The Giuliani Papers

When Giuliani Tried to Cancel Elections

Before the smoke began to clear over New York after September 11, 2001, Rudolph Giuliani devised a plan that would halt impending mayoral elections and keep him in power beyond the term-limited end of his second and final four years as mayor.

The contemporary account of Giuliani's power grab written by Wayne Barrett of the Village voice is here.

To accomplish this coup Giuliani would have to persuade the New York candidates for mayor to postpone their ambitions and agree to appoint Rudy Dictator of New York.

On the Republican side, Michael Bloomberg didn't mind waiting a couple months. He was Giuliani's endorsed successor and basically the only Republican running.

It was the Democrats, of course, that Rudy needed on this one. The two major Democratic candidates were Mark Green, the city's public advocate, and Fernando Ferrer, the Bronx borough president. Their primary had been scheduled for 9/11 and then rescheduled to October. Green ended up winning the nomination and then losing to Bloomberg. (Green has since bought the progressive radio network Air America.)

Giuliani's Cancer Cured by "Government-Run" Medicine

Giuliani's recent lies about England's prostate cancer survival rate obscure what is more important: Giuliani was, as Mayor, treated and cured for prostrate cancer by the government-run health plan in place at the time for New York City public employees.

Giuliani and the Right

Frank Rich and The Times were all over the supposed decline of the most rabidly politicized religious right.

The Times magazine described the disillusionment of evangelicals with Bush Republicanism, which provides the reason why Giuliani is a "viable" candidate among these "values voters" despite his "moderate" views on "abortion," "gay rights" and "gun control." (See previous post.)

Rich went over some of the same territory, but he began the journey on Memory Lane, reminding us of the halcyon summer of 2001, before EVERYTHING CHANGED FOREVER. He recalls a column he wrote about the warm and fuzzy Rudolph Giuliani that was published in The Times on August 4, two days before the August 6, 2001, President's Daily Briefing that told Bush that "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S."

Back then, even Frank Rich saw soothing signs of kumbaya emerging from the mouth of Dick Cheney:

Most intriguing of all are the latest visible fault lines in the usual conservative American antipathy -- most of it in Mr. Giuliani's party -- to gay unions. The shift became visible when Dick Cheney, debating Joe Lieberman during the campaign, said that he was wrestling ''with the extent of which there ought to be legal sanction of [gay] relationships,'' adding, ''I think we ought to do everything we can to tolerate and accommodate whatever kind of relationships people want to enter into.''

Is it a sign of "moderation" that the fundies are ready to accept Giuliani as a candidate? It's a "story" lots of pundies clearly want to flog, including Rich.

But I don't get it.

And, in the end, Frank can't leave without covering his ass:

“You have absolutely nothing to fear from me,” Rudy disingenuously told the assembled at the Values Voter Summit last weekend. Actually, there’s plenty for everyone to fear from a Giuliani presidency, starting with the mad neocon bombers shaping his apocalyptic policy toward Iran. But that’s another story.

That's where he's wrong. It's the same story.

Giuliani Makes Cheney Look Like Che Guevara

How the MSM can continue to be so braindead on Giuliani is beyond scandalous.

Andrew Sullivan again makes the TOTALLY OBVIOUS point:

One of the most fundamental questions of the next election is whether the American people are going to endorse the protectorate of extreme executive power that Cheney and Bush have constructed: an executive empowered to over-rule the rule of law, issue signing statements declaring itself the superme branch of government, to detain any person at will, torture at will, and wage war at will, without Congressional approval, and to do all this on a permanent - not temporary, emergency - basis. With Giuliani, you have one more dictatorial impulse: to refuse to submit even to an election if he deems the crisis too great. Any rule-of-law conservative who believes that liberty is best secured when power is divided knows whom not vote for.

The TOTALLY OBVIOUS argument is summarized by David Greenberg in The Washington Post:

...the idea of Rudy as a liberal or even a moderate is unreal, topsy-turvy -- like describing George McGovern as a hawk or Pat Buchanan as a Zionist. The case for Giuliani's moderation rests mainly on three overblown issues -- guns, gay rights and abortion -- and even in those cases, his deviation from conservative orthodoxy is far milder than is usually suggested.

The "social" and "cultural" issues that divide Americans encompass much more than guns, gay rights and abortion. They include state support of religion; the legitimacy of dissenting speech; the president's right to keep information secret; the place of fair procedures in dispensing justice. The Bush administration's hard-line stands on these matters have polarized the nation as much as the Iraq war has. And on these issues, Giuliani is just as hard-line as the man he'd like to succeed.

If you've managed to keep liking President Bush, you'd have no trouble loving President Giuliani.

When will the craven ass-licking sycophants masquerading as journalists start to do their fucking jobs?

Giuliani and Torture

Giuliani says torture is in the eyes of the beholder. Andrew Sulivan remarks:

He tells the truth about what Bush and Cheney believe. Asked in Iowa last night whether he believed that waterboarding was torture, he replied:

"It depends on who does it."

If the Khmer Rouge does it, it's torture. If the United States does it, it's not. This man cannot be allowed to be president of the United States. He believes that the United States is above morals and the president of the United States is above the law. He is a tyrant to the depths of his being.

The Essential Giuliani

Rachel Morris in Washington Monthly presents a must-read, concisely rendered overview of why Rudolph Giuliani is the most dangerous potential holder of the office of president of the United States.

Many Giuliani watchers already understand that Rudy is a hothead and a grandstander, even a bit of a dictator at times. These qualities have dominated the story of his mayoralty that most people know. As that drama was unfolding, however, so was a quieter story, driven by Giuliani's instinct and capacity for manipulating the levers of government. His methods, like those of the current White House, included appointments of yes-men, aggressive tests of legal limits, strategic lawbreaking, resistance to oversight, and obsessive secrecy. As was also the case with the White House, the events of 9/11 solidified the mindset underlying his worst tendencies. Embedded in his operating style is a belief that rules don't apply to him, and a ruthless gift for exploiting the intrinsic weaknesses in the system of checks and balances. That's why, of all the presidential candidates, Giuliani is most likely to take the expansions of the executive branch made by the Bush administration and push them further still. The blueprint can be found in the often-overlooked corners of his mayoralty.

Giuliani will make the Bush regime's grab for unconstitutional power look mild:

What is most disturbing is the likelihood that a Giuliani administration would venture beyond the expansive claims of executive authority staked out by the Bush White House. For instance, though Bush has demanded that Congress fund the war in Iraq, he has never openly questioned Congress's power of the purse. Giuliani, however, told a reporter that the president has the right to provide money for the troops to stay in Iraq even if Congress withdraws funding. Similarly, Bush has implied that critics of his Iraq policy are unpatriotic, but he has not declared that the government can silence their voices. This September, echoing the sentiments that he repeatedly attempted to enforce as mayor, Giuliani said that the "General Betray Us" ad paid for by the left-wing group MoveOn "passed a line that we should not allow American political organizations to pass."

Read the entire piece. It is essential to understand Rudy.

Giuliani's Deal With the Fundies

Did Giiuliani promise to support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage to ease support among the crazy Christians this weekend?

Steve Benen notes:

Rudy Giuliani has a tough enough time dealing with abortion rights — he offers the convoluted pitch of being a pro-choice candidate who will oppose his own beliefs once in office — but he generally stays away from gay marriage altogether.

Privately, however, his pandering may have reached jaw-dropping levels.

"Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, told The Hill Saturday that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) would support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

Perkins said Giuliani told him in a private meeting that if the Defense of Marriage Act appeared to be failing or if multiple states began to legalize same-sex marriages, then he would support the constitutional amendment.

Giuliani did not mention the amendment or the issue of gay marriage during his address to the Values Voters Summit, but that position could win him favor with some social conservatives who view the former mayor warily.

Perkins said that was not enough to assuage his concerns about Giuliani, but “it was nice to hear.”

Mukasey is Bush is Giuliani

Andrew Sullivan is unerring on the most dangerous AND UNREPORTED actual threats to America.

Mukasey is just one more example:

I think we're in denial about this. Following Mukasey's statements with confirmation would set a precedent we may well deeply regret. Think of another terrorist attack. Think of the Cheney precedents. Think of Giuliani in the White House. Now think of what would be left of democracy and the Constitution the day after.

Why Giuliani Won't Lose the Fundies

Alex Koppelman in Salon makes my point from yesterday. If the Christos abandon Giuliani for a third party the Republicans have ZERO chance in 2008. With Giuliani they have a candidate who can at least SEEM to compete.

If a third-party conservative entered the race, a Giuliani candidacy really would redraw the electoral map. But that realignment would favor Clinton, not Giuliani, and make her presidency a virtual fait accompli.

Giuliani and Kerik: Why Nobody Knows About Rudy's Lies

In a matter related to my post yesterday about Giuliani's lies to the Bronx prosecutor regarding his knowledge of Kerik's past, Media Matters notes the negligence of Chris Matthews and Newsday:

Summary: In reports on the possible indictment of former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik on charges relating to a company suspected of having ties to organized crime, Newsday, MSNBC's Hardball, and Fox News' Special Report all uncritically aired statements by Rudy Giuliani suggesting he had been unaware of Kerik's relationship with Interstate Industrial Corp. However, in April 2006, Giuliani reportedly "told a grand jury that the former city commissioner of investigation remembered briefing him on some aspects of Mr. Kerik's relationship to the company in question."