent $50,000 to the Red Horse Strategies political consulting firm in Brooklyn, which was working for the Panepinto campaign.

Erie County Democratic Chairman Jeremy J. Zellner said at the time that the committee never received money from UFT/COPE, a teachers union political committee. In fact, he said he never reported the income and never cashed a check because he never received one.

A UFT spokesman also said at the time that the union cut a check for Erie County Democrats on Oct. 28, 2014, as part of its efforts to aid Senate Democrats, but never sent it after establishing other priorities.

Campaign finance records show the New York State United Teachers union spent more than $1 million on the 2014 race to defeat Grisanti.

Campaign finance law in New York State is opaque and complex, so your guess is as good as mine whether there's anything here for the UFT and NYSUT to be worried about.

NYSUT dropped $1 million to defeat Grisanti in 2014, which sounds like an awful lot of money, until you hear that charter school proponents spent $1.5 million+ in the recent special election to replace soon-to-be imprisoned Dean Skelos in his Long Island state Senate seat (their guy lost anyway.)

Quite frankly it bothers me a bit that de Blasio's getting a campaign finance colonoscopy for his 2014 efforts to win the state Senate for Dems when nobody blinked at Cuomo for raising $17 million from undisclosed sources for his Committee To Save New York and using $10 million of that to fund TV ads touting his agenda.

It also is bothering me that the teachers unions are getting this scrutiny for their donations but nobody's looking at the hedge fund managers and education reformers spending millions to elect their guys and push their anti-union/pro-charter school agenda.

Quite frankly, somebody ought to be looking into how StudentsFirstNY, Families for Excellent Schools and some of the other ed deform/Wall Street entities are spending their cash and the same goes for Cuomo.

Audit Of Cuomo's Start-Up NY Finds $200 Million+ Program Has No "Tangible Results" (UPDATED)

Fred Dicker in the Post:

An audit to be released Monday by state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli raises “real doubts’’ about the value of Gov. Cuomo’s $200 million-plus “Start Up NY’’ advertising campaign to attract businesses to the state, The Post has learned.

The widely anticipated audit of the 1½-year-old program comes just a month after the Cuomo administration conceded the Start Up program, touted by the governor as a “game changer’’ for the state, had created only 76 jobs in 2014.

The new audit found that the massive national television advertising campaign for the Start Up tax-reduction program did virtually nothing to generate interest among businesses in coming to New York, a source familiar with the findings told The Post.

“The audit found that even though a significant amount of money was spent on Start Up NY advertising, the advertising did not increase the number of applications for the Start Up program,’’ said the source.

“The audit reveals real doubts about whether the advertising results can justify the costs that were involved.’’

If there was any doubt that the $200 million+ spent on Start-Up NY served little purpose other than to run ads touting Andrew Cuomo, that will be shelved by this audit.

We should add Start-Up NY to the list of corrupt activities Andrew Cuomo has engaged in.

This one should go under campaign finance fraud.

UPDATED - 12:30 PM: From State of Politics:

The state’s $211 million advertising campaign to promote economic development programs and attract businesses to the state has not produced any “tangible results” in terms of generating new jobs and business for the state, an audit from Comptroller Tom DiNapoli’s office found.

The long-awaited audit, released on Monday, critiqued the advertising campaign from Empire State Development Corp., which has had a near ubiquitous presence on cable television over the last several years.

Critics of Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s administration had seized on the campaign — which aired both here in New York and in other states — as a back-door way of promoting the governor, though Cuomo himself by law cannot appear in the state-founded ads.

The advertising campaign has not shown any ability to boost job growth in the state or attract new businesses.

The state spends $211 million dollars for an advertising campaign for jobs/business that has "tangible results."

Andrew Cuomo's record in crystal form - all PR, no tangible results (except for the harmful ones, of course.) 

Cuomo Accused Of Ethical, Criminal Violations In Book Promotion Tour

It seems Cuomo is using his goons to keep anybody who isn't a sychophant away from him on his book tour:

Gov. Cuomo may have violated state criminal and ethics laws by using his public position and employees to promote his newly published autobiography, “All Things Possible,’’ a sworn complaint charges.

The complaint, filed with two state agencies by a Republican foe late Friday, says members of Cuomo’s State Police detail allegedly “forcibly ejected individuals from book-tour events that asked questions not pertaining to his book.’’

The complaint was referring to at least one alleged incident involving an Iona College freshman, Bill Maloney.

Maloney told The Post that he was “pushed away’’ from the governor at Cuomo’s recent book-signing at a Barnes & Noble in Manhattan when the student tried to question the governor about the Moreland Commission scandal.

Maloney said he didn’t know whether it was the governor’s aides or state troopers who pushed him away.

But the lawmaker who filed the complaint — Assemblyman Steven McLaughlin (R-Rensselaer), a strong backer of Cuomo’s GOP gubernatorial rival, Rob Astorino — says he wants the incident investigated to find out. He added that he has been told of similar complaints.

And then there's this Quid Pro Cuomo:

McLaughlin’s filing also questions whether Cuomo violated ethics laws by appearing on David Letterman’s “Late Show’’ on CBS last week to peddle his book, for which he is reportedly being paid about $750,000.

The appearance could be an “impermissible gift,’’ since “CBS recently negotiated with Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s office a tax break for the ‘Late Show’ of at least $16 million,’’ reads the complaint, a copy of which was obtained by The Post.

“Does the opportunity of a coveted guest spot on the ‘Late Show’ constitute an impermissible gift from CBS to Gov. Cuomo pursuant to [the] Public Officers Law?” the complaint asks.

In addition to possible ethics violations, the governor’s actions raise “issues as to whether Gov. Cuomo violated penal law . . . which establishes an ‘E’ felony for state officials who obtain ‘services or other resources with a value in excess of $1,000 from the state’ for personal gain,’’ according to the complaints.

The complaints were filed with JCOPE,  the Joint Commission on Public Ethics, and the state Board of Elections.

McLaughlin is not expecting a pre-Election decision from either entity but wanted to get these complaints on record:

“We have a governor who is out shilling books for his own personal gain,” the lawmaker told The Post. “He’s using state resources, the State Police, state employees, for his own personal gain, and that’s wrong,”

Add the complaints McLaughlin has filed against Cuomo with JCOPE and the Board of Elections to the detailed list of campaign finance machinactions WNYC's Andrea Bernstein reported on Friday and to what we know about his tampering in the Moreland Commission matter and what we have here is a portrait of a very corrupt governor who belongs in prison, not the highest political office in the state.

Cuomo The Campaign Finance Crook

WNYC's Andrea Bernstein has done a masterful job of putting together the ways Andrew Cuomo has skirted campaign finance law - all while claiming to uphold campaign finance law and "clean up Albany."

Here's a taste:

In May 2013, the housekeeping committee wrote a $900,000 check to Buying Time. A day later, an ad began appearing, featuring Cuomo looking straight into the camera. “I am proposing a clean-up Albany plan to fight corruption," he said. "It empowers our district attorneys, it increases criminal penalties. It decreases the influence of money in politics.”

Yes, that’s right. To pay for an ad about decreasing the influence of money and politics, Cuomo used an account with no contribution limits whatsoever. One of the main goals of ethics reformers has been to curtail housekeeping contributions.

Just a couple of months after that not-a-campaign ad ran, Cuomo’s own campaign committee paid Buying Time another $430,000 to run a virtually identical ad, with the same bright piano music underneath – even using the same font in the “paid for by” message.

“I am appointing a new independent commission led by top law enforcement officials to investigate and prosecute wrongdoing," Cuomo said in the ad. "The politicians in Albany won’t like it, but I work for the people.”

But then things started to go off-track for the governor. Because the “new independent commission,” known in Albany shorthand as the “Moreland Commission,” smelled something fishy when it noticed that the housekeeping account was buying ads. So it issued a subpoena for information on – yes –Buying Time.

One of the governor’s closest aides, Larry Schwartz, immediately had it quashed, according to three knowledgeable sources. The circumstances are now under investigation by federal prosecutors. Neither Schwartz nor Buying Time would comment for this story.

Bernstein recounts Cuomo's shenanigans with the Committee To Save New York, a shadowy PAC that surfaced to promote his agenda, spending millions on pro-Cuomo ads without ever revealing who the donors were (though news accounts later found gambling interests gave a couple of million in return for expanded legalized gambling in the state.)

She also notes how Cuomo's using hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars for pro-Cuomo ads as part of an ad blitz paid for by the Economic Development Corporation.

The ads are ostensibly about how New York is "open for business," but of course the message is, "Cuomo is great!"

Bernstein concludes that all of Cuomo's campaign finance shenanigans, while certainly hypocritical and ethically challenged, may not be illegal:

Last spring, after the Moreland Commission was shut down, Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, seized its papers and vowed to continue its investigations. But speaking in Manhattan last week, he was rueful. “The scandal is not necessarily what’s illegal but what is legal." he told an audience. "And we have limited powers and we can only go after things that are illegal.”

So far, there’s no evidence Cuomo has done anything illegal. But the evidence does show that he stretched New York’s campaign finance limits so far they’ve become meaningless. And he did it to tell people he is cleaning up Albany.

Bharara has been very quiet about Cuomo since the summer.

That doesn't mean he's not working on something spectacular to be revealed after the election.

Alas, the statements Bharara made last week concern me that he's warning us that Cuomo the Campaign Finance Crook will get away with his criminality.

Daily News Hits Spitzer On Money Spent On Campaign - But What About Bloomberg?

From the Daily News:

With the polls showing a surge in voter support for Scott Stringer in the Democratic race for city controller, Eliot Spitzer is pouring money — big money — into his redemption drive. Desperation to win has trumped principle.

No surprise there.

On Aug. 30, this column challenged Spitzer to keep faith with his long-stated support for campaign finance reform. He has repeatedly backed public funding of political races to eliminate corruption and to level the playing field for all candidates by setting spending limits.

Manhattan Borough President Stringer is paying for his race with small donations plus matching funds awarded by the city’s campaign finance system. The rules limit Stringer to spending $6 million, and that’s quite enough.

Spitzer entered the race after the deadline to join the voluntary system and is free to spend what he likes. He is aided in that regard by the fact that he comes from a family of high wealth thanks to the real estate business built by his father.

When last we wrote, official filings showed that Spitzer had dipped into his considerable wallet for $3.7 million. Updated documents showed that as of 4 p.m. Thursday, Spitzer had boosted his contributions to $10.3 million and had spent $8.9 million.

Those numbers are likely to rise as Spitzer attempts to buy his way into an office that he took for granted. He and Stringer are on the air with attack ads: Stringer focusing on Spitzer’s betrayal of his oath of office as governor, Spitzer knocking Stringer on a term limits issue. Both are fair game.

What’s not fair game is Spitzer’s push to leverage his wealth to overwhelm Stringer with commercials. He used to swear by campaign reform, but not now.

Worse, Spitzer went so far as to attack Stringer for accepting public-campaign financing. Then he offered an utterly bogus explanation for refusing to limit his own personal spending: He claimed that the business community was planning to run anti-Spitzer ads as payback for Spitzer’s Wall Street crackdown.

Such a blitz never materialized, partly because corporate leaders feared running afoul of Securities and Exchange Commission rules, which prohibit financial houses that deal in municipal securities from funding the political races of officials responsible for selling those securities. That covers the controller.

Don’t get us wrong. Rich candidates are free to finance political races to whatever extent they like. Mayor Bloomberg is a case in point. What’s galling is that Spitzer was once a vocal advocate for giving candidates an equal financial shot.

It turned out that he meant all candidates but one: him.

I get it - so Spitzer is not allowed to spend all the personal wealth he wants to spend on his race but Michael Bloomberg is.

And that's because Bloomberg has never been for campaign finance reform but Spitzer once was.

Yeah, that makes sense.

No, wait - actually it doesn't.

Hit out at Spitzer all you want for trying to buy his race, DNers.

But don't give Bloomberg a pass for doing the same thing.

Doesn't matter if the candidate once expressed support for campaign finance reform or not.

Throwing gobs of their own wealth into races is obscene.

End of story.

You ever notice how the men writing the editorials (and they almost always men) twist themselves into pretzels when they write these things?

John Liu: Too Much Emphasis On High Stakes Testing in New York City Schools

He penned this for the Brooklyn Daily Eagle:

This week New York City students in grades 3 through 8, with their No. 2 Ticonderoga pencils nervously in hand, are struggling through the math portion of the annual New York state tests. Once again, these scores — along with their English Language Test results from last week — will determine crucial educational outcomes in their lives.

In this elementary and middle school equivalent of “who will live and who will die,” these tests often decide whether a child can advance to the next grade, be held back or be required to attend summer school.

But this high-stakes testing has enormous implications for teachers and entire school communities as well. Mayor Bloomberg has repeatedly and publicly called for teachers to be evaluated based on these test scores. And his Department of Education has closed down more than 100 New York City public schools predominantly because their students did not perform well on the high-stakes tests.

All this, despite the fact that high-stakes testing results have been criticized as unreliable.

Tests are an important measure of student knowledge and the success that a teacher has had in getting concepts across to his or her class. But they are by no means the only way to measure teacher performance. Report cards that cover an entire quarter’s performance and several months’ worth of teacher commentary are also good evaluators.

High-stakes tests have become problematic because they now hold such a heavy sway in determining a child’s, a teacher’s and even a school’s future. Yet they occur so infrequently as to be obviously susceptible to a bad day, a stomachache or getting up on the wrong side of the bed.

The New York state tests in Math and English Language Arts are given over a two-week period once a year. The New York City Specialized High School Admissions Test (SHAT), which determines which students get selected to attend one of the city’s elite public high schools, is given on one day every winter.

The SATs have taken on too big a role in deciding whether a student will attend a good college. Too much power is invested in these tests and the price that our students, educators, and school communities pay because of their outsized influence is embarrassingly high.

I favor more frequent, low-stakes testing: the Friday spelling test with papers folded in half and a list of 10 words, five on each side, that are put on the blackboard the previous Monday; the history pop quiz that gets handed out as the high-schoolers walk into their classroom. How about the impossible math problem up on the board that takes an entire period to unravel? These are all good methods for discovering how much our students know and whether their teachers are effective.

We need to remember that tests are merely tools, tools that are best utilized by educators to get a handle on how to do their jobs better, on a day-to-day, week-by-week basis.

High-stakes tests should not shape the destiny: for students, teachers or for entire school communities.

It is high time we break the yoke of high-stakes testing and broaden the conversation on public education in our city.

No wonder they have tried to destroy Liu with a jive campaign finance fraud "investigation."

Liu's politics are too outside the oligarchical mainstream views.

So they went after him for campaign finance fraud on $7000 donations.

Meanwhile Mayor Bloomberg, who according to the NY Daily News bribed his way onto the Independence Party line through three elections - two of which were won by the margin of votes he garnered on the Independence Party ballot line - somehow isn't under investigation for bribery and campaign finance fraud even after he admitted to laundering money to the Independence Party during the Haggerty trial.

Bloomberg Claims Halloran, Smith Indictments Are Call For More Politicians Like Himself

Our unindicted criminal mayor, the man who finagled three elections via unethical and/or potentially criminal activity with the Independence Party, told reporters today that the criminal indictments of State Senator Malcolm Smith, City Councilman Dan Halloran and others on bribery and fraud charges are an example of why the country needs more "non-partisan" elections that elect politicians like, well, himself:

Mayor Michael Bloomberg today argued that the U.S. attorney's complaints against State Senator Malcolm Smith and Queens Councilman Dan Halloran present as strong an argument as any for nonpartisan elections in New York City.

"All of this comes out of the fact that we have partisan elections when cities aren't partisan," said Bloomberg today, during a press conference about education in Queens.
...

"If you go back to 2005, I think it was, I think I spent $7 million of my own money trying to convince everybody that we should have nonpartisan elections," said Bloomberg (who has very much played the partisan game when he's needed to, and contributed millions of dollars to the controversial Independence Party, which provided him a crucial non-major-party line to run on). "We are the only big city in the country that has partisan elections. The only one. ... But I could not get any newspaper or any good government group or any union or anybody to back it."

"Generally speaking, partisan elections deprive the public of the right to pick their own leaders because the only people that vote and the only elections that matter are the fringe group of whether it's one party or another party," he continued. "And maybe they make good choices, maybe they don't. But it's very hard to argue that it is democratic. It is not. And that's where all this craziness comes from."

Bloomberg is of course full of it on multiple accounts here.

First, as Capital NY points out, Bloomberg has gamed the election system more than once by changing party affiliation the way he changes tuxedos.

First he was a Democrat, then a Republican, then an "independent," then he was a Republican again.

If anybody has made a sham out of "partisan elections," it's our "non-partisan" mayor whose only allegiance is to himself and the corporate state of affairs.

Next, he's corrupted elections all over the country by using his billions as a bludgeon against anybody or anything he doesn't like.

The Bloomberg M.O. goes like this:

Agree with the mayor, receive Bloomberg largess.

Go against the mayor's wishes and the mayor's PAC drops a bunch of money into your opponent's campaign bank account and runs commercials against you.

The mayor's PAC has threatened politicians all across the country on a multitude of issues, most specifically gun control and education reform.

A billionaire soon-to-be ex-mayor with billions to toss into politics to influence elections for years to come is much more corrosive and damaging to the political system then two bit crooks like Smith and Halloran taking and/or receiving $50,000 in small cash bribes.

Finally, as I pointed out earlier and as the Capital NY article points out as well, the mayor has bribed Independence Party officials through three election cycles to put him on their "non-partisan" ballot line and fool people into thinking it's some independent ballot line rather than a sham front for Bloomberg.

Is that fraud perpetrated by Bloomberg, a sham that twice won him the votes that meant the difference between winning and losing the election) any less corrupting that Halloran and Smith's shenanigans?

It would be nice if the journalists covering him would call him on his b.s. to his face and ask him how his PAC, his Independence Party shenanigans, and his party switching isn't crazy too?

Smith, Halloran Arrested For Pittance Compared To Bloomberg's Independence Party Bribes

When you look at the details of the alleged criminal wrongdoing by Dan Halloran, Malcolm Smith, the Republican Party operatives and the Westchester pols arrested on bribery and fraud charges this morning, you realize that there really wasn't a lot of money being thrown around.

The NY Times account has Halloran receiving $20,000 in bribes, negotiating $40,000 or $50,000 in bribes for GOP officials to finagle Smith's name onto the GOP ballot even though Smith was a Democrat, Smith complaining that the operatives were trying to shake him down for more.

Contrast those five figure bribes with the bribes Michael Bloomberg handed out to Independence Party figures through three election cycles, as chronicled by the Daily News back in December 2102:

Much ado about next to nothing, Mayor Bloomberg said of this series of editorials about the Independence Party. “What’s the big deal?” he asked.

To answer the question: The big deal is that a clique of political operatives with no claim to broad public support has played a powerful role in determining who runs New York — notably Bloomberg — while making dupes of voters.

By the thousands, New Yorkers have mistakenly joined the Independence Party when enrolling to vote. Intending to have no political affiliation, these voters instead checked the “Independence Party” box — empowering the group to exploit an illusion of popular strength.

Still more seriously, Independence leaders have exercised the authority to back candidates by stocking legally mandated governing panels with the names of unwitting people, many of whom have no idea they are listed as party members.

Bearing the earmarks of orchestrated fraud, the tactics represent a distortion of the democratic process as it has been established by state law and court rulings.

...

 

No New York official has built closer ties to Independence leaders or benefited more from their support than Bloomberg. He ran as their candidate in three mayoral campaigns, twice scoring votes on the Independence line that exceeded his margin of victory.

...

The history of how he secured the favor offers both a look at Independence Party power playing and an understanding of how determinedly the mayor courted the Newmanites. As you might expect, money played a key role.

Roll the clock back to 2001. Although Bloomberg opened what seemed the world’s largest checkbook, he was handicapped as a Republican running in a Democratic city.

Only three modern Republicans — Fiorello LaGuardia, John Lindsay and Rudy Giuliani — had made it into City Hall. All had succeeded by running as the GOP candidate and as the candidate of a second party. No dummy, Bloomberg reached out to Independence Party state Chairman Frank MacKay.

Word came back that Bloomberg needed Newman’s blessing. So the aspiring mayor made a pilgrimage to 60 Bank St., a West Village townhouse where Newman lived with his followers.

Among those in residence were Gabrielle Kurlander and Jackie Salit. The New York Times described the two women in Newman’s 2011 obituary as his life partners in an “unconventional family of choice.”

The Bloomberg-Newman meeting brought the Jewish businessman billionaire face to face with a man who was an avowed Marxist, plus a Jew with a record of making anti-Semitic pronouncements, plus an unaccredited psychological counselor who espoused patient-therapist sex known as “friendosexuality.”

Newman was in charge because he and his adherents had taken control of the Independence Party, an organization founded in the 1990s by breakaway Republicans. Now, he gave his stamp of approval — and the ballot line — to Bloomberg.

But trouble erupted when Newman’s firebrand ally Lenora Fulani declared four days after 9/11 that the attack was “all too much the result of how America has positioned itself in the world.” She added: “It is easy to forget that the attack . . . itself was an act of revenge.”

Bloomberg called on Independence Party leaders to disavow Fulani’s statement, announcing: “I will not campaign on their line, and I will urge people not to vote for any candidate on that line, myself included.”

Newman refused a disavowal. Bloomberg backed down and kept the line rather than heighten his risk of defeat. The strategy worked. He scored 59,000 Independence votes, almost twice the slim margin of victory that put him into City Hall.

No politician forgets numbers like that. Bloomberg was soon solidifying bonds with Newman.

Over the years, he contributed $400,000 of his personal wealth to New York City Independence Party accounts. He also gave a total of $650,000 to two causes run by Newman followers: the All Stars Project, a nonprofit that works with underprivileged children, and a theater group that showcases propaganda plays written by, you guessed it, Newman.

Meanwhile, the city Industrial Development Agency enabled the All Stars Project to buy and renovate a W. 42nd St. building with the help of $12.75 million in triple-tax-free bonding. The city is not on the hook for the debt, and the administration says the financing program is open to all qualified nonprofit groups.

Bloomberg pushed the deal over opposition from City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, then-Controller Bill Thompson, then-Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, Queens Borough President Helen Marshall and then-Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion.

The opponents cited anti-Semitic remarks by Fulani. Bloomberg, who had called the statements “despicable,” said they were not legal grounds for spurning the All Stars.

Thanks to the financing assistance, the All Stars have a modern theater complex that will be home in the 2012-13 season to seven shows, three of them Newman-related — including a production called “Carmen’s Place,” book and music and lyrics by Newman. Photographs of Newman adorn the lobby and offices that are viewable from the street.

In 2005 and 2009, Newman again gave the Independence ballot line to Bloomberg — delivering him 75,000 votes in 2005, less than the mayor’s margin of victory, and 150,000 votes in 2009, more than his winning margin.

 Meanwhile, Bloomberg was also working with state chairman MacKay, a former nightclub owner and talent agent who has prospered by providing clandestine help to the mayor.

In 2008, Bloomberg poured $1.35 million into one of MacKay’s fund-raising accounts. MacKay spent most of the money on consultants in a hidden attempt by the mayor to support the reelection of three Republican state senators. After the election, MacKay paid himself a $60,000 “consulting fee.”

In 2009, as Bloomberg sought a third term, he sent an additional $1.2 million to MacKay for the purpose of hiring Republican operative John Haggerty to monitor poll sites for election fraud — a task that was likely to prompt charges of voter intimidation.

By routing the funds through MacKay, Bloomberg kept the activity under wraps — until the Manhattan district attorney charged Haggerty with stealing $1.1 million of the mayor’s money to buy a house. Haggerty was sent to prison.

Seriously, compared to Bloomberg's criminal legacy with the Independence Party, the Smith/Halloran/GOP operatives mess is penny ante.

Count up the bribes Bloomberg gave to people in the Independence Party as chronicled by the NY Daily News.

$400,000 to the personal accounts of Independence Party figures.

$650,000 in charitable contributions to charities run and/or affiliated with Independence Party figures.

$12.75 million in tax breaks to a charity run by an Independence Party figure.

$1.35 million laundered through the fundraising account of the Independence Party chairman, which the Independence Party used to re-elect three Republican state senators.  The Independence Party chairman paid himself $60,000 for enabling that money laundering scheme by the mayor.

$1.2 million to Independence Party operatives to intimidate voters at the polls - $1.1 million of which was "stolen" by John Haggerty.

And those are the bribes and money laundering events that we know about.

You can be sure there are more behind the scenes.

Bloomberg has used the Independence Party to engineer three terms in City Hall, to re-elect three Republican state senators so that his policies would be promoted in Albany and has paid Independence Party officials and affiliates handsomely in return.

If Smith and Halloran have been arrested on charges of trying to rig the 2013 mayoral race, why isn't Bloomberg sitting in a cell next to them for successively rigging three mayoral elections and three state senate elections?

Well, you know what they say:

Steal a little and they throw you in jail.

Steal a lot and they make you Mayor4Life.

Why Doesn't Bloomberg Go To Jail With Him?

John Haggerty was ordered to jail today to start serving his sentence for defrauding the Bloomberg campaign back in 2009 to the tune of $1.2 million dollars:

John Haggerty was convicted in December 2011 of second-degree grand larceny and second-degree money laundering charges.

Haggerty was found guilty of stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars from Mayor Bloomberg that was supposed to go toward an Election Day poll watching operation.

The political operative instead used the money to buy a house.

Prior to his court appearance Tuesday, Haggerty had been out on bail pending an appeal.

He will spend at least 16 months behind bars and have to pay Bloomberg $750,000 in restitution.

Meanwhile the man who used Haggerty's Independence Party to launder money and skirt campaign finance laws - Mayor Michael Bloomberg - has not been held accountable at all for his crime.

Funny how that is.

Lawyer Says Feds Tried To "Manufacture" Case Against John Liu

The allegation against the feds was made in court today:

An indicted fund-raiser for city Comptroller John Liu claims the feds wanted him to help "manufacture" charges against the embattled mayoral hopeful.

In court this morning, a lawyer for Xing Wu "Oliver" Pan said "the facts here are so unique and disturbing" that he would seek the unprecedented dismissal of campaign-finance charges against Pan.

Defense lawyer Irwin Rochman cited the "highly improper manner in which the government dealt with Mr. Pan" prior to his arrest following a sting operation last year.

Rochman said the feds tried "to pressure Mr. Pan to help the government manufacture a case against Mr. Liu."

Rochman didn't elaborate on his allegations, and refused to do so outside court, saying more details would be contained in a motion due Sept. 10.

But he specified that the feds wanted to build a criminal case against the Queens Democrat, and "possibly some of his associates."

A spokeswoman for the Manhattan US Attorney's Office declined comment.

Liu's campaign spokesman also declined to comment.

Pan is charged with scheming with an undercover FBI agent to use phony "straw" donors to funnel $16,000 into Liu's 2013 campaign account.

The amount is more than three times the legal limit of $4,950 in contributions from a single individual.

Earlier this year, Liu all but dared the feds to bring charges against him in the case, in which his former campaign treasurer, Jia "Jenny" Hou has also been charged.

"If there is anything that my campaign is guilty of, or my supporters or my staff or by extension me, then prove it," Liu said at the time.

So far, the feds haven't proven anything, although the allegations against Liu have been damaging enough to short circuit any chance he might have had to win a race for City Hall in 2013.

Interestingly enough, one politician has been caught in a money laundering scheme to pay an associate $1.1 million dollars from his own personal account to a political operative in order to campaign finance rules.

That politician's name is Michael Bloomberg.

Funny how the politician who serves the interests of the elite 1% pays nothing for breaking campaign finance law while the politician who seems to try and serve the 99% is destroyed by campaign finance fraud allegations from a case that so far hasn't even been brought by the feds, let alone proven.

If it turns out the feds were putting pressure on Pan to "manufacture" a case against Liu, that makes this even worse.

But in a country where you are rewarded for serving the interests of the elite and punished if you try and serve the interests of the 99%, I guess none of this should be a surprise.