tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-75860661176845842322024-03-14T01:21:13.239-07:00Jeff Feldman is Back Helping Pick Brooklyn Supreme Court JudgesAfter Judge Gleeson cited Feldman's actions as part of his decision to abolish judicial screening conventions; after he was indicted by the Brooklyn DA for" for coercion by extortion of two candidates for county-wide Civil Court judgeships in 2002;" After he turned on his former boss and his testimony help convict Norman in 2007; Jeff Feldman was back this year helping to run county leader Vito Lopez Judicial Convention. None of the press that covered this story in the past were present.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger32125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-73145048647337758182008-09-17T07:37:00.000-07:002008-09-17T08:07:18.249-07:00Feldman Returns to Vito's 2008 Judicial Convention<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsGM-dWVdESEg2FpExrcnsGfMVRPP_xuRIZPZb5O1hkkCrWv2gqCENHVhhF-5d6iG5RRWkaNYcOa9cjdvaXcxw6J-PTZfNC9N9ifHFAvCZbhJD_mW-eU1VN92lDzVa5vsvQPs_HtwPOvXV/s1600-h/feldman2.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsGM-dWVdESEg2FpExrcnsGfMVRPP_xuRIZPZb5O1hkkCrWv2gqCENHVhhF-5d6iG5RRWkaNYcOa9cjdvaXcxw6J-PTZfNC9N9ifHFAvCZbhJD_mW-eU1VN92lDzVa5vsvQPs_HtwPOvXV/s320/feldman2.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5247000858413190546" /></a><br /><strong>THE BANANA REPUBLIC OF BROOKLYN</strong><br />Jeff Feldman seated on the end, helping to run the September 16, 2008 Brooklyn Judicial Delegate Convention.<br /><br /><strong>U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens said Judicial Conventions are bad, declaring that ...<br />“The Constitution Does Not Prohibit <br /> Legislatures From Enacting Stupid Laws.” </strong><br />New York Times Editorial January 17, 2008<br />A Defeat for Judicial Reform <br /> <br />By upholding New York’s machine-dominated system for selecting judges, the Supreme Court has dealt another setback to voters. The court has once again allowed political bosses to rig elections in ways that deny voters a meaningful role. New York’s political power brokers are no doubt cheering, but they should not be allowed to triumph. Even if New York’s method of selecting judges is constitutional, it remains unfair and undemocratic. It needs to be replaced.<br /><br />New York State Supreme Court justices — who despite their titles are trial-level judges — are selected through a byzantine process. Primary voters select judicial delegates, who then meet in party conventions to choose their nominees. The conventions are generally controlled by political bosses, who often steer the nominations to candidates who deliver patronage back to the party machine. It’s a disgraceful way to choose judges. They are supposed to be above politics.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-10952259431344224862007-02-02T06:58:00.000-08:002008-09-17T07:04:22.638-07:00Feldman Says Party Boss Pressured Judge to Hire VendorClarence Norman Jr.’s former second-in-command in the Brooklyn Democratic Party testified yesterday that he saw his boss angrily threaten to withhold support for a judge on his ticket in 2002 if she refused to pay for fliers designed by the party’s favored vendor.<br /><br /><strong>Jeffrey Feldman, a former official in the Brooklyn Democratic Party, testified Thursday against his former boss, Clarence Norman Jr. </strong><br />Mr. Norman, in the fourth corruption trial against him in two years, is accused of strong-arming two judicial candidates into paying his cronies thousands of dollars. His former lieutenant, Jeffrey Feldman, the party’s longtime executive director, was originally charged along with Mr. Norman, but charges against him were dropped when he agreed to testify for prosecutors.<br /><em>-NY Times, Feb., 2. 2007</em><br /><br />"A judge yesterday sentenced disgraced Brooklyn Democratic Party boss Clarence Norman to one to three years behind bars for shaking down a judicial candidate. <br /><br />Brooklyn Supreme Court Justice Martin Marcus also ordered "King of Brooklyn" Norman to pay back $10,000 he coerced from former civil-court judge Karen Yellen, $1,000 of which went to a fellow politician and $9,000 to pay a favored get-out-the-vote operative." <em>New York Post, April 17, 2007</em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-7890701959003685122006-01-28T07:14:00.000-08:002008-09-17T08:33:20.443-07:00Feldman is A Big Part of Judge Gleason's Decision to Do Away With Judicial Conventions<strong>"Rebuking Party Leaders, Court Halts System of Picking Judges </strong><br />A federal judge yesterday struck down the system that has given state political party leaders a stranglehold over the way top trial judges across New York State have been elected for decades.<br /><br />In a decision that could have a lasting impact on the judicial selection process across the state, the judge, John Gleeson of the United States District Court in Brooklyn, found the system unconstitutional and ordered it halted immediately. <br /><br />Judge Gleeson barred the State Board of Elections and Republican and Democratic Party officials from the practice of selecting candidates for State Supreme Court justice at sharply controlled nominating conventions that some critics said effectively robbed voters of their say in who made it to the bench. He ordered that they instead hold primaries until state lawmakers pass legislation setting up a new system." - NY TIMES - January 28, 2006<br /><br /><strong>Feldman: "No such list existed “anywhere in the world" <br />From Judge Gleason Decision:“</strong><br /><br />Concededly, there is not a rich history of challenger candidates even attempting to make their case to the delegates selected by the party leaders. But plaintiff Margarita López Torres has tried it, and her experience in the Second District does not bode well for other such candidates, especially those who deign to run slates of judicial delegates against those fielded by the party leadership. Beginning in March of 2003, López Torres wrote repeatedly to the Kings County Democratic County Committee to learn three basic things: (1) the date, time and place of the convention; (2) the names of the delegates, so she could lobby them; and (3) whether she could address the delegates at the convention. She did not hear from its Executive Director, Jeffrey C. Feldman, until September 4, 2003, after she once again requested the information.<br /><br />Feldman’s response is difficult to reconcile with the defendants’ gauzy characterizations of a democratic process open to all party members who seek the office of Supreme Court Justice. He began by mocking the request for a list of delegates to lobby: “I erroneously believed that a learned jurist, such as yourself, would be well aware that Delegates and Alternate Delegates to the Democratic Judicial Convention stand for independent election in the Primary Election, yet to be held.” <br /><br />No such list existed “anywhere in the world,” Feldman helpfully added. Id. As for López Torres’s inquiry about addressing the convention, Feldman wrote as follows: “I suffer from the innocent belief that the floor of the Convention is open, only, to elected Delegates and their successors. I am not aware of any Convention in my thirty (30) years of attendance, which permitted a non-accredited member to be accorded the privilege of the floor ....” Id. In closing, Feldman “note[d] for the record that” López-Torres’s fax machine was “in violation of Federal Communications Commission regulations” and admonished her to bring it into compliance. Id.<br /><br />He then chastised her for mailing him so many (unanswered) letter requests, and spending “copious sums in postage from, presumably, your political committee.” Id. In sum, lobbying judicial convention delegates and alternates is not a realistic route to a nomination even for diligent candidates if they lack the support of party leaders. “Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-82641715614102271922006-01-17T12:26:00.000-08:002008-09-17T12:32:49.870-07:00Brooklyn District Attorney says the Supreme Court Election System Corrupts<strong><em>Charles Hynes: Amicus Curiae Brief in Judge Lopez Torres vs. NYS Board of Elections:</em></strong><br />“New York’s uniquely constructed and statutorily- mandated nominating process for the state Supreme Court, which in effect places ultimate control over who becomes a state Supreme Court justice in the hands of powerful county political party leaders, creates and sustains a breeding ground for corruption and malfeasance and undermines the public’s confidence in the judiciary. <br /><br />Under the current system, Party leaders select Supreme Court Nominees based on their political connections and/or contributions to the party or its leaders; voters lack any meaningful opportunity to nominate, let alone elect, an alternative candidate to those nominees; and, once elected, the judges (desiring to be renominated and reelected or, in the case of lower-court judges, desiring to be promoted to the Supreme Court) come under great pressure to carry out their duties in a manner that satisfied party leaders. The result is a system in which only party-chosen candidates attain the Supreme Court and in which public confidence in the administration of justice and the rules of law is low.” <br /><em>U.S. Supreme Court Briefs in Support of Respondents</em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-64506102142497847742006-01-04T07:07:00.000-08:002008-09-17T07:09:20.584-07:00Charges Against Feldman Stand, Will He Talk?"The Appellate Division, Second Department, gave the go-ahead last week for a trial of the most serious charge against former Brooklyn Democratic leader Clarence Norman and Jeffrey Feldman, the executive director of the Brooklyn party. The pair are accused of pressuring two Civil Court candidates to use favored vendors in their 2002 campaigns. Both Mr. Norman and Mr. Feldman had asked the trial judge, Acting Justice Martin Marcus, to dismiss the case, claiming in their omnibus motions that the indictment did not charge a crime. Only Mr. Feldman, however, asked the Second Department for a writ of prohibition barring the trial from proceeding. In denying the request, a unanimous court in an unsigned opinion stated that Mr. Feldman had failed to demonstrate a "clear legal right" to have the charge rejected." <br /><em>New York Law Journal, November 30, 2005</em><br /><br /><strong>WILL JEFF FELDMAN DO THE ABRAMOFF?</strong><br />"Words will not ever be able to express my sorrow and my profound regret for all my actions and mistakes. I hope I can merit forgiveness from the Almighty and those I've wronged or caused to suffer. I plead guilty, your honor” (Lobbyist Jack Abramoff, January 3, 2006). According to the plea agreement, prosecutors will recommend a sentence of 9 1/2 to 11 years, providing he cooperates with federal prosecutors.” <br />---------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />Jeff Feldman, Executive Director of the Kings County Democratic Club, and chief advisor to County Leader Clarence Norman is facing the toughest decision of his life. <br /><br />If he hasn’t done it already, within a few days or hours, Jeff will have to decide whether to follow in the footsteps of Mr. Abramoff and bargain for a reduced jail sentence or to hang tough and hope for a miracle. <br /><br />Tampering with judicial elections through Bribery and Extortion is not an offense that escapes with just a token punishment. In fact, there may have been enough basis for a Federal RICO probe which considered conspiracy charges against Clarence, Jeff, and even Professor Boonie III.<br /><br />Setting an excruciatingly painful example is evidently the only way to deter those who are intent on making a profit out of the Judicial system. So even with a reduced sentence, Jeff is likely to do at least 4 years in prison. But on the other hand, a conviction after trial could land him in the slammer for twice as many years. <br /><br />According to reports, Jeff has retained one of the top criminal lawyers in the United States at the kind of fee which usually requires taking out a mortgage on a home. Attorney Branfman is a blue-blood lawyer usually retained by the rich and famous like Michael Jackson. - <em>Footnotes, January 4, 2006</em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-28695723021369274502004-01-09T07:05:00.000-08:002008-09-17T07:05:58.991-07:00Indicted Democratic Leader Swears In Brooklyn Judge"Jeffrey Feldman, the executive director of the Brooklyn Democratic Party, presided over the swearing in ceremony Tuesday of Martin M. Solomon, a Civil Court judge who was elected to the Supreme Court in November. A recent series of indictments and Commission on Judicial Conduct findings against several Brooklyn judges has led to intense scrutiny of the ties between politics and the judiciary in the borough. Both Mr. Feldman and Brooklyn Democratic leader, Assemblyman Clarence Norman, have been indicted on charges of pressuring judicial candidates to hire favored vendors for their campaigns. Justice Solomon, through a spokesman, said he had no comment. On Monday, Mr. Feldman and Brooklyn District Attorney Charles J. Hynes crossed paths at the swearing in of ShawnDya Simpson, who had been an assistant district attorney in Brooklyn before her election to the Civil Court. Judge Simpson, who had party backing, thanked both Mr. Feldman and Mr. Norman at the ceremony, a source said. Judge Simpson could not be reached for comment yesterday." -- Daniel Wise <br /><em>New York Law Journal, January 9, 2004 </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-64667641846598892262003-11-19T06:53:00.000-08:002008-09-17T06:58:42.459-07:00Feldman Indicted Extorting Money From Judge Yellen<strong>"Mr. Feldman demanded that unless both candidates paid $10,000 for an effort to get out the vote on primary day, all party workers would be pulled off operations on the judges' behalf.</strong><br /><br />Ms. Yellen ultimately paid $9,000 for the get-out-the-vote effort shortly after the primary, according to prosecutors, because she felt that she had a political obligation to do so. Judge Sikowitz never paid for the campaign effort because she did not raise enough funds to make the payment, they said."<br />Law Journal, November 19, 2003<br /><br /><br />"The mistake of Messrs. Feldman and Norman was to assume that duly elected judges, some with a decade or more on the Brooklyn bench, need not be exempted from this formula. Thus the meetings listed in the indictment, in which funds were demanded, threats issued, and sitting judges rudely informed of just where they stood in the pecking order."<br /><em>New York Sun, Novermber 19, 2003 </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-7431755159468405462003-11-18T07:11:00.000-08:002008-09-17T07:12:33.059-07:00Indictment Against Jeffrey Feldman<strong>KINGS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY CHARLES J. HYNES ANNOUNCES INDICTMENT AGAINST CLARENCE NORMAN AND JEFFREY FELDMAN FOR COERCION BY EXTORTION </strong><br /><br />TWO JUDGES TESTIFIED THAT THEY WERE FORCED TO PAY MONEY OR THEY WOULD BE “DUMPED” BY THE PARTY <br /><br />Brooklyn, November 18, 2003 -- Kings County District Attorney Charles J. Hynes today announced the indictment of Kings County Democratic County Committee (KCDCC) Chairman Clarence Norman and Jeffrey Feldman, Executive Director of the KCDCC, for coercion by extortion of two candidates for county-wide Civil Court judgeships in 2002. They are being charged with multiple counts of extortion, Grand Larceny, Attempted Grand Larceny and Conspiracy. <br /><br />In May 2002, district leaders of the Kings County Democratic party met at the Park Plaza Restaurant (with Norman and Feldman present) and voted endorsements for the three county-wide judicial seats for the Civil Court of the City of New York subject to election in 2002. The district leaders endorsed the re-election of Civil Court Judges Margaret Cammer and Karen Yellen, and the candidacy of Housing Court Judge Marcia Sikowitz. Soon after, Judge Cammer decided to withdraw from the race, and she was replaced as endorsee by Robin Garson. <br /><br />The indictment charges that in the summer of 2002, there were at least three meetings in which the candidates, along with some of their supporters and consultants, met with Norman and Feldman at their KCDCC offices to discuss their campaigns. Norman and Feldman set forth a proposal for a joint campaign for the three candidates. An ambitious program of newspaper ads, mailings, lit. drops, palm cards, and TV ads were discussed, with an estimated price tag of $100,000 to $150,000 per campaign. Most of the negotiation was between Norman and Feldman on one hand and Yellen’s consultants from The Advance Group on the other. Ultimately, the KCDCC made a non-negotiable demand of three joint mailings via Branford Communications. <br /><br />Although the Advance Group felt it could find a cheaper alternative to Branford, the Yellen campaign agreed to the proposal after Norman allegedly stated that any candidate that did not agree to the Branford mailings would be “dumped” or functionally disendorsed and otherwise not supported by his Party. The candidates testified that they felt that the Party’s endorsement was very valuable as they had access to a ready workforce, they could provide legal assistance, and they could use the club’s workforce to distribute literature and palm cards on Primary Day, which was all crucial to their campaigns. <br /><br />The agreement by the Yellen campaign to the joint mailings via Branford, upon pain of being “dumped” by the Party, gives rise to the first set of charges against Norman and Feldman: Attempted Grand Larceny in the Second Degree (attempt to extort more than $50,000) and Attempted Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree (attempt to steal by extortion). <br /><br />Of the three joint mailings agreed to, only one actually took place. That was in August 2002. The plan for the two additional joint mailings fell apart because Robin Garson successfully challenged the ballot petitions of her opponent (and thus, was assured the nomination for one of the three seats), and Sikowitz simply ran out of money. The Yellen campaign paid Branford approximately $7,600 for the one mailing. This payment, resulting from the agreement coerced by Norman and Feldman, is the basis for the second set of charges against Norman and Feldman: Grand Larceny in the Third Degree (extortion of more than $3,000), Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree (larceny by extortion), and Coercion in the Second Degree (a misdemeanor coerced under threat of harm to business, calling, career, etc.). <br /><br />The second part of this case concerns Norman and Feldman’s demands that Yellen and Sikowitz fund street operations in central Brooklyn (Norman’s assembly district and adjacent ones), budgeted for $16,000. This expense did not make sense to either Yellen or Sikowitz, who preferred to focus the use of their limited resources in other parts of Brooklyn. But here, Sikowitz said she felt bullied. Norman allegedly threatened that the Party would not do anything on Primary Day for the candidate who did not agree. Sikowitz agreed, but ultimately never actually paid the money because she simply did not have it. The Yellen campaign, however, after stalling, paid $9,000 in a check payable to William Boone (a political operative of Clarence Norman Jr.), after Feldman reiterated the demand and threat in early September, on the eve of the Primary. <br /><br />The “central Brooklyn” proposal is the basis for the third and fourth set of charges against Norman and Feldman: as to the Yellen campaign, Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree, and Coercion in the Second Degree; and as to the Sikowitz campaign, Attempted Grand Larceny in the Third Degree, Attempted Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree, and Attempted Coercion in the Second Degree. <br /><br />Sikowitz and Yellen lost the Primary on September 10, 2002, to their opponents, Civil Court Judge Margarita Lopez Torres and Housing Court Judge Delores Thomas.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-52734424018274990862003-11-18T07:09:00.000-08:002008-09-17T07:11:02.791-07:00Feldman and Norman Indicted In Judicial Corruption Case“prosecutors have obtained the first criminal charges directly related to suspected corruption in the selection of Brooklyn judges: an indictment of the borough’s top two Democratic officials on charges that they tried to strong-arm judicial candidates into hiring consultants favored by the party.” The Brooklyn Democratic Party Chairman, Assemblyman Clarence Norman Jr., and party executive director Jeffrey Feldman surrendered “to face charges of attempted grand larceny, a felony, and other charges.” Two unsuccessful Democratic candidates for Civil Court have told investigators that Norman and Feldman “threatened to withdraw the party’s support during the 2002 race unless they hired the party’s choices to print brochures and work to get out the vote.” <em>-- New York Times, Nov 18, 2003</em><br /><br />"Brooklyn Democratic party boss Clarence Norman and his top aide surrendered last night on charges they made $100,000 the going rate for a Brooklyn judgeship.<br />Norman, who was indicted last month on separate grand larceny charges, carried buttermilk cookies and joked with reporters about spending his second night on a cot in Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes' office.<br /><br />"Since I've been here before, I knew to bring my cookies and magazines," said Norman, who arrived on foot just after 9 p.m. with a half-dozen friends and supporters. "Why should I be angry? How many times do you have a second chance to spend the night in the district attorney's office?<br /><br />"We all know this is nothing more than a bunch of nonsense."<br /><br />Norman and Jeffrey Feldman, the party's executive director, are expected to be arraigned today on charges they shook down three judges up for reelection in 2002 after the party had endorsed them.<br /><br />They were indicted on 22 counts Friday. The indictment was set to be unsealed today. Each faces up to seven years in prison, if convicted on the top count of grand larceny.<br /><br />Feldman arrived about 15 minutes before Norman, accompanied by his attorney, Ronald Aiello. "We are at a loss - a total loss - as to what crimes could have been committed by Mr. Feldman," said Aiello.<br /><br />A source said Feldman allegedly told Civil Court judges Karen Yellen, Marcia Sikowitz and Margaret Cammer they each had "to come up with 100 grand or we're going to take this away from you."<br /><br />The indictment also charges the pair warned Yellen in a separate incident that she would be thrown off the ticket if she did not pay certain favored consultants, another sources said.<br /><br />Sources close to the case said all three women as well as a Brooklyn district leader are expected to testify against Feldman and Norman, who also is a longtime state assemblyman and controls judgeships in the heavily Democratic borough.<br /><br />The dual surrender came a month after another grand jury declined to issue a formal charge on the alleged scheme to sell seats on the bench."<br /><em>-Daily News, November 18, 2003 </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-32411284762462661002003-10-04T06:52:00.000-07:002008-09-17T06:52:59.330-07:00Will Feldman Rat on His Friends?"For months, prosecutors have dangled the prospect of "favorable treatment" in front of Feldman in exchange for his giving information on Norman, a source close to Feldman said. The grand jury has been looking into allegations that Norman forced judicial candidates to pay tens of thousands of dollars to get on the Democratic line." <br /><em>Daily News October 4, 2003 </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-7809740743961988992003-09-09T06:48:00.000-07:002008-09-17T06:51:20.968-07:00Controlling Judges Decisions"The final dagger was wielded by state Supreme Court Justice Gloria Dabiri, who, through her misunderstanding of the law and lack of common sense, not only knocked Eisenberg off the ballot but created a monster that will haunt New York politics. Dabiri ruled that residence can be used as a weapon against candidates.<br />Recchia wanted his opponent barred for using the Americanized Tony Eisenberg rather than the Russian Anatoly Eyzenberg. Recchia also said Eisenberg wasn't registered at the right address.<br /><strong>The Dems put Dabiri on the bench, so when Brooklyn party honcho Jeff Feldman showed up in her courtroom to observe the proceedings, she got the message. She bought the whole package and bounced Eisenberg on both his name and residence"</strong> <em>- Daily News, September 9, 2003</em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-75795928846687046762003-09-08T06:46:00.000-07:002008-09-17T06:48:33.422-07:004 Judges Feldman About Feldman Extortion Racket"Since then, the only people to be indicted are Mr. Norman and the executive director of the Brooklyn Democratic Party, Jeffrey C. Feldman. Both are accused of threatening to withhold the party's support from judicial candidates unless they hired the party's favored consultants to print brochures and work to get out the vote." - New York Sun, October 25, 2005<br /><br />"Political analysts said if the district attorney wins again, he will also be able to use his success as a warning to others, including the executive director of the party, Jeffrey Feldman, who, like Norman, is charged with extortion and coercion.<br />That indictment accuses them of demanding that two judicial candidates, Karen Yellen and Marcia Sikowitz, hire the party's go-to vendor, Branford Communication, to print campaign literature, and to hire a political consultant favored by the Brooklyn Democratic Party, William Boone, in exchange for the party's endorsement in 2002.<br />Many who are following the case say one of the big outstanding questions is whether Mr. Feldman, who has a pending appeal, will cut a deal with prosecutors if his case heads to trial. According to published reports, Mr. Feldman has not had those discussions with prosecutors."<br />New York Sun, November 7, 2005<br /><br />"But it is essentially the opposite. Mr. Norman and Jeff Feldman seem to be politicizing crime. At least that is what the four judges and several of their campaign workers are telling prosecutors. They testify they felt extorted into hiring particular consultants, who weren't even in their best interest, if they want the endorsement of the Brooklyn organization."<br /><em>New York Sun, September 8, 2003</em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-66833567172931156972003-06-19T06:43:00.000-07:002008-09-17T06:45:15.061-07:00Endorsements and Payoffs"Messinger said she regrets not having kept the bill presented to her by Norman and Jeffrey Feldman, executive director of the county Democratic Committee. She said the endorsement's price was "several hundred thousand dollars."<br />"There was no discussion of anything else," recalled Messinger, who said the leaders never talked about her chances of winning the general election or her stand on issues as conditions of an endorsement. "We were told this is what it will cost you."<br /><em>New York Post, June 19, 2003 </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-19764676540854531262003-05-07T06:40:00.000-07:002008-09-17T06:43:06.127-07:00Judge Gleason Rules: Judicial Screening Panels Controlled by County Leaders"TWO MEMBERS of the committee that screens judicial candidates in Brooklyn quit the panel Monday night, saying it did not live up to their expectations.<br />Panel member Robert L. Begleiter announced his resignation and that of Jane N. Barrett at the start of a meeting of the newly restructured Kings County Democratic Judicial Screening Committee.<br /><br />A letter from the pair to panel Chairman Martin Edelman was distributed to its members yesterday. . .<br /><br />We resign with regret, as we both had high expectations that the Panel, as reconstituted this year, would further merit selection of judges in Brooklyn and would restore the perception of integrity to a process that has been severely criticized," it said. "Unfortunately, our experience with the Panel has convinced us that it will not, under current procedures, be a vehicle for that reform. . . <br /><br />We strongly urge the Panel be charged with providing short lists of recommended individuals for judges' positions," rather than rating candidates as "qualified" or not qualified," the letter says. The pair urged that the committee identify "the most merited among the qualified." That is similar to the New York County Democratic Party's method and the process for selection of U.S. magistrate judges. . . <br />They claim the panel reached the same conclusion by consensus at its first meeting. Ms. Barrett and Mr. Begleiter said in their letter that the indicted pair participated in a June decision about the panel's charter. However, Robert Liff, the party's spokesman, said Mr. Norman has presided over executive committee meetings without voting and Mr. Feldman is not a member."<br /><em>Law Journal, July 22, 2004 </em><br /><br /><strong>"The executive director of the Brooklyn party, Jeffrey Feldman, declined to give a reason for the two lawyers' resignations, and said they would be replaced after the panel has finished its business for this year. "The panel is in the middle of the process," Mr. Feldman said. . .</strong><br /><br />"They just got cold feet from all the press," said one Brooklyn Democrat. They resigned without any formal letter, he said. "These are not letter-writers."<br /><em>New York Sun. May 7, 2003</em><br /><br />"Though three judicial screening panel members resigned, none of the others followed suit. And Jeffrey Feldman, executive director of the county organization, said Brooklyn is still a leader in judicial reform. "We're one of only about five organizations to enjoy the input of the screening panel," he said. "We've always been on the leading edge."<br /><em>Newsday, May 21, 2001</em><br /><br />"The First District's selection process is the best in the state because of its screening panel, which is discussed further below, and because of the intense involvemnet of Manhattan Democratic Clubs in judicial politics. . . Nevertheless, even in the First District, New York County's Democratic leader controls the process. Farrell assembles a package of candidatges for presentation to the convention and the delegates approve it. Candidate who Farrell decides should be nominated get nominated. . .<br /><br />More specifically, the overwhelming majority of these disputes involves rival Democrats clubs in Manhattan. These clubs' members, who must pay dues, represent approximately 1.3% of the registered Democrats in Manhattan. That there are occasional frights for control at the upper levels of the political structure of an AD or a county does not mean the delegate selection process is open to a challenger candidate who seeks her party's nomination. To the contray, it is yet another window into how closed the process is to the ordinary voters. "<br /><em>From Judge Gleason' Decision </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-79588821610407390672003-05-01T06:38:00.000-07:002008-09-17T06:39:59.554-07:00State Commission on Judicial Conduct leaks?"More on leaks: The state Commission on Judicial Conduct is seeking to remove Brooklyn elected state Supreme Court Justice Reynold Mason for abusing an escrow account (using it to pay for child support and political donations). Mason, who is appealing to the state's top court, presented an affidavit last month alleging that <strong>the commission leaked word to Brooklyn Democratic Executive Director Jeff Feldman that the judge would be ousted.</strong> Feldman denies it, but if true, it would be a breach of the panel's duty to conduct its affairs in confidence and evidence of a pipeline to the party. Information is power."<br /><em>Daily News, May 1, 2003 </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-46530460199717510502002-11-17T06:33:00.000-08:002008-09-17T06:36:32.955-07:00Federal Judge: Voting Wrongs, State Voting Rights"Jeffrey Feldman, the Brooklyn Democratic Party's executive director, collects $64,000 a year as his special staff assistant for voting rights on the payroll of a state senator." - Daily News Editorial, November 25, 2002<br /><br /><strong>Federal Judge on Feldman</strong><br />"Feldman’s response is difficult to reconcile with the defendants’ gauzy characterizations of a democratic process open to all party members who seek the office of Supreme Court Justice. He began by mocking the request for a list of delegates to lobby: “I erroneously believed that a learned jurist, such as yourself (Margarita Lopez Torres), would be well aware that Delegates and Alternate Delegates to the Democratic Judicial Convention stand for independent election in the Primary Election, yet to be held.” <br /><em>Decision by Eastern District Judge John Gleeson</em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-89689634584701243142002-09-17T06:29:00.000-07:002008-09-17T06:32:40.239-07:00Feldman Blocks Judge Lopez Torres Supreme Court Campaign"Judge Lopez Torres, who earlier this month won a bruising primary battle against the county party to run on the Democratic line in November for a second term on the Civil Court, said she received no response from Mr. Norman. <br /><br />One source close to the committee reported that two of its 16 members, upon learning of Mr. Norman's referral role, are considering resigning.<br /><br />Neither Mr. Karp nor Mr. Norman returned phone calls seeking comment.<br />The Brooklyn Democratic party's executive director, <strong>Jeffrey Feldman, however, acknowledged that the screening panel performs a "gatekeeping" role,</strong> but said that "anyone" who writes to Mr. Norman or the county headquarters expressing an interest in a Supreme Court nomination is "referred as a matter of course to the screening panel."<br /><br />When Mr. Norman was asked about his role by the Village Voice in August, he was quoted as responding, "it's my screening committee ... if I know there is someone we are not going to endorse, then what is the point."<br /><br /><strong>Mr. Feldman explained the apparent discrepancy between the two responses by saying he offered a "technical" answer and Mr. Norman a "philosophical" one.</strong> A candidate who was "repugnant" to the party, Mr. Feldman said, might not be referred to the screening committee for review."Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-3481482061868388352002-09-16T07:13:00.000-07:002008-09-17T07:14:14.511-07:00Feldman: Surrogate FEINBERG STAYING PUT!<strong>"Jeff Feldman, executive director of the Brooklyn Democratic organization, which strongly backed Feinberg's 1996 election, said he'd just had dinner with Feinberg and reported, "He is quite comfortable being surrogate, as should all citizens of the borough be comfortable with him being surrogate. There is no basis…to suggest that Judge Feinberg will not continue for the infinite foreseeable future as the surrogate for this county." </strong><br /><br />But what about the investigation under way? "I don't know anybody in Kings County of any prominence who's not under investigation by one agency or another," Feldman said. Feldman meant that as a defense of Brooklyn politics, but it could certainly be construed more as an indictment of it." --- By Erik Engquist, As printed in the <em>Courier Life Newspapers, September 16, 2002 </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-81702224335271103962002-09-12T06:26:00.000-07:002008-09-17T06:29:11.402-07:00It Is Not About Ethnic Voting Dummy: It is About Integrity<strong>"Jeffrey Feldman, the executive director of the Brooklyn Democratic party, attributed his group's defeat in the countywide races to a fundamental shift in ethnic voting patterns in the borough.</strong><br /><br />In the past, Mr. Feldman said, Jewish women in countywide races enjoyed a distinct advantage, but that was not the case this year, where the strongest turnout came in Hispanic and black communities. The two losers in the countywide race, Judge Yellen and Judge Sikowitz, are both Jewish. Justice Lopez Torres was born in Puerto Rico, and Judge Thomas is black."<br /><em>Law journal September 12, 2002</em><br /><br /><strong>NY Times Editorial Endorsement of Margarita Lopez Torres for Civil Court Judge</strong><br />"To punish her refusal to hire law clerks referred by clubhouse leaders and other so-called acts of "disloyalty," Margarita Lopez Torres, an able sitting Civil Court Judge was denied the backing of the Democratic Party organization for a second 10-year term. Herdemonstrated independence only bolsters the case for her re-election and the enthusiasm of our endorsement. <strong>For voters looking for a way to register their disgust with the crude partonage politics that prevail in judicial endorsements, this is it." </strong>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-7240684436591129362002-09-09T06:24:00.000-07:002008-09-17T06:26:18.731-07:00Democracy Brooklyn Style: Knock Them Off the Ballot"Jeff Feldman, executive director of the county Democratic organization, said it will take more than a handful of spirited races to unseat Norman.<br /><br /><strong>A few months ago, they had about 100 people running - state committee candidates, judicial delegates, people running for every office," Feldman said. "At the end of the day there are four of them left. If that's supposed to indicate a changing of the guard in the party, then I don't see it."</strong><br /><em>Daily News, September 9, 2002 </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-49551998479143612572002-08-21T06:23:00.000-07:002008-09-17T06:24:44.508-07:00Feldman: The Enforcer-in-Chief"Petitions with too many stray markings or cross-outs can result in summary removal from the ballot. Candidates that changed political parties less than one general election ago may not witness petitions as members of a different party. And so on. Seven candidates for district leader in Central Brooklyn were bounced because their petitions indicated they were running for the office universally called "district leader." That would have been fine in most boroughs, but in Brooklyn the office goes by a different name: State Committee.<br /><br />Insiders are unforgiving about such errors. Referring to the seven victims of the "district leader" goof, Jeff Feldman, the enforcer-in-chief of the Brooklyn Democratic organization, told me, "I'm not accusing these people of fraud, I'm accusing these people of utter stupidity<em>."Daily News, August 21, 2002 </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-71290190355941988922002-08-01T06:18:00.000-07:002008-09-17T06:20:02.453-07:00Feldman: Ballot Access Dead on Arrival"But that may not be enough to get the insurgents on the ballot. <strong>'Most of these insurgents are already toast,'</strong> the executive director of the Brooklyn Democratic organization, Jeffrey Feldman, said. "County's not even going to knock them off the ballot - they're dead on arrival."<br /><em>New York Sun, August 1, 2002 </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-11318462478593454322002-04-02T06:15:00.000-08:002008-09-17T06:23:16.473-07:00We Are Above the Law"As solid as the News stories were, they did not point out the case their own facts made for criminal charges. Between May and August of last year, Norman, who is also an assemblyman, got the county party he controls to make three loans totaling $115,000 to the assembly committee he controls. He told reporters that the interest-free loans were used to pay workers in a variety of city campaigns last year. ''The work of the Democratic county organization is performed by the local political clubs,'' he said. ''The various district leaders hire people to go out and give out flyers and to assist with the get-out-the-vote effort.''<br /><br />The problem is that it's a misdemeanor violation of Section 2-126 of the state election law for a party organization to spend one cent of its money on a primary, or for ''any person representing or acting on behalf of a party or party committee'' to do the same. <strong>Since all of these loans--the largest in county party history, according to its spokesman, Jeff Feldman--came during the primary campaign, every expenditure made by Norman's committee designed to aid a primary candidate would constitute a potential misdemeanor. The loans cannot be explained, as Feldman claimed, by calling them ''a bridge loan'' designed to resolve ''a cash-flow problem'' with Norman's committee, since Norman had no race in 2001 and started the year with a $108,193 balance.</strong><br /><br />Feldman also contends that these so-called loans--which Norman repaid only after he was contacted by the News--don't violate state law because the prohibition covers only expenditures by a party committee, not loans. Presumably, any competent prosecutor could demonstrate that shifting the funds between committees was a transparent circumvention of the party's spending ban.<br /><br />While misdemeanor violations of the election law are punishable by up to a year in prison, the statutes also provide that a repeated practice of violation can constitute a felony. Since Norman's committee did not report receiving two of the loans, it's not possible to fully determine how much of the party funds were dispersed for primary activities. But clearly some were--for example, immediately after receiving the one reported loan, the committee paid $2133 to a printer and $8000 to two Norman campaign operatives, Carmen Martinez and William Boone."<br /><em>Village Voice, April 2, 2002 </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-2053923068008560982001-12-02T06:11:00.000-08:002008-09-17T06:14:20.381-07:00Not, We the People, WE THE MACHINE"While not 100% accurate - the party machine occasionally does lose - Feldman reveals the contempt in which pols hold the principle of an independent judiciary. Not surprisingly, ex-politicians, county bosses and district leaders clutter the bench. The old saw that there are only three ways to leave elective office - indictment, death or a judgeship - isn't far off the mark.<br /><br />After a comprehensive review, the Daily News has concluded that of the city's roughly 180 elected Supreme Court justices and surrogates, at least 89, virtually half, are ill-chosen or unfit. The judiciary may disagree, but this finding is based on a large body of fact.<br /><br /><strong>Who are the judge makers? They're people like Jeffrey Feldman, executive director of the Brooklyn Democratic organization and husband of an elected judge. Feldman once boasted, "We haven't lost a judicial seat in over 100 years." He didn't mean "we, the people." He meant "we, the clubhouse." That says it all."</strong> <em>- Daily News, Editorial, December 2, 2001 </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7586066117684584232.post-83462928477527403132001-08-01T06:08:00.000-07:002008-09-17T06:10:25.191-07:00Judge Sweeney and Nadelson Insects"One reason that Roper's candidacy for district attorney has raised the special ire of the county Democratic party is that she circulated her petitions along with two insurgent candidates for Brooklyn Civil Court - Peter Sweeney and Eileen Nadelson - who would challenge the party's picks for the court.<br /><br /><strong>If you have an insect flying around the room, and it has bitten you twice, said Jeff Feldman, counsel for the Brooklyn Democratic Party, 'then you do something about it.'"</strong> <em>- Daily News, august 1, 2001 <br />(Both Peter Sweeney and Eileen Nadelson beat feldman's county backed candidates and were elected to the Brooklyn Civil Court.) </em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0