New York City

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      How New York’s Mayoral Hopefuls Would Change the N.Y.P.D.

      by

      Some candidates in the Democratic primary want to cut $1 billion or more from the police budget, while others have more moderate proposals, frustrating activists.When the former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin was found guilty this week of murdering George Floyd, the Democrats running for mayor of New York City, unsurprisingly, offered a unanimous chorus of support.The two leading moderates in the race — Andrew Yang and Eric Adams — said that justice had been delivered, but that the verdict was only the first step toward real police accountability. Maya Wiley and Scott Stringer, two left-leaning candidates, seized the moment more overtly, appearing with other mayoral hopefuls at a rally at Barclays Center in Brooklyn, the site of many of last year’s Black Lives Matter protests.“For once, we got a little bit of what we deserve — to be seen as people who deserve to breathe,” Ms. Wiley said to a crowd, within hours of the verdict.But the candidates’ unanimity disappears when it comes to their approaches to running the New York Police Department, the nation’s largest. From the size of the police budget to disciplining rogue officers, the candidates offer starkly different visions.In the wake of the Floyd case and other recent police killings, several candidates on the left, including Ms. Wiley and Mr. Stringer, have adopted the goals of the “defund the police” movement and want to significantly cut the police budget and divert resources into social services.Another candidate, Dianne Morales, a former nonprofit executive who also attended the rally at Barclays, has embraced that movement more fully, calling for slashing the $6 billion budget in half and for eventually abolishing the police altogether. She and others argue that having fewer officers would reduce violent encounters with the police.But Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams, more centrist candidates, strongly oppose reducing the police force and instead are calling for more expeditious decisions on police discipline and for improving accountability.The debate is happening at a precarious moment for New York City, which is facing a troubling rise in gun violence: Last year was the city’s bloodiest in nearly a decade, and the number of shooting victims doubled to more than 1,500.Shootings typically spike as the weather gets warmer, and the coming months will reveal whether the increase in violence over the last year was an aberration linked to the pandemic or the beginning of a worrisome trend.If gun violence increases in May and June, in the weeks leading up to the June 22 primary that is likely to decide the city’s next mayor, it could have an outsize impact on the race. And it may help moderate candidates like Mr. Yang, a former presidential hopeful, and Mr. Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, who tied for first when voters were asked in a recent poll which candidate would best handle crime and public safety.Mr. Adams, a Black former police captain, has positioned himself as a law-and-order candidate, saying that he is far better equipped than his rivals to make the city safer — a key step in its recovery from the pandemic.“Public safety is the prerequisite to prosperity in this city,” Mr. Adams often repeats on the campaign trail.Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, is a former New York City police captain who strongly opposes reducing the size of the force.Gabriela Bhaskar for The New York TimesMr. Adams is allied with moderate Black lawmakers who have criticized the defund movement and have argued that their communities do not want officers to disappear. Similarly, Mr. Yang supports some police reform measures but has not embraced the defund movement.Chivona Renee Newsome, a co-founder of Black Lives Matter Greater New York, said she feared that Mr. Yang or Mr. Adams would not bring meaningful changes to the Police Department.“I want a mayor who will listen,” she said, someone who was “not at the mercy of the N.Y.P.D.”Calls for sweeping changes and a push to defund the police last summer led to laws banning chokeholds, limiting legal protections for officers facing lawsuits and opening police disciplinary records to the public. But elected officials did not make substantial cuts to the police budget or limit the types of situations officers respond to.“We’re long past the time where people are going to be satisfied with cosmetic reforms or some attempts that really don’t get at the root question around reducing police violence and surveillance, increasing police accountability and transparency, and basically divesting from the N.Y.P.D.’s bloated budget and reinvesting that into our communities,” said Joo-Hyun Kang, the director of Communities United for Police Reform.Left-wing activists are already applying a fresh round of pressure on the City Council and Mayor Bill de Blasio to reduce police spending in next year’s budget.The death of Eric Garner in Staten Island in 2014 put a particular focus on holding officers accountable. Daniel Pantaleo, the officer who put Mr. Garner in a chokehold, was not criminally charged, and it took the city five years to fire him from the Police Department.Mr. Garner’s mother, Gwen Carr, endorsed Raymond J. McGuire, a former Wall Street executive who has more moderate views on policing. Ms. Carr said the next mayor would only be able to tackle police reform if the city’s finances were stabilized. Mr. McGuire supports measures like increasing funding for the Civilian Complaint Review Board, which investigates accusations of police brutality and misconduct and makes disciplinary recommendations.The next mayor and his or her police commissioner will have to resolve a host of thorny issues: how to discipline officers; whether the police should respond to calls involving the homeless and mental health issues; and how to address protests over police brutality. To put it more simply, in the post-Floyd era, what is the correct form and function of the police force and its 35,000 officers?When it comes to firing an officer, Mr. Yang believes the police commissioner should continue to have final say; Mr. Adams argues it should be the mayor; and Mr. Stringer wants it to be the Civilian Complaint Review Board. Ms. Wiley has not given a clear answer.The left-leaning candidates want to prevent police officers from responding to mental health emergencies and remove them from schools; Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams are reluctant to do so.While Mr. Stringer, the city comptroller, and Ms. Wiley, a former counsel to Mr. de Blasio and former chair of the Civilian Complaint Review Board, have distanced themselves from the word “defund,” they both want to cut the police budget. Ms. Wiley has suggested cutting $1 billion per year. Mr. Stringer says he would trim at least $1 billion over four years and released a detailed plan to transfer 911 calls for issues involving homelessness and mental health to civilian crisis response teams.Scott Stringer, the city comptroller, has proposed removing police officers from public schools in New York City.Benjamin Norman for The New York TimesMs. Morales has called for the most sweeping changes to the criminal justice system: She wants to decriminalize all drug use, eliminate bail and build no new jails. Two other candidates — Kathryn Garcia, the city’s former sanitation commissioner, and Shaun Donovan, the former federal housing secretary — have more moderate positions that are nuanced enough that activists have created spreadsheets to keep track of where the candidates stand.Mr. Yang and Mr. Adams have their own proposals, but activists are skeptical. Earlier this month, when Mr. Yang attended a bike vigil for Daunte Wright, a young man killed by the police in Minnesota, an organizer recognized him and grabbed a bullhorn.“You’re pro-cop — get out of here,” she said. “Boo! Shame on you, Andrew Yang.”Mr. Yang said in an interview that he decided to leave after that, and that he had spent more than an hour with the group biking from Barclays Center to Battery Park in Lower Manhattan.“I wanted to join this event in order to really have a chance to reflect and mourn for Daunte Wright’s unnecessary death at the hands of law enforcement,” he said.Mr. Yang said he supported measures like requiring officers to live in the city and appointing a civilian police commissioner who is not steeped in the department’s culture. He said officers like Mr. Pantaleo should be fired quickly. But he rejected the idea that he was pro-police or anti-police.“I think most New Yorkers know that we have to do two things at once — work with them to bring down the levels of shootings and violent crimes that are on the rise, and we also need to reform the culture,” Mr. Yang said.Andrew Yang has said that he would choose a civilian police commissioner if elected mayor.Spencer Platt/Getty ImagesProtesters were upset that Mr. Yang called for an increase in funding for a police task force in response to anti-Asian attacks. They also have doubts about Mr. Yang because Tusk Strategies, a firm that advises him, has worked with the Police Benevolent Association, the police union, which embraced President Donald J. Trump.Mr. Adams attended the same vigil for Mr. Wright, and he was peppered with questions over his support of the stop-and-frisk policing strategy. Such stops soared under Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, and they disproportionately targeted Black and Latino men. Mr. Adams said he believed stop-and-frisk could be a useful tool, but that it was abused under Mr. Bloomberg.Mr. Adams has offered his own ideas: diversifying the Police Department, where Black officers are underrepresented; disclosing the department’s own internal list of officers with records of complaints and giving communities veto power over precinct commanders.He also argues that he is the only candidate with the credibility to transform the force. Mr. Adams has said that he was beaten by the police as a young man and that inspired him to push for changes when he later joined the Police Department.In an interview, Mr. Adams said that it took the city too long to fire Mr. Pantaleo and he would move more quickly on disciplinary matters if elected.“I’m going to have a fair but speedy trial within a two-month period to determine if that officer should remain a police officer,” he said. “And if not, we’re going to expeditiously remove him from the agency. The goal here is to rebuild trust.”Mr. Adams wants to appoint the city’s first female police commissioner, and he has spoken highly of a top official, Chief Juanita Holmes, whom the current police commissioner, Dermot F. Shea, lured out of retirement. Mr. Yang is also considering Ms. Holmes or Val Demings, a congresswoman from Florida and a former police chief, according to a person familiar with his thinking.Mr. de Blasio has praised a new disciplinary matrix that standardizes the range of penalties for offenses like using chokeholds and lying on official paperwork. But while current leaders settled on these rules, the agreement signed by the police commissioner and the chairman of the Civilian Complaint Review Board is not legally binding, allowing the next administration to set its own policies.Many of the mayoral candidates have called for changing how the city handles mental health emergencies. Since 2014, N.Y.P.D. officers have killed more than 15 people with histories of mental illness. The city is currently conducting a small experiment that sends social workers instead of police out on calls with emergency medical technicians in parts of Harlem.As the Police Department says it is trying to build trust with the community, one recent decision appeared slightly tone deaf: bringing a robot dog to an arrest at a public housing building. The candidates criticized the use of the device, which costs at least $74,000.Mr. Adams said the money would be better spent “stopping gun violence in communities of color.”“You can’t build the trust we need between those communities and police with a robot,” he said. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Ranked-Choice Voting for N.Y.C. Mayor: What to Know

      by

      [Want to get New York Today by email? Here’s the sign-up.]It’s Friday. Weather: The sun will be out today with a high in the mid-60s and skies will be clear tonight. It will be mostly sunny on Saturday but then clouds will move in during the evening. Expect a rainy Sunday. Alternate-side parking: In effect until April 29 (Holy Thursday, Orthodox). Amr Alfiky/The New York TimesThe June 22 primary is fast approaching.But voters will find a different type of ballot when they select their party’s nominee: For the first time, the city will use ranked-choice voting for primary elections. That means New Yorkers can select a set number of candidates in order of preference — up to five total.[Read more tips for using ranked-choice voting and the latest news on the race.]Here’s what you need to know about the new system:So how does this work?Ranked-choice voting is like voting in rounds: If one candidate receives more than 50 percent of first-choice votes in the first round, they win. But if no one does, the last-place candidate will be eliminated, and all other candidates move to the next round.Votes for the eliminated candidate are then reallocated to whichever candidate those voters ranked second — and votes are retabulated. Rounds of elimination will continue until two candidates remain.On top of the mayor’s race, you’ll be ranking candidates for borough president, comptroller, public advocate and City Council.Wait … what does this actually mean for me?You’ll mark your preferences by filling in a numbered bubble next to each candidate’s name. You can rank as many candidates as the ballot allows, just one candidate, or anything in between — though ranking more than one won’t hurt your favorite.You’re still ultimately casting one vote for one person: Just think of your vote as transferable. If your first choice is eliminated, then your vote transfers over to your next choice.Proponents say the system allows people to more fully express their preferences: You don’t have to choose between a candidate you love and one you’re just OK with but you think has a better chance of winning.What’s the strategy if there’s a candidate I really don’t want to win?Don’t vote for them! Vote for the person you most want to see in office.You could also give high ranks to the candidates you believe are most likely to take down your least-favorite option to pull power away from them.Can I mail in my ballot or vote early?Yes. The last day to request an absentee ballot is June 15 and ballots must be postmarked or delivered to the Board of Elections by June 22.In-person early voting lasts from June 12 to June 20.From The TimesHow New York’s Mayoral Hopefuls Would Change the N.Y.P.D.Andrew Yang, Looking for Endorsement, Offends Gay Democratic ClubSomeone Threw Acid in Her Face. A Month Later, the Family Has No Answers.Councilman Pleads Guilty to $82,000 Tax Fraud. He Has No Plans to Quit.Port Authority Bomber Is Sentenced to Life in PrisonWant more news? Check out our full coverage.The Mini Crossword: Here is today’s puzzle.What we’re readingThe Open Streets program helped struggling stores and shops in the pandemic’s earliest months. But some business owners say a lack of financial support has put Open Streets at risk. [The City]New York City’s mask mandate will remain in place through June at minimum, Mayor Bill de Blasio said. [NBC 4 New York]What we’re watching: The Times’s Metro reporters J. David Goodman and Matthew Haag discuss New York City’s economy and recovery from the pandemic on “The New York Times Close Up With Sam Roberts.” The show airs on Friday at 8 p.m., Saturday at 1:30 p.m. and Sunday at 12:30 p.m. [CUNY TV]And finally: Your virtual social weekend The Times’s Melissa Guerrero writes:Although many performance spaces, museums and community centers are closed, people are finding creative ways to connect through virtual events and programs. Here are suggestions for maintaining a New York social life this weekend while keeping a safe distance from other people.Book talk: ‘Glamour’s Women of the Year’On Friday at 7 p.m., join a conversation about the book “Glamour: 30 Years of Women Who Have Reshaped the World,” with the editor in chief of Glamour magazine, Samantha Barry.R.S.V.P. for free on the event page.Webinar: Legendary female jazz singersLearn about the life of Bessie Smith, Billie Holiday, Ella Fitzgerald and Sarah Vaughan with a discussion by the D.J. and jazz historian Matthew “Fat Cat” Rivera on Friday at 8 p.m.Purchase a ticket ($10) on the event page.Earth Day workshopOn Saturday at 1 p.m., learn how to make a self-watering seed pot for a post-Earth Day celebration.Watch the free Facebook livestream on the Dyckman Farmhouse Museum page.It’s Friday — take a break.Metropolitan Diary: N.Y.P.L. on the UES Dear Diary:I pity the poor encyclopedia,Dreary and dingy and dusty.Does anyone here want to readeeya?Long ago you were tried, true and trusty.Every woman and child and manica,Once pored through your pages, perusedThe treasures inside old Britannica,Now unwanted, unloved and unused.Can’t they see you’re enticing, enjoy’ble?Will they fondle your pages once more?Why is wanting attention a foible,When you’ve knowledge and info galore?There you sit on the shelves; you’re a martyr,And ignorant louts should be warned:No one here among us is smarter,Than the mighty tomes that they’ve scorned.I pity the poor encyclopedia,Suff’ring a silent malaise,Sexy screens and seductive new mediaThat’s what’s on the menu these days.— Lou CraftNew York Today is published weekdays around 6 a.m. Sign up here to get it by email. You can also find it at nytoday.com.What would you like to see more (or less) of? Email us: nytoday@nytimes.com. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      How Does Ranked-Choice Voting Work in New York?

      by

      What is ranked-choice voting? Instead of casting a single vote for a single candidate, voters in a ranked-choice system select a set number of candidates in order of preference. In New York’s mayoral primary, voters will be allowed to choose up to five. What types of elections use it? In the U.S., ranked-choice voting is […] More

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Andrew Yang, Looking for Endorsement, Offends Gay Democratic Club

      by

      Participants described Mr. Yang’s remarks as offensive, saying that even as members of the club wanted to discuss policy issues, he mentioned gay bars.Andrew Yang, the former presidential candidate and leading contender for mayor of New York City, met with a prominent L.G.B.T. Democratic political organization on Wednesday to seek its endorsement.It did not go particularly well.In an interview with the Stonewall Democratic Club of New York City, Mr. Yang cited gay members of his staff as apparent evidence of his openness to the club’s concerns, and expressed enthusiasm about the prospect of visiting Cubbyhole, a storied New York lesbian bar, participants said.He proactively talked about resurrecting the city’s Pride March, but failed to pay sufficient heed to more substantive issues they were actually concerned about, including homelessness and affordable housing, they said.The club is arguably the leading L.G.B.T. club in New York City, according to Christine Quinn, New York City’s first openly gay City Council speaker. Its members, she said, are politically “sophisticated.” Yet Mr. Yang’s appearance struck those members as pandering and tone deaf, according to interviews, a video and a copy of the comments that unfolded during the virtual meeting.“I genuinely do love you and your community,” he said, according to a partial recording of the remarks, describing his affection for the L.G.B.T.Q. community. “You’re so human and beautiful. You make New York City special. I have no idea how we ever lose to the Republicans given that you all are frankly in, like, leadership roles all over the Democratic Party.”“We have, like, this incredible secret weapon,” he added. “It’s not even secret. It’s like, we should win everything because we have you all.”According to limited public polling as well as private polling, Mr. Yang has surged to the front of the mayoral pack, fueled by his name recognition and celebrity status, as well as his cheery demeanor and optimistic discussion of the city’s future. But in the past, he has struggled with issues of tone: His presidential campaign has been trailed by allegations of a “bro” culture; in one of his own books, he admits to having named his pectoral muscles, Lex and Rex.A woman now running for Manhattan borough president has also claimed that Mr. Yang had discriminated against her on the basis of gender when she worked for him at his test prep company, allegations that he has consistently denied.While Mr. Yang has a consistent lead in the polls and has acquired a handful of endorsements from elected officials, he has generally failed to win significant support from New York City institutions, including labor unions and the Stonewall Club, which did not endorse him.For the first time this year, New York City voters will be able to rank up to five candidates in a mayor’s race. On Wednesday, the club’s board voted to endorse a slate of three: In first place, it chose Scott M. Stringer, the New York City comptroller; followed by Dianne Morales, a former nonprofit executive; and Raymond J. McGuire, a former vice chairman at Citigroup.Ms. Quinn, who was a longtime club member but was not present at the endorsement interviews, said that while people “appreciate diversity in representation and staffing,” club members have “a long and diverse agenda and want that spoken to.”Multiple participants described Mr. Yang’s remarks as offensive, saying that members of the club who raised policy issues found his mention of gay bars off-putting.“Gay, gay, gay. Wow,” one person wrote in the chat accompanying the forum, which was later shared with The New York Times. “More to us than just that.”To Harris Doran, a club member and filmmaker, Mr. Yang’s insistence on referring to members as “your community” particularly stung.“He kept calling us ‘Your community,’ like we were aliens,” Mr. Doran said.Sasha Neha Ahuja, one of Mr. Yang’s two campaign managers — both are gay — said she heard at least one other candidate on the call use the same term, and suggested that some members had gone into the interview process with their minds already made up.“I hope Andrew continues to have space for folks to listen with an open heart about the experiences of all communities that have been deeply impacted by years of oppression,” she said. “I apologize if folks felt some type of way about it.”Mr. Yang’s interview was one of nine the club held Wednesday night, before it held its endorsement vote. He was unlikely to win an endorsement, given the club’s longstanding relationship with Mr. Stringer, but Rose Christ, the club’s president, said Mr. Yang could have delivered a performance that avoided the ensuing outcry.“There were questions and critiques raised about each candidate, but I think it was the tenor with which he addressed the membership that stood out from the other candidates,” Ms. Christ said.She added that it felt “outdated.”To some Stonewall attendees, Mr. Yang’s appearance only fueled concerns about whether he can discuss the problems at hand with sufficient depth and seriousness. More broadly, the reaction speaks to how polarizing Mr. Yang’s personality can be — eliciting sincere enthusiasm and disdain in seemingly equal measure.“When I see a candidate come in just with Michael Scott levels of cringe and insensitivity, it either tells me Andrew Yang is in over his head or is not listening to his staff,” said Alejandra Caraballo, a member of the organization, referring to the character played by Steve Carell on “The Office.” “Those are both radioactive flashing signs that say he is not prepared to be mayor of New York.”Ms. Christ said members were offended that Mr. Yang chose to focus on bars, parades and his gay staff members.“Those are not the substantive issues that our membership cares about and it came off poorly,” Ms. Christ said.Michael Gold contributed reporting. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Were Brendan Hunt's Social Media Rants Free Speech or Illegal Threats?

      by

      The trial of Brendan Hunt, an avid Trump backer and New York City resident, will be one of the justice system’s first attempts to grapple with the events of Jan. 6.Two days after the attack on the U.S. Capitol, a 37-year-old man living in New York City posted a video online entitled “KILL YOUR SENATORS.”The man, Brendan Hunt, was not in Washington on Jan. 6. But in the 88-second video, he said that “we need to go back to the U.S. Capitol” ahead of President Biden’s inauguration and “slaughter” members of Congress, according to the criminal complaint.“If anybody has a gun, give me it,” he said. “I’ll go there myself and shoot them and kill them.”Now, the question of whether the video and three other social media posts by Mr. Hunt crossed the line from free speech into illegal threats is at the heart of a federal trial starting this week in Brooklyn.Brendan Hunt in a picture from his BitChute account.This is the first federal trial in the country that will force jurors to grapple deeply with the events of Jan. 6, diving headfirst into the national debate about how much the government should police violent rhetoric in the wake of the Capitol attack.Mr. Hunt became part of the Capitol breach’s sprawling aftermath as law enforcement officials not only arrested hundreds of rioters who stormed the Capitol but also charged people with making online threats around the attack. As officials in Washington consider new ways to combat violent extremism, including a possible domestic terrorism statute, Mr. Hunt’s trial could be a bellwether of how the authorities balance the pursuit of serious threats with constitutional protections for political speech.“These types of threats are particularly dangerous when made in a charged political environment that has already led to the overrunning of the United States Capitol and the interruption, for the first time in United States history, of the certification of a presidential election,” federal prosecutors in Brooklyn said in a court filing last month.Mr. Hunt faces one count of threatening to murder members of Congress, which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. In December, Mr. Hunt posted on Facebook urging a “public execution” of prominent Democratic politicians, including the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Chuck Schumer, according to prosecutors.Mr. Hunt’s lawyers have described the case as a groundbreaking prosecution, arguing that the government was trying to criminalize Mr. Hunt’s political opinions. Mr. Hunt had no weapons, no plans to carry out violence and no affiliations with organized groups, his lawyers said. He was ranting into the vast internet void, they argue, with no expectation that anyone would act on his words.“Seen in context, the posts are more consistent with intoxication than insurrection,” his lawyers wrote.Jan Rostal, a federal defender for Mr. Hunt, said in a statement that the First Amendment encouraged political debate “in the town square, not in secret, so bad ideas can get tested.”“This case could have serious implications for freedom of speech on social media,” Ms. Rostal said.Although Mr. Hunt had been posting menacing statements on social media since early December, he was not arrested until Jan. 19, the day before Mr. Biden’s inauguration. Mr. Hunt has been in jail since his arrest.The trial will wade into an unsettled area of law that has become especially urgent with the explosion of incendiary political speech in recent years. One of the central disputes at Mr. Hunt’s trial will be whether a “reasonable person” would have viewed his social media posts as a serious threat to kill members of Congress.“The courts have said we’ve got to leave a lot of room for dissent, including dissent that’s raised in violent terms,” said Eugene Volokh, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles. “But how much room is a very important question.”To convict Mr. Hunt, prosecutors must prove that he was not just joking or exaggerating. They must show that he made the statements with the intention of either interfering with the official duties of members of Congress or retaliating against them for certifying the 2020 election results.Prosecutors have said that they may call Capitol Police officers as witnesses to testify about what happened on Jan. 6 and how they reacted to Mr. Hunt’s social media posts.The trial will require jurors to parse through Mr. Hunt’s web of political beliefs to understand his motivations. During jury selection, jurors were asked whether they have strong opinions about the 2020 election or about supporters of President Donald J. Trump that would prevent them from being fair and impartial.Prosecutors will show that Mr. Hunt, a fervent supporter of Mr. Trump, was furious about the outcome of the 2020 presidential election and believed members of Congress were “traitors” for supporting an election result that he viewed as illegitimate.Using Mr. Hunt’s social media comments and private text messages, prosecutors will argue that his statements were deliberate threats motivated by white supremacist and anti-Semitic beliefs.In the video that Mr. Hunt shared two days after the Capitol riot, he used references that are known to white supremacists, prosecutors said. The video was posted on BitChute, a platform with less restrictive moderation policies than YouTube, which has cracked down on the spread of hate speech and conspiracy theories.In a court filing, Mr. Hunt’s lawyers said he removed the video within two days of posting it. It was a “fellow conservative” who saw the video on BitChute and alerted the F.B.I., they wrote.The defense said Mr. Hunt held more nuanced political views than the government’s portrayal. He has posted on social media that he voted for President Barack Obama in 2008 and was later involved in the Occupy Wall Street movement, according to a court filing from his lawyers.“While we do not agree with many of Mr. Hunt’s views, we will fight to the death his right to express them,” his lawyers wrote.In December, Mr. Hunt wrote on Facebook describing Mr. Schumer, Ms. Pelosi and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez as the sort of “high value targets” that Mr. Trump’s supporters should shoot, prosecutors said.“They really need to be put down,” he wrote, according to the complaint. “These commies will see death before they see us surrender!”On the social media site Parler, prosecutors said, after another user suggested acting peacefully following the Capitol riot, Mr. Hunt wrote: “lets go, jan 20, bring your guns #millionmilitiamarch.”Law enforcement officials have historically been careful about bringing criminal charges hinged solely on speech, often waiting to see if the person making troubling statements online takes concrete steps toward violence. But in the weeks after Jan. 6, prosecutors around the country signaled that they were less willing to wait after witnessing how online rhetoric turned into the real-world violence that unfolded at the Capitol.During the pandemic, Mr. Hunt had been working from home in Ridgewood, Queens, making about $57,800 a year in his clerical job with the New York State courts system. He was terminated from the job after his arrest.Mr. Hunt had a long history of promoting conspiracy theories online, including falsely implicating the federal government in a cover-up of the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, which killed 20 first graders and six educators.Mr. Hunt’s father is a retired family court judge in Queens.At a hearing last month, Mr. Hunt’s father, John M. Hunt, told the court that after his son graduated from college, he pursued a career in acting and clashed frequently with his mother over his marijuana use. Family disputes sometimes escalated into physical altercations, prosecutors said, to the point where Mr. Hunt’s father called on the police to intervene.The father blamed his son’s social media rants on marijuana and alcohol.“My son is not a walking time bomb,” he said in court. “He’s a bright guy. He can be engaging.” More

    • 113 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Andrew Yang Wins Endorsement from Left-Wing Rival Carlos Menchaca

      by

      Carlos Menchaca, who bowed out of the New York City mayoral race last month, will endorse his former opponent.Andrew Yang may be leading early polls in the New York City mayor’s race, but he has nonetheless faced skepticism from many left-leaning voters and trails most of his main Democratic rivals in endorsements.On Wednesday, Mr. Yang will try to counter that skepticism, announcing that he has landed the support of Carlos Menchaca, a city councilman from Brooklyn.Before dropping out of the mayor’s race last month, Mr. Menchaca had positioned himself as one of the most left-leaning Democrats in the field.Mr. Menchaca, who is Mexican-American and grew up in public housing in Texas, is best known for scuttling the Industry City rezoning on the Brooklyn waterfront last year — the city’s biggest clash over development since the collapse of the Amazon deal in Queens — and for proposing the legislation that created identification cards for undocumented residents.He also called for defunding the police, as has Dianne Morales, a former nonprofit executive whom Mr. Menchaca often praised on the campaign trail, and who would have been a more expected endorsement choice.But Mr. Menchaca said in an interview that he was drawn to Mr. Yang because of the candidate’s support for universal basic income — even though Mr. Yang’s plan for New York involves a pared-down model — and his proposal to create a public bank to serve low-income and undocumented residents who do not have a bank account.“We share a lot of values that are rooted in bringing community voices to the table to shape policies,” Mr. Menchaca said.Activists in the left wing of the party have viewed Mr. Yang and Eric Adams — the two perceived front-runners in the race — with suspicion for being too moderate and too friendly toward the business and real estate communities. Neither has embraced the defund movement as Mr. Menchaca has.But Mr. Yang does have backing from two prominent left-leaning Democrats: Representative Ritchie Torres of the Bronx, the first openly gay Afro-Latino member of Congress, and Ron Kim, a Queens assemblyman who has made headlines recently for criticizing Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s handling of nursing home deaths during the pandemic.Mr. Yang said in an interview that Mr. Menchaca was part of the “next generation of leaders” who were joining his campaign. Mr. Yang, 46, would be the city’s first Generation X mayor, and Mr. Menchaca, Mr. Torres and Mr. Kim are all younger than him.“Carlos is a young Latino L.G.B.T.Q. progressive leader, and we are excited to have him on board on so many levels,” Mr. Yang said. “He has been fighting for marginalized communities for years.”Carlos Menchaca has generally been associated with causes that are to the left of Mr. Yang’s stances.Gabriele Holtermann/Sipa, via Associated PressMr. Menchaca, who cannot run for the City Council again because of term limits, said he hoped to work in a Yang administration should Mr. Yang win.“We’re going to get him elected with this growing coalition, and then we can start talking about what the next government is going to look like,” he said.Mr. Yang is perhaps best known for promoting universal basic income on the presidential campaign trail. As mayor, he wants to provide 500,000 New Yorkers living in poverty with an average of $2,000 per year. He said the city will pay $1 billion each year toward the program, but he has not said where that money would come from, and critics say the payments are too low to make a meaningful difference in people’s lives.He differs from Mr. Menchaca on some issues, most notably on development-related concerns. Mr. Menchaca has been a fierce critic of city rezonings that allow for new development and has raised fears over gentrification, while Mr. Yang says he is generally pro-development. Mr. Yang called the collapse of the Amazon deal a “black eye” for the city and lamented the jobs that could have been created.Mr. Menchaca said he hoped to advocate for community needs with Mr. Yang during future rezoning battles.“Government didn’t listen to constituents” during the Amazon deal, Mr. Menchaca said, “and that would not happen in a Yang administration. That’s not going to happen if I’m there or Ron is there.”Mr. Kim opposed the Amazon deal and a rezoning effort in Flushing, Queens, that was approved by the City Council last year. When Mr. Kim endorsed Mr. Yang early in the mayor’s race, he said he joined the “Yang bus” in part to influence him on issues like rezonings.“I chose to be on that bus so that I can steer that bus in the right direction,” he said.When Mr. Yang ended his 2020 presidential campaign, he related how several of his former rivals, including Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey and Vice President Kamala Harris, called or sent text messages to commiserate.He said he did the same for Mr. Menchaca when the councilman dropped out, sharing mutual experiences over what it feels like to end a campaign.“We connected on that human level,” Mr. Menchaca. “That’s the kind of mayor I want to have.” More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Teachers’ Union Backs Stringer for N.Y.C. Mayor, Giving Him a Boost

      by

      The endorsement comes at a critical time for the city comptroller, who has struggled to gain traction in the race.New York City’s influential teachers’ union endorsed the city comptroller, Scott M. Stringer, in the race for mayor on Monday, providing a much-needed boost to a campaign that has struggled to gain momentum thus far, despite Mr. Stringer’s deep experience in city politics.Mr. Stringer is a decades-long ally of the United Federation of Teachers and was long considered the front-runner for its support. With nine weeks before the June 22 primary, the endorsement comes at a critical time: In the limited public polling available, Mr. Stringer consistently trails the former presidential candidate Andrew Yang and the Brooklyn borough president, Eric Adams.In recent weeks, some labor leaders, political operatives and his own allies had privately worried about Mr. Stringer’s viability in the race, as the more moderate Mr. Yang has threatened his Manhattan base, and left-wing activists and leaders — expected to be solidly in Mr. Stringer’s corner — have not yet coalesced around a single candidate.Mr. Stringer is hoping to assemble a broad coalition that includes both traditional sources of Democratic power — in particular, union support — as well as backing from the left-wing activist slice of the party that has been influential in several recent elections across the city. Last week, in an effort to build a unified progressive front, the Working Families Party endorsed Mr. Stringer as the party’s first choice, followed by Dianne Morales, a former nonprofit executive, and Maya Wiley, a former counsel to Mayor Bill de Blasio.Mr. Stringer referenced his position in the race during a news conference to announce the endorsement on Monday. “This race is getting started,” he said. “I’ve been known to close strong, this union closes strong, and I promise you the race of your lifetime.”The U.F.T.’s endorsement is coveted, because of the union’s political influence and its ability to mobilize its roughly 200,000 members. Still, its members are split into several political caucuses and may not vote as a bloc, and the union does not have the same organizational prowess as other large city unions.Over the last year, the teachers’ union was at odds with elements of the city’s push to reopen schools in the nation’s largest school system during the pandemic, placing the U.F.T. under an unusual level of scrutiny. Some parents who were not politically active before the reopening debate became deeply frustrated by the pace of reopening and critical of the union.It is not at all clear whether there are enough parents who have turned against the union to actually make a difference in the upcoming election; the vast majority of city parents have kept their children learning from home this year, and most city parents do not play close attention to union politics.The city has now reopened all grades for in-person learning, with many younger students back full-time, though some high school students who have returned to classrooms are still learning online from inside their school buildings.Mr. Stringer, who is himself a public school parent, was not a vocal supporter of Mr. de Blasio’s push to bring students back into classrooms last fall and was sometimes sharply critical of the mayor’s effort. Mr. Stringer and his wife decided to send one of their sons back into classrooms last fall and keep their other son learning remotely.As comptroller, Mr. Stringer has also criticized the mayor’s handling of the city’s homeless student crisis, and appeared to briefly jeopardize the rollout of the successful universal prekindergarten program after he raised alarms about the contracting process for some of those programs.Mr. Stringer’s promise to put two teachers in every elementary school classroom as mayor is attractive to the union, since it would boost its membership. But the idea has also appealed to education experts who have said adding more teachers could make traditional public schools more attractive to parents who might have considered gifted and talented programs or private schools, which tend to have large teaching staffs.Mr. Stringer is also one of a small group of mayoral hopefuls who have committed to eliminating the high-stakes exam that dictates entry into the city’s top high schools, including Stuyvesant High School. Like many of his rivals, he is skeptical about charter schools, a position that is all but a prerequisite for the U.F.T.’s backing.Mr. Stringer’s campaign is likely to use the endorsement as fresh evidence that his coalition-building strategy remains viable. Perhaps more than any other candidate in the race, Mr. Stringer’s candidacy — already supported by a long list of prominent New Yorkers — will test whether endorsements move voters in an unpredictable election unfolding amid a pandemic.The U.F.T.’s choice of Mr. Stringer also carries enormous stakes for the union.Unlike other powerful city unions, the teachers union has failed to endorse a winning candidate since 1989, when it backed the former mayor David N. Dinkins. That has prompted concern among U.F.T. officials that the union’s clout in electoral politics could shrink if it again bets on the wrong candidate. The former mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who clashed with the U.F.T. throughout his tenure, went so far as to call the union’s endorsement “the kiss of death” during the 2013 race to replace him.“I don’t know what goes through voters’ minds, but maybe they understand if the U.F.T. wants it, it ain’t good and you don’t want that person,” Mr. Bloomberg said at the time.The outcome of the race could offer major clues about how much weight the U.F.T.’s endorsement — or the backing of any municipal union — still matters in local politics.With the U.F.T. endorsement settled, most major municipal unions have made their choices — with the notable exception of the union representing transit workers. Many prominent unions have backed Mr. Adams, but Ms. Wiley scored a major victory in February when she won the endorsement of Local 1199 of the Service Employees International Union, the city’s largest union.In some years, labor unions have largely flocked to a particular candidate. Mr. Stringer, for example, had overwhelming support from labor groups in his 2013 race for comptroller, when he defeated the former governor, Eliot Spitzer. But this year, the labor endorsements are diffuse.One of the biggest open questions in the mayoral race is whether there will be any union-affiliated independent expenditure effort to stop Mr. Yang — but it is not yet clear which organizations, if any, would have both the resources and the inclination to mount one.Mr. Stringer has won the backing of other education unions, including the union representing school principals and administrators, and the union representing teachers and staff at the City University of New York. Mr. Yang has not earned a major union endorsement yet, but is leading in all publicly available polling.The teachers’ union membership includes about 75,000 active classroom teachers — as well as roughly 64,000 retirees, many of whom no longer live in New York. About 90 percent of the U.F.T.’s delegate assembly — a group of about 3,400 elected representatives, including educators from each school in the city — voted to back Mr. Stringer on Monday afternoon.The union has, for decades, played a major and occasionally decisive role in key education decisions, and that has been particularly true over the last year.The U.F.T. made a number of safety demands last summer, and tensions escalated to the point that the union president, Michael Mulgrew, suggested that teachers would strike if those safety demands were not met. Public health experts supported many of those demands, such as improved ventilation, but some families were angered by the union’s insistence that all rules remain in place even as teachers were vaccinated.Advisers for Mr. Yang are hoping to attract at least some of those disaffected families.During a recent interview on Fox Business, Bradley Tusk, the powerful political strategist and lobbyist who is, with his team, managing Mr. Yang’s campaign, said his candidate “takes positions that are a little at odds with the Democratic orthodoxy on things like education.“The teachers’ unions [have] blocked the ability for students to come back into the schools of New York City,” he added.Though Mr. Yang accused the union of delaying school reopening in an interview with Politico, he walked back his comments during a recent U.F.T. forum held to determine the endorsement. Mr. Yang said he and Mr. Mulgrew had agreed that the mayor, not the union, was primarily to blame for any stumbles on reopening. City Hall officials say that last summer, the union represented a significant obstacle to reopening.Dana Rubinstein contributed reporting. More