https://twitter.com/Will_Antonin/status/348301440206389249
Earlier this week, Ace of Spades HQ blogger John Ekdahl uncovered evidence that New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s gun-grabbing group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, was using city resources to host its website. “As a NYC taxpayer, I’m pissed,” wrote one city resident.
Bloomberg would have gotten away with it too if it weren't for those meddling Ekdahls. @JohnEkdahl
— jon gabriel (@exjon) June 22, 2013
Ekdahl’s research raised a host of ethical and legal questions about whether NYC taxpayer dollars should support Nanny Bloomberg’s pet project, a tax-exempt 501(c)(4) like the ones targeted by the IRS.
Nothing to see here, move along, says New York City Deputy Mayor Howard Wolfson.
It is absolutely both legal and appropriate to use a City server to host a website in support of the City's legislative agenda.
— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) June 22, 2013
Not just legal, but appropriate.
NYC Councilman Brad Lander, co-chair of the progressive caucus, disagrees. Delicious:
@howiewolf It's the City's server. But it's the Mayor's legislative agenda. Important distinction (even when, as in this case, I agree w/it)
— Brad Lander (@bradlander) June 22, 2013
@howiewolf I'd be very happy to vote in favor of doing this in the City's budget. That'd be a better way of making it legal & appropriate.
— Brad Lander (@bradlander) June 22, 2013
Wolfson sneered at the councilman’s concerns.
@bradlander sorry, I don't get to sign off on the contents of your website and you don't get to sign off on the contents of ours.
— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) June 22, 2013
“Ours”?
https://twitter.com/redsteeze/status/348304452773625856
Think I kinda sorta started a Democrat civil war in NYC.
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
Heh.
The city’s sponsorship of MAIG is so clearly “legal and appropriate” that the story was picked up by Politico and BuzzFeed.
The website typifies what critics have long hit Bloomy for – a blurring of lines btwn his wealth and the govt http://t.co/wqyeU26S1b
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) June 22, 2013
@JohnEkdahl @NathanWurtzel And there was a story there and we chased it. Thanks John
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) June 22, 2013
Mayors Against Illegal Guns Website Is Hosted On NYC Government Servers http://t.co/cQ0g21enxU
— Jacob Fischler (@ItsFischy) June 22, 2013
Reporters and citizen journalists weren’t satisfied with Wolfson’s answers, but he continued to sneer at the concerns they raised.
bit of difference between putting the mayor's agenda/policy views on city hosted webpage and hosting nationwide group on an issue on servers
— … (@Hoosier114) June 22, 2013
@Hoosier114 @maggiepolitico zero difference. Building national coalition in favor of legislation to keep NYers safe is NYC Mayor's job.
— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) June 22, 2013
@howiewolf @Hoosier114 Then why doesn't every mayor that's part of this coalition have their own website on their own government servers?
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) June 22, 2013
@maggiepolitico @howiewolf @Hoosier114 and what happens if the next NY mayor doesn't want to be part of the coalition?
— Edward-Isaac Dovere (@IsaacDovere) June 22, 2013
@IsaacDovere @maggiepolitico @Hoosier114 than obviously he leaves it.
— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) June 22, 2013
@maggiepolitico @Hoosier114 I suspect many Mayors have a great deal of content about their legislative priorities on their sites.
— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) June 22, 2013
@howiewolf @Hoosier114 Do you think many mayors who are in this coalition have a lot of separate websites for their issues?
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) June 22, 2013
@maggiepolitico @Hoosier114 are you arguing that some content on sites is ok but a separate website isn't?
— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) June 22, 2013
@howiewolf @Hoosier114 I wasn't aware I was arguing, thought I was reporting. But okay.
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) June 22, 2013
@howiewolf @maggiepolitico How would we know that NYC tax dollars are being spent on/contributed to MAIG website? Shouldn't we?
— Brad Lander (@bradlander) June 22, 2013
https://twitter.com/ElBuehn/status/348286760821866498
@ElBuehn @Hoosier114 @maggiepolitico the content is irrelevant. Mayors are elected in part to pursue legislative outcomes.
— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) June 22, 2013
https://twitter.com/ElBuehn/status/348288987045171201
@ElBuehn @Hoosier114 @maggiepolitico I assume elections have consequences and the next mayor will be elected to carry out his agenda.
— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) June 22, 2013
LOVE that NYC’s deputy mayor uses the “elections have consequences” line to excuse this stuff. Delicious.
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
@maggiepolitico @marclavorgna @howiewolf but if the city is registrant for the sites, doesn't the next mayor take control of them?
— Edward-Isaac Dovere (@IsaacDovere) June 22, 2013
@IsaacDovere @maggiepolitico @marclavorgna I assume he will.
— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) June 22, 2013
@howiewolf @maggiepolitico @marclavorgna he?
— Edward-Isaac Dovere (@IsaacDovere) June 22, 2013
@IsaacDovere @maggiepolitico @marclavorgna or she
— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) June 22, 2013
@howiewolf @Hoosier114 Did the mayor win a coin-flip with Menino as to which co-founder of MAIG would get to have their govt host this site?
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) June 22, 2013
@maggiepolitico @Hoosier114 rocks paper scissors
— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) June 22, 2013
https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedAndrew/status/348290205305950208
@BuzzFeedAndrew @maggiepolitico @Hoosier114 not answerable at midnight.
— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) June 22, 2013
It’s no longer midnight. We’re still waiting for the answer, Howie.
Nanny Bloomberg’s press secretary upped the petulant ante when he got in on the action.
@bradlander the elected Mayor doesn't get to advocate for what they think Federal laws impacting NYC should be? Where did u go to 5th grade?
— Marc La Vorgna (@lavorgna) June 22, 2013
@howiewolf @Hoosier114 Then why doesn't every mayor that's part of this coalition have their own website on their own government servers?
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) June 22, 2013
@maggiepolitico @howiewolf @Hoosier114 they could. Just as they have issues they advocate for as elected mayors on their city websites
— Marc La Vorgna (@lavorgna) June 22, 2013
@marclavorgna @howiewolf @Hoosier114 You guys may be the only people alive who have the choice of bypassing DOiTT but using it anyway
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) June 22, 2013
@maggiepolitico @howiewolf @Hoosier114 and what happens if the next NY mayor doesn't want to be part of the coalition?
— Edward-Isaac Dovere (@IsaacDovere) June 22, 2013
@IsaacDovere @maggiepolitico @howiewolf @Hoosier114 lost here. There are a million things we advocate for on our website. We shouldn't?
— Marc La Vorgna (@lavorgna) June 22, 2013
@marclavorgna no problem with putting stances on city issues on site, issue is hosting nat'l group (who I support). you can't be that dense.
— … (@Hoosier114) June 22, 2013
@Hoosier114 we put out a letter with 17 other mayors on food stamps $$. It's on our website. So that is wrong? Guess we are "dense".
— Marc La Vorgna (@lavorgna) June 22, 2013
LaVorgna bravely ran away before answering these tweets.
@marclavorgna @Hoosier114 Are you creating a separate website for the food stamps issue? Is the mayor funding ads personally on this topic?
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) June 22, 2013
@marclavorgna @Hoosier114 Feels like false binary to say only options are the govt funding a site or the mayor being unable to advocate
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) June 22, 2013
.@marclavorgna did you also create a 501(c)(4) to agitate for national food stamp laws & devote NYC resources to other states? @Hoosier114
— Jason Hart (@jasonahart) June 22, 2013
.@maggiepolitico @marclavorgna @Hoosier114 Exactly, why not host the MAIG site on http://t.co/BDOEJqXKa0?
— Robert A George (@RobGeorge) June 22, 2013
.@marclavorgna MAIG is a 501(c)4 that runs ads against pro-gun cands. Why is MAIG using taxpayer-funded http://t.co/lH4l8BCwPu servers?
— CatsPolitics (@CatsPolitics) June 22, 2013
The Weekly Standard’s Jim Swift ran with the story and it was picked up by The Drudge Report.
NYC Taxpayers Help Sponsor Bloomberg's Gun Control Group… http://t.co/lkTLYG5A6U
— NEWS MAKER (@NEWS_MAKER) June 22, 2013
More from Swift on the press secretary’s spin.
@JohnEkdahl @hotairblog Their spox told me that it's been vetted and certainly not an accident. Described it as NYC's federal agenda.
— Jim Swift (@JimSwiftDC) June 21, 2013
@JohnEkdahl Marc La Vorgna told me pretty much Bloomberg is acting in his capacity as mayor. Cited other examples of fed. advocacy
— Jim Swift (@JimSwiftDC) June 21, 2013
As Ekdahl notes, questions remain.
That’s the crazy part about this, Bloomberg has all sorts of staff and infrastructure at http://t.co/hbFAEWOtZ8.
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
And remember, it’s not *what it would cost for him host it himself*, it’s what it costs taxpayers.
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
And if it’s an organization for “xx mayors across the country”, why are NYC taxpayers forced to fund the costs?
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
So far, it seems like the mayors office has been confused on the 501c3 vs 501c4 distinction and what part is doing what.
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
You can tell this wasn’t a big deal because Bloomberg’s press secretary and deputy mayor were dismissive and rude tonight.
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
Still don’t get how a government can legally fund partisan attack ad.
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
Also seeing a lot of “regardless how good the cause is…” arguments from media/libs, which is always good.
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
Lost in the $$ angle is that this may have been going on since 2006.
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
Not so much what it *costs* to host your own website, it’s what *it costs for NYC to do so*
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
Infrastructure, staff, pensions, healthcare, etc.
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
So maybe it only costs a few hundred bucks a month to do it yourself, but it’s wildly expensive for NYC to do it.
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
Another interesting question: Was the management of the the website outsourced or done by NYC?
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
If it was outsourced, that means a private non-government person had access to official http://t.co/acFqGRIEvA servers. How is that ethical?
— American Journalists Publish Chinese Propaganda (@JohnEkdahl) June 22, 2013
Join the conversation as a VIP Member