Following up on other stories about Bloomberg's Republican operatives, the Haggerty brothers of Queens, it is being reported today in the NY Post that John Haggerty may get jail time in his attempt to steal funds from the Mayor...
Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance Jr. is demanding that a top Republican operative spend time behind bars as part of a plea deal to avoid indictment for allegedly swiping $750,000 of Mayor Bloomberg's campaign funds, The Post has learned.
"It's make a deal or be indicted," said one source. "The DA is insisting on jail time."
The DA began investigating John Haggerty after The Post unmasked him in January as the man behind a mysterious Election Day poll-watching operation funded by the mayor through a $1.2 million personal contribution to the state Independence Party last year.
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email This
Hits: 1017
Trackback(0)
TrackBack URI for this entryComments (13)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Robert Hornak , June 10, 2010
Hahahahaha. It does seems what goes around comes around.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by evannyny , June 10, 2010
Now some of you Queens GOP'ers probably know more about the Haggerty Brothers than I do. So any corrections or comments to my remarks here would be appreciated
I was at the GOP Convention last week. I am still thinking of putting my MYERS MERMEL cap and
t-shirt for bid on Ebay.
Anyway, back to the Haggertys, at the Convention BART was a Lazio floor whip, during the vote.
But JOHN was recently hired to lead the PALADINO petition drive. Paladino picked OGNIBENE as his running mate. But in 2005, when Ognibene challenged Bloomberg for the GOP nomination, weren't both Haggerty Brothers a major part of the effort to keep Tom OFF the ballot? But now JOHN, is supposed to be helping with petitions for Paladino AND Ognibene, who he opposed in 2005. Is he basically a hired hand, who goes where the money is?
John Haggerty is under a darkening cloud, and this CARL PALADINO, who wants to clean up Albany puts him on his campaign staff. I don't get it.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
written by Daniel Peterson , June 11, 2010
It's kind of like Melrose Place or something, isn't it Evannyny?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Robert Hornak , June 11, 2010
It's being reported that Haggerty has rejected a plea deal. Good. Let's watch him go down and take the rest of his corrupt gang down with him.
How does that song go.... "Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey, goodbye." :-)
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
written by swmirsky , June 16, 2010
I don't get the near manic delight some seem to be taking in the legal problems the Haggertys are experiencing. While I have no direct knowledge of the facts of the case and haven't had much first hand information from the participants so I'm probably not up to date on all the latest twists and turns, I have to wonder why the difficulties of these two guys occasions such an outpouring of delight by some here?
We're all Republicans, after all, and if John Haggerty turns out, indeed, to be guilty, that will be an unfortunate commentary on our party. The mere fact that he is under investigation and/or indicted is a scandal that can do us no good in the minds of the voting public. On a more personal note, Haggerty is a human being and we should not rejoice at his misfortune, like him or loathe him. After all, the campaign finance laws can sometimes be exceedingly arcane and easy to run afoul of, even if inadvertently.
Of course, even more significant, we are all of us supposed to be entitled to the presumption of innocence before the law until proved guilty. Why dance on the grave of someone who is not yet buried, let alone pronounced dea?
In sum, I am disconcerted by the tone here that seems to delight in the downfall of others. It's the same misguided partisanship that prompts so many to rail at Obama no matter what he does or that, in the prior administration, led to the kind of over the top vitriol we saw directed agains former president George W. Bush. Surely we can disagree with others, compete with them, even oppose them without seeking to destroy them or laughing as others do the job for us?
SWM
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
written by Robert Hornak , June 16, 2010
Stu, what's not to get? These are bad people, who put personal ambition over Party at any cost, have lied and cheated their way into their current positions, and have engaged in the politics of personal destruction with their Republican rivals.
People like that deserve to be in jail and I will delight at seeing it happen. The Republican Party will be all the better for it.
It's no different than how people look at characters like John Gotti. Some are enamored with the glitz and persona. Others only see a killer who deserves what he got.
You seem way too enamored with these con men, liars and thieves.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by swmirsky , June 17, 2010
I'm sorry Robert but I don't know them as "con men, liars and thieves". I have never seen any of that in them though I will admit that I am not in their confidences or particularly close to them.
It could be that you know something more than I do about all his but so far your many allegations against them have been uncorroborated and smack, to me anyway, of personal attacks. On the other hand I have personally seen them wronged in the past by County through unconscionable election shenanigans which, somehow, the courts sustained (and which you now seem to believe is acceptable -- much to my surprise and chagrin).
If you personally know of wrongdoing on their part in this case, perhaps you should testify against John? If not, then I must presume that you know about as much as the rest of us who read the papers and hear the stories. In that case you should wait for the judgment of the courts since a person is presumed innocent in this country until proven guilty.
In the meantime, this kind of thing, even if John Haggerty is exonerated is bad for the party and for the Republican brand. There's nothing to rejoice about here, however this turns out.
SWM
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Robert Hornak , June 17, 2010
Stu, you admit you don't really know them, you've never dealt with them in the arena I'm talking about, and yet you have the audacity to challenge me like this? Would you prefer I call them thugs and bullies?
Any of these adjectives would be appropriate descriptions of how they conduct themselves. They may be personal attacks, but that does not make them wrong. I can give dozens of examples of incidents that would establish my characterizations. If you like, I will.
And which exactly of my allegations are uncorroborated? Please be specific. Again, I will be happy to elaborate for you.
I have no clue what wrongs by County you are referring to. Since I became involved, in the Ragusa admin, I have seen exactly the reverse. I have seen them act as bullies and crybabies. I have seen them come to reorg meetings with dozens of forged proxies - that County allowed.
I have seen them lose two reorgs in both the straight vote and the weighted vote and then file fraudulent papers with the BOE to the contrary claiming Bart as County Chair. They have initiated numerous lawsuits against Ragusa, sapping time, energy, money and drive from County that could have been spent on fighting democrats.
I know of plenty of wrongdoing on their part, of course not all wrongs are criminal, except in the court of public opinion.
What I also know is that, in addition to the very damning evidence the DA has presented, that this kind of behavior is exactly what we have been warning people about with the Haggerty's for a while. We told Bloomberg they were not to be trusted. Our warnings, it turns out, were very prescient.
John may be innocent until guilty in court and before the law. This is not a court or even a legal forum. And in the court of public opinion we can make judgments based on something less than absolute proof.
To me, a pattern of sleazy and destructive behavior in enough. And there is more than sufficient circumstantial evidence to declare this not only a victory for justice, but one for the Republican party. We can do better without them, just as Israel would be better off without radical Islam.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by swmirsky , June 18, 2010
Yes, I admit I don't know them very well though I am not unacquainted with them. It is my limited acquaintanceship that I rely on when I say that I have no experience of them as you describe them.
Does my comment to you count as having "the audacity to challenge (you)"? I'm surprised that you would think that disagreeing with you is audacious! Since when are we under such restraints in disagreeing with others or expressing our views? I am astonished that you put it that way.
I will repeat that I don't know the facts of the present issue and I don't know the Haggertys so well that I could feel confident forming an opinion in anticipation of the facts coming out. However, I think it's absurd to go after them with a knife, as you seem to be doing, or to rejoice at their destruction (if that is what ultimately comes of this). They are first of all human beings, second of all citizens in a country where the presumption of innocence obtains and third of all members of our own party whose troubles can only besmirch the Republican name, whether John Haggerty is ultimately exonerated or acquitted.
I don't know the genesis of your deep antipathy for them but I am troubled by its manifestations here. Even assuming you are justified in your bitter feelings, don't you think it would be appropriate to play that down and adopt a more dispassionate attitude? As one of the editors of this site, shouldn't you aim to be more evenhanded?
Robert added:
"And which exactly of my allegations are uncorroborated? Please be specific. Again, I will be happy to elaborate for you."
I was referring to the truth or falsity of the claims that John Haggerty acted illegally in accepting and handling the Bloomberg campaign funds. As far as I know, that is the subject of the criminal proceedings being discussed. If you have evidence of the truth of those charges, you should take it to the DA, testify, etc. If not, then what do you know that the rest of us don't? That he has been charged? Well charges are not convictions.
Robert further wrote:
"I have no clue what wrongs by County you are referring to. Since I became involved, in the Ragusa admin, I have seen exactly the reverse. I have seen them act as bullies and crybabies. I have seen them come to reorg meetings with dozens of forged proxies - that County allowed."
If "County allowed" them, then how can you claim they were "forged"? If they were, indeed, forged, County shouldn't have allowed them. If County did allow them, then County, by doing so, was prima facie recognizing them as legitimate. But to fail to challenge their legitimacy in the appropriate venue only to do so when there is no further possibility of adjudication strikes me as preposterous and unacceptable.
By the way, you certainly have more than a clue as to what wrongs by County I was referring to, as you and I have spoken about it and I have posted extensively about them on the old UE site (and a little on this one as well) and, as Dan has noted, it is to be found in the archives called "Food Fight in Queens GOP" (or some such). So why pretend you don't know?
As to the situation today, I am not suggesting I am current on it. Indeed, I have become so fed up with the attitude of County (as expressed through your comments here) toward my legitimate concerns of being disenfranchised as a County Committeeman that I am just about ready to chuck my involvement with the Queens GOP entirely. If all you people need me for is to collect signatures on petitions once a year, and to hell with my opinions or concerns, then I don't see much reason to help out any longer. I may be ONLY a County Committeeman whose vote has been unfairly diluted to almost nothing, but I am still my own person.
I had hopes that Bart Haggerty would present a viable alternative and a new voice for the Queens County organization but it looks like that wasn't in the cards. I'm as disgusted with Haggerty's passivity as I am with his unwillingness to negotiate and compromise -- and as I am with the tone deaf stonewalling of a County organization so intent on preserving control for a few that they will invent all sorts of mechanisms to disenfranchise the rest of us.
SWM
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Robert Hornak , June 18, 2010
Stu, I'm very disappointed in you. First, you have no trouble telling me what I should be saying and how I should be acting in this case. Yet you claim to be "astonished" that I would call you audacious for claiming to know better about someone you admittedly have very limited experience with?
It is unfortunate that your social interactions with Bart have not allowed you to see the real Bart Haggerty. Perhaps you will eventually come to see what most other people have seen.
You feel bad for them as I try to expose the real Haggerty legacy. Well, you are free to do so. But don't make a fool of yourself by reading the indictment and saying you don't know what to make of it or that reasonable people can't form a judgement from it. They are thieves, plain and simple. The Republican party will be all the better after ridding itself of these charlatans.
I don't need to have testimony to offer to be informed about this. I was one of the few people who publicly called John a liar when he claimed to be only a "volunteer" for the campaign. I knew he was getting paid somehow, we just couldn't prove how. Of course, we never expected that he would go to such lengths to enrich himself, and at the expense of his "friend" Bloomberg. With friends like John.... well you know the rest.
Stu, we have discussed County business to death. I was not at the meeting you referenced so can not comment on it other than what I heard, from both sides. I was not a member of County then. However, since Ragusa took over I have seen major accommodations made to try to be fair to them, within the limits of the bylaws that were in place when Ragusa became Chair.
Why has the Haggerty's hatred of Serf Maltese carried over to Ragusa? Maybe you should be asking that? If not for their personal assaults on not only Ragusa but others involved we not have this dissention. I came into County trying to make peace and actually defending Bart. Well, I learned not to make that mistake again.
I have always liked you Stu, and have always encouraged you to stay involved. But if you want to use complaints about the bylaws as concerning the bi-annual reorg meeting as an excuse for dropping out, then please by all means do so. Politics is about a lot more than petitioning.
When I helped fight to get the Rockaway Club a charter all those years ago I thought it was to help build a permanent organization in that district. I'd hate to see that opportunity squandered, but it's your opportunity to do with as you like.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by swmirsky , June 18, 2010
As to disappointment, Robert, I think the feeling is mutual my friend, though I suspect I may be first out of the box on that one.
You'd do well to read what I wrote above again, by the way. Nowhere did I say, as you put it, that I "know better about someone admittedly have very limited experience with" than you.
I said my experience of those two individuals did NOT accord with what you were reporting and while you might have different experience I doubted you had direct knowledge of the truth of the charges brought against John Haggerty which puts you in the same category as the rest of us.
Given that, your angry words directed against the Haggertys over the charges in question can have no special claim on anyone else's readiness to believe them.
Note that I do not deny you may have other experiences concerning them which have soured you on them or that those experiences might not justify your bitterness. I only said that MY experience with them does not match yours.
Moreover I have had no "social interactions" with Bart, though you put it that way. He and I have been on friendly terms in the past but we're not buddies. The discussions we've had have occurred in the context of Republican meetings and activities and have been focused on the future of the Queens GOP and his role in it.
You say, upon reading the indictment (presumably) that the Haggertys are "thieves plain and simple". Again, I will just note that we are all entitled to the presumption of innocence until we are proven guilty and that, whatever your opinion, it's just name calling and hearsay without either your having direct knowledge of what you're referring to or there being a verdict in the court case. This situation, however, should not prompt gloating or glee from any of us (not even you no matter how much anger you feel toward them). The Haggerty brothers are human beings, entitled to our understanding at least, and they are Republicans whose situation currently stains our party as a whole, whether John is finally exonerated or not.
As to your comments on the Rockaway group, note that lots of folks fought to help the Rockaway Republicans get a charter back when we began when I was Vice President so you can't claim any special credit in that department.
I haven't been an officer in the club for a couple of years by the way and no longer consider myself one of the club leaders. The Rockaway Republicans have changed a lot over the years though I stilll consider myself a member. Unlike the club, however, I did not support Mayor Bloomberg this last go-round so there has been some divergence in our views. I don't even know a lot of the currently active members and, when I show up at meetings, the new secretary treats me like a newcomer!
So this isn't about the Rockaway Republicans, it's about my view of what the County organization has done and you know those views.
The County has no right to reduce the voting capacity of County Committee members merely because County leadership currently is operating under by-laws that say they have that right. Those by-laws, to be changed, must go through a vote that is already contaminated by the misallocation of voting power enshrined in them. It's a catch-22 isn't it?
To change the voting rules found in the by-laws, County Committee members have to vote under the rules of those same by-laws which disenfranchise them while artificially allocating 50% of their votes to a small group of people who benefit from that misallocation. That is they actually benefit from NOT changing the by-laws!
How did those rules get into the by-laws in the first place then? The answer is they were snuck in during a contentious meeting in a voting process that was contaminated by arbitrary and questionable rulings from the floor and by a failure to provide information (let alone debate) about the proposed revisions to the by-laws to those who were being asked to vote on changing them!
So now we have a situation where the by-laws enshrine an obviously undemocratic mechanism and the only way to change them is to overcome the forces that put that mechanism in place and which seek to keep it there.
Of course, as long as that mechanism is in place, the votes needed to make the change will be affected by the very skewing which the change is intended to undo. So you tell me how the matter could even be seriously addressed other than with the cooperation of the small coterie of people who actually benefit from preventing the change from occurring!
SWM
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Robert Hornak , June 19, 2010
Stu, you can hide behind the presumption of innocence if you like, but it seems like the DA has a very good case. John clearly took the million dollars and clearly spent most of it for personal use. The money trail is indisputable.
But can you at least admit that this looks very bad and on its face is very damning?
And talk about driving the dagger in, you take every opportunity when county in mentioned to drone on about the bylaws and what you don't like about them. This is the umpteenth time you've repeated yourself at length. Can't you ever use a short version? Regardless, I'm not gonna have that debate with you again.
Well, at least we do agree here on one thing, the Haggerty's certainly have put a stain on the Republican Party.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
written by swmirsky , June 19, 2010
Yes, of course, it looks bad for Haggerty. I just don't think much is gained by others crowing about it. I prefer to wait for the outcome rather than draw a conclusion in advance. But if you feel you know enough about him to draw a conclusion now, before the courtroom verdict, that's fine. Just don't dance on the guy's grave.
As to the issue about the undemocratic voting mechanism implemented by the Queens County organization, I didn't initially bring that up in this thread. I mentioned the situation I had witnessed at that party reorg meeting I attended some years back at which I concluded that the Haggerty brothers got roughed up by undemocratic procedural mechanisms which damaged the credibility of the Queens County Chairman and his supporters at the time.
As it happens, the current issue between us, that the Queens County GOP has in place a system that unfairly allocates 50% of the voting power on County Committee to 2% of the County Committee members, who AREN'T EVEN ELECTED to the Committee but are members "ex officio", goes back (at least in spirit) to that night when new by-laws were rammed through via a contested floor vote even though the people voting had been given no advance opportunity to read the text of the by-laws they were being asked to vote on and no time to ask questions, hold a debate, etc.
There was one irregularity on top of another that night. As we have seen, once something gets into the by-laws it is almost impossible to get it out unless those who control the voting process are agreeable to it (given their capacity to control the voting process). You have already made it clear that the leadership will not consider even debating the appropriateness of a rule in the By-Laws that allocates 50% of the voting power to the 2% of the members on the committee who were not elected to the committee.
Now I don't actually recall if this particular rule entered the county rules during that meeting which I attended or at the one after that followed it which I missed. But the issue is the same: What Queens party leadership did to the Haggertys on the night I was present is qualitatively the same as what is going on now since THE BY-LAWS CONTINUE TO ENSHRINE A PRINCIPLE OF ALLOCATING A DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE OF THE VOTING POWER TO A TINY SEGMENT OF THE COUNTY COMMITTEE.
As I noted earlier in these threads, what this is, in essence, is a system whereby a miscarriage of democracy has been slipped into the Queens County By-Laws and, by their very presence, they prevent any effort to reconsider them, let alone correct them.
After all, to change the by-laws you need a majority of County Committee votes but, since the By-Laws give 50% of the votes to 2% of the members and it is in their interest to hang onto that disproportionate allocation, there is little hope that the 50% of the vote they control will be cast in favor of restoring a one-man/on-vote rule, the standard for any real democracy.
Thus the opposition has to secure the support of 100% of the other 98% of the County Committee members. In all honesty, do you think there is any serious possibility of unanimity among the other 98%? It only takes one vote among them to make the difference. How hard do you think it would be for the County leadership, which put the undemocratic rule into the By-Laws, to peel off a tiny minority of real County Committeemen to keep the questionable rule in?
Thus, my point: The By-Laws as now written effectively prevent any changes to them.
THAT'S WHAT'S FINALLY WRONG WITH THEM. They are written for the undemocratic purpose of keeping Queens County Committee decisions in the hands of a small coterie of "leaders", rendering the rest of the County Committee membership incapable of having a say in the outcomes of their own Committee. Given the structural impediment to change, if the County leadership will not open this up to a real debate and reconsideration (which you have made clear is out of the question), then the only remedy available is likely to be adjudication in the courts. And that means more unnecessary bitterness and infighting. Either that, or people like me just give up on the Queens GOP and walk away, leaving it to those who want run things by controlling the process, whatever it takes.
You don't have to debate it with me though. I didn't ask you to and am guessing you'd prefer not to. What I was hoping is that from the discussions of the issue on this list you'd go back to the County leaders and talk to them about finding a way to correct this obvious inequity while preserving County unity. But your response, instead, has been to rail against my points and try to hammer me into silence. When that didn't work you stopped responding and whenever I raise the issue again, you respond by telling me I shouldn't be raising it.
Well as long as this remains unresolved, someone needs to raise it. And someone needs to fix it.
SWM
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
