Here's an interesting historical fact about the state Ethics Commission, currently in the mix as an investigator of the Spitzergate mess:
When the commission investigated Alan Hevesi, the commissioner he had nominated -- Susan Shepard -- recused herself. And when the commission investigated Eliot Spitzer over a complaint from Tom Suozzi about Spitzer's service on the board of a family non-profit, the commissioner he had nominated -- Carl Loewenson -- recused himself.
So does that mean that this time around, the two commissioners Spitzer has chosen -- Loewenson, and new chairman John Feerick -- will recuse themselves? And if the probe rolls over in September to a new 13-person public integrity board, will the seven appointed by Spitzer recuse themselves?
Or will everyone signal the new, higher ethical standard Spitzer has brought to Albany by ruling on a case involving the guy who chose them?
John Riley
Comments (1)
How is it not a crime to use NYS troopers (paid by NYS taxpayers) to engage in political or personal activities?
How is it different than using a NYS employee (also paid by NYS taxpayers) to drive the former comptroller's wife around?
Abuse of tax dollars is abuse of tax dollars. Its a crime.
The only question is the amount of the abuse in terms of dollars. Is it a misdemenor or is it a felony?
Also, as aggressiveand controlling as Mr. Spitzer is, it is impossible for him not to have known his top aides were engaging in this type of behavior.
It's quite telling that Mr. Dopp has hired a criminal attorney. Will he roll on Mr. Spitzer?
Inquiring minds want to know, what did Mr. Spitzer know and when did he know it?