James Sanders. (Photo: Facebook)

Several days ago, State Senator James Sanders reacted to the news that his predecessor wore a wire in an attempt to reduce her corruption sentence, by criticizing her for "snitching." Well, the New York Post didn't take kindly to that, and this morning, the publication editorialized harshly against Mr. Sanders, claiming he "seems to be endorsing the crime-abetting law of street thugs."

Mr. Sanders released a follow-up statement this afternoon taking exception to the Post's characterization. "Snitching," Mr. Sanders wrote, was only in the context of entrapment, which he insisted the editorial missed.

"In response to the New York Post editorial on May 7, 2013, what was not said speaks volumes," Mr. Sanders said. "While the Post highlighted a portion of my statement made to the New York Times that mentions 'ensnaring' others, which in the context used, described entrapment, which is prohibit under the law, the article neglected to mention my encouragement to perform a public service by exposing actual corruption that one knows of. Deliberately leading people into a crime that they would not have committed, be they legislators or private individuals, is wrong and shows no honor. I have always and will always encourage full cooperation with law enforcement to root out real corruption."

The state senator's comments, of course, come as New York State has been rocked by multiple corruption scandals, not the least of which involves State Senator Shirley Huntley, his wire-wearing predecessor, who is due to be sentenced on Thursday. Additional information Ms. Huntley collected is due to be released at 2 p.m. this afternoon.

Mr. Sanders' full "snitching" quote to The New York Times was appended to his statement today:

“There are few among us who can stand up to 20, 30, 40 years without, as the streets call, snitching,” [Senator Sanders] said. “I think that it is tragic that one finds themselves in a world of pain and even more tragic if you’re trying to buy down your sentence by ensnaring others,” Mr.Sanders added. “Now, if you are merely speaking of what they have done, then you’re probably doing a public service. But if you are ensnaring people, then it just proves you have no honor."

John Sampson. (Photo: Facebook)

The U.S. Attorney's office is holding a press conference any moment now to detail the charges against State Senator John Sampson, who was arrested this morning for his alleged involvement in a bribery scheme. Specifically, Mr. Sampson is charged with two counts of embezzlement, five counts of obstruction of justice and two counts of making false statements.

One particularly interesting moment in the indictment, which can be viewed below, is when FBI agents approached Mr. Sampson at the end of July to ask about the alleged criminal schemes. According to the complaint, "At the conclusion of the interview, agents advised the defendant John Sampson that he had lied to federal agents, which constituted a federal crime. After being asked whether he wished to revise his statement, Sampson stated, 'Not everything I told you was false.'"

View the indictment:

John Sampson. (Photo: Facebook)

After State Senator John Sampson was arrested for his alleged involvement in a bribery scheme this morning, the lawmaker who replaced Mr. Sampson as the head of the Senate's Democratic conference, Andrea Stewart-Cousins, acted swiftly by stripping him of rank and privilege.

“These allegations are deeply disturbing," Ms. Stewart-Cousins said in a statement. "The alleged activity represents an offensive violation of the public trust for which there is no place in our government. Senator Sampson has been stripped of his ranking positions and all committee assignments."

Mr. Sampson was the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee as well as the Senate Committee on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse. According to Ms. Stewart-Cousins, Mr. Sampson "has also informed us that in order to avoid being a distraction to the conference he will no longer conference with the Senate Democrats.”

Mr. Sampson's own predecessor in Democratic leadership, State Senator Malcolm Smith, was arrested himself last month on corruption charges. At that point, however, he had left the Democrats for the breakaway Independent Democratic Conference. IDC leader Jeff Klein reacted similarly, booting Mr. Smith from the caucus.

U.S. Attorney Loretta Lynch is holding a press conference to further unveil the charges at 11 a.m.

John Sampson (Photo: N.Y. State Senate)

State Senator John Sampson, who up until recently led his chamber's Democratic conference, is set to turn himself into federal authorities today after being ensared in a bribery scandal, according to The New York Times and New York Post.

It's unclear to what extent Mr. Sampson may have been cooperating with federal prosecutors prior to this point. His involvement in an alleged scheme with then-State Senator Shirley Huntley, who already pleaded guilty to her own charges, was revealed last week when a sentencing letter made public Ms. Huntley's own cooperation. The Times reports Mr. Sampson be charged with obstruction of justice.

Should Mr. Sampson indeed be charged as expected, his arrest will follow what has been a recent string of corruption scandals in New York, including State Senator Malcolm Smith, Councilman Dan Halloran and Assemblyman Eric Stevenson, who was caught when a colleague revealed he had been wearing a wire himself and resigned. And, in the past couple years, pols like Councilman Larry Seabrook, State Senator Pedro Espada and State Senator Carl Kruger have been convicted in their own bribery or embezzlement schemes.

Furthermore, Assemblyman William Boyland Jr. was indicted for stealing public funds again last Friday, and the day before, two close associates to Comptroller John Liu, a candidate for mayor this year, were found guilty of attempting to organize a straw donor scheme on his behalf.

Needless to say, when it comes to good governance, New York is not gaining a particularly good reputation these days. And with more cooperating witnesses, there's no  sign that the scandals will end anytime soon.

Update (9:00 a.m.): According to multiple reports, Mr. Sampson has indeed turned himself in. U.S. Attorney Loretta Lynch is holding a press conference at 11 a.m. to further discuss the arrest.

Elected officials opposing Wal-Mart!

Opposing Wal-Mart was already a pretty easy position to take in New York City Democratic politics, but thanks to The New York Times' report of an extensive bribery scheme on the part of the company in Mexico, and similarly extensive efforts to cover it all up, that position just got a whole lot easier.

At a press conference earlier today, a plethora of officials, including three top tier mayoral candidates, blasted Wal-Mart for its various sins. And each of them emphasized that they do not want the superstore within the boundaries of New York City, thank you very much.

Declaring Wal-Mart's corporate boardroom a "crime scene," Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer "wished them luck in their upcoming criminal investigation" and stated, "They've disgraced the United States of America."

"We're not here today to say no to big business, we're here today to say no to bad business, and that's what Wal-Mart is," former Comptroller Bill Thompson contended. "You go back and look at the history of Wal-Mart: child labor allegations, discrimination against women, [and] discrimination against seniors. That's Wal-Mart."

"Wal-Mart is one of the biggest reasons why middle class is in decline in this country," Public Advocate Bill de Blasio said. "These are bad guys. They are bad actors. They do not belong in New York City."

While Assemblyman Rory Lancman, a candidate for congress in Queens, took an even sharper tack and called for the Justice Department to investigate political and charitable contributions Wal-Mart has made in New York, just in case they've been bribing government officials like they did in Mexico.

"We know they know of price of buying government favors in Mexico and I think all of us are deeply concerned that they may know the price of buying government favors in the United States and possibly New York," he said. "I think that the Justice Department should examine very, very closely those who have accepted contributions from Wal-Mart."

Update: Wal-Mart's communications team requested a quote favorable to them also be present in this post. Here's one from company spokesman Steve Restivo:

“Our track record as a good corporate citizen is well known and in large cities like New York, residents continue to choose to shop and work at Walmart. As a result, we continue to evaluate opportunities here to make access to our stores more convenient for customers.”

Watch the Wal-Mart hate bonanza below:

(Photo: Getty)

After The New York Times uncovered the internal reaction of Wal-Mart's top executives to an extensive bribery scheme in Mexico, depicting the company in a fairly negative light, a variety of New York City politicians latched onto the report in order to further their arguments against the superstore ever setting up shop in the city. The group of elected officials who have sent out statements on the issue includes three top mayoral candidate in 2013, as well as a congressional contender in Queens, demonstrating the salience of rhetorically torching the company in local politics.

Saying that "Wal-Mart has once again revealed it's true colors," Council Speaker Christine Quinn was particularly critical of the company in her statement:

"The corporation's tactics of bribery, scheming and corruption are the latest in a litany of despicable business practices including discrimination, worker mistreatment and predatory pricing. This is precisely the type of business we do not want in our communities and I remain committed to fighting against Wal-Mart's corporate poison from entering the five boroughs.

Wal-Mart's actions in Mexico should be fully investigated and they must be held fully accountable for any laws, American or Mexican, that were broken."

Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, who was actually first out of the gate in sending out a statement reacting to the report, echoed Ms. Quinn's thoughts:

"New York City cannot open its doors to a company that sanctions bribery and then covers it up as a part of doing business. Walmart is notorious for breaking its promises to communities, but these new revelations show Walmart is just as willing to break federal laws. New Yorkers should be put on notice: there is no tactic too underhanded for Walmart to try in order to open here. If we are going to prevent the loss of thousands of New York City jobs and avert a race to the bottom in retail wages, we need to redouble our efforts to keep Walmart out."

As did Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer:

"A company that tries to bribe its way into a community has no place in New York City. Once again Wal-Mart has shown itself to be a bad corporate actor and a bad neighbor, a company whose black marks already include predatory pricing and blatant disregard for the rights of working men and women."

Meanwhile Assemblyman Rory Lancman, who's running for congress in in a race that has seen opposition Wal-Mart cited as a key issue in labor endorsements, connected the bribes in Mexico to the company's surge of charitable contributions to New York City causes:

"This morning's New York Times story regarding allegations that Walmart orchestrated a $24 million bribery campaign to gain favorable treatment by the Mexican government should be a wake up call for New Yorkers who have witnessed Walmart's aggressive lobbying effort and recent streak of opportunistic 'philanthropy' in our city. Elected officials in New York have an obligation to stand up for workers and small businesses in our city and send Walmart a clear message, that whether it's through politically-motivated charity donations, campaign contributions or outright illegal bribes, our city is not for sale."