While Eliot Spitzer stays mum, David Paterson seems to have become the Democratic ticket’s point man for discussion of the possibility of removing Alan Hevesi from office.
Here’s what he told me yesterday about the hypothetical mechanics of that process:
“Now that the prosecutor has said that there are no fixed rules for the interpretation of how a removal procedure should go, either we have to agree on them or we have to take the rules that exist in the impeachment proceedings, and those are the rules, generally, that I think will apply.”
He said that as a potential juror, effectively, he has attempted to remain impartial, and has steered clear of discussing the facts of the case. He criticized other legislators, including Joe Bruno, for immediately calling for Hevesi’s removal.
“I’m the one that is running for higher office here. You would think that if you wanted to manipulate politics I had the greatest benefit by doing it, but I haven’t said anything about the facts,” he said. “This is the reform that Albany needs, not just legislative reform but personal ethics, where you understand what your duty is as a public servant and you oblige it.”
