Attacks on Spitzer: Whitewater Redux?
Over the past few months, I’ve had some time to soak up all the bits and pieces of information coming out about the so-called Troopergate scandal. I’ve come to believe, based solely on circumstantial evidence, the Senate Republicans are paying someone on the tax-payer’s dime in an effort to smear the Governor through strategic leaks to Fred Dicker at the NY Post, owned by Rupert Murdoch.
Join me below the fold for all the juicy details.
Back in September, we found out the republican majority on the NYS Senate Investigations Committee hired Joseph E. diGenova as a special counsel. A September 20, 2007 NYT article gives us the details:
“Mr. diGenova will have the title of special counsel and will report to Senator George H. Winner Jr., an upstate Republican and chairman of the Senate’s Committee on Investigations and Government Operations. He will be paid with taxpayer money allocated to the Senate for outside consulting, in a contract that Mr. Winner said would not exceed $500,000 and would expire in March.
Although Winner claims the contract “would not exceed” $500,000 I seriously doubt diGenova will walk away with anything less than all $500,000. If the contract is set to expire in March, and they hired him at the end of September, that means diGenova is getting about $100,000 a month from NYS taxpayers. Must be nice.
For those not familiar with diGenova, here’s some background from a Feb. 1998 Slate article:
(Joe) diGenova is being disingenuous in pretending he has no idea why anyone would be interested in him. If the Clinton team has investigated diGenova and Toensing, it might be because the couple seems to act as a conduit for leaks from Starr’s office.
snip
One gets a glimpse of Joe and Vicky’s peculiar role in the fiasco that occurred in late January, when the Dallas Morning News reported, then retracted, then semi-reasserted that a Secret Service witness to a Clinton-Lewinsky encounter was prepared to testify.
On the evening of Monday, Jan. 26, the paper published a report on its Web site. It quoted a lawyer “familiar with the negotiations” as saying there was a Secret Service agent who had seen Clinton and Lewinsky in a “compromising situation” and that he had become a government witness. Hours later, the paper recanted: “the source for the story, a longtime Washington lawyer familiar with the case, later said the information provided for Tuesday’s report was inaccurate.” The paper further noted that, “The source is not affiliated with Mr. Starr’s office.” But the following day, the paper reissued a version of the story. An intermediary for a witness or witnesses who might or might not be a Secret Service agent or agents had told Starr’s office about seeing Clinton and Lewinsky in what was now described as an “ambiguous situation.” Inexplicably, the story quoted “former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova, who is not directly involved in the case,” as saying that the intermediary had made contact for the witness or witnesses with Mr. Starr’s office. “In essence, your story is correct,” diGenova told the paper.
So we know diGenova has a penchant for leaks and a hatred of Democrats. That brings us to the modern day, with a slew of investigations into Democratic Governor Eliot Spitzer, mainly hyped and pushed by the State Senate Majority. But there are other forces pushing the investigations into Spitzer, other forces named Fred Dicker, a writer for the NY Post tabloid.
Dicker seems to be at war with the Governor. Seemingly everyday he has a new article up about one controversy or another. What’s key here is virtually all of Dicker’s stories on the Governor quote unnamed sources that very well could be Joseph diGenova.
Lets take a little walk down memory lane.
November 19, 2007, Dicker writes “‘ELIOT’S BULLY’ MADE THREAT: INSIDER”. In the article, Dicker cites bewilderingly vague sources. Take a look:
A top aide to Gov. Spitzer involved in the Dirty Tricks Scandal angrily threatened to “professionally kill” a top utility executive for opposing the governor’s energy policies, sources have told The Post.
snip
“Pope was screaming and threatening to get him fired with his bosses and jabbing his finger in Donohue’s face,” added another source, who claimed Pope had also threatened several lobbyists over policy disagreements.
Pope is one of three Spitzer lawyers who helped prepare a controversial sworn statement for the governor’s former communications director, Darren Dopp, in which Dopp gave details of his role in the effort to use the State Police to gather purportedly damaging information on Bruno (R-Rensselaer).
Dopp, according to sources, contradicted a claim in the sworn statement in under-oath testimony to the state Public Integrity Commission, alleging that he was pressed into signing it by Pope and other Spitzer aides.
November 20, 2007, Dicker pens an article titled “STONEWALL GOV MUM ON LAWYER“. In this article Dicker leaves the impression Spitzer has done something illegal, because he refuses to say whether he has retained a private attorney. Clearly, using the word STONEWALL in the article’s title is meant to give readers a certain negative impression. But what’s more important are the sources Dicker cites. For example, take this passage:
Sources familiar with what are now four scandal probes told The Post that they believe Spitzer and several of his top aides have hired private counsels to deal with the Public Integrity Commission. The commission’s extensive probe is expected to include testimony from the governor and Albany District Attorney David Soares.
“With the DA getting back involved, they all need lawyers, including the governor,” said a source close to the Spitzer administration.
November 26, 2007, Dicker writes “FBI TWIST IN SPITZ PROBE“. Citing “Sources close to Bruno,” Dicker claims Spitzer, then a Democratic State AG, convinced George Bush’s Justice Department to investigate Republican Joe Bruno. Yeah, because we all know how credible and non-partisan the Justice Department is.
December 6, 2007, Dicker writes “SPITZ VS. DA ON DOPP ‘LIE’“. Quoting “sources familiar with (Dopp’s) testimony,” Dicker say’s:
Dopp also contended before the commission that he had been “pressured” by Spitzer aides to sign the statement and claimed some of the statement wasn’t true,
While I’m sure there are more questionable, unnamed sources in other articles written by Dicker, we all get the picture by now.
So, is Joe diGenova the source behind these stories? I don’t know. Could diGenova be the source? Let’s take a closer look.
In the articles mentioned above, Dicker cites “sources,” “another source,” “Sources familiar with what are now four scandal probes,” “a source close to the Spitzer administration,” “Sources close to Bruno,” “sources familiar with (Dopp’s) testimony,”.
Joe diGenova could reasonably be described as any of those sources, the only questionable one may be “a source close to the Spitzer administration,” but I would wager being special counsel to the Senate Investigations Committee makes diGenova close enough to the administration for Dicker to quote him in this way.
If diGenova is the source behind any of these stories, it would be quite a big deal. Since he has a $100,000 a month tax-payer funded contract with the State Senate, diGenova would be using State resources (himself) to smear the Governor for political purposes.
What an irony that would be. The guy ostensibly hired to investigate the alleged use of public resources for political gain has done exactly that in his “investigation”.
Perhaps someone needs to ask the Attorney General to investigate.
Related posts:
Whatever happened to Roger Stone? Anybody know?
Have the Senate Democrats pushed for an investigation into the misuse of public funds to pay these hired hands?