http://nypost.com/2016/05/17/de-blasio-could-be-taken-out-with-the-trash-literally/ Only fitting de Blasio could be taken down by trash bags
As metaphors go, it would be hard to top this one: Garbage bags could help bring down the de Blasio administration. Yes, garbage bags. How perfectly fitting. Of the many revelations about City Hall’s pay-to-play culture, the case of how New York came to buy a certain brand of trash bags for parks caught the attention of prosecutors. As The Post first reported <http://nypost.com/2016/05/17/everything-about-this-business-dealings-with-the-city-stinks-literally/>, the seller, Joseph Dussich, tried for nearly a decade to get the city to buy his Mint-X bags, which he says deter rats and squirrels. But he got the brush-off — until he contributed $100,000 to the Campaign for One New York, a slush fund de Blasio created. Presto, Dussich got a meeting with the mayor, a trial contract for $15,000, and then, through a middleman, a deal worth nearly $6 million. The sequence is shocking — and consistent with that of so many large donations under scrutiny. Report after report shows that people who needed a city permit, a vendor contract or other government action were hit on for a contribution by de Blasio or a consultant. Instead of asking for about $5,000, which is the limit under the campaign-finance law, the mayor and his team routinely asked for $50,000 or more, then funneled the money to the slush funds they created. The amounts are so large, and the favors granted so obvious, that they beg a fundamental question: If the transactions are legal, it is almost impossible to imagine a quid pro quo that would be illegal. Put it this way: If it is kosher to pay $100,000, then get a meeting with the mayor and a contract you were denied before you paid up, what would a crime look like? What else would have to be involved for the handcuffs to come out? Modal TriggerJoseph Dussich touts his rodent-repellent Mint-X trash bags.Photo: Ellis Kaplan That is the cloud that hangs over the entire de Blasio way of doing business. If what he is doing breaks no laws, we should end all corruption investigations and empty the prisons of convicted politicians because nobody can be guilty of anything. Even then, de Blasio’s reprehensible behavior would still stand out. He beats his chest to declare himself an enemy of income inequality and claims to be in favor of getting big money out of politics. Yet his conduct completely undermines any notion of fair play and public trust. Based on numerous credible accounts, it looks as if he slaps a high price tag on what should be routine government functions. The result is more inequality because only the super-rich can pay his price. And if they are willing to pony up hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep him happy, that must mean the government action they want is worth much, much more. Even the names of his slush funds — the Campaign for One New York, The Progressive Agenda Committee and United for Affordable Housing — reflect a profound cynicism. Their names suggest the exact opposite of what they actually do. The affront is compounded by de Blasio’s sinister claim that he is the victim of political investigations. “How convenient that when we’re doing a lot of work to help everyday people, there’s all sorts of efforts being made to obscure that work,” he insisted. Like so much else he says and does, that whine belongs in one of those expensive garbage bags. Gradtuitous politics What is it with politicians? Why do so many think it is OK to use college commencement speeches to settle scores and peddle their agenda? Families and grads are gathered for a celebration of perseverance and accomplishment. It is a coming-of-age ritual that marks the beginning of adult life and, for parents, tuition liberation. To have it spoiled by partisan attacks, as President Obama and others have done, is appalling. They must imagine that everybody agrees with them and is happy just to be in their presence. My modest suggestion: Schools should avoid political/celebrity speakers and leave the happy day to a nonpartisan thinker. That way, everybody can learn something and go forth with a smile. Dems in a splitstorm Here’s a grabbing fact: Bernie Sanders could arrive at the Democratic convention with more pledged delegates than Hillary Clinton. True, he would have to win the remaining contests by margins of about 2-1, according to a CNN tally, and even then wouldn’t reach the magic number of 2,383 to secure the nomination on the first ballot. But it is still shocking to realize that, at this late date, Clinton could lose the pledged-delegate battle. Her front-runner status is based primarily on her overwhelming support among superdelegates, who are unbound by voter preferences. Dems have nearly 700 of them — elected officials, party leaders, union bosses — and 521 back Clinton, with only 41 supporting Sanders. If Sanders goes on a roll and grabs the lead in pledged delegates, would Dem insiders really nullify millions of voters and the entire primary process to hand the nomination to Clinton? If so, the GOP civil war would look like a pillow fight by comparison. It’s nay-a culpa at NY Times No news here: The New York Times has no regrets about its vicious attack on Donald Trump’s relationship with women going back decades. <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/us/politics/donald-trump-women.html?_r=0> Why should it? The Times is never wrong. Don’t take my word for it. The paper’s former public editor, Margaret Sullivan, labeled the high-handed attitude toward complaints “New York Times Exceptionalism,” which she defined as “The idea that whatever The Times does is, by definition, the right thing.” She called it a potential “fatal flaw” and added that “it’s safe to say that many Times journalists find it hard to admit they got something wrong. In fact, what’s much more likely than any such admission is the tendency to double down.” Sullivan wrote that a month ago, but her observation fits the Trump story like a glove. The woman the paper cites as the first example of his “debasing” behavior says the Times distorted and lied about what she told reporters. “I did not have a negative experience with Donald Trump and I don’t appreciate them making it look like I was saying it was negative,” Rowanne Brewer Lane said on Fox. Yet the reporters defend their own version of events, and a spokeswoman insists, “The story provides context for the reader,” whatever that means. That is New York Time Exceptionalism in action. It asserts its own superiority even when describing the personal experiences of others. This is not journalism. This is groupthink reinforced by institutional arrogance. That’s why the sweeping conclusions of the Trump piece sound as if they were written before a single interview was conducted. The article’s formulaic structure suggests a preconceived conclusion awaiting only cherry-picked anecdotes. If 10 reporters and editors signed off on it, that’s 10 certain votes for Democrats. That’s not journalism, either. That’s politics hiding behind a press card. __._,_.___ ------------------------------ Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected]> ------------------------------ Visit Your Group <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMmEyN2k1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NjM1OTcyMzM-> [image: Yahoo! Groups] <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlY2FobGVrBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ2MzU5NzIzMw--> • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • Unsubscribe <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> __,_._,___ -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
