Blitzer did not ask Bloomberg about police surveillance of political activists before 2004 convention

In an interview on the May 22 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, host Wolf Blitzer did not take the opportunity to ask New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (R) about the New York Police Department's surveillance of non-violent anti-Bush activists and protesters prior to the 2004 Republican National Convention -- despite CNN's having reported the story less than a week before. CNN correspondent Tom Foreman reported on the May 17 edition of The Situation Room, that "the New York Police Department was secretly monitoring" protesters before and during the convention "and not just at public events." In March, Bloomberg had defended the surveillance activities, saying, "We were not keeping track of political activities. ... We have no interest in doing that." As a March 28 New York Times article noted, however, "the records [in federal lawsuits] show that the police did covertly monitor political activity. Virtually every intelligence report, even those about expressly peaceful groups, described the political viewpoints of the organizations."

Bloomberg appeared on CNN to discuss his proposal to reduce pollution by replacing New York City's taxicabs with hybrid vehicles in the next five years. However, Blitzer also asked Bloomberg for a "quick reaction to what your friend [Sen.] Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, said the other day after meeting with you amid speculation [that] maybe there should be a third party team out there running for president."

As Foreman noted in his May 17 report, "Six hundred pages of secret police files were released to the public [on May 16] as the result of a lawsuit filed by the New York Civil Liberties Union. They reveal that New York's finest began spying on performers like Jay-Z, LL Cool J, and others, months before they were to perform at a protest rally during the GOP convention." Foreman reported that, according to the released documents, police also "monitored websites and a guy known for throwing pies. They spied on meetings of Billionaires for Bush, who were not for Bush at all. ... While some protesters were self-declared anarchists, most planned performances or marches or theater. One group planned to sing about the war." On May 5, The New York Times reported how a January 23, 2004, "secret key findings" report transformed a self-described "pacifist anarchist['s] ... plea for non-violence" into a series of "recommended new activism strategies with regard to the Republican National Convention." The Times continued: "It is fair to say, however, that ... the intelligence report missed the entire point. From start to finish, [the pacifist anarchist's] actual words were a plea for nonviolence. He urges activists not to see police officers as adversaries, and to try to dissuade violent protesters from disrupting demonstrations."

In a May 16 article on the documents, the Associated Press noted the NYPD's attention to the "tuxedo-wearing performance art troupe" Billionaires for Bush, reporting that "[o]nce-confidential documents prepared as the NYPD readied for the convention cautioned the group was 'forged as a mockery of the current presidency and political policies,' and they noted that 'preliminary intelligence indicates that this group is raising funds for expansion and support of anti-RNC organizations.' " On March 25, The New York Times reported, "A police report on an organization of artists called Bands Against Bush noted that the group was planning concerts on Oct. 11, 2003, in New York, Washington, Seattle, San Francisco and Boston. Between musical sets, the report said, there would be political speeches and videos. 'Activists are showing a well-organized network made up of anti-Bush sentiment; the mixing of music and political rhetoric indicates sophisticated organizing skills with a specific agenda,' said the report, dated Oct. 9, 2003."

According to the March 25 Times article, these reports were part of the NYPD's broad surveillance of potential convention protesters:

For at least a year before the 2004 Republican National Convention, teams of undercover New York City police officers traveled to cities across the country, Canada and Europe to conduct covert observations of people who planned to protest at the convention, according to police records and interviews."

[...]

But potential troublemakers were hardly the only ones to end up in the files. In hundreds of reports stamped "N.Y.P.D. Secret," the Intelligence Division chronicled the views and plans of people who had no apparent intention of breaking the law, the records show. These included members of street theater companies, church groups and antiwar organizations, as well as environmentalists and people opposed to the death penalty, globalization and other government policies. Three New York City elected officials were cited in the reports.

In February 2003, a federal judge, at the request of the city -- and with Bloomberg's support -- relaxed requirements governing police surveillance of political groups, which the NYPD had agreed to in 1985 in order to settle a lawsuit over surveillance abuses by the NYPD in the 1960s and 1970s. The New York Times reported on December 22, 2005, that, in that lawsuit, "the city acknowledged that the Police Department had used infiltrators, undercover agents and fake news reporters to spy on yippies, civil rights advocates, antiwar activists, labor organizers and black power groups." The settlement required, in part, "the creation of an oversight panel that included a civilian appointed by the mayor," and also required that the police "have 'specific information' that a crime was in the works before investigating such groups." In asking for the lifting of the settlement's restrictions, the city said that they inhibited the police department's ability to investigate and stop terrorism.

On February 16, 2007, The New York Times reported that the same federal judge who had relaxed the guidelines in 2003 had found, in a February 15, 2007, ruling unconnected to the convention spying lawsuit, that "the Police Department had ignored the milder limits he had imposed on it in 2003. Citing two events in 2005 -- a march in Harlem and a demonstration by homeless people in front of the home of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg -- the judge said the city had offered scant justification for videotaping the people involved."

From the May 17 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:

BLITZER: Secret files unsealed and showing who New York City Police were spying on in the days before the 2004 Republican presidential convention. That list includes some prominent hip-hop artists. CNN's Tom Foreman is joining us with details of these newly released documents -- Tom.

FOREMAN: Wolf, when the Republicans had their convention in New York in 2004, there was a lot of concern about the tactics that protesters might use to disrupt the convention. The police looked into it, the convention came off without a hitch, but now there are questions about the tactics the police themselves used.

[begin video clip]

FOREMAN: Attention protesters and peaceniks, anarchists and Alicia Keys, and all those other artists who came out in 2004 to protest the Grand Old Party's big national convention. These private eyes were watching you. That's right, the New York Police Department was secretly monitoring these artist-protesters, and not just at public events.

DONNA LIEBERMAN (New York Civil Liberties Union executive director): To participate in meetings, to monitor emails, and to act as, not police officers, but undercover agents, in dealing with organizations that are exercising their right to protest, raises serious concerns.

FOREMAN: Six hundred pages of secret police files were released to the public as the result of a lawsuit filed by the New York Civil Liberties Union. They reveal that New York's finest began spying on performers like Jay-Z, LL Cool J, and others, months before they were to perform at a protest rally during the GOP convention.

They monitored websites and a guy known for throwing pies. They spied on meetings of Billionaires for Bush, who were not for Bush at all. New York police say the surveillance was justified.

NY POLICE COMMISSIONER RAY KELLY: People wanted to come here to shut down the city, to replicate what happened in Seattle, and Montreal, and Genoa. We simply didn't let that happen.

FOREMAN: New York has refused to release the documents for three years. The New York Civil Liberties Union went to court to get access to them as part of a lawsuit on behalf of people who were arrested while protesting the GOP convention.

While some protesters were self-declared anarchists, most planned performances or marches or theater. One group planned to sing about the war.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: [singing] Stop the war. Stop the war.

FOREMAN: Lawyers for the protesters say all the spying discourages regular people from exercising their right to free speech.

LIEBERMAN: If the government is monitoring lawful, political dissent, then people who -- people are intimidated.

[end video clip]

FOREMAN: The police had some legitimate concerns here. There have been instances where protesters have organized big movements to try to shut down large areas of downtown. They didn't want that to happen. They thought that would be bad for New York, bad for the Republicans, bad for everyone there.

But, nonetheless, the people who wanted to have protests of the Republican Party are very put off by the fact that they feel they were treated and spied upon as if they were criminals -- Wolf.

BLITZER: All right Tom, thank you -- Tom Foreman reporting.

From the May 22 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:

BLITZER: And joining us now in New York City is the mayor, Michael Bloomberg, with the Brooklyn Bridge behind you. I take it no one's selling that bridge, at least not today, Mr. Mayor. You've got a different agenda right now.

[...]

BLITZER: All right, let's talk about driving in New York. This is a major decision involving, what, 13,000 cabs in New York City over the next five years. Is it really going to have a practical impact on the environment on global warming? Or are you simply trying to send a symbolic message out there that other people should take notice?

[...]

BLITZER: So, in terms of fares for the passengers, is it going to have an impact in the -- price is going to go up, going do go down? What's going to be the net effect?

[...]

BLITZER: What does it say, Mr. Mayor, when a mayor like you or a governor like Arnold Schwarzenegger, that you have to make these kinds of decisions within your own communities, as opposed to the federal government making these kinds of decisions that could impact global warming, the environment? What does it say to you as a politician?

[...]

BLITZER: What about after the taxis? What about the other vehicles, including the city vehicles, whether from the police department, the fire department, other city vehicles? What are you trying to do? What, if anything, do you want to do with those cars?

[...]

BLITZER: One final question -- we're out of time, Mr. Mayor. I just want your quick reaction to what your friend Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, said the other day after meeting with you amid speculation maybe there should be a third party team out there running for president.

He said: "It's a great country to think about a New York boy and a Nebraska boy to be teamed up leading this nation." What do you think?

BLOOMBERG: Well, maybe he was talking about somebody else from New York.

Chuck Hagel's a good guy. He's very smart. He's independent. He says what he thinks, and I'm proud to have him as a friend.

BLITZER: I think he was referring to you, though.

BLOOMBERG: We don't know. You'll have to go ask Chuck. He's doing the right thing. He's out there trying to give the public more choice, and I think that is an interest. I'm not a candidate for president, and I don't know whether Chuck Hagel is, but the more candidates, the better the public will have as a -- will be served.

BLITZER: Is it time for a third party also?

BLOOMBERG: It depends. If the public comes up with candidates that they find acceptable from two parties, no, and if they don't find them acceptable, three or four parties.

There's nothing magical about two. The public wants to have people that have experience and that clearly state what they're going to do, and then are willing to have themselves held accountable after they get elected for delivering what they promised.

We tried that with a scorecard here, and I think all these candidates should be held to the standard of: OK, don't just tell us you're in favor or against something, what are you going to do about it?

BLITZER: Michael Bloomberg is the mayor of New York with a major announcement today involving a lot of cabs out there.

Mr. Mayor, thanks very much.