If Dick "dummy" Dadey traded his integrity to the governor for financial support would it be a reportable business relationship?

No surprise Dick "dummy" Dadey clarified his position on the "Milgram" rule today.

I'm sure he got the same phone call Milgram did.

And I'm sure the rest of the JJOKE posse that lack the ability to have an independent position that differs from what the 2nd floor demands are frustrated today that the media thinks the "Milgram" rule was created to shelter the Duffy house purchase from criticism.

And while I think my last blog clearly established how wrong the "Milgran" rule was, afterall it was in direct contradiction to JJOKE's own guidelines, FAQs, training materials and Ellen Bibens public statements, let me provide some additional examples that according to JJOKE and Dick "dummy" Dadey would not be required to be disclosed as reportable business relationships under the "Milgram" rule.  Remember these are hypotheticals to the best of my knowledge.

Dick "dummy" Dadey promises to provide Governor Cuomo a case of rare spark plugs for the governors old car in return for the Governor paying $5000. The spark plugs are not available to the general public at any price.

Dick "dummy" Dadey promises to provide Governor Cuomo the use of his luxury vacation home in return for the Governor paying $5000. The home is not available to the general public at any price.

Dick "dummy" Dadey promises to provide Governor Cuomo ethics compliance consulting in return for the Governor paying $5000. The consulting is not available to the general public at any price.

Dick "dummy" Dadey promises to endorse Governor Cuomo's ethics reform legislation in return for the Governor paying $5000. The endorsement is not available to the general public at any price.

Dick "dummy" Dadey promises to clarify his public statement about the Duffy home purchase in return for the Governor paying $5000. The clarification is not available to the general public at any price.

or how about the following

Dick "dummy" Dadey trades what is left of his integrity to the Governor in return for the Governor's promise of support for Dick's organization.  Wait that would not be reportable because Dick's integrity is worthless.

I think you get the point.  The "Milgram" rule's reliance on the flow of money only going in one direction, from the lobbying entity to the public official, is just wrong.  It's not what the law says, it's not what the JJOKE guidelines say,  it's not what the JJOKE FAQs say,  it's not what the JJOKE training materials say, it's not what Ellen Biben said, it's only what the powers that be want it to say now that the Duffy house deal is being questioned.

And unfortunately the media once again is missing the point.  You need to ask why would Milgram change his quote, why would Dick need to clarify his position, why are the JJOKE commissioners refusing to go on the record to explain the "Milgram" rule.  I think the answer is they were told to use their official position to provide an unwarranted exemption to the reportable business relationship disclosure for the Duffy home purchase.  And that would be a violation of the Public Officers Law.

I'd like to know what Susan Lerner thinks.

I'd like to know what Barbara Bartoletti thinks.

I'd like to know what Russ Havens thinks.

They all had supported the reportable business relationship requirements, is this what they thought it would be?

I'd like to know what the JJOKE commissioners think, do any of them have the guts to explain the "Milgram" rule in public?  in a forum where I can debate them?  I'm ready willing and able anytime anywhere.

This is just one more pathetic example of how controlled JJOKE and the good government phonies are.  Sonny Liston would be proud.