Flashback: Judi Nathan Had Her Own Taxpayer-Funded Security Detail In 2001
By now you've heard about the big story that The Politico broke yesterday: That as New York mayor he apparently made trips to the Hamptons to see Judi Nathan on the taxpayer's dime while still married to Donna Hanover.
In light of this, I thought it would be worth recalling a story that everyone's forgotten now but that is suddenly very relevant in light of these revelations:
In 2001, the last year of Rudy's mayoralty, the city gave Judi her own taxpayer-funded security detail, too -- even as it reduced the size of the security detail assigned to Rudy's soon-to-be-ex.
From the New York Post on June 4, 2001:
The Post has learned that city detectives have once again been assigned to protect Mayor Giuliani's girlfriend, even as he has scaled back the size of his estranged wife's police detail.Nathan and her pooch were seen yesterday being escorted to her Upper East Side apartment by one of the detectives now assigned to watch over her during the day when she's not at the mayor's side.
Police protection, provided by one detective at a time, began about two to three weeks ago after the mayor's divorce case, heated up and brought intense media scrutiny on Nathan, sources said.
Providing a detective for 12 hours every day would likely require at least three cops -- exactly how many were yanked from Hanover's staff when the mayor fired her as first lady May 24.
Each cop who is involved makes about $100,000 a year, including overtime.
Hanover still has a security detail, but she no longer has the three detectives who were assigned to an advance team that would inspect sites where she was scheduled to appear as first lady.
The story wasn't denied by Giuliani's team, and indeed it was picked up by the Associated Press.
What's more, that wasn't the first time Judi enjoyed taxpayer-funded protection, either. She'd been assigned her own detail in January of that year -- but it was yanked after The Post reported on it at the time. Her security detail was quietly reinstated in the spring.
This, combined with Politico's story, reveals just how expensive Rudy's extramarital trysts really were to New Yorkers -- and adds plausibility to the Politico's suggestion that tax money funded Rudy's visits to see Judi in the Hamptons.
Comments (17)
AlwaysTiptheWaitress wrote on November 29, 2007 12:29 PM:Typical Republican. No money for those who need help getting through community college or paying for medical bills, but taxpayers are expected to pay for the mayor's P****. What a disgrace.
MarcNYC wrote on November 29, 2007 12:42 PM:These stories just prove what we New Yorkers have know about Giuliani for a long time: Rudy cares about one thing, and that's Rudy. His poll numbers in NYC on September 10, 2001 were as bad as the Decider's are today. This kind of crap just shows that he was justifiably held in contempt by the people he was supposedly representing.
newpantaloons wrote on November 29, 2007 1:24 PM:Boy, oh boy! Is this the best you Republicans can do? Good God!
RagingGurrl wrote on November 29, 2007 1:33 PM:Hey I'm a New Yorker. Can I get a refund on the tax money I paid for these bogus security details?
Why can't we take Rudy to court over this?
So if you get screwed by Guliani you get
a secutity detail?
I don't think we can afford it.
So let me get this straight. The Clinton's are evil because they held their marriage together through good times and bad. But Giuliani is the standard bearer of the "family values" party, the obvious choice for the evangelical base being an excommunicated Catholic who divorced his wife and charged the taxpayers for his twice divorced Jewish girlfriend? That sounds about right for Bushworld.
ihatebeets wrote on November 29, 2007 3:15 PM:I bet the Family Values people are licking their chops over this. This may very well be the big beginning of the Rudy implosion. The man just can't keep it in his pants - that's a given. But to rub everyones' noses in it is too much to be expected to take. New Yorkers should demand a thorough investigation and taxpayers should get a refund.
Can someone tell me WHY Judi needed a security detail back then? Were Rudy's mob enemies trying to kill her too??
votenic wrote on November 29, 2007 4:00 PM:2008 Presidential Candidate Weekly Poll
The Only Poll That Matters.
Results Posted Weekly Tuesday Night at Midnight.
Providing police protection for the mayor's mistress as well as his then-current wife seems only prudent. After all, if someone had a grudge against the mayor, especially after learning that the mayor was dunning the taxpayers for the extra security costs of his booty calls to the Hamptons, that person might take it out on the mistress. Or the wife might assault the mistress, or the mistress might assault the wife. We wouldn't want the mayor to be accused of sex discrimination in this matter, would we now?
rts wrote on November 29, 2007 4:58 PM:Correct me if I am wrong but isn't this rather similar to what Alan Hevesi was caught doing - having his wife chaffeured in a city car - and which resulted in his resigning from office? In fact, can't it be argued that this is felony under NY law - defrauding the government?
Bob wrote on November 29, 2007 6:14 PM:Whoa, there folks. Looks like we've got some bad math going on here. First,it's not like these cops were not being paid anyway. Yes, it would be nice if they could be doing something other than protecting the Mayor's girlfriend, but, in reality, it doesn't cost the city anything.
Also, why is nobody challengine the assertion in the story that says a NY city cop makes $100k a year. Can someone verify they are that incredibly well paid? Seems highly unlikely.
Non-story. Next.
AlwaysTiptheWaitress wrote on November 29, 2007 7:40 PM:Cops working this kind of detail get overtime. That's where the seemingly high salary comes in. For example, while the mayor was doing the deed with Ms. Judy, they were on the clock, even if it were to dine and sleep in the Hamptons.
Nic etry to defuse the story though.
SarahWest wrote on November 29, 2007 8:39 PM:I don't think there are two dudes in America who have risked more to get laid than Bill Clinton and Rudy.
kefa wrote on November 30, 2007 7:40 AM:The light will show all the truth about Rudi to the American public pre-9/11.
AlwaysTipthe Waitress wrote on November 30, 2007 8:46 AM:Yes. But Clinton didn't give Monica secret service protection and a driver.
will wrote on December 5, 2007 3:09 PM:Rudy Sucks! One Big Phoney
opalmac wrote on December 6, 2007 9:28 PM:As a New Yorker I'm glad the truth is finally being written about "America's Mayor" who's been given a free pass since 9/11 to say and do whatever he wants, with no accountability. Which Mrs. Giuliani were they protecting? His mother, his current wife or his soon-to-be third wife? And people wonder why his children don't talk to him? Unbelievable!
