One thing that's really telling about the Lefties' fake outrage over Sean Patrick Maloney running in the district where he lives, NY17, and not NY18, is that none of them are demanding that Jerry Nadler or Carolyn Maloney run outside of NY12, where they both live.
If protecting House incumbents is such a priority, why aren't Lefties demanding that Jerry Nadler run in #NY10?
Nadler currently represents big chunks of the new NY10 in FiDi, Tribeca, West Village
This is literally the same logic Lefties are positing re: Sean Patrick Maloney.
Clearly, the answer is that the 🌹's fake outrage vs. Sean Patrick Maloney isn't based on any lofty principle of fairness.
They don't even care about protecting Progressive Caucus member Carolyn Maloney.
They just wanted to avoid a Jamaal Bowman vs. Mondaire Jones primary.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Look, I'm perhaps as guilty of AOC derangement syndrome as any.
But no other single individual has poisoned the well of New York Democratic politics with demonstrable falsehoods, childish tantrums, intentional sabotage of liberal Democratic programs and messaging like she has.
Literally the day before Joe Biden and Barack Obama hold a joint event to tout the successes of the Affordable Care Act expansion, she goes on a tirade about "why the ACA is bad actually".
Democrats might not be the best at messaging - the least AOC can do is not sabotage it.
I purposefully don't follow AOC on anything.
But living in New York City, every time I open a computer or a phone my eyeballs are inundated with AOC media and affiliated propaganda so patently false and intentionally divisive it's disorienting.
I believe that Andrew Cuomo is a backslapping politician who hugs and kisses staffers, who tells cringey jokes - and that could be the basis of a Title VII lawsuit.
But I doubt some of the most explosive, lascivious accusations. They seem ... contrived. And out of character.
This entire saga reminds me too much of the "Handsy Joe Biden" narratives circa 2019-2020.
I absolutely believe that he hugged too much and kissed too much.
... but the notion that that established a character propensity to commit manual sexual assault was a bridge too far.
I've read all 165 pages of the Attorney General's Report. It's a roadmap for individual employees to litigate for damages.
But I am not sold on impeachment.
I doubt Andrew Cuomo committed any high crimes or misdemeanors or gross misconduct.
Of the individual accusations vs. Andrew Cuomo in the James Report, I believe that the most damning - if true - might be Executive Assistant #1 (but I have serious doubts whether her accusations are true).
I believe the most truthful might be Trooper #1.
These accusations by Executive Assistant #1 and Trooper #1 are so serious that they could, by themselves, fell the Governor of New York.
I do think that it is imperative for the State Assembly Judiciary Committee to hold hearings.
At this point, all of the nonsense we argued about re: Lindsey Boylan and Charlotte Bennett is frankly irrelevant.
They're no longer the main characters in this soap opera - they're just parlaying it into celebrity status.
OK, so now for the stuff that Cuomo fans are really not going to like...
(I warned you, I'm calling balls and strikes here)
Let's subtract all of the individual accusations that you might think are over-the-top, exaggerated, or cranks.
Governor Cuomo is still in legal jeopardy. A civil rights claim on the basis of a "hostile work environment" is a very real thing.
So subtract any single one of the accusations that you find hard to believe - for any reason.
Even if Cuomo simply made comments about employees' clothing choice, or called them "sweetheart", or asked "do you have a boyfriend?", that can be an actionable civil rights claim.
One of the major weaknesses of the James Report is that it seems to take every one of the accusers' allegations at face value.
I 100% believe Andrew Cuomo hugged and kissed staffers and made some cringey jokes.
But there's also a lot of stuff in here that seems really doubtful.
The most glaring example on this is the section on Lindsey Boylan.
From Boylan's own statements to the press, we know she accused Cuomo of kissing her on the lips - then walked back the story dramatically.
The James Report includes Boylan's accusation - but not her retraction.
I interpret this to mean that the AG investigators more or less printed every accusation verbatim, everything that a court could _possibly_ find to be true - even if there's a lot of good reason to be skeptical.
It makes me doubt some of the more lascivious accusations in here.
I've finished reading the James Report. It's not so much a conclusion of fact-finding, as much as it is a legal brief.
It reads less like the Warren Commission Report or the Mueller Report and more like a roadmap for possible future sexual harassment litigation.
The James Report concludes that Governor Cuomo's office violated federal and state laws re: sexual harassment, including a hostile work environment, and unlawful retaliation.
It's a persuasive argument. If a plaintiff made these arguments, it goes to trial.
But I think the commentariat is misreading the James Report in one crucial way: the AG is a prosecutor, but AG is not indicting the Governor.
Sexual harassment is a tort - it's a private action. One of the 11 accusers has to file a claim in state or federal court.