.png)
Newsroom
![0:00
[Music]
0:07
welcome back to the freedom file I'm
0:08
joined once again by civil and criminal
0:11
defense attorney David Schwarz and
0:12
former Federal prosecutor Doug Burns
0:15
both longtime colleagues and friends of
0:17
mine I want to get into the uh legal
0:20
maneuvering in the mayor Adams bribery
0:22
case David to you first in an
0:25
unusual U clause in the New York state
0:29
constitution the governor of New York
0:32
can remove the mayor if she believes he
0:34
can no longer exercise his duties the
0:36
city Charter provides for the same thing
0:40
if the May if the governor believes that
0:43
the mayor is no longer free to exercise
0:46
his judgment but is only exercising in
0:49
in a way that he wants that he thinks
0:51
the feds want him to so they don't
0:53
regenerate the prosecution should she
0:56
remove him if she comes down to that uh
1:00
conclusion which I think is a faulty
1:02
conclusion in the first place she would
1:04
have every right to remove him but
1:05
removing him doesn't mean just pressing
1:07
a button judge and removing removing
1:10
there's due process so she could make
1:12
that decision and then the mayor would
1:15
have 30 days uh uh to defend that his
1:19
position and they would have an a
1:20
hearing on that and then 30 days she
1:22
would decide whether or not it's
1:24
permanent removal or not I think that
1:27
would be a ridiculous move on the
1:28
governor's part you know uh Doug
1:30
the there's due process and there's due
1:32
process this is a weird weird system
1:34
here in this hearing that David just so
1:37
nicely described the governor would be
1:40
both the judge and the prosecutor this
1:43
is ridiculous it's happened once before
1:46
with Franklin delanor Roosevelt and
1:48
Jimmy Walker that never even got to the
1:50
hearing uh to the hearing stage but if
1:53
she believes that his judgment is not is
1:57
is not impaired but is regulated by fear
2:00
of the feds shouldn't she do something
2:02
about it yeah but I think this one I
2:05
don't I predict confidently she won't do
2:08
that um because I don't think it rises
2:10
to the level of the Jimmy Walker
2:12
situation you know I watched you the
2:13
other day explaining it was a great
2:15
history lesson about the Jimmy Walker
2:17
and then he resigned mayor Walker but
2:19
the conduct was far far more serious
2:21
this thing again it's a mixed bag uh
2:24
real quick which is that it sounds like
2:26
you know they're hanging it over his
2:28
head but the converse argument is
2:30
they're just asking him to do that which
2:31
he's supposed to do anyway so it's
2:33
really the classic R Shack test okay
2:36
left is going to see it their way
2:38
right's going to see it their way and
2:39
that's very unfortunate in a criminal
2:41
case that should not be the case I wish
2:43
we could keep politics out of a criminal
2:46
case as I as I mentioned and I think you
2:47
both agree with me you're both
2:49
experienced criminal prosecutors and
2:51
defense lawyers when when when politics
2:54
enters the case it it often produces a
2:57
political result which is not not NE
2:59
necessarily consistent with right or
3:01
wrong uh or guilt uh and and innocence
3:05
back to uh judge hoe who's the
3:08
relatively new Biden appointed federal
3:11
judge in lower Manhattan uh who for
3:13
better for worse has this uh on his desk
3:16
should he have put should he have
3:18
brought all the lawyers in the courtroom
3:21
if it were me I would have had Danielle
3:23
Sassoon there and say why did you resign
3:25
what is wrong what did they want you to
3:26
do that you think was wrong how strong
3:28
is this case he didn't do that David no
3:31
no he didn't do that I I don't think you
3:33
know for the first hearing on this that
3:35
that should have been done certainly the
3:37
judge can do that at a later hearing if
3:39
the judge wants to inquire more into it
3:41
but like Doug laid out earlier the the
3:44
judge the prosecution has has wide
3:47
discretion to dismiss any case that they
3:50
want and ultimately this case will be
3:53
dismissed and even if though it's
3:55
dismissed without prejudice there is a
3:57
99.999
3:59
percent chance this case will never see
4:01
the light of day ever again let me uh
4:05
suggest the
4:06
unthinkable judge hoe appoints a retired
4:10
federal judge or retired prosecutor as a
4:13
special SL private attorney general to
4:16
prosecute the case douge what happens
4:19
yeah no that could happen but I think
4:20
the odds are very very low on that no an
4:23
independent counsel by analogy in a
4:25
state you know in that situation in
4:27
federal court and then they do the case
4:29
but I don't think it happen back to
4:31
David's point he's so right 39 years
4:33
just quick Point I've never seen a case
4:35
dismissed without prejudice come back
4:36
not once David have you ever seen a
4:38
private attorney general appointed by
4:40
the court because the feds or even the
4:43
local da didn't want to prosecute the
4:45
case but the court thought it should
4:46
have been prosecuted I've never seen it
4:48
maybe Doug has seen it but I've I've
4:51
never seen it in my career judge yeah I
4:53
I I saw it in another courtroom when I
4:56
was on the bench I didn't do it uh
4:59
myself this situation never confronted
5:01
me uh I think that the second circuit
5:04
would uh reverse judge hoe If he did
5:06
that douge what do you think no I agree
5:08
I don't think it's warranted I think it
5:09
would be reversed judge ho you know one
5:12
last thing it's interesting rule 48 of
5:14
the rules was changed and you needed
5:16
leave of court to dismiss so in a
5:18
political case the judge doesn't want
5:20
any part of having to be the one who
5:23
dismissed it you see what I mean but
5:26
doesn't the judge not want his court
5:29
room to be used for a political purpose
5:33
saving the meraly of this wounded Eric
5:37
Adams David yeah like Doug said before
5:40
politics should play no role a court
5:42
should be a laboratory where it's only
5:44
the evidence before the court that rules
5:46
the day gentlemen it's a pleasure thank
5:48
you very much I have thoroughly enjoyed
5:50
this conversation we'll have you back
5:52
again soon that is my show this week
5:55
special thanks to Doug Burns and David
5:57
Schwarz thank you for watching the
5:59
freedom file we will see you next week
6:01
have a great weekend
6:03
[Music]
6:14
[Applause]
6:14
[Music]
6:21
[Applause]
6:22
[Music]](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/1b6091_188f204d58624b6780c63903dd0bb615~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_265,h_265,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/Image-empty-state.png)
![0:00
[Music]
0:06
welcome back to the freedom file once
0:08
again I'm here with former Federal
0:09
prosecutor Doug Burns and civil and
0:11
criminal defense attorney David Schwarz
0:13
I want to get right back to the
0:15
conversation we're having about bribery
0:17
in the case against mayor Adams Doug uh
0:19
to you first uh this time why is it that
0:23
prosecutors can offer something of value
0:26
to a witness to tailor the witness's
0:29
test testimony and if anybody else did
0:32
that like defense counsel he'd be
0:34
indicted for witness tampering well it's
0:36
the word tailor which has a little bit
0:38
of room to argue in but you've been
0:41
through this you know it's tailoring
0:43
course of course but the fact of the
0:44
matter is um they make the lame argument
0:48
oh no no no all we're doing is offering
0:50
you some leniency in return for the
0:52
truth and of course I'm smiling because
0:55
who determines what the truth is when
0:57
you're sitting in that conference room
0:59
so you're right
1:00
I mean of course I mean the prosecutor
1:02
wants to hear what they want to hear
1:04
they want to hear inculpatory
1:06
information against the bigger player in
1:08
the case if they don't hear that all of
1:10
a sudden they're not going to be lenient
1:12
if they start hearing that then they're
1:14
happy and they will be lenient so I
1:16
don't disagree with your scholarship
1:18
your writing about this bribery concept
1:20
but at the same time the criminal
1:22
justice system would just completely
1:23
fall on its face David this is another
1:25
sort of damle situation is it not where
1:29
the prose utor holds the sort of dles
1:32
over the witness's head if you testify
1:35
the way we want we don't prosecute you
1:37
or we enter into a a lame plea agreement
1:40
but if the words don't come out of your
1:42
mouth that we like we go back to
1:45
Prosecuting You full boore if you made a
1:48
threat like that or an offer like that
1:50
to a witness the government would come
1:52
after you right right so as a former
1:54
prosecutor that the the scenario you
1:56
laid out judge is a bad prosecutor you
1:59
know sometimes there are meritorious
2:01
situations where you need a cooperating
2:04
witness when you have a felony murder
2:07
and you you you you take the driver of
2:09
that murder and you you get them to
2:11
testify truthfully truthfully as to what
2:14
they saw what they heard in that in that
2:16
sitation but truthfully means whatever
2:18
the prosecutor wants to hear in in in a
2:21
lot of cases but I know when I was a
2:23
prosecutor when Doug was a prosecutor
2:25
you you're interviewing a defendant and
2:27
they tell you their whole story and then
2:29
you say okay we're going to make you
2:31
into a cooperating witness to take down
2:33
the other two defendants that's a
2:35
meritorious situation and that happens
2:37
most of the time what you laid out is is
2:41
a a situation in reality that does
2:44
happen and that's unfortunate judge yeah
2:47
um Doug let's get back to Mayor Adams is
2:50
there a sort of damle hanging over his
2:52
head right now as we speak there is
2:55
because of this language in the memo
2:58
that I held up saying we're going to
3:00
re-evaluate this case after the mayor
3:02
election that was never should have been
3:04
put in that memo if you take that out
3:07
and it's just oh it's without prejudice
3:10
To The World At Large yeah it seems that
3:13
way but honestly all cases are dismissed
3:15
that way so it's really not this is why
3:17
politics and law don't mix judge I've
3:19
said that a million times right right uh
3:22
David how bad does it look when seven
3:25
prosecutors ordered to do something by
3:28
Washington each refused to do it and
3:31
resign and in the case of several of
3:33
them I only know them by reputation
3:35
their reputations are extraordinary and
3:38
excellent one of them so good Danielle
3:40
Sassoon she was just made the temporary
3:43
head of the office by none other than
3:44
Donald Trump himself well first of all
3:47
It's Not Unusual that prosecutors resign
3:49
but in this particular case these
3:52
prosecutors were Prosecuting a case
3:54
which I believe they were forced to
3:56
prosecute in the first place because no
3:58
prosecutor in their right mind would
4:01
would prosecute a case like this against
4:04
mayor Adams for the allegations that
4:06
were contained in that indictment so
4:08
what was trying to be done is to really
4:10
using the wrong way to undo a wrong in
4:13
the first place obviously it's a blow to
4:15
the justice department where you have
4:17
good line prosecutors resigning from
4:19
their job but you know what there's a
4:21
lot of lawyers out there there'll be new
4:23
lawyers to take their jobs Doug should
4:25
the court go along with this or should
4:27
the court say I'm not going to have
4:28
anything to do with these a political
4:30
Shenanigans I'm going to dismiss it with
4:32
Pro with prejudice yeah well that you
4:34
know there's a huge conundrum which is
4:36
the judge has the right legally to
4:38
inquire into whether he or she thinks
4:41
that the deal was improper but it leaves
4:43
them nowhere they can't force the
4:45
government to do the case so to your
4:48
point the judge is going to say because
4:50
technically uh be a little bit of a nerd
4:53
in the weeds I don't think technically
4:54
the judge can direct the dismissal that
4:57
way it's up to the prosecutors judge
4:58
should say guys
5:00
you should seriously consider dismissing
5:02
this with prejudice let's take a
5:04
10-minute break we'll come back you tell
5:05
me what you want to do we're going to
5:07
take a two-minute break and when when we
5:09
come back we will delve even more deeply
5:13
uh into all of this when the freedom
5:15
file returns
5:19
[Music]](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/1b6091_5a8987722c2c4aafb5605a8beabbedbd~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_265,h_265,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/Image-empty-state.png)
![0:00
I don't know if mayor Adams is innocent
0:01
or guilty but in my view it's better for
0:04
him to walk free than permit the system
0:07
to bribe him with impunity now I want to
0:09
open up this discussion with my good
0:11
friends and esteemed lawyers Doug Burns
0:14
and David Schwarz David to you first is
0:18
this a bribe to the mayor it's not a
0:21
bribe judge you know I I agree with the
0:23
general premise that you laid out that
0:25
there is something wrong with a with a
0:27
Criminal Justice System where if the
0:31
defendant can do something for the
0:33
prosecution their case could be
0:34
dismissed but this is normal course of
0:36
business okay so deals are made all the
0:40
time in in federal court and this
0:44
situation is not a bribe it actually is
0:47
trying to undo a faulty case in the
0:50
first place of taking a couple of
0:52
upgrades on flights so so and other
0:55
things which I know we don't want to get
0:56
into here we we'll get into some of the
0:58
details after the break but I I have to
1:01
I have to get to Doug I know you don't
1:02
want to do this make the argument that
1:05
this is a bribe that there is a quid pro
1:08
quo councelor Burns well I'm very
1:10
familiar with your writings on this
1:12
topic and we have discussed before judge
1:15
that there was a Colarado case where a
1:17
judge determined that when prosecutors
1:20
make a deal with a cooperating
1:22
testifying defendant it's a bribe and
1:24
you know the argument obviously um
1:27
putting aside whether I agree with it or
1:29
not is that of course you're offering
1:31
something of value uh to coers a person
1:34
to behave in a certain way so it matches
1:36
up like a bribery thing here what's
1:39
worse though it's really not about the
1:41
bribery and it's not about the without
1:43
prejudice forget that because cases are
1:45
always dismissed without prejudice the
1:46
problem is in the memo of February 10th
1:49
they say we're going to re-evaluate the
1:51
case after the mayoral election that's
1:54
crazy because that makes it as you've
1:56
described it judge and I've been
1:57
watching you obviously a sort of Amic is
2:00
over his head right right hang on guys
2:02
we need to take a quick break don't go
2:04
anywhere we're going to continue this
2:06
conversation on how a bribery case
2:08
appears to be influenced by another
2:10
bribe right here when the freedom file
2:12
returns
2:14
[Music]
2:18
[Applause]
2:19
[Music]](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/1b6091_027fad8c57554d51a4622c39cb888caf~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_265,h_265,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/Image-empty-state.png)
![0:00
[Music]
0:01
and I look
0:02
forward to defending myself and
0:06
defending the people of this city all
0:10
right joining us now with more on all
0:11
this is New York Daily News City Hall
0:13
reporter Chris sumers felt he's on the
0:15
phone former Federal prosecutor Francy
0:18
hakes and criminal defense attorney
0:20
David Schwarz he's known and worked with
0:22
mayor Adams for years Chris you're the
0:25
city hall reporter so I want to start
0:26
with you maybe my bar for bribery is
0:29
high after Senator Mendez was found with
0:32
stacks of gold bars and bags of cash and
0:34
a mercedesbenz but did Adams allegedly
0:38
really sell his soul for free flights in
0:40
hotel
0:41
rooms it sounds like it based on the
0:45
indictment but I will still say we are
0:47
talking about
0:50
$125,000 worth of free flights free
0:53
hotel rooms for him and multiple of his
0:56
associates according to indictment but
0:58
perhaps even more serious is the fact
1:01
that the mayor is being accused of
1:03
having received tens of thousands of
1:06
dollars in illegal campaign donations
1:09
that are coming from Turkish Nationals
1:11
or being funded by Turk Turkish
1:14
Nationals the way that New York City's
1:17
campaign Finance system works is that
1:19
these allegedly illegal donations
1:23
unlocked nearly $10 million in what's
1:27
called public matching fund
1:30
right which is City taxpayer dollars
1:32
that were able to prop up the mayor's
1:34
campaign quite a lot and what the
1:37
prosecutors are alleging is that he
1:39
should have gotten none of this money
1:41
because of the illegal Turkish donations
1:43
that he allegedly uh received all right
1:46
David the indictment says that not only
1:48
did the campaigns Adam Adams campaign
1:51
take this money they did it explicitly
1:54
at the direction of Adams himself
1:56
according to text messages in this
1:58
indictment right so we have to look at
2:00
the text messages we have to look at all
2:02
the surrounding circumstances I agree it
2:04
would be it would be very serious if
2:06
Adams knew about it or he directed it
2:09
but right now there is no evidence an
2:12
indictment is evidence of nothing okay
2:15
an indictment is a prosecutor preparing
2:18
a 57 page document which outlines what
2:22
they think their case is going to show
2:24
the only time it's relevant is when
2:26
there's a conviction so an indictment is
2:28
evidence of nothing uh there has to be a
2:31
quidd pro quo here so although well the
2:34
allegation is he took all this money
2:35
from turkey and from Turkish interests
2:38
and then he when they couldn't get a
2:40
building approved to be open he told the
2:42
fire inspector if you don't agree to
2:44
open this building I'll fire you and I
2:46
think that's all hypothesis and that's
2:48
speculation and the Supreme Court was
2:50
very clear on on this issue there has to
2:53
be an exact quid proquo there has to be
2:56
the exchange between what I'm benefiting
2:58
from and what you're benefiting from has
3:00
to be very tight and and so far I don't
3:04
I don't see that I see some upgrades I
3:07
don't see gold bars going to Eric Adams
3:09
I don't see sacks of cash going to Eric
3:12
Adams where did Eric Adams benefit
3:14
personally from when from my reading of
3:16
that indictment yes the campaign may
3:18
have benefited he had upgrades he had
3:21
hotel rooms but that's not benefit he
3:24
had some free there there are text
3:25
messages to the extent that you know he
3:27
was he was flying and staying in hotels
3:30
not just upgraded but for free or
3:32
sometimes paid a nominal fee but we'll
3:34
get we'll those are technical violations
3:36
yes okay not a crime Francy indict the
3:39
indictment was handed down last night
3:40
he's going to appear in court tomorrow
3:42
it was sealed I'm just curious why did
3:45
the feds raid the mayor's home this
3:47
morning after the indictment was handed
3:50
down well they must think Elizabeth that
3:53
they can find more evidence they must
3:55
think that since the indictment was
3:57
unsealed that there is something at Eric
4:00
Adams house that they can find that
4:02
proves their case which is a little
4:04
concerning typically speaking when you
4:06
unseal the indictment the investigation
4:09
is largely over other than maybe
4:11
flipping codefendants or even the
4:13
defendant himself or some other
4:15
Witnesses so it is a little bit curious
4:17
I have to agree with David though
4:19
Elizabeth this is this indictment is a
4:21
little bit small ball and the Civil
4:24
campaign Finance violations have been
4:26
handled civil rather than criminally in
4:29
many cases in the past so it makes me
4:31
curious as to why the Department of
4:34
Justice has brought this indictment
4:35
because if you look at the Hillary
4:37
Clinton campaign the Barack Obama
4:38
campaigns they had very serious very
4:41
high dollar campaign Finance violations
4:44
that could have been prosecuted
4:46
criminally but were instead handled
4:48
civil and Donald Trump with the stormmy
4:50
Daniels payments and now Eric Adams with
4:53
this campaign Finance scheme as they
4:55
call it is being handled criminally so
4:58
I'm curious as to the different
4:59
treatment uh it's it also it's not just
5:01
the seizure by the way Francy of the
5:03
mayor's own devices 10 months ago and
5:05
again this morning the feds have also
5:08
searched and seized the phones of so
5:10
many senior AIDS in the Adams
5:12
Administration this is unusual and very
5:15
aggressive well this is them trying to
5:18
prove what they've got in the indictment
5:21
which is all these conversations I'll
5:23
give you a great example of something
5:24
that can be argued either way they said
5:26
they have a text message that Eric Adams
5:28
at one point said regarding uh campaign
5:31
contributions everyone has to be a US
5:33
citizen his defense attorneys are going
5:35
to say that Eric Adams was describing
5:38
the lawful donation that it has to be
5:41
from US citizens but what the government
5:43
is saying is that he was in effect
5:46
inviting a fraudulent and criminal
5:49
scheme so that's just one place where I
5:51
want to see the evidence that I think
5:53
can be found if it exists on all these
5:56
different devices all right super quick
5:58
Chris C governor Kathy hokel says quote
6:00
this is a very serious matter that is
6:03
unfolding and that she would quote
6:05
deliberate before deciding whether or
6:06
not she's going to remove him from
6:08
Office what do you think is going to
6:11
happen it's very hard to tell at this
6:14
point uh Governor hokel has been a
6:16
steadfast Ally standing by Eric Adams
6:18
throughout a lot of scandals and as you
6:21
mentioned there have been quite a few
6:22
even before this indictment was handed
6:26
down the fact that she did not come out
6:29
and offer support immediately for the
6:31
mayor stood out to me just given how
6:35
supportive she has been for him for a
6:38
long time oh all right whether or not
6:40
that means that we should know that we
6:42
should read into that that the governor
6:43
is going to try to actually unseed them
6:46
we we can't tell at this point do you
6:47
think you survived 10 seconds I believe
6:49
in the presumption of innocence so um
6:51
that's not the same that's not what I'm
6:52
asking I believe I believe the facts
6:55
will come out I'm not too sure right now
6:57
oh you're not sure you're not sure he'll
6:59
I'm hoping survives because the
7:01
presumption of innocence Chris
7:03
sommerfelt David Schwarz Francy hes
7:05
thank you so much all of you for joining
7:07
us on that political hurricane of sorts
7:10
in New York City](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/1b6091_93ec00d5c05944cf862013d57a71e090~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_265,h_265,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/Image-empty-state.png)
![0:01
[Music]
0:07
former US senator Bob Menendez of New
0:09
Jersey who was convicted of bribery
0:11
obstruction of justice and serving as a
0:13
foreign agent for the Egyptian
0:15
government in July has asked the trial
0:18
judge to reverse the guilty verdicts and
0:20
find him not guilty as a matter of law
0:23
the Senator's lawyers have argued that
0:25
even if he did what the government
0:27
demonstrated at trial it does not itute
0:30
criminal Behavior as the Supreme Court
0:32
has interpreted it does he have a shot
0:35
back with us of course is trial attorney
0:38
and my friend David Schwarz so David you
0:40
and I both know the case of Governor Bob
0:43
McDonald of um of Virginia uh who was
0:46
convicted of bribery for accepting a
0:48
Rolex watch and the payment of the of
0:51
the bills for his daughter's wedding by
0:53
a guy had who had some business before
0:55
the state and then the Supreme Court
0:57
reversed that conviction N9 to nothing
0:59
say yeah he got all those gifts but he
1:01
didn't do anything out of the ordinary
1:03
in return to get the gifts that is
1:06
basically what Bob Menendez is going to
1:09
argue that what he is accused of doing
1:12
is what Senators always do Lobby for
1:15
constituents and he would have done it
1:17
anyway what do you think how how does an
1:19
argument like that rest on the ears of
1:22
the trial judge who presided at the
1:25
case so the facts in the McDonald case
1:28
are different than the facts in the
1:29
Menendez case so although that it's true
1:33
you know he was evicted of the of the
1:35
bribery you have to have this close
1:37
connection between the the act of taking
1:41
something of value whether it's uh
1:44
watches uh gold bars or Furniture in
1:47
this case or cash and connect it to the
1:50
official act that the senator is accused
1:53
of doing so it's going to be a fact
1:56
specific case uh certainly the jury felt
1:59
there was enough of a connection and
2:01
we'll see uh what the judge decides I
2:04
believe there overwhelmingly that the
2:06
judge will uphold the jury the jury
2:09
conviction well most trial judges as you
2:12
know do but I'm going to make you the
2:15
chief judge of the United States court
2:17
of appeals for the second circuit for
2:19
the purposes uh of this uh argument but
2:23
judge Schwarz my client did not exercise
2:27
the official levers of power in behalf
2:31
of the Egyptian government or any of his
2:34
codefendants and that phrase official
2:37
levers of power is directly out of the
2:39
McDonald case we suggest to you that the
2:42
trial judge misunderstood what the
2:44
Supreme Court told him he should have
2:46
understood how do you rule yes counselor
2:50
but the way I rule is the official
2:52
levers of power were directly tied to
2:56
these gold bars to the cash and to to
3:00
the furniture that Menendez received and
3:03
he actually got his wife involved to be
3:06
the recipient of all that and the
3:09
evidence is overwhelming at trial that
3:12
those official acts in in helping the
3:15
Egyptian government were were tied to
3:18
the receipt of those things of value so
3:22
in this particular case we can
3:24
distinguish it from the McDonald case
3:27
and uphold the jury verdict that's how
3:29
would rule here's now now you're back to
3:31
being good old David Schwarz criminal
3:33
defense lawyer so here's one from way
3:36
out of left field his wife's trial
3:39
starts next month what happens to Bob
3:42
Menendez if he takes the witness stand
3:45
and says I did it I did everything she
3:47
had nothing to do with it let her
3:50
go well I I I certainly think that would
3:54
be some good evidence on her behalf and
3:58
and that's something that that he may
4:00
consider doing you never know but but
4:03
certainly if he did that uh you know
4:06
that would adversely affect the the the
4:09
case that he has on appeal that would be
4:11
an interesting scenario judge you you
4:13
hit me with a a curveball there but um
4:16
you know certainly that would help his
4:17
wife if he testified in that fashion I
4:19
threw the curveball but you hit it into
4:21
the Outfield David Schwarz what a
4:23
pleasure my dear friend I hope you'll
4:24
come back and join us again I hope so
4:27
thank you judge of course that's my show
4:29
for for this week thank you for watching
4:31
have a great weekend
4:33
[Music]](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/1b6091_bd10b252c76744c2b3e0dae6bafe5790~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_265,h_265,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/Image-empty-state.png)
![0:02
[Music]
0:07
welcome back my friends attorneys for
0:08
former president Donald Trump have asked
0:10
Justice Juan mean to push back
0:13
sentencing for his conviction for
0:15
falsifying business records sentencing
0:18
is now tentatively scheduled for midep
0:21
but Trump's legal team is asking for a
0:23
delay until after the election there are
0:25
a few key technical reasons for the
0:28
request here to help break it down down
0:30
with me is veteran trial lawyer and my
0:33
longtime friend and colleague attorney
0:34
David Schwarz David uh welcome here I
0:37
was telling some of the sure I was
0:40
telling some of the folks here at
0:42
Newsmax that in my career I have
0:43
sentenced more than a thousand people I
0:46
have never heard the government say it's
0:49
up to you judge it's always they have
0:51
their own opinion they tell you what
0:52
they want to do why do you think when
0:54
Trump's people obviously do not want the
0:57
sentencing before election day the
0:59
government said it's up to you
1:02
judge well I I think on the part of the
1:04
government it was a good strategic move
1:06
look they got their conviction at trial
1:09
they got their pound of Flesh I I I
1:11
think politically and not to interfere
1:15
with the election I think it was a good
1:16
move on the government on the
1:18
government's part to at least appear
1:21
impartial and they're not supposed to be
1:23
impartial obviously they're advocates
1:25
for the state but to at least appear
1:27
indifferent as to sentencing so the
1:31
government is going to say everything
1:33
that Trump did Even though some of his
1:35
behavior in this case signing checks to
1:37
Michael Cohen was done in the White
1:40
House the government's going to say none
1:41
of it was official and everything he did
1:44
was personal the reason they're going to
1:46
make this argument is because Trump's
1:48
leers are going to say oh that immunity
1:50
decision that the Supreme Court came
1:52
down with judge Miran you have to
1:55
extract from what we uh what the jury
1:58
heard that would was official I don't
2:01
think any of Trump's behavior in this
2:04
case could be characterized as official
2:08
as exercising the powers of the
2:10
presidency do you well that started you
2:13
know before the presidency but even
2:15
while he was President this clearly was
2:18
you know a personal uh matter that that
2:21
he was taken care of it was had nothing
2:23
to do with the His official du duties or
2:27
pursuant to any duty to the presidency
2:30
whatsoever so I I I would agree with
2:33
that the sentencing itself now you have
2:37
dealt with a lot of sentences I've
2:39
sentenced over a thousand people in my
2:41
career there's a couple of questions
2:42
that judges asked themselves to begin
2:45
with uh does the defendant have any
2:47
priors no uh is the defendant a danger
2:51
to society no how badly has the
2:55
defendant harmed the victim I would say
2:57
what victim do you think
3:00
uh that Justice Miran will impose a
3:04
sentence of incarceration and perhaps
3:06
suspend it uh for appearance sake or do
3:09
you think he'll say probation for two
3:12
years let's get this over with right
3:14
this should not be a tough decision
3:15
judge with a 78y old man who's never
3:18
been convicted of any crimes whatsoever
3:21
he was convicted of the lowest level you
3:23
know nonviolent felony falsifying
3:26
business records a Class E felony and
3:29
and how he was even bumped up to a
3:31
felony we know is very questionable so
3:35
there's two parts to the judge's
3:36
decision here one is is he going to
3:39
delay the sentencing uh I think it's a
3:42
no-brainer sentencings get delayed all
3:44
the time for a a myriad of reasons so
3:47
there's no reason why the judge for
3:49
appearance purposes shouldn't delay it
3:52
for two months after the election the
3:54
second the F the question that you asked
3:56
though I don't believe uh the judge uh
4:00
Sean should sentence Trump to any jail
4:02
time whatsoever based on those factors
4:05
that it's a nonviolent crime that he's
4:07
at a clean history and and the the
4:10
questions uh as to this crime in the
4:13
first place you know and one of the
4:15
questions will be presidential immunity
4:17
I I I I believe the threeyear the
4:20
probationary period would be in sentence
4:23
got it David I'd like you to stick
4:25
around because former Senator Bob
4:27
Menendez was back in court to see if he
4:29
could get his guilty verdict overturned
4:32
David and I will talk about his chances
4:35
on this when the freedom file returns in
4:37
just a moment](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/1b6091_935bfc298d0b47a5a8dd237b73eed082~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_265,h_265,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/Image-empty-state.png)
![0:00
new tonight a grand jury has indicted
0:02
Alec Baldwin on an involuntary
0:04
manslaughter charge in the 2021 fatal
0:06
shooting on the set of the movie Russ
0:08
CBS 2's John Diaz live in our Newsroom
0:10
now with the latest developments John
0:12
yeah well Morris and Christine a grand
0:13
jury indicted the Alis actor this
0:15
afternoon after earlier this week
0:17
special prosecutors brought the case
0:19
before them in Santa Fe New Mexico but
0:21
it will be a criminal trial that will
0:23
determine if Baldwin should be convicted
0:26
years after a fatal shooting on set of
0:28
the western movie run
0:30
Alec Baldwin who was the lead actor and
0:32
co-producer is now facing new legal
0:35
problems a new analysis by experts in
0:37
ballistics on the gun used on set back
0:40
in 2021 determined the trigger had to
0:43
have been pulled or depressed 32 Santa
0:46
Fe one female shot in the chest Baldwin
0:48
admitted he was holding the gun but had
0:51
repeatedly denied pulling the trigger
0:53
saying he only pulled back the hammer
0:55
and then the gun went off the actions
0:58
led to the death of cinematographer
1:00
Helena Hutchin and wounded a director I
1:03
take the gun out slowly I turn I [ __ ]
1:05
the pistol bang it goes up she hits the
1:06
ground lawyers who represent Hutch's
1:08
parents said in part quote it is a
1:11
comfort to the family that in New Mexico
1:13
no one is above the law we support the
1:16
charges we spoke with a legal expert as
1:19
far as this rising to the level of a
1:21
crime on the part of Alec
1:23
Baldwin I don't think so we're told the
1:26
experts conducted this new analysis by
1:28
using forensic testing relied on
1:31
replacement parts that were used to
1:33
reassemble the gun Baldwin was holding
1:36
after parts of the gun were broken
1:38
during testing by the FBI in April
1:41
special prosecutors dismissed an
1:44
involuntary manslaughter charge against
1:46
Baldwin saying they were informed the
1:48
gun might have been modified before the
1:51
shooting and malfunctioned there's a lot
1:54
of Defense here where number one Alec
1:57
Baldwin was told that there was no live
2:00
ammunition in the gun or at the site and
2:04
earlier an FBI report said Firearms of
2:06
that design could go off without pulling
2:09
the trigger if force was applied to an
2:12
unlocked Hammer now lawyers for the rust
2:15
movies said that they do not plan on
2:16
making a comment and Baldwin's legal
2:18
team well they were just recently
2:20
responding saying quote we look forward
2:22
to our day in court live in The Newsroom
2:25
John Diaz CBS 2 News okay John thank you](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/1b6091_5eca4d3bf3cc49a99c990d1c782783db~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_265,h_265,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/Image-empty-state.png)
![0:03
of this news earlier today that actor
0:05
Alec Baldwin will be charged for that
0:07
deadly shooting on the set of his movie
0:08
rust now sadly this is nowhere near the
0:11
first time somebody has lost their life
0:13
on a movie set here in the U.S since
0:15
1990 it's happened at least 43 times and
0:18
on top of that more than 150 people have
0:20
suffered life-altering injuries while
0:23
filming but far more rare are there
0:26
circumstances we're talking about right
0:27
now with charges as serious as
0:29
involuntary manslaughter the nature of
0:32
that crime varies from state to state
0:33
Although our investigative reporter
0:35
Kristen Thorne sat down with defense
0:37
attorney and legal expert David Schwartz
0:39
earlier today to better understand
0:40
exactly what we're talking about with
0:41
the magnitude of the charges
0:44
first I want to get your reaction to
0:47
this charge today the news of this
0:48
charge
0:51
well I'm
0:52
entirely surprised the
0:55
the fact-based charge and and there was
0:57
a long investigation and I think the
1:01
prosecutors could have gone either way
1:03
they could have not charged Alec Baldwin
1:05
but they also had enough negligence in
1:09
this case and that's the standard is a
1:11
negligent standard where they where they
1:14
created a high enough bar to bring
1:18
criminal charges let's explain to people
1:20
what involuntary manslaughter is I'm
1:24
familiar with that because of what I do
1:25
you're familiar with that what does that
1:28
mean
1:29
sure you know in New York it's it's
1:31
different than New Mexico so in New
1:33
Mexico
1:34
the theory is where there's a lawful
1:37
activity going on at that time but there
1:40
was negligence involved with the
1:42
activity meaning that a reasonable
1:45
person would not have acted the way Alec
1:48
Baldwin did a reasonable person would
1:50
have taken other precautions before
1:53
firing the weapon so
1:55
um you know so it's a different standard
1:58
so it's that reasonable person's
2:00
standard and the fact that he was
2:02
handling a gun involves an enhancement
2:05
so the enhancement uh brings it up to a
2:09
potential of five years in jail the
2:11
regular involuntary manslaughter charge
2:14
is a year and a half speaking of jail
2:18
prison time do you think he's going to
2:19
do any
2:21
I don't think so if he does do jail time
2:23
it'll be minimal jail time uh either
2:26
this case is going to have a disposition
2:29
where there's a plea bargain and Alec
2:32
Baldwin will have to plead guilty to a
2:34
crime and and then that would involve
2:37
probably little to no jail or he's going
2:40
to go to trial and face the maximum of
2:43
five years in jail we'll see what
2:45
happens if he goes to trial it'll be one
2:47
of those Blockbuster trials that's for
2:49
sure but there's a good chance that this
2:51
case could settle uh before that point
2:54
his attorney called this a quote
2:57
terrible miscarriage of Justice what do
2:59
you think
3:00
if I were his attorney I would say the
3:03
same exact thing I think Alec Baldwin
3:05
has a lot of arguments I think Alec
3:07
Baldwin has the argument that this is
3:09
just a horrible horrible accident that
3:12
took place but there was no negligence
3:14
on his part and if there was no
3:16
negligence on his part why should he be
3:18
charged he's claiming that he had no
3:21
idea and would have no idea that there
3:24
could be live ammunition in that gun as
3:27
opposed to the prosecutors are saying
3:29
wait a second you should have known that
3:32
this was a dangerous situation there was
3:34
a danger involved in this whole episode
3:37
there was negligence throughout there
3:39
was cutting of corners and they feel
3:42
they have enough evidence to show that
3:44
Alec Baldwin was negligent so his
3:48
attorney is going to argue look this is
3:50
a civil case not a criminal case and the
3:52
civil case was already
3:54
um uh you know the civil case uh has had
3:58
a disposition already
4:00
what do you think one thing that's
4:03
bothered me I don't know if it's
4:04
bothered you is how did that bullet end
4:07
up in that gun in the first place
4:09
doesn't that seem to be kind of really
4:12
an issue here
4:13
it's a huge issue and the prosecutors
4:17
need to explain that issue because you
4:19
would think if they had a person that
4:23
actually put the live round in that gun
4:25
well aren't we talking a little bit more
4:27
about voluntary manslaughter and maybe
4:29
even murder aren't we talking about that
4:31
if somebody takes a gun that's going to
4:34
be used on a set and instead of putting
4:36
blanks in knowingly puts in live
4:38
ammunition I think we're more on the
4:40
murder realm so it leads me to believe
4:42
that they don't have that that the
4:45
prosecutors have not figured out how
4:47
that live rounds got into that gun and
4:50
if it goes to trial I don't think it
4:52
will either but if it does that will
4:54
obviously be a huge discussion
4:58
absolutely I mean if you're the defense
5:01
attorney just saying you know where
5:03
where's the proof like who put this live
5:06
live live bullet in this gun certainly
5:09
Alec Baldwin did not because he's not
5:12
being charged with that so you know I I
5:15
think the prosecutors have a lot of
5:17
barriers to overcome in this case I
5:19
think the defense does have a viable
5:21
case but so does the prosecution it's
5:24
one of those close calls which makes
5:26
this case a very interesting case and
5:28
it's very fact specific and it could be
5:31
based on many different nuances that we
5:33
don't know about right now yeah because
5:35
if it goes to trial that is not going to
5:37
be a good look for law enforcement and
5:39
prosecutors here that they have not been
5:41
able to pinpoint who did that because
5:43
the really lucky person here is whoever
5:46
put that bullet in that gun it didn't do
5:48
it by itself it didn't walk into the
5:51
chamber and into the gun someone did it
5:53
and I am still very curious and and
5:56
think that person needs to be held
5:58
account as well
5:59
Kristen that sounded like an opening
6:01
statement right there a hundred percent
6:03
a hundred percent that that is what the
6:06
defense is going to argue but we don't
6:08
know what's happening right now right is
6:11
the investigation over who knows Kristen
6:13
we may see somebody charged with putting
6:16
that bullet in the chamber so we don't
6:18
know what's about to come next but I'm
6:20
led to believe at least by these charges
6:23
today that they don't have that person
6:25
and they're they're going strictly on a
6:29
negligence standard as it goes to Alec
6:31
Baldwin what he should have known did he
6:34
act like a reasonable person did he
6:37
exercise the reasonable amount of care
6:39
that he should have in that situation
6:41
when handling a gun
6:44
if you were his attorney right now or
6:46
maybe you can give us some insight what
6:48
are they talking about right now
6:50
well first they're talking about
6:51
shutting him up okay he can't do any
6:53
more interviews he can't go out in the
6:55
Press he needs to stop talking because
6:59
everything he says could be used against
7:01
them at this point and before this point
7:04
so that's the first thing the second
7:07
thing is they're trying to get as much
7:09
information from him as possible but I'm
7:11
sure they have their own team of
7:12
investigators right now who are
7:15
conducting uh their own interviews their
7:17
own analysis and their own investigation
7:20
so their own investigation could come up
7:23
big in this case as well
7:25
well thank you so much I hope you'll
7:27
stay in touch with us we know that this
7:29
is the charges are formally you know are
7:31
going to be announced later this month
7:33
and so we know that this will still be
7:35
be going on so thank you so much for
7:37
being with us
7:38
thank you Kristen
7:40
coming up next on the Eyewitness News
7:42
countdown uh discussion about what is on
7:44
the line when it comes to raising the
7:45
federal debt limit in the United States
7:49
[Music]
7:50
welcome back to the Eyewitness News
7:52
Countdown the U.S has now hit its debt
7:54
ceiling and that means the clock is now
7:55
ticking on Congress to prevent a
7:57
financial](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/1b6091_ff106596446e454b8da09664607d878b~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_265,h_265,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/Image-empty-state.png)
![0:00
joining us live on newsline is David
0:02
Schwartz who has worked as a New York
0:04
criminal defense attorney he is also a
0:07
former prosecutor David good to have you
0:09
here this morning I'm curious about this
0:12
I want to play you this clip in which
0:14
Alec Baldwin was asked this in the past
0:18
take a quick listen do you never pull
0:19
the trigger no no no no no I would never
0:22
point the gun that I'm going to pull a
0:23
trigger at them never okay so that's
0:25
what he said in that interview with
0:26
George Stephanopoulos today we find out
0:29
he is going to be charged with
0:30
involuntary manslaughter is that to say
0:33
prosecutors believe that he did indeed
0:35
pull the trigger or what
0:37
well well it doesn't necessarily mean
0:40
that he that he uh believed he pulled
0:42
the trigger first of all it was a very
0:44
fast set of events but the involuntary
0:47
portion of the manslaughter means that
0:50
Alec Baldwin at least they're accusing
0:52
Alec Baldwin of handling this gun
0:54
without you caution and circum
0:58
circumspection so with which is more
1:00
like a criminal negligence concept where
1:04
he didn't act as a reasonable person
1:06
would in that situation in handling the
1:09
weapon and safeguarding that weapon so
1:12
they might have some facts where they
1:15
have they have concluded that
1:17
involuntary manslaughter is the right
1:19
charge for him so so if you're his
1:23
defense attorney then what do you argue
1:25
do they say well look you know they
1:28
handed me the gun you know how am I
1:29
supposed to know right you're that's
1:32
exactly what you're arguing you know
1:34
this is a horrible horrible accident a
1:37
tragic accident but my client out
1:41
Baldwin has no culpability whatsoever he
1:44
did not pull the trigger he did act as a
1:47
reasonable person and sometimes in life
1:50
horrible things happen accidents happen
1:53
and that's why this should be handled as
1:55
a civil case which it was the civil case
1:57
was was settled but it should not enter
2:00
the arena of criminal case and that's
2:03
where you have the tug of war between
2:05
criminal defense attorneys and
2:06
prosecutors because prosecutors uh they
2:09
they have concluded something different
2:11
that that this uh does enter the word
2:13
world of criminal culpability and it's
2:17
more than just an accident that there
2:19
was some degree of recklessness involved
2:22
on the part of Alec Baldwin and that's
2:24
going to be litigated in court right so
2:27
the special prosecutor David uh had this
2:29
quote this morning saying if any one of
2:32
these three people including Alec
2:33
Baldwin had done their job that was the
2:37
quote had done their job Helena Hutchins
2:39
would be alive today it's that simple
2:42
but it doesn't sound that simple again
2:45
what's the defense to that in terms of
2:47
what Baldwin's job was supposed to be
2:50
well and what the prosecutor means by
2:53
that is that that Baldwin was acting in
2:56
a reckless Manner and if he wasn't
2:58
acting in a reckless manner if he took
3:00
all the precautions if he looked to see
3:02
if the gun was loaded if he examined the
3:05
gun you know and and and it you know who
3:08
looks up to the jury to see what a
3:10
reasonable person would do Under the
3:12
same set of circumstances that's where
3:15
the push and the pull comes it's a very
3:17
interesting case it's very highly
3:20
um reliable on the the specific facts of
3:24
what exactly happened and look the
3:26
prosecutors have done their
3:27
investigation and they have concluded
3:30
that there are enough facts to support
3:32
this charge and we'll just have to see
3:34
how that all plays out in court but
3:37
certainly out involved into the criminal
3:38
case has many many defenses and and
3:41
again you land at the same defense that
3:44
this is a horrible accident but Alec
3:46
Baldwin acted reasonably so that's what
3:49
you're basically going to argue as his
3:51
defense attorney right so David do we
3:53
see this uh go to a a public trial is
3:56
this something that's going to be um you
3:58
know all over Court TV and more or what
4:01
well your your guess is as good as mine
4:03
if if there's certainly uh room here for
4:07
a plea to be had and I'm sure the plea
4:10
uh could involve minimal jail time uh so
4:14
certainly that's going to be a
4:15
possibility here there's there's a lot
4:18
of room for negotiation but if the
4:20
negotiations don't work then the case is
4:23
going to go to trial and and you know
4:25
Alec Baldwin has a giant ego and he may
4:28
just take this all the way to trial who
4:30
knows your your guess is as good as mine
4:32
at this point right I guess we'll find
4:34
out together David but um as for this
4:37
charge this typically comes with what 18
4:41
months in prison if convicted yes yes
4:44
under the New Mexico law there is uh
4:47
there's an enhancement involved it could
4:49
be five years but generally speaking I I
4:51
believe it's 18 months I I haven't read
4:54
the sentencing charts yet in New Mexico
4:56
right and if people take please in a
4:59
case like this a matter of months in
5:03
jail time or no jail time again I know
5:05
we're we're all just trying to get the
5:07
particulars of New Mexico right right in
5:10
an involuntary manslaughter situation
5:13
where look the the Alec Baldwin has
5:16
settled the civil case uh in this type
5:19
of situation you can see a non-jail
5:22
disposition with probation certainly a
5:25
felony plea and maybe some other
5:28
attachments restitution which seems to
5:31
have been covered in the civil case
5:32
fines
5:34
things like that but there can be some
5:36
jail time too
5:37
one last quick thing if you were his
5:40
lawyer Alec Baldwin would you tell him
5:41
not to give any interviews at this point
5:43
absolutely no interviews no public
5:46
statements uh and you know I understand
5:49
there's the court of public opinion but
5:52
in a criminal case there's just too much
5:53
on the line to allow your client to be
5:56
out there uh uh giving interviews David
6:00
Schwartz a New York criminal defense
6:01
attorney and former prosecutor David
6:04
thank you so much
6:05
thank you it was a pleasure thank you
6:07
very much
6:09
the news watch never stops
6:12
this is 10 10 wins at 92 3 FM you give
6:17
us 22 minutes we'll give you the world
6:20
[Music]](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/1b6091_8ef283f64d684b138a2f12ca84eb5873~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_265,h_265,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/Image-empty-state.png)
Cuomo seeks to woo centrists in NYC mayor’s race
The poll from Gotham Polling & Analytics released last month showed Cuomo clearly leading in the first round of a ranked-choice voting matchup and pulling out a win in the final round with 51 percent to city Comptroller Brad Lander’s 31 percent and state Assembly member Zohran Mamdani’s 18 percent.
NY-4 Congressional Race Locked in a Statistical Tie as Key Issues Drive Voter Preferences
A cutting-edge polling and analytics firm founded by analytical and political experts Stephen Graves, President; David Schwartz, Chairman; and Denny Salas, Executive Vice President, launched today, releasing a survey conducted on NY’s 4th US Congressional District (CD4).
NY-4 Congressional Race Locked in a Statistical Tie as Key Issues Drive Voter Preferences
The survey of likely voters in CD4, shows a razor-thin margin between incumbent Republican Anthony D’Esposito and Democratic challenger Laura Gillen. With 46% of likely voters supporting D’Esposito and 45% backing Gillen, the race is currently too close to call, falling well within the poll’s margin of error.
Newsweek: Joe Biden's Advisers Find Themselves in the Firing Line
Salas told Newsweek, "We must also learn from recent history. The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's refusal to step down during the Obama administration had far-reaching consequences for the Supreme Court's composition and subsequent rulings."
Fox News: SVP Denny Salas Breaks Down the Presidential Race
Fox News: SVP Denny Salas Breaks Down the Presidential Race - https://www.livenowfox.com/video/1484854
Moonlock: Deepfakes are a rising security threat, and its going to get worse
From AI-driven deepfakes interfering in the US election to a new iOS trojan that steals biometric data from iPhone users to the Hong Kong deepfake scandal that cost a multinational $26 million, AI-driven deepfakes are on the rise.
Brooklyn Law School: Student’s Law Journal Article Examines Legal Issues of “Google Dorking”
Star Kashman ’23 examined the legality of an advanced search tactic commonly referred to as “Google Dorking,” and found that cybersecurity law does not explicitly address the technique, which can be used for legitimate purposes such as research, but can also be used to commit criminal acts, including cyberterrorism, industrial espionage, identity theft, and cyberstalking.
This Month in Government: June
Stay informed with insightful analyses, breaking news, and key policy changes that impact the political landscape of the Empire State. Our newsletter covers a wide range of topics, including legislative updates, government initiatives, and influential decisions shaping the future of New York.
Yahoo Finance: More Downstate Voters Rejecting Major Parties & Registering Independent
NEW YORK, Oct. 16, 2023 /PRNewswire/ -- Voters in New York City and Long Island are increasingly scrapping the two major political parties to register as independents – a trend that underscores the importance of candidates appealing to voters 50-plus, a new AARP New York-sponsored analysis of voter rolls shows.
AP News: Gotham Government Relations LLC Joins Forces with The Auxiliary Police Benevolent Association of The City of New York
NEW YORK, NEW YORK, UNITED STATES, October 17, 2023 / EINPresswire.com / -- Gotham Government Relations LLC, a leading government relations firm, proudly announces its newest client, The Auxiliary Police Benevolent Association of The City of New York (APBA). Recognizing the recent decline and neglect of the Auxiliary Police Department in New York City, Gotham is committed to restoring and revitalizing this vital civilian branch of the NYPD.
Dan's Papers: Calone, Romaine Make Their Cases to Long Island Seniors at AARP Forum
Democrat Dave Calone and Republican Ed Romaine each argued why they are the best person to be the next top-elected official on eastern Long Island while making their case to the region’s largest voting bloc — seniors — during the AARP’s Suffolk County executive candidate forum on Oct. 10.
PoliticsNY: Calone, Romaine Make Their Cases to Long Island Seniors at AARP Forum
Democrat Dave Calone and Republican Ed Romaine each argued why they are the best person to be the next top-elected official on eastern Long Island while making their case to the region’s largest voting bloc — seniors — during the AARP’s Suffolk County executive candidate forum on Oct. 10.
NY Daily News: No to Medicare Advantage Plan
Mayor Adams has rightly been critical of a series of misguided decisions by the United States Supreme Court, expressing outrage at the high court for stripping away federal protection for a woman’s right to choose, in consultation with her doctor, concerning her reproductive rights.
