NY State Assembly Will Continue Cuomo Investigation
The investigation includes the nursing home death scandal during the COVID pandemic.
The New York State Assembly decided to continue its investigation of Gov. Andrew Cuomo. The AG investigation already found he sexually harassed at least 11 women.
The assembly originally chose to suspend the investigation since Cuomo will officially resign in the coming days.
Carl Heastie, the Assembly speaker, said since they could not impeach a former governor the assembly stopped the investigation. Democrats and Republicans fumed, which caused a reversal:
The reversal on Monday does not mean that lawmakers will move to impeach Mr. Cuomo; Mr. Heastie had cited a six-page legal memo on Friday that argued that lawmakers lacked the constitutional authority to impeach an official who was out of office. Indeed, there is no precedent in New York for impeaching a former governor.
Last week’s announcement had prompted an outcry from both Republican and Democratic legislators, who said that the Assembly had a duty to, at the very least, make public the findings of the taxpayer-funded investigation, which began in March. Some legislators, especially Republicans and a small group of left-wing Democrats, argued in favor of continuing impeachment efforts, even with Mr. Cuomo out of power.
On Monday, Mr. Heastie and Charles Lavine, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, which is leading the investigation, issued a statement saying it would continue. “The Assembly Judiciary Committee will continue to review evidence and issue a final report on its investigation of Governor Cuomo,” they said.
“The New York State Assembly thinks corruption, sexual harassment/assault, and retaliation are acceptable,” declared Cuomo accuser Charlotte Bennett. “Employing a lazy legal argument and offering a poorly reasoned memo, the speaker has taken the coward’s way out.
CBS2 found out the investigation will include Cuomo’s nursing home death scandal, if his staff “improperly worked on his book,” and the “allegations he covered up safety concerns at the Gov. Mario M. Cuomo Bridge.”
Heastie admitted they “found credible evidence” to impeach Cuomo if he chose not to resign.
The assembly would give authorities investigating its report and evidence.
Heastie did not say when the assembly will finish and release its report.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
There are no signs of due process but great enthusiasm for political show trials.
Surely they can find a way to prosecute him under criminal statutes? Then he could share a cell with the creepy porn lawyer.
Where were they 15 months ago ?
Typical Democrats – recognize the problem AFTER it has been resolved.
Or create a precedent for impeaching a former governor? Lack of precedent is no reason to not be the first.
Profiles in courage, the lot of them. Now that he’s safely volunteered to resign, they’re finding all sorts of evidence they could’ve used to impeach him.
“Mr. Heastie had cited a six-page legal memo on Friday that argued that lawmakers lacked the constitutional authority to impeach an official who was out of office. Indeed, there is no precedent in New York for impeaching a former governor.”
So what? There was no precedent for impeaching a former president either, but it was done.
Or by doing so, were the impeachers subconsciously acknowledging that he was still the legitimately-elected president?
Here’s the memo. Do you find any flaws in it?
And there was much harumphing heard throughout the land.
A harumph a day keeps the reporters at bay.
Cuomo is probably going to run as a Candidate for President. But, experts wonder whether he has sexually harassed ENOUGH women to qualify as a Democrat Candidate.
Borderline.
They should have scheduled an impeachment vote for Monday. You know the pervert will try to run again once it dims a bit in the voters memories.
It’s not clear whether impeachment could prevent him from running again. On the federal level when the senate convicts someone on impeachment it may (but doesn’t have to) ban them from future federal appointed office, but not from elected office. But the NY state provision is worded a bit differently, and it’s not clear whether the same thing applies.
Well, that’s the first time I ever heard you say something’s not clear.