Daily News Picks Up Deadspin Report On Sexual Misconduct Allegations Against Kevin Johnson

From the NY Daily News:

In the days leading up to Donald Sterling’s lifetime ban from the NBA, one of the strongest advocates for disciplining the Clippers’ owner was former All-Star guard and current Sacramento, Calif., mayor Kevin Johnson.

“The players are waiting for the commissioner to act decisively,” Johnson said in late April, speaking on behalf of the players’ union. “They want the maximum of what the constitution and bylaws will allow and we’re trying to figure out what that is. They want a decision to be made quickly and decisively. If you don’t respect the players in this league, then the values that we all espouse are for naught. If what has been alleged and stated is authentic then there must be sanctions that make it clear that the NBA family will have zero tolerance for such conduct today, tomorrow or ever.”

Johnson got his wish when NBA commissioner Adam Silver banned Sterling for life and fined him $2.5 million after Sterling admitted he made the racist comments in a taped conversation between himself and his former girlfriend.

But while Johnson may be viewed as a strong, moral voice in the Sterling saga, a Deadspin report published last week revisited dark chapters in the California politician’s past — including alleged sexual misconduct by Johnson when he was the president and CEO of St. HOPE Academy, a charter school organization he founded in Sacramento — and misuse of federal funds the school received.

The St. HOPE matter came less than a decade after Johnson, according to a joint U.S. Senate and House report, paid “$230,000 to resolve claims brought by a Phoenix teenager who alleged Johnson molested her.”

Arizona prosecutors never filed criminal charges against Johnson in that matter but an investigation into the ex-NBA guard’s tenure at St. HOPE ultimately led to an August 2008 referral to the U.S. Attorney’s office in the Eastern District of California by the Inspector General for the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) “for criminal and civil prosecution of Kevin Johnson” and another St. HOPE executive for misuse of federal funds.

“I will tell you that my staff, which had a totally nonpolitical agenda, looked into all the allegations,” says Gerald Walpin, the former Inspector General for the CNCS, whose office ultimately made the referral to the U.S. Attorney’s office to prosecute Johnson the same year the former hoops star ran for mayor of Sacramento. Walpin was fired by President Obama in the ensuing fallout. “I would not have referred it to the U.S. Attorney’s office unless there was evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. And there was no doubt that there was established documentary evidence of misuse of federal funds.”

Read the whole Daily News piece, read the more detailed Deadspin piece by Dave McKenna they picked up on and ask yourself this question:

How did Kevin Johnson get away with what he got away with and why is he considered anything other than a sexual predator?

Allegations That Anthony Weiner Had A Relationship With Congressional Staffer

Inevitable - more allegations involving Anthony Weiner:

Before he married his wife, Anthony Weiner had a previously undisclosed relationship with an on-again-off-again congressional and campaign aide nearly two decades his junior.

In pushing back against the publication of this story, the spokeswoman for his current mayoral campaign, Barbara Morgan, phoned The New York Observer‘s editor in chief. Partially confirming the relationship, she said the two “had a personal relationship.” (At that point, Ms. Morgan stopped mid-sentence to request the conversation be continued off the record.)


In a cease-and-desist letter sent to The New York Observer today, an attorney for the woman said his client, Dolev Azaria, “vehemently denies” that she and Mr. Weiner had any romantic relationship “while Ms. Azaria was working for Mr. Weiner.”

“Anthony was my boss and a mentor and we remain friends to this day. There was never anything inappropriate about our relationship. I’m saddened that rumors to the contrary would imply anything else,” Ms. Azaria further said in a statement late Thursday night.

Nearly a dozen sources and former staffers, however, said they strongly suspected that wasn’t the case.

Instead, they described the lengthy relationship between the pair as a badly-kept open secret, with the two openly flirting and behaving unlike any other staffers in the office for a period they say began well before late 2006–when Ms. Azaria left Mr. Weiner’s payroll–and continuing after she returned in mid-2008. (In 2006, Ms. Azaria would have been turning 24 years old, while Mr. Weiner would have been turning 42.) The allegedly unprofessional behavior made some staffers uncomfortable.

“You’d have to be an idiot to not know what was going on,” said one ex-aide, who, like the majority of others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid damaging his relationship with Mr. Weiner and their former colleague. “It was a known secret in the office,” another said.

The close relationship was especially striking, sources said, in contrast to the way Mr. Weiner behaved with others.

“It was pretty clear they had a different relationship than everyone else,” said one source, describing the behavior–openly flirting and largely behaving unlike Mr. Weiner was with any other staffer–as continuing into 2008, when Mr. Weiner began dating his current wife. “If you worked for Weiner, you were lucky if he refused to acknowledge your existence. Those less fortunate got called ‘cocksucker,’” said another. “So [their] rapport was exceptional.”

While relationships between staffers and their bosses–especially in the incestuous world of politics–are not unheard of, this pairing nonetheless suggests that Mr. Weiner was not completely honest when he insisted his personal proclivities were completely constrained to his private life.

“I think the notion of a member of Congress having a relationship with his staffer does not fit the bill of somebody making smart decisions about how he’s running an office and how he’s going to carry on in public life,” said one source. “It is a thing when the boss is having a relationship with a staffer and attempting to keep it a secret from anyone. That’s not appropriate and I think not something that represents smart, sound judgement.”

Smart, sound judgement and Anthony Weiner - things that don't go together.

Thankfully all this stuff broke before he won a slot in the runoff - or worse, became the Democratic nominee.

Weiner was a terrible Congressman, a terrible boss, and he would have made a terrible mayor.

Eliot Spitzer Should Just Tell The Truth About This And Move On

Last week I posted that I thought Eliot Spitzer was less than forthcoming when asked questions about whether he had hired any prostitutes since he resigned as New York State governor.

Spitzer was getting defensive about these questions and eventually told the press “I’m done answering this question," which, given Spitzer's history with prostitutes and the circus surrounding Anthony Weiner's sexting scandal 2.0, seemed like stonewalling defiance and wishful thinking.

 At the time I wrote:

That kind of defiance around the prostitute issue raises more questions, however, and suggests that Eliot may not be as genuine and truthful as he wants us to think he is being over this matter.

Weiner has played fast and loose with the truth, claiming he told the public more sexting photos and text would surface but neglecting to note that these would be photos and sexts sent after his resignation from Congress.

The way Spitzer is responding to these questions around his use of prostitutes, now defiantly saying he won't answer the prostitute question as if it's actually an affront for anybody to ask it after we have learned of Weiner's post-resignation sexting adventures, smells fishy and suggests he may be hiding something here.

If I'm right about this and he is hiding something or playing fast and loose with the truth around his use of prostitutes, that will come out in the end.

Spitzer's has lot of enemies who want to do him in, so if he is hiding something or lying, we'll know soon enough.

But if I were him and I were trying to distance myself from Weiner and convince the public that I had truly rehabilitated myself post-resignation, I don't think I would get so testy and defensive when people ask legitimate questions over when I stopped hiring prostitutes.

 Well, sure enough, just one week later, we learn that Eliot Spitzer is hiding something:

Eliot Spitzer refused today to deny that he has a girlfriend.

The candidate for city comptroller was asked three times at a campaign stop this morning in Brooklyn about persistent rumors he is having an "extra-marital affair."

"I am so tired of the personal attacks and I've answered all those questions," Spitzer said outside the Borough Hall subway station, where he was shaking hands with voters and received an overwhelmingly positive response.

"The public cares about what I did in government. That's what I'm going to be talking about and that's what the public is going to be voting on -- based on what I did in terms of trying to clean up Wall Street, which got a lot more attention than the other things we did.

But the other things we did was just as important."

When the topic came up again, Spitzer insisted voters don't care about his personal life.

"We've said everything we can say about that and these are attacks that are coming out of left field and frankly, you know, the public cares about what the public should care about. The public frankly is a lot smarter in this regard than some folks in the media," he said.

At that point, an aide tried to end the impromptu press conference.

But Spitzer took one more question, when a reporter gave him a chance to "reject" the rumors.

"I have said everything we're going to say about this," Spitzer concluded.

Now having an extra-marital affair is different than hiring prostitutes.

This is not something that needs to be between Spitzer and the police.

This is something between Spitzer, his wife, their rabbi and some lawyers to figure out.

But just as Anthony Weiner should have been completely forthcoming about his sexting habits before he announced for mayor and gotten everything out into the open, Spitzer should have been open about this circumstance when he announced for comptroller.

Instead, like Weiner, Spitzer has played a game of rolling disclosure and cat-and-mouse on this stuff that in the end will come back to bite him.

If Spitzer wants to focus on issues in the comptroller's race, he should just come out with whatever the story is - all of it - and say "That's it, folks.  There's nothing else, we're going to move on now and get back to the issues."

Spitzer hasn't done that, however.

Rather, he's said his marriage is fine even when the tabloids have him staying at his parents' house while his wife stays in the Spitzer family house, he's said there is no validity to the rumors that his wife looking to divorce, he's said that this is all personal and none of it should matter in the election.

He's right about that last part, but alas, given his past history with hookers and Weiner's current travails, good luck getting the press to drop the scent of a Spitzer extra marital affair.

It's probably too late to do a full disclosure without turning the comptroller campaign into more of a circus than it already is.

But had he started out with a full disclosure, he might have been able to avoid some of the pain that is sure to come when this story finally is revealed and his campaign has to play clean-up for a few media cycles.

When will politicians learn that it's not the sex or the sexting or the extra marital affairs that really cause them political and personal headaches - it's trying to keep a straight face while covering that stuff up that does it?

When will humans learn that whatever we run from we are actually running toward?

Spitzer's Hiding Something Too

Scandal-scarred Eliot Spitzer got into the race for NYC comptroller after he saw the success scandal-scarred Anthony Weiner was having running for NYC mayor.

Weiner was receiving favorable news coverage and a friendly reception on the campaign trail, so Spitzer figured why the hell not jump into the race for comptroller and try and resurrect his own political career.

Spitzer and Weiner were connected this campaign cycle even before the revelations that Anthony Weiner was less than forthcoming about his sexting behavior broke this week.

At first when Spitzer jumped into the race, the connection between he and Weiner helped him.

After all, if Weiner could be making such a good showing on the campaign trail post-scandal, with some polls showing him leading the Democratic primary contest and voters saying they could envision him as mayor, didn't that bode well for Spitzer's chances in the comptroller's race?

And indeed, polls taken after Spitzer entered the race showed him leading his opponent, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, by a double digit margin.

But now that voters have been confronted with new pictures of Anthony Weiner's penis that Weiner sent over the Internet to a stranger just last year, when he was already devising a run for mayor, the connection between Spitzer and Weiner is no longer helping Eliot:

It has come to this in New York City’s election — a reporter asked Eliot Spitzer on Wednesday whether he has slept with prostitutes since resigning as governor.

“Absolutely not,” Spitzer said as he greeted morning commuters on Staten Island. He added, “I’m done answering this question."

...

Spitzer found his political comeback overshadowed this week by the new sexting scandal buffeting former Congressman Anthony Weiner’s mayoral dreams.

But Spitzer could not leave his own scandalous past behind.

Some analysts said Weiner’s new troubles pose a risk to Spitzer’s campaign for city controller, by reminding voters of the bad-boy behavior that got Spitzer into hot water and raising questions in the minds of voters whether he has changed his ways.

Spitzer was forced to step down as governor in 2008 amid revelations he used the services of high-priced call girls.

“I think when people think about it, they’ll ask, ‘How do we know Spitzer is over his problem? Did this leopard change his spots? Maybe he’s just like Weiner,’” said Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.

Spitzer took pains Wednesday to distance himself from Weiner’s sexcapades

The question is, given the scandal connection between the two, can Spitzer really distance himself from Weiner's sexcapades?

Spitzer is a lot smarter than Weiner so you would think he's smart enough to know if he was still hiring prostitutes post-resignation that would pose a problem for him in this race - especially because unlike Weiner, Spitzer has a dedicated cadre of Wall Street people, hedge fundies, and union leaders who hate his guts and are looking to destroy him.

He has to know that they've hired detectives to look into him and dig up any dirt they can use to torpedo his bid for comptroller. 

That said, Spitzer is also as arrogant a man as Weiner and his behavior as governor suggests he may be as pathological as Weiner as well, since he had to know his reckless behavior hiring hookers when he was governor would eventually be exposed given how many enemies he has and how badly his governorship was going.

So, let's ask the question again:

Has Eliot Spitzer hired any prostitutes since he resigned his governorship back in 2008?

He is on record now unequivocally saying he has not.

But he's also on record saying that he's not going to answer that question anymore.

That kind of defiance around the prostitute issue raises more questions, however, and suggests that Eliot may not be as genuine and truthful as he wants us to think he is being over this matter.

Weiner has played fast and loose with the truth, claiming he told the public more sexting photos and text would surface but neglecting to note that these would be photos and sexts sent after his resignation from Congress.

The way Spitzer is responding to these questions around his use of prostitutes, now defiantly saying he won't answer the prostitute question as if it's actually an affront for anybody to ask it after we have learned of Weiner's post-resignation sexting adventures, smells fishy and suggests he may be hiding something here.

If I'm right about this and he is hiding something or playing fast and loose with the truth around his use of prostitutes, that will come out in the end.

Spitzer's has lot of enemies who want to do him in, so if he is hiding something or lying, we'll know soon enough.

But if I were him and I were trying to distance myself from Weiner and convince the public that I had truly rehabilitated myself post-resignation, I don't think I would get so testy and defensive when people ask legitimate questions over when I stopped hiring prostitutes.

NOW Launches Attack Against Weiner And Spitzer

From Politicker:

The National Organization for Women is urging voters to stay far, far away from this election’s two comeback candidates: disgraced former Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who is running for comptroller, and former Congressman Anthony Weiner, a candidate for mayor.

Advocates with the pro-women’s group, which has endorsed City Council Speaker Christine Quinn for mayor, held a press conference on the steps of City Hall today where they slammed the two redemption-seeking polls as anti-women.

“We need to be very clear that this prostitution scandal is not a victimless crime. His prostitution scandal is a crime, a crime for which he has yet to answer for. A crime that he has not been held accountable for.  And Eliot Spitzer is not above the law,” said NOW-NYC President Sonio Ossorio, who stood in front of a row of women holding signs reading, “Can’t trust a John with our DOUGH,” and, “Spitzer: woman won’t forget.”

Ms. Ossorio lumped Mr. Spitzer, who was forced to resign as governor five years ago in a prostitution scandal, together with Mr. Weiner, who was forced to resign as congressman after a sexting scandal, and disgraced ex-Assemblyman Vito Lopez, who has been accused of sexually harassing staffers and is now running for City Council.

“Eliot Spitzer, Anthony Weiner and Vito Lopez, all three think they can mistreat women and that women voters are going to dash to the polls to bring them back, to elect them to represent them,” she said. “Let’s not let that happen. The question for voters is: Are these men really going to be in tune to the needs of women or are they just going to see us as objects? … We expect more from out elected leaders.”

She further questioned both men’s judgement in allowing themselves to put their careers at risk in exchange for sexual satisfaction. “When you risk so much and you just throw  it all down the drain ’cause you want to send pictures of your genitalia to women? I mean, we can do better that. There are so many smart, great candidates,” she said.

So Weiner's gone from getting great press last week for how well people were reacting to him on the campaign trail to stories where's he's being lumped in with Eliot Spitzer and Vito Lopez as untrustworthy and misogynistic.

I bet even Weiner never forsaw this coming.

We'll see when the next slate of public polls comes out whether this publicity is hurting Weiner's support.

But it surely has taken him off message and derailed his campaign momentum while emboldening his rivals to start attacking him on his ethics.

Quinn Attacks Weiner And Spitzer Again

One of the beneficiaries of Eliot Spitzer's entrance into the comptroller race was Christine Quinn.

Quinn, suffering from plummeting poll numbers and overtaken by Anthony Weiner's campaign momentum, has been able to use Spitzer's entrance into the race to attack Weiner:

Eliot Spitzer and Anthony Weiner present much the same problem to the voting public, if you ask Christine Quinn.

Today, speaking on the steps of City Hall, Quinn posed a rhetorical question to the reporters gathered before her: "What have these two men done since their fall from grace to make it clear to women—and men for that matter—that their selfish, dishonest ways are behind them?"

It's the second time she's delivered that sort of message in as many days.

Quinn could just as well be asked what she's done to put the slush fund scandal and the term limits debacle behind her.

I guess that's for the voters to decide.

But the good thing in all of this is, Quinn's finally attacking Weiner.

Somebody had to start doing it.

Weiner was getting a "free ride" in this campaign so far, as Michael Mulgrew put it to the NY Times, with no candidate in the Democratic primary willing to step out and attack him for fear he/she would drive her own poll numbers down and help other candidates.

But now with Spitzer in the comptroller's race, Weiner's "free ride" is over.

Quinn has gone after him twice and Liu has attacked Weiner's ethics as well.

Dunno if Quinn's attacking Weiner helps her, but it doesn't help Weiner.

It will be interesting to see the next set of poll numbers on the race.

The pollsters are out in the field right now, polling the state of the race and what Spitzer's entrance into it means for Weiner.

I'm going to bet that Spitzer's entrance into the race has not helped Weiner.

But we'll see when the numbers come out.

Weiner's Freak Show

Azi Paybarah on what Spitzer's entrance into the comptroller's race has done to Anthony Weiner's race for mayor:

A "White House insider" told the Post that New York "has officially entered the Twilight Zone," thanks to the concurrent post-scandal candidacies of Anthony Weiner and Eliot Spitzer.

The Times Union said the Democratic Party would be damaged if voters see a ballot with Weiner at the top, Spitzer in the middle and Vito Lopez, the former assemblyman who resigned from office after several women accused him of sexual harassment, down below.

Chris Smith of New York magazine attempted to put Weiner and Spitzer's behavior in relative context, and comes up with a comparison that doesn't really flatter either man: "Spitzer’s acts were (very slightly) more sane, Weiner’s more twisted; Spitzer’s transgressions more offensive, Weiner’s sillier."

All this must be particularly galling to Weiner (notwithstanding his stated indifference to the Spitzer candidacy), whose greatest accomplishment to this point has been the achievement of something like normalcy in his candidacy.

The addition of a second high-profile, extraordinarily self-assured former official seeking redemption from a sensational scandal in this election makes it a freak show again.

A Bronx Democrat contacted me yesterday to report having received a survey call from Quinnipiac University that included a question about whose behavior was more "objectionable," Weiner's or Spitzer's.

That's a losing proposition, no matter who comes out ahead.

Indeed it is.

You know, when news first broke Sunday night that Spitzer was jumping into the comptroller race, I thought to myself "How many more of these disgraced politicians do we have to deal with here?"

But since then, I have revised my opinion of the matter.

I think Spitzer's jumping into the comptroller's race has been a blessing.

First, any time a candidate can scare Michael Mulgrew, Kathryn Wilde, and the contingent of editorial staff/neo-liberal columnists at the Daily News, Post and Times, he must be doing something right.

Spitzer's jumping back into politics has sent waves of fear through the corridors of power in NYC and so, from that angle, I think his entering the race is a good thing.

But more importantly, it has wrecked Anthony Weiner's campaign momentum and returned it to "freak show" status once again.

No one's paying any attention to his policy pronouncements.

They're asking him whether he thinks showing his junk on the Twitter and lying about it is worse than going to hookers but telling the truth about it when caught.

Weiner's candidacy has been all about show anyway.

His policy pronouncements are coming from a booklet he wrote up in 2009 and even his most signature policy, single payer health care for NYC, is a half-baked idea that Weiner's says would have to be fleshed out by a health care reform commission.

So it's nice to see that Weiner's been thrown off message here by Spitzer's entrance into the race and his campaign overtaken by the "freak show" once again.

Because in the end, that's exactly where Anthony Weiner's campaign belongs.

And we have Eliot Spitzer to thank for bringing Weiner back there.

Is Spitzer Dragging Weiner Down Already?

From Politicker:

Political observers widely view Mr. Spitzer’s bid as a threat to Mr. Weiner’s. The former congressman has striven every day to rebrand himself from serial sexter to serious statesman, and Mr. Spitzer’s presence reminds voters of everything Mr. Weiner wants them to forget.

Mr. Spitzer’s candidacy “will increase the scandal stories—we’ve already seen it. Now people will be thinking, ‘We’ve got to have an all-perv ticket?’” said veteran Democratic consultant Jerry Skurnik. “I think it increases chances of both of them being considered laughingstocks and not serious candidates.”

“Oh, it hurts,” Hunter College Professor Kenneth Sherrill concurred. “I think that, while one candidate in difficulty of this sort can save himself, there’s a good chance two pull one another down.”

At his Monday press conference, when Politicker asked Mr. Weiner how he thought the media’s obsession with Mr. Spitzer would affect him, he was expectedly blasé.

“Clearly, it’s shifted away,” Mr. Weiner said sarcastically, gesturing to the reporters huddled around him, prompting laughter from all in attendance.

For two straight days, much of the attention of the political press has been on Spitzer, not Weiner, and when Anthony has gotten some attention, it's in the "What do you think about these two pervs?" vein.

Yeah, Spitzer's hurting Weiner already.

Weiner's probably hoping Spitzer can't get the 4000 signatures he needs to get on the ballot by Thursday so that he can go back to trying to make believe like he's a candidate with some gravitas.

Because with Spitzer in, Anthony Weiner is relegated to the role of the Little Perv to Sptizer's Steamroller Perv.

And his rebrand is in the toilet.

UFT Threatens To Use Its Own Campaign Funds To Destroy Spitzer

The Times has an article out tonight saying business leaders and labor are joining together to put a stake through Spitzer's run for city comptroller:

Business leaders leapt into the ruckus, finding common cause with organized labor as they described Mr. Spitzer as ill-suited to the job of managing the city’s multibillion-dollar pension system and policing city spending. 

Such a post, said Kathryn S. Wylde, the head of the New York City Partnership, made up mainly of real estate, Wall Street and insurance firms, requires intense collaboration and diplomacy with the mayor’s office, the business community and municipal labor unions. 

“The tone of the Spitzer announcement and history suggest that’s not the way he would approach the job,” she said in an interview. 

...

It appeared that the muscle for the anti-Spitzer operation might emerge from the city’s labor unions, which view Mr. Stringer as a reliable ally, and are wary of the less predictable Mr. Spitzer, who has not hesitated to confront them in the past. 

Michael Mulgrew, president of the United Federation of Teachers, said all options — including tapping its own campaign funds for television ads — were under consideration. “We’re going to make sure that we do everything in our power to make sure Scott is the next comptroller,” he said. “Weiner has kind of been given a free pass.”

The one good thing to come out of all of this is, it looks like Weiner's "free pass" has been revoked:

From corporate boardrooms to the headquarters of the city’s Democratic political campaigns, phone lines lighted up and strategy sessions were organized on Monday with a single mission in mind: stopping Eliot Spitzer. 

The surprise decision by former Governor Spitzer to run for citywide office startled and galvanized the city’s political establishment, which worried aloud about handing the TV-savvy and self-financed candidate a new megaphone. 

In candid conversations, some of the leaders expressed acute regret over their failure to swiftly undercut the mayoral campaign of former Representative Anthony D. Weiner, another scandal-scarred candidate for citywide office, and said they would not make the same mistake twice. 

 

...

Strikingly, Democratic leaders drew parallels between Mr. Spitzer and Mr. Weiner, trying to lump them together as two wayward men obsessed with reclaiming power and unworthy of redemption, in a direct appeal to women voters who may decide the races. 

“For me the question with both Anthony Weiner and Eliot Spitzer is what have they been doing to earn this second chance?” asked Christine C. Quinn, the City Council speaker and a Democratic candidate for mayor. She said she had seen little that would “redeem themselves from their selfish behavior.” 

They gave Weiner a "free pass" because he's a reliable neo-liberal happy to not upset the gravy train both business and labor leaders have been riding for the last 40 years.

But Spitzer is anything but reliable and they won't give him a free pass to the comptroller office.

Unfortunately for Weiner (though fortunately for us), Anthony's free pass looks to be the first piece of collateral damage from the business/labor War on Spitzer.

Liu Uses Spitzer's Entrance Into Comptroller Race To Attack Weiner

As I suspected might happen, sex scandal-plagued Eliot Spitzer's announcement that he is entering the race for New York City comptroller has given the mayoral candidates an invitation to attack Anthony Weiner on his own sex scandal.

Current comptroller John Liu took that opportunity today:

In the midst of the rising chatter that has erupted since Anthony Weiner and Eliot Spitzer launched their comeback campaigns for citywide offices, most of their rivals have stayed mum on the sex scandals that led to their initial downfalls.

But City Comptroller John Liu, who is running against Mr. Weiner for mayor and holds the office that Mr. Spitzer is now running for, addressed both scandals directly for the first time Monday afternoon after accepting an endorsement from the National Latino Officers Association on the steps of City Hall.

After giving his remarks, Mr. Liu set up the exchange, jokingly asking, “What other questions could there be?”

To no one’s surprise, there were quite a few. But what was surprising was how Mr. Liu used Mr. Spitzer’s entry into the race as an opportunity to aggressively confront both the former governor as well as Mr. Weiner.

“I don’t think it damages the reputation of the political system. I think on some level, this is a huge affront to women in New York City and far beyond. If you think about what these two individuals have been responsible for, and to continue the denigration of the women they’ve been involved with, this is–it just doesn’t smell right,” Mr. Liu said.

When Politicker asked whether he thought Mr. Spitzer and his Democratic rival, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, were qualified to succeed him in office, Mr. Liu reiterated his fiery disapproval of the conduct of the pair of scandal-scarred pols.

“That’s up for the people of this great city to decide,” said Mr. Liu,  as a campaign aide urged him to steer the conversation back to the endorsement. “But at some point, between Spitzer and Weiner, it just seems like the women of this city should be incensed. I can’t claim to be a woman, but I’m incensed for the sheer disrespect that this–the calls for redemption this year have been–have taken taken place in this city.”

Weiner has been treated with kid gloves so far in this campaign.

With Spitzer's return to politics, it looks like the kid gloves are coming off.

It's about time.

Weiner shouldn't be getting the kid glove treatment in this race, not with so many unanswered questions surrounding his past behavior.

As I wrote in an earlier post:

There are still questions over his text communications with a seventeen year that have never been answered by Weiner that need to be answered before he takes charge of New York City as mayor (and the New York City school system in the bargain.)

Still waiting to have someone address those questions straight up, but we might be getting closer to that point now.

Spitzer's Return Hurts Weiner's Chances

Anthony Weiner had all but put the sexting scandal and his spotty congressional record behind him in his run for mayor.

He'd been garnering good press these days, voters along the campaign trail were responding well to him, he'd done quite well in recent polls, and even conservatives were rooting for him to win the Democratic primary.

As things stood yesterday afternoon, the odds were pretty good that Weiner would make the September runoff in his race to be the next New York City mayor.

And then scandal-plagued Eliot Spitzer shocked the New York political world last night and announced he was running for comptroller.

Now suddenly the spotlight is back on Weiner's sexting scandal in almost every article written about Eliot Spitzer's entrance into the race.

Even worse, Weiner's record of doing absolutely nothing as a congressman is also back in the spotlight as commentators are comparing Weiner's record to Spitzer's record and finding that, as Ben Smith put it:

Spitzer has basically nothing in common with Weiner, aside from their low body fat and shared (and lightly observed) Jewish faith. Weiner is a talented politician who left Congress with no major legislative accomplishments and everything to prove. Spitzer was a major force in American public life for eight years despite having no particular talent for politics. Weiner’s online romances brought him down because they were weird. Spitzer’s ordinary sin — any number of politicians have survived prostitution scandals — ended his tenure as governor because his governorship was already going terribly. 

The question about Weiner is whether, as mayor, he will be able to turn his talent for communications into leadership, something he’s never done — but the sort of thing that can happen when you’re mayor, as it did to Ed Koch.

The question for Spitzer is whose head he will take off first.

Spitzer was, as New York State attorney general, a terrifying and fascinating figure. He had learned from his legendary former boss Robert Morgenthau that under-resourced public prosecutors can’t beat deep-pocketed law firms on a level playing field, and that where banks and wealthy defendants may have time and money on their side, prosecutors can use the press to erase at least the first advantage. He leaked shamelessly, even as he denied leaking, playing extremely high-stakes games with the stock prices of major corporations. He understood the power of fear and the innate conservatism of corporate executives, and persuaded much of New York City’s financial elite that he was actually out of his mind — an incredibly valuable perception in high-stakes negotiations.

Maybe Weiner can survive the comparison of his record to Spitzer's, but the comparisons of the sex scandals threatens his candidacy too:

Hunter College Political Science Professor Kenneth Sherrill adds, "Combined with Anthony Weiner, Spitzer gives the Democrats an image problem. Just when Weiner was coming back, Spitzer’s candidacy could pull him down. While either one of them might have saved himself, we might see the spectacle of two drowning men pulling one another down, each reminding the public of the other’s undesirability."

I wrote earlier today that I am hoping Spitzer's entrance into the race and the scrutiny he will receive over his prostitution scandal will extend to Weiner and his sexting scandal.

There are still questions over his text communications with a seventeen year that have never been answered by Weiner that need to be answered before he takes charge of New York City as mayor (and the New York City school system in the bargain.)

So far, the questions surrounding Weiner's communications with the seventeen year old have been ignored by the press and Weiner's rivals.

With Spitzer in the comptroller's race running against the Manhattan madam that he hired hookers from, it's far more likely that reporters and rivals are going to begin focus on both Spitzer's and Weiner's scandals and shed some much needed light on the subjects before Election Day so that voters know what they would be getting if they decided to vote in Spitzer as comptroller and Weiner as mayor.

It's All "Fair Game" Against Spitzer, Even The "Black Socks"

Eliot Spitzer doesn't seem like he's going to get the same kid glove treatment in the comptroller's race that Anthony Weiner has gotten in the mayor's race:

Running on the Libertarian line for comptroller is Kristin Davis, the madam who arranged hookups for the married Spitzer — known as Client No. 9 in federal documents. Spitzer’s favorite former call girl was Ashley Dupre.

“BRING IT,’’ Davis tweeted of her new rival last night.

...

But Stringer will bash Spitzer on his sordid past, insiders said.

It’s all fair game, “even the black socks,’’ one source said.

...

 “All you need is Vito Lopez running for public advocate and you call it the Perv Party,” sniped one City Hall source, referring to the former state assemblyman and current City Council candidate who was drummed out of office amid sexual-harassment claims.

I'm not in the habit of agreeing with City Hall sources, but this time the City Hall source has a point.

So far, Anthony Weiner has not gotten the scrutiny over the sexting scandal - including the possibility that he sent sexual communications with a seventeen year old female - that Spitzer is sure to get in his race.

Here's hoping that Spitzer's entrance into the race and the scrutiny over the "black socks" brings some scrutiny to Weiner as well.

As hard as this may have been to imagine a few months ago, New York City may have a mayor who was forced to quit his congressional seat over a sexting scandal (including sending sexual communications to a seventeen year old) and a comptroller who was forced to quit his governorship over a prostitution scandal in which it was said he liked to act "violently" toward the women.

Incredible.

Spitzer, Madam He Hired Hookers From, Running For Same City Comptroller Office

This is fabulous:

In a bombshell announcement, former Gov. Eliot Spitzer says he is running for city controller this year.

Spitzer told the Daily News this evening that he plans to jump into the race. He joins Anthony Weiner, who is running for mayor, as the latest disgraced politician looking to re-enter the political arena.

...


In an odd twist, the madam linked to his scandal, Kristin Davis, is running for city controller on the libertarian line.

"That's going to an an incredible debate," said one political insider.

Yeah, it sure will.

First question to Ms. Davis:

You blacklisted Mr. Spitzer from hiring prostitutes from your service because you said he acted "violently" towards them.  Can you please illuminate us on just what you meant by "acted 'violently' towards them"?

Yeah, that's going to be a fab-o debate to watch.

Spitzer To Run For City Comptroller

Another weiner returns to politics:

Eliot Spitzer, who resigned as governor of New York five years ago amid a prostitution scandal, is re-entering political life, with a run for the citywide office of comptroller and a hope that voters are ready to look past his previous misconduct. 

Mr. Spitzer, a Democrat, said he was eager to plunge back into politics and believed he could revolutionize the often-overlooked city office into a new model for government accountability and shareholder activism. 

“I’m hopeful there will be forgiveness, I am asking for it,” he said in a telephone interview on Sunday night. 

His re-entry comes in an era when politicians — like Representative Mark Sanford of South Carolina and the New York mayoral contender Anthony D. Weiner — have shown that public disapproval, especially over sexual misconduct, can be fleeting, and voters seem open to those who seek forgiveness and redemption. 

Mr. Spitzer, an aggressive watchdog over Wall Street when he served as attorney general of New York, said he wanted to transform the comptroller’s office into a robust agency that would not merely monitor and account for city spending, as it does now, but conduct regular inquiries into the effectiveness of government policies, in areas like education. 

Such a reading of the office, which would significantly expand its scope, could put Mr. Spitzer into conflict with the city’s next mayor, much as his reign as attorney general put him at odds with federal regulators of Wall Street.

He has to get all his signatures collected by Thursday to make the ballot.

I guess there is no disgrace that can keep a politician from re-entering politics these days.

Good thing Nixon and Agnew are dead, eh?

Clintons Will Stay Neutral In Mayoral Race - At Least Publicly

From Politico:

Bill and Hillary Clinton are making clear they are staying out of the New York City Democratic mayoral primary, just as the race is about to be roiled by the candidacy of their close aide Huma Abedin’s husband, Anthony Weiner.

The pair of stay-on-the-sidelines statements came as Weiner is set to declare his candidacy by video this week, likely on Tuesday or Wednesday. But the statements seem aimed at avoiding the appearance of taking sides in a race that includes the potential first female (and first openly gay) Democratic nominee, a potential second black New York mayor, and Hillary Clinton’s own former Senate campaign manager.

...

 

A great deal of attention has been paid to Weiner’s relationship with the Clintons, who have employed Abedin for over 15 years, and who numerous reports pegged as unhappy with the scandal surrounding his resignation.

Hillary Clinton has not spoken out in a political race since leaving the State Department (although there are relatively few this year), and the New York race is taking place a few dozen miles from the couple’s Chappaqua home. Bill Clinton has weighed in on some primaries in recent years, depending on how well he knows the person.

But Clinton’s 2000 Senate campaign manager, Bill de Blasio, is one of the candidates. And the Clintons have little interest in appearing to block either Christine Quinn, the New York City Council Speaker, or Bill Thompson, the former city comptroller and 2009 Democratic mayoral nominee who is vying to be the city’s second black mayor.

They may be staying out of it in public, but you can bet behind the scenes they are looking to cut off Weiner from any new fundraising opportunities and make sure any unaffiliated political campaign staff sat unaffiliated.

Like most New Yorkers, Bill and Hillary want Weiner to go away as soon as possible - though for different reasons.

 

Weiner's scandal is too close for Clinton comfort.

As one commenter at Politico put it:

Confused, why can't a sexual pervert endorse another sexual pervert?

 

Good point.

Why Wasn't Mulgrew Rubber-Roomed For The Grady Woodshed Allegations?

On an earlier post about the NY Post report that UFT President Michael Mulgrew's sister just received a $75,828 a year management position at the DOE after being on child care leave for 11 years (during which time she worked for a tutoring services company that received almost $11 million dollars worth of business from the NYCDOE in 2011), a commenter wrote this:

Well, this is a lot like the Mulgrew at Grady woodshed story.

If he were a mere mortal, he'd be in a rubber room. If we're going to let Mulgrew slide, we should extend the same to the two Horndog High ladies and say that they were consenting adults.

The problem is that there is a double-standard that the higher-ups benefit from connections. How Mulgrew-Daretany got this far suggests that some connections were pulled. Other mothers would be terminated a lot earlier, as rules are extremely stringent on maternity leave in NYC.

The commenter makes two great points here.

I'll deal with the maternity/child care leave point in another post, it's the Grady woodshed story I want to deal with here.

First, let me remind you what the Grady woodshed story was.

A lawsuit filed by a disgruntled teacher claims the powerful head of New York City's teachers union was caught having sex with a teacher in a high school wood shop.

Andrew Ostrowsky says the United Federation of Teachers covered up the scandal to protect Mike Mulgrew, who became president in 2009, and that the union traded key concessions with New York schools officials in order to keep the alleged misconduct quiet.

The lawsuit further claims that the teacher allegedly having sex with Mr Mulgrew, Emma Camacho-Mendez, was rewarded with a cushy union job paying her $22,000 a year, in addition to her $85,000 teaching salary.

 The New York Post reports that former teachers at William E Grady High School in Brooklyn had also heard the rumors about Mr Mulgrew's tryst on a drafting table with Ms Camacho-Mendez in 2005.

 According to the lawsuit, a janitor discovered the pair having sex. New York school officials used that knowledge to 'extort' concessions from the union in exchange for the the city's silence on the matter.

Both Mr Mulgrew and Ms Camacho-Mendez, who is now married, denied the allegations and said they had never heard of the accusations before.

 Additionally, Mulgrew allegedly used his clout to get Ms Camacho-Mendez, a guidance counselor, a job as union liaison for special education.

In 2010, Mulgrew gave Ms Camacho-Mendez an award at a union banquet attended by 1,200 teachers at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel.

 Union insiders told the Post they aren't sure how Ms Camacho-Mendez received so much attention from union.

 'No one ever heard of this woman until Mr Mulgrew brought her on board,' a union representative told the Post.

She has no union credentials.' 

Now this is the sort of tabloid story that, if Mulgrew were an ordinary teacher at, say James Madison High School, and this showed up in the papers, he would have been immediately pulled from the classroom, placed in a rubber room and maybe even fired.

You know, like these two teachers:

The two "Horndog High" teachers who were sacked after an alleged lesbian sex romp in a Brooklyn classroom are slapping the city with a $2 million lawsuit for trashing their good names.

The Department of Education last month fired Alini Brito and Cindy Mauro, following a state arbitrator's report that said they engaged in a topless tryst at James Madison High School after ducking out of a student song-and-dance show.

A two-page summons with notice, filed Wednesday in Manhattan Supreme Court, says the two romance language teachers are victims of "wrongful termination, libel and slander."

"They've had to deal with these false allegations of engaging in lesbian sex," said Michael Valentine, a lawyer for the classroom cuties. "It's been painful.

"Aside from losing their jobs, their reputations have been ruined."

Brito and Mauro, who have previously filed suit in an attempt to overturn their firings, got yanked from their teaching jobs in November 2009 after a janitor reported barging in on their steamy session in Room 337.

But the formerly tenured teachers contend the janitor simply let his imagination get very overheated.

"He just assumed it was two women having sex," said Valentine of Altman Schochet. "Then he went and told everybody he could tell."

Brito, who has diabetes, defended herself against the sizzling allegations by saying Mauro was giving her candy and sugar to help treat her medical condition.

But a state arbitrator's report countered that the sexy Spanish teacher was topless while a naked Mauro kneeled between her legs.

The women deny that that there was any sex - though their supposed X-rated hijinks at the Midwood school turned them into a punchline and Daily News covergirls.

"There wasn't one person who testified seeing either one of them involved in a sexual act," Valentine said.

The city destroyed school surveillance tape that one of the teachers claimed would have exonerated them both.

 

As a result, a judge reinstated Brito to her job.

Meanwhile Mulgrew, who may or may not have had sex with Camacho-Mendez at the Grady woodshed, nevertheless did put this woman in a union position she had no experience or skills to be in, yet was never called to account for either the sex allegation or the patronage job.

Just another example of how there are two codes of justice - one for the elites and one for the rest of us.

Michael Mulgrew received the elite, kid glove treatment while the two teachers from James Madison High School received the treatment the rest of us get:

Guilty as charged unless you can prove your innocence.

Some Very Scary Words

Here you go:

Anthony Weiner, who resigned his congressional seat over a sext scandal that was exposed by an errant tweet, launched a new Twitter account today.

Not as scary as the words "Pearson" and "no-bid contract," but nonetheless the words "Weiner" and Twitter" do not belong in the same sentence unless that sentence is "Anthony Weiner is forbidden from having a Twitter account."

And so Weiner's re-emergence into public life continues.

I still say he should close the damned Twitter account, stop giving interviews to the press and get a real freaking job for once in his life.

Seriously, this man has never had a real job or worked for a living in is entire life.

That crap he did as a congressman (which was mostly garner publicity and attention for himself) doesn't count.

Hey, Anthony, go get some help.

Find a Sex Addicts Anonymous meeting.

Go to therapy.

Find yourself.

And leave the rest of us alone.

Why Do The Elite Media Love Michelle Rhee?

I've wondered this - for being such a controversial figure, why does Michelle Rhee get such adoring press?

Considering this cheating scandal has been following her for two years now, she's managed to make lots of public and media appearances without ever being asked "Ms. Rhee, why won't you come clean on these allegations?"

She's also managed to avoid questions about the alleged sexual misconduct her husband, Kevin Johnson, former NBA star and current mayor of Sacramento, engaged in at his charter school and just what actions she took to help those allegations go away.

It's difficult to imagine other public figures with the stink of two different scandals swirling around them avoiding press and media scrutiny

And yet, Michelle Rhee has consistently made public appearances and gone on TV without ever being called to account for either of these scandals.

The press, for whatever reasons, seems to like her and give her the benefit of the doubt over these things.

Michael Tomasky wrote back in 2011 that part of the reason why Rhee gets such uncritical treatment from the elite press is because they see her as one of their own:

That's it, in a nutshell. She's one of them. Or us, whatever, although I didn't get within a light year of the Ivy League when I was young, as you know. But this is the story. I've met Rhee, once. She presents well. She dresses well. She seems, and I suppose is, refined. You could imagine meeting her at a cocktail party and discussing the latest issue of The New Yorker with her, or Jonathan Franzen, or whether it'll be The Social Network or The King's Speech.

Union officials? Please. They were plaid shirts, polyester ties, thick glasses. They went to SUNY New Paltz, or small and obscure Catholic schools. There was a time when these descriptors applied to journalists, too, and I guess they still do regionally, but not in the elite press. Hence, the identification has been almost entirely with Rhee.

I do think elitism is one of the reasons why so many journalists, especially in the national media, identify with Ivy League education reform elites like Rhee and Kopp over working teachers and identify with the Ivy League-laden Teach For America over, say, the latest graduating class of education majors at Hunter College.

They see themselves as part of the same fabric of meritocratic excellence that Rhee and Kopp like to wrap themselves in.

That that fabric of meritocratic excellence is a sham with both Rhee and Kopp and their education reforms doesn't seem to bother the elite journalists any.

They just keep printing the hype over Rhee and Kopp/TFA.

I also think they like the drama and sensationalism Rhee brings to her work - the broom to sweep out the "bad teachers," the bee she supposedly ate during her teaching days, the excitement she brings to firing people (as in the time she happily fired a principal on camera for Frontline.)

You know the saying in journalism - If it bleeds, it leads, and there sure is a lot of blood around Michelle Rhee, though rarely her own.

I also think many of them want to believe her jive (and Kopp's jive too) - that class and poverty don't matter, that if children from high-poverty backgrounds are just given "great teachers," they can overcome anything.

Let's be frank - journalism, especially political journalism, resembles WWF wrestling more than anything else these days.

Journalists pick the winners and losers beforehand and then run with the script - Gore is a bore, Bush is a "regular" guy, Rhee is a "warrior woman" out to fight entrenched interests like teachers and unions (as Oprah might say.)

They pick someone like Rhee to back because

a) she gives them lots of drama to write about and

b) she promotes a vision of society they, recipients of the same cultural and financial help she has received, want to believe in - that hard work and merit are what matter, not who you know or what family you have been born into.

Will they now turn on one of their own or will they continue to protect her as they have done so far?

Make no mistake about this - Rhee has been protected by the corporatists in power like Barack Obama and Arne Duncan as well as the wealthy backers of her reforms.

But she has also been protected by the elite media.

For Rhee to be taken down by this scandal, they have to turn on one of their own and start reporting truth.

Good luck getting them to do that.

Diane Ravitch notes there is already a ho-hum factor setting in on the cheating memo.

The likelihood is, the elite press will continue to protect her and she will be back bashing teachers in no time.

Just A Reminder About Michelle Rhee

This isn't the first time there have been allegations about her running a cover-up:

Here is Washington City Paper piece back in 2009 covering allegations of a cover-up of a sex misconduct scandal involving her husband, Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson:

Stories broke this morning in the Los Angeles Times and in the Examiner reporting that D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee took an active role in investigations of her fiance, Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson.

Allow LL to explicate a little more fully what this is and what Rhee is alleged to have done.
Rhee's involvement in Johnson's dealing has been revealed as part of an investigation by two congressional Republicans into the firing of Gerald Walpin, who had served as inspector general for the federal AmeriCorps program until June. Republicans allege that Walpin was fired by the Obama administration for political reasons—in particular, for pressing his investigation of mismanagement of federal funds by St. Hope, the nonprofit founded by prominent Democrat and Obama ally Johnson. The Republican report [PDF], released today, concludes that the White House's decision to fire Walpin was "based on incomplete and misleading information"; that a White House lawyer's explanation for the firing is "not credible"; and that the firing "is likely to have a chilling effect on the IG community." In other words, there's a lot of political posturing going on here.

But along with their report, the Republicans also released Walpin's IG report on St. Hope, which includes interview notes indicating that Rhee got involved after a St. Hope employee reported being "touched inappropriately" by Johnson.

Rhee's involvement in the probe stems from the statements of Jacqueline Wong-Hernandez, a former St. Hope staff member, to federal investigators. According to an interview report, Wong-Hernandez told an investigator that Rhee was well known as someone who filled several roles with Johnson's St. Hope organization and would use Johnson's office when she was in town. Wong-Hernandez said that Rhee 'played the role as "Damage Control". When there was a problem at St. HOPE, Ms. Rhee was there the next day taking care of the problem.'

When the sexual misconduct allegations were raised, Rhee contacted Wong-Hernandez to figure out what had happened, telling her "she was making this her number one priority and she would take care of the situation." Subsequently, Wong-Hernandez found out that Johnson's lawyer had contacted the accuser, after which the accuser dropped the complaint.

Disgusted with how the incident had been handled, Wong-Hernandez quit St. Hope, and it was Rhee who conducted the exit interview. She told Rhee the reason she was leaving was the way St. Hope had handled the sexual misconduct allegation. According to the interview report, "Ms, Wong-Hernandez also informed Ms. Rhee that she didn't trust the management at St. HOPE. Ms. Rhee documented the interview in her daily planner and responded to Ms. Wong-Hernandez by thanking her for bringing it to her attention how disorganized the program had become. Ms. Rhee didn't try to talk Ms. Wong-Hernandez into staying."

The L.A. Times further reports that Rhee spoke directly to Walpin, having discussions "in which she made the case for Johnson and the school he ran in Sacramento" and described Johnson as "a good guy." Still, the paper reports, "Rhee's position had little effect on [Walpin], who filed a criminal referral to the U.S. attorney on Johnson....But both the Sacramento police and federal attorneys declined to pursue charges."

When Walpin's report had to say regarding Johnson's sexual misconduct was a relatively minor part of the report, which focused on misappropriation of federal funds and other serious-but-less-salacious charges. But allow LL to share what Walpin turned up—the first instance related in the report is what was described to Rhee by Wong-Hernandez; it's unknown if Rhee was aware of the other allegations below:

G. Improper Sexual Physical Conduct
Our investigation disclosed evidence of sexual misconduct towards young female Members by Mr. Johnson. One Member, [REDACTED] (Ex. 19 hereto), reported that, in the February/March 2007 time frame, she was entering grades into the SAC High database system per Mr. Johnson's instructions at the St. HOPE office at night, purportedly as part of her AmeriCorps service. [REDACTED] contacted Mr. Johnson to inform him that she had completed the grades and wanted him to review them. About 11:00 pm, Mr. Johnson arrived at St. HOPE and instructed [REDACTED] to gather her things and come with him. Mr. Johnson drove to [REDACTED] apartment, which is managed by St. HOPE Development and houses its AmeriCorps Members, purportedly so that they could review the students' grades. While in [REDACTED], in which another AmeriCorps Member had a separate bedroom, Mr, Johnson laid down on [REDACTED's] bed, [REDACTED] sat on the edge of the bed to show him the grades, at which time Mr. Johnson "layed down behind me, cupping his body around mine like the letter C. After about 2-3 minutes or so, I felt his hand on my left side where my hip bone is." Further, although not detailed in her written statement, [REDACTED], during the interview, demonstrated, while explaining, that Mr. Johnson's hand went under her untucked shirt and moved until his hand was on her hip. [REDACTED] immediately got up and stated she was done and left the room. When she returned, Mr. Johnson was still in her bed, but now apparently sleeping. Only after [REDACTED] sought to take a blanket to sleep elsewhere did Mr. Johnson exit to the living room of the apartment. [REDACTED] related that Mr. Johnson slept on the couch in her apartment living room that night and subsequently left the apartment at approximately 6 a.m. the next day.
After, as [REDACTED] put it, she "got the courage to tell... my supervisors," she reported the incident, which, she was informed, was communicated to St. HOPE Academy's Human Resources Department and the Chief Financial Officer. The night after [REDACTED] made her report, Mr. Johnson approached her and apologized. Subsequently, Kevin Hiestand, Johnson's personal attorney, met with [REDACTED], described himself only "as a friend of Johnson," and "basically asked me to keep quiet." Also, about one week after this incident, when [REDACTED] told Mr. Johnson she was going to quit because of financial and family reasons, Mr. Johnson "offered to give me $1,000 a month until the end of the program," stating that it would be confidential "between him and I." As [REDACTED] related that conversation, Mr. Johnson "said all he needed was my savings account number," he would make the deposit and "no one needed to know about it." [REDACTED] did not accept this offer by giving Mr. Johnson her account number.
Another former Member, [REDACTED] (Ex. 20 hereto), reported that, while attending a St. HOPE sponsored trip to Harlem, NY, from June 26 to July 16, 2006, Mr. Johnson, on three occasions, "brushed [her] leg with his hand," including once "flip[ingj up the edge of her skirt. Other times, she stated, Mr. Johnson kissed her cheek, brushed up against her as he walked past, and massaged her shoulders. ([REDACTED] reported another incident that occurred in Sacramento, CA, in which Mr. Johnson touched [REDACTED's] inner thigh with his hand while enroute to a restaurant. [REDACTED] said she did not report the incidents to AmeriCorps officials at that time because she feared she would be terminated from the program and because Mr. Johnson was assisting her in obtaining acceptance into the United States Military Academy, where she subsequently enrolled.
In addition, former SAC High teacher Mr. Erik Jones (Ex. 12 hereto) reported that a former AmeriCorps Member, [REDACTED], reported to him, sometime in 2007, that, while at SAC High, Mr. Johnson had inappropriately touched her. Mr. Jones stated that [REDACTED] had reported that Mr. Johnson started massaging her shoulders and then reached over and touched her breasts. (Attempts to interview [REDACTED] have been so far unsuccessful.) Mr. Jones related that, after he reported this incident to St. HOPE Academy officials, he was contacted by Mr. Hiestand, Mr. Johnson's attorney, but who identified himself solely as St. HOPE'S counsel, and stated he was conducting an internal investigation. Mr. Hiestand told Mr. Jones that [REDACTED's] "story" was different from Mr, Jones' and told Mr. Jones to change his "story" and then go back to work. Mr. Jones, realizing what he was being asked to do, elected to resign as a teacher and left SAC High.

It's important to remember that she has some experience making sure an investigation goes nowhere.

NY Post Says Custodian Denies Seeing Mulgrew And Guidance Counselor "Tooling Around" In School

Pretty much a slam dunk that this case will be dismissed:

UFT chief Michael Mulgrew was accused in court papers last week of selling out union members’ work protections in order to cover up a 2005 sexual tryst with a colleague in a Brooklyn school — a charge his spokesman dismissed as “absurd.”

...

The lawsuit filed by Queens high-school teacher Andrew Ostrowsky alleges that Mulgrew rendezvoused in a classroom with guidance counselor Emelina Camacho-Mendez, when both were working at William Grady HS in Brooklyn.

The up-and-coming labor leader brought his alleged paramour up the union ladder with him.

The mayor and schools chancellor colluded in a coverup of the incident — gaining contract give-backs from the union in exchange for remaining silent, according to the rambling federal court papers.

Ostrowsky claims it was the erosion of work rights that prohibited him from successfully challenging a recent negative rating.

“Everything in the lawsuit is false,” Mulgrew said yesterday, speaking directly about the claims for the first time. “It really does read as a book of crazy fiction.”

Ostrowsky’s lawyer, Joy Hochstadt, admitted in the court papers that she had no concrete proof of the alleged sexual tryst — but says it was witnessed by the former principal and a custodian.

Yet the custodian whom sources identified as the witness in question flatly denied to The Post yesterday that he had seen any tooling around in the shop room.

“The guy didn’t do nothing in front of me. If they did do something like that, I would have thrown them out,” said retired custodial helper Donald Herb.

So the filing of the lawsuit has been used by the NY Post (and now the Daily News and the mayor) to humiliate Mulgrew, to compare this lawsuit based upon hearsay to lawsuits the union has filed against school closures, and to once again smear a teacher in the press as a "perv."

Of course, this time the teacher is actually a former teacher and a current labor leader.

A mess all around.

The only thing that I hope comes out of this is Mulgrew now realizes how horrific it is to be smeared in the papers and comes to the defense of his members when the Post or the Daily News turns their smear lenses on them.

But I won't hold my breath for that.

The UFT leadership, from Randi Weingarten to Michael Mulgrew, have been only too happy to throw their own members under a bus for political expediency.

That policy is so ingrained at the UFT that I cannot imagine this Mulgrew episode will change it.

But at least Mulgrew now gets a "Walk A Mile In Someone Else's Shoes" moment.