Posted on 03/29/2007 8:52:01 PM PDT by RDTF
Rudolph W. Giuliani told a grand jury that his former chief investigator remembered having briefed him on some aspects of Bernard B. Kerik’s relationship with a company suspected of ties to organized crime before Mr. Kerik’s appointment as New York City police commissioner, according to court records.
Mr. Giuliani, testifying last year under oath before a Bronx grand jury investigating Mr. Kerik, said he had no memory of the briefing, but he did not dispute that it had taken place, according to a transcript of his testimony.
Mr. Giuliani’s testimony amounts to a significantly new version of what information was probably before him in the summer of 2000 as he was debating Mr. Kerik’s appointment as the city’s top law enforcement officer. Mr. Giuliani had previously said that he had never been told of Mr. Kerik’s entanglement with the company before promoting him to the police job or later supporting his failed bid to be the nation’s homeland security secretary.
In his testimony, given in April 2006, Mr. Giuliani indicated that he must have simply forgotten that he had been briefed on one or more occasions as part of the background investigation of Mr. Kerik before his appointment to the police post.
-snip-
There is no evidence that Mr. Giuliani knew about the apartment renovation before promoting Mr. Kerik to police commissioner. But the top investigator who briefed Mr. Giuliani in 2000, the transcript shows, was aware that Mr. Kerik’s brother and a close friend had been hired by an affiliate of the company, which for years had been struggling to secure a city license.
-snip-
The transcript of Mr. Giuliani’s testimony was not given to The New York Times by any rival campaign.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
N-i-c-e take.
Rudeo is a nightmare and a danger to our Nation.
He is a con man, whose limited abilities revolve around deceiving voters into his scheme to get into power.
An "unpublished 1988 Interview??????" lol How convenient.
Rudy left New York City awash in red ink, and current Mayor Michael Bloomberg is up to his armpits in debt.
It's true, look it up for yourself.
Happy to help.
Uh, wasn't that on the heels of the worst disaster this country has ever experienced? And NYC was ground zero?
No surprises here. But Rudy's long record speaks for itself. You should read it sometime.
So who are you calling a liar Katie, are you disputing what Mrs. Guiliani had to say about her boy?
I would look with skepticism on any "unpublished 1988 interview." Rudy has a history of conservatism on most issues.
Ask another question...what kind of bizarro world have we crossed over into, where (some) FReepers and the Gray Lady stand side by side.
One of the two changed..and I don;t think that the NYT has decided to become more conservative.
Great posts.
Choices carry consequences, and lawful authority is what we have all granted the various levels of government, and the agreed upon standard that we have all set in place, to make sure that you face the consequences of your wrong choices, or are absolved of them.
Anything less than that is anarchy, and loss of freedom ensues.
"...what kind of bizarro world have we crossed over into, where (some) FReepers and the Gray Lady stand side by side."
You are certainly making a sad, but excellent point.
I don't know, have you seen anybody saying nice things about the New York Times in this thread?
Actually, have you seen anybody say anything on either side particularly helpful to determining whether Rudy is a good candidate?
A couple of people tried to discuss the merits of the relationship between Rudy and Kerik, but the Rudy supporters want to forget Kerik exists.
bump for later
Authority is a damper on freedom that is a necessary evil because of the evil of humanity. It has nothing to do with freedom, except that it guarantees that our freedom will be constrained such that it doesn't interfere with others.
In the process, being wielded by flawed men, it also takes away our freedom for no reason other than power, stupidity, or sheer lazyness.
It's easier for example to simply ban 18-year-olds from drinking, than to teach them responsible drinking and vigorously enforce the laws preventing minors from getting alcohol. And it's easier to ban me from growing pot in my back yard than to police the smoking of that weed, even though the pot in my back yard harms nobody.
Once you give government authority to restrict your freedom, it is imperative to put in power people who find the use of it abhorent. Those who enjoy using their power over people, like Rudy, will inevitably take away your freedoms for no reason because they are lazy, power-mad, or stupid.
Like banning guns because it's easier than policing their use, or banning ferrets because, well, I haven't figured out year why Rudy was upset with ferrets, maybe he just didn't like them and, being power-hungry, figured if he didnt like them then he was mayor and nobody could have them in "his city".
Anybody bothered by the "his city", and "his auditorium" stuff? Sure, he kicked out Afafat so we were all "happy", but what if some really strongly opinionated pro-life person was showing up and Rudy didn't like HIM and kicked him out of "my auditorium". Wouldn't you then wonder how something paid for by all the taxpayers of the city became "Rudy's"?
We need authority for freedom, but freedom is not giving in to authority. Authority is anathema to freedom.
So much for the MSM loving Rudy, LOL.
Can one of you please explain something to me please.
I swear I'm not trying to be a wise ass and I really don't have an agenda, but...
Is the NY Times pro or against Rudy? Half the time I think that they want to see him be the Republican nominee because they think it's a partial victory for liberals if a pro choice, pro gay, pro gun control candidate gets the GOP nomination. Then sometimes, they seem to cringe at the idea of a tax cutting, supply side, Friedmanomics, military hawk ruling for 4 years.
Which is it?
I like to read the Times with a grain of salt. I'm just not sure what their angle is.
I'm with you
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.