The Intercept is a lefty publication but it isn’t afraid of exposing corrupt lefties. Lee Fang’s article is a timely example of that. In the article, Fang writes about the second-worst NYC mayor in recent history, aka Mike Bloomberg.

In the article, it quotes Bloomberg, a Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-independent-turned-Democrat, as saying “I inherited the police practice of stop-and-frisk, and as part of our effort to stop gun violence it was overused. By the time I left office, I cut it back by 95%, but I should’ve done it faster and sooner. I regret that and I have apologized — and I have taken responsibility for taking too long to understand the impact it had on Black and Latino communities.”

That halfhearted apology would be respected more if he didn’t omit important information. Fang wrote this:

The statement drew immediate backlash over its twisting of history. In 2001, New York City maintained an aggressive program of stopping and searching people throughout the city, with an overwhelming focus on young African American and Latino men. But, under the Bloomberg administration, the program vastly expanded, from around 97,296 stops in 2002 to a height of 685,724 in 2011, a more than sevenfold increase during the former mayor’s tenure.

That paints quite the different picture. That different picture gets even more different in light of this information:

Far from changing course over the mayor’s focus on “racial equity,” as he has since claimed, the practice was clawed back by several lawsuits, which charged that the law enforcement program violated the basic constitutional rights of residents. U.S. District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, in a scathing decision, noted that over the course of 2.3 million frisks, weapons were found only 1.5 percent of the time. The decision pointed out that over half of the stops included African Americans and about third Latino, with less than 10 percent targeting white people.

Bloomberg’s apology is halfhearted because he’s attempting to hide the whole truth from voters. He’s just another career politician trying to con the people. It’s difficult to trust him. That’s the personification of the Swamp. That’s the personification of the Democrat establishment, too.

Bloomberg didn’t stop the policy of Stop, Question and Frisk. A judge ruled the technique unconstitutional. That’s what stopped the program. It didn’t happen because of Bloomberg’s enlightenment. This NYTimes article quotes Donna Lieberman, the executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, as saying “What the statement fails to capture is the magnitude of stop-and-frisk and the several years-long period during which stop-and-frisk was through the roof.”

I’m betting that people wouldn’t have a problem with a well-run program that wasn’t this racist. I’m betting that people were disturbed when they heard this:

Throwing kids against the wall to get guns off the streets? What part of that sounds like a well-run, disciplined, well-supervised plan? It’s wrong to let the MSM off the hook for calling the program Stop-And-Frisk. That isn’t its proper name. Its real name is Stop, Question and Frisk.

The bottom line is this: Mayor Bloomberg abused a legitimate program that reduced violent crime. Then he compounded the problem by making these exceptionally racist statements. The more we learn about him, the less appealing Bloomberg is. Let’s remember, too, that establishment Democrats are looking to him as their political savior.

4 Responses to “The Intercept vs. Mike Bloomberg”

  • eric z says:

    So, really worried about Bloomberg’s ability to outspend the Don. Is it time for an old saying, silk purse, sow’s ear?

    “Second worse” NYC mayor. Yes, Rudy was worse by a mile.

  • eric z says:

    So, really worried about Bloomberg’s ability to outspend the Don. Is it time for an old saying, silk purse, sow’s ear?

    “Second worse” NYC mayor. Yes, Rudy was worse by a mile.

    Also Bloomberg is a Republican, but giving lip service to a notion he is something else. Just think, two “Mayor B” candidates, one wealthier by far than Trump, the other a total upstart with academic credentials but a college town mayor being all in that portfolio, aside from McKinsey, military ticket punching, and a Rhodes Scholar (just like Bill Clinton). Both Mayor B candidates are chasing the Bern. Part of an inner party coordinated effort to smack down Bernie and Liz for wanting a new and better dawn.

    The two Mayor B guys are a pair of white corporatist tools, but one may get the nomination in the course of suppressing progressive change. Wall Street clearly is hedging its bet on Biden.

    Gary, do you think Bloomberg will be able to buy the nomination or will he fail? He could get it, and Tom Perez likely would approve. Wall Street too.

    “CHANGE” surely was a slogan and nothing more. You put in your eight years doing as told, and end up with Martha’s Vinyard waterfront mansion ownership.

  • Gary Gross says:

    Eric, de Blasio is the worst by far. NYC isn’t as safe or as prosperous. That’s why people are leaving. Bloomberg doesn’t connect with people the way that Bernie or President Trump do. He’s a suit, albeit a very expensive custom-tailored suit. Bloomberg is as appealing as a cactus.

    Stop with the ‘Bloomberg is a Republican’ BS. He started as a Democrat. Then he wanted to run for mayor of NYC but there were a bajillion Democrats already running. Out of convenience, he ran as a Republican.

    Bernie is the front-runner. Period. Warren is history. I won’t say that Buttigieg is toast yet because I’d love to see him get sliced & diced by Trump. Plastic Man vs. Trump = Pop the Popcorn matchup.

    I don’t see Bloomberg getting the nomination. I don’t get the impression that he’s a debater + he’s a phony. I can picture Bernie attacking him. It isn’t pretty. Warren would carve him up, too. You’re right, though. Perez would love it if Bloomberg got the nomination.

  • Gary Gross says:

    Bloomberg doesn’t have a message. Imagine the ads from the Trump campaign highlighting the Big Gulp restrictions, Bloomberg’s outright racism & his desire to eliminate fossil fuels. That might play in the primaries but it won’t play in the general.

Leave a Reply