Thug Tactics

Gee, for all the screeching coming from the left about the supposed thug tactics of the right, why is it that the real thug tactics on the left are routinely ignored? Hmmmm? Projection, maybe? Michael Goodwin, writing in the New York Daily News, absolutely rips into New York Governor Elliot Spitzer for the brute force thuggery that was just revealed. Spitzer swears it was his staff that falsified information in an attempt to smear New York State Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno.

The dirty tricks scheme run out of Spitzer's office is unprecedented in modern New York. For the governor's inner circle to order the state police to gather information on a political rival and leak the information to a handmaiden newspaper is the kind of cheap plot that gets you kicked out of Hollywood. That this outrageous abuse of power really happened in Albany ought to produce a grand jury, one where the governor and his staff are forced to testify under oath.

Let me be blunt: I believe Eliot Spitzer not only knew about the scheme, I believe he approved it and maybe even ordered it. His denials Monday that he knew nothing ring as hollow as his earlier claim that "we have never asked the state police to do anything that wasn't standard operating procedure, nor would we." Attorney General Andrew Cuomo's report, despite its important findings, falls short. Spitzer's office says the governor was never questioned about the sordid plot against Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno. And two of the four known participants in the plot refused to answer questions by the attorney general. They submitted only brief sworn statements that Cuomo said he disregarded. Given those lapses, the hasty conclusion that no laws were broken is troubling.

Two patterns suggest Spitzer was directly involved. First, volcanic anger at targets, followed by leaks to the media, both of which happened here, was standard operating procedure for Spitzer as attorney general. Virtually every Wall Street case he brought was first previewed in newspapers, often with evidence such as key e-mails released by anonymous sources. Notwithstanding that the evidence was often damning, the tactics were more thuggish than professional.

The second argument for Spitzer's involvement is that he is a micromanager. The notion that his A team - his chief of staff, his communications director, the deputy head of homeland security, the head of the state police - conspired to target the powerful Bruno without Spitzer's knowledge defies belief.

Goodwin's right. Spitzer's normal MO when he was attorney general was trial by media first and foremost. There was always a huge amount of incriminating evidence leaked to the press - mostly so Spitzer could get bigger and better headlines. New York deserves answers: how involved was Spitzer in this outright criminal exercise that originated from his offices? WaPo report on the scandal is here.