Mayor Bloomberg holding an AR-15 assault rifle like the one used in Newtown while announcing a gun trafficking bust last October. (Photo: Getty)

When the smoke cleared at a movie theater in Aurora, Colo., in the wee hours of a Friday morning last July, 12 people were dead, 58 were injured and Mayor Michael Bloomberg was in New York, readying an assault of his own.

The campaign that Mr. Bloomberg and his “gun team” came up with in the hours and days after Aurora involved carpet-bombing Washington with millions from the mayor’s immense fortune and a media blitz that would be deployed following the next massacre.

“He was so frustrated by the lack of conversation around this issue ... that he decided to force the conversation himself,” Howard Wolfson, deputy mayor for government affairs and communications, told Politicker.

By 5 a.m., just a few hours after the shooting, Mr. Bloomberg was emailing members of his staff, preparing a media offensive against President Barack Obama, Mitt Romney and what he perceived as their campaigns’ silence on gun control.

At 8 that morning, the mayor came out swinging during his regular appearance on WOR’s John Gambling Show.

“Maybe it’s time that the two people who want to be president of the United States stand up and tell us what they are going to do about it, because this is obviously a problem across the country,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “No matter where you stand on the Second Amendment, no matter where you stand on guns, we have a right to hear from both of them concretely, not just in generalities. Specifically, what are they going to do about guns?”

The moment had come—in fact, it had come and gone several times. The next time a tragedy like Aurora went down, he would be ready.

In his years building the business empire that made him a billionaire, Mr. Bloomberg developed a unique fluency for numbers and learned to view the world through a statistical prism. Multiple people close to Mr. Bloomberg have said that the figure he’s most preoccupied with is the number people in his city who die of preventable causes. This obsession with bringing down the death rate has driven the mayor’s notorious crusades against smoking and sugar, and according to John Feinblatt, the mayor’s chief adviser, it was a major factor behind his decision to step into the national gun control debate several years ago.

“This was part head, part heart. The head part was, he had been extremely successful, with [NYPD Commissioner Ray] Kelly and others, in driving crime down during the first term, but I think there was a recognition that, to continue to drive it down, one had to do something about guns. I think that the mayor is always driven by data, and there’s one data point that’s sort of hard to miss, which is that 85 percent of the crime guns in New York City come from out of state, so you knew that to really address this, you had to address this nationally,” explained Mr. Feinblatt. “I think the heart part was ... every mayor gets that call at 2 in the morning and has to arrive at the emergency room and break the news that’s going to break somebody’s heart ... You see gun violence up close [and] personally in a way that federal officials just don’t.”

Mr. Bloomberg’s first national initiative was called Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a group he co-founded with Boston Mayor Tom Menino in 2006 to address what Mr. Menino described at the time as “a crisis on the streets of our nation.” In the years that followed, the group grew from 15 mayors who attended the inaugural summit at Gracie Mansion to more than 900. They shared gun control strategies and launched a PR campaign that included two Super Bowl ads.

It took the Aurora shooting to propel Mr. Bloomberg to kick those efforts into high gear. Both Mr. Wolfson and Mr. Feinblatt said the shooting was the event that defined the mayor’s current approach to gun violence. “It all flows immediately from that moment,” Mr. Feinblatt said.

Mr. Bloomberg’s anti-gun battle plan would be driven by data and paid for largely with the mayor’s vast personal fortune, allowing him to fuel the national conversation on gun control. Mr. Wolfson said this strategy “didn’t really crystallize until after Aurora” and stemmed from the mayor’s “real disappointment with the lack of focus last fall on this issue and the sense that the NRA had the field to itself.”

On December 14, 21 weeks after the Aurora shooting, Adam Lanza opened fire on an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., killing 26 children and teachers. This time, Mr. Bloomberg was ready.

Three days later, he appeared at City Hall, flanked by more than 30 people who had been touched by gun violence, to unveil the “Demand a Plan” initiative his aides had been working on since Aurora. It included three “common sense public safety measures” he called on Congress to enact: requiring criminal background checks for all gun buyers, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and making gun trafficking a federal crime. Work on the "Demand a Plan" website had begun within 72 hours of the Aurora shootings.

Along with pushing the conversation on gun control—on the cover of Time magazine, and in numerous other media outlets—the mayor’s initiatives also shaped the White House’s own response. Mayor Bloomberg and his “gun team,” which has been working “seven days a week” since the killings in Connecticut, according to Mr. Feinblatt, have made multiple trips to Washington to speak with lawmakers and provide both polling and logistical data on the feasibility of various gun control policies.

In January, the president sent a plan to Congress that included all three of the key elements from Mr. Bloomberg’s plan.

With Mayors Against Illegal Guns functioning as the propaganda arm of Mr. Bloomberg’s anti-gun movement, its military arm is Independence USA PAC, a political action committee that the mayor created in October and tapped Mr. Wolfson to lead. The so-called super PAC is dedicated to electing politicians who support his gun control proposals—and defeating those who don’t.

Using approximately $10 million of the mayor’s money, the PAC saw three of the six candidates it backed in November House races go on to win; the impact of the mayor’s money on those races was hard to gauge, however, given the relatively small amount of time between the PAC’s October launch and election day. Even with a mixed record of success, Mr. Bloomberg’s election spending put Washington on notice, adding muscle to his other anti-gun violence efforts.

“Putting the PAC together with his, what I’ll [call] purchasing power, it absolutely keeps him on everyone’s radar, you know, no different than a Sheldon Adelson,” Staten Island Congressman Michael Grimm told us during a December conversation about Mr. Bloomberg’s stature in Washington. “This is a guy that by virtue—just by the virtue of his financial means, is a player whether you like it or not. I mean he is because he has the clout to be that.”

Last month, the PAC notched its first unequivocal victory when Democrat Robin Kelly defeated former Congresswoman Debbie Halvorson in a special primary election to replace Illinois Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr., who resigned in late November before pleading guilty to federal campaign finance fraud charges.

Ms. Kelly was supported by approximately $2.5 million in ads paid for by Independence USA that, according to Mr. Wolfson, “helped make the race a referendum on guns.” The New York Times, MSNBC and others all called the race a “win for Bloomberg.”

“We elected somebody who’s going to be a real champion on this issue. There’s going to be a vote in this House. She will be a reliable—not just a reliable vote, but a champion for the president’s proposals, and that’s really important,” said Mr. Wolfson of Ms. Kelly’s victory.

In many ways, the anti-gun violence strategy hatched by the mayor and his advisers after Aurora was uniquely Bloombergian. Both of his gun control initiatives are extraordinarily well-financed and, as a result, are backed by top political consultants. Demand a Plan—which was redubbed Demand Action this month after the president revealed his Bloomberg-friendly gun control plan—is also driven by data, with all of its legislative recommendations backed by extensive polling and research.

Whether or not Congress passes the president’s gun control plan, Mr. Wolfson described the mayor as “in this for the long haul.”

Mr. Bloomberg is currently headed into the home stretch of his 12 years in City Hall. Though he and his close aides have remained tight-lipped about his future, it seems clear he will be substantially engaged in advocacy on the issues closest to his heart, which, in addition to gun control, include immigration reform, gay rights, climate change and education reform. Mr. Bloomberg won’t say where or how he will strike next, but his gun control initiative provides a blueprint for the type of effective, expensive approach he could bring to this post-mayoral political activity.

“Look, the mayor has an enormous platform and will continue to have influence on the issues he cares about,” Mr. Wolfson said of the mayor’s future plans. “He spent roughly 10 million dollars last November. He described that as sticking his toe in the water.”

hwalker@observer.com

(Photo: Getty)

Yesterday evening, socially conservative Democratic mayoral candidate Rev. Erick Salgado's campaign sent out a press release announcing a breakfast in East Harlem this morning featuring "community leaders rallying support for Erick Salgado," including Congressman Charlie Rangel. The event seemed an odd choice for the staunchly liberal veteran congressman and when we called his office to see whether he would indeed be attending they insisted he hadn't heard of Mr. Salgado and that the breakfast wasn't on his schedule. In spite of this, Mr. Salgado's campaign insisted Mr. Rangel would actually be at their breakfast. The congressman called Politicker this morning to set the record straight and, according to him, it seems both his office and the Salgado campaign were partially correct.

"Edwin [Marcial], who happens to be--I understand now--the campaign manager of this Salgado, is an old El Barrio friend of mine. He came to see me a couple weeks ago and he wanted to have coffee with me and I don't know how to say 'no' to an old-timer and I said, 'I'd be glad to,'" Mr. Rangel explained. "I was surprised to see that there was a flier talking about this fellow Salgado and that Reverend Senator Díaz and I was going to be there and it went on talking about him. I called Marcial, I told him that I wasn't thinking about meeting any candidate. I've never heard Erick Salgado and I would not be able to attend any breakfast in support of him."

Nevertheless, Mr. Rangel said he would stop by as a courtesy to Mr. Marcial and not in support of Mr. Salgado.

"He understood that and I told him that I would drop by--and not sit down--and say hello to him," said Mr. Rangel of his conversation with Mr. Marcial.

Though he said he planned to visit the breakfast, Mr. Rangel stressed his appearance was not an endorsement of the conservative mayoral candidate.

"If anyone wants to explain why I'm there, I'm only there because Edwin Marcial is a good community guy. ... So I'll be stopping there, but there won't be any politics as far as I'm concerned. I just feel sorry for Edwin or whomever as he's a one-man operation. ... I don't know anyone who knows Erick Salgado or has heard of Erick Salgado."

A graphic representation of "Martian Meals" from Sen. Tom Coburn's "Wastebook." (Photo: Coburn.Senate.gov)

With the $85 billion in automatic so-called "sequester" budget cuts set to take affect tomorrow, the National Republican Congressional Committee has released a series of press releases blaming the situation on President Barack Obama's fondness for "martian menus" and "robotic squirrels." According to the NRCC, President Obama and House Democrats are more interested in funding wasteful programs and "scaring American families" than protecting the country from the impending, drastic cuts, so they highlighted a series of initiatives, including plans to develop food for astronauts and funding for a "Robosquirrel" used to research rattlesnake behavior. Several versions of the NRCC statement were released pairing President Barack Obama with different Democratic members of Congress.

"Most Americans will never get to order off the ‘Mars Menu’ that their taxpayer dollars are funding, but instead of cutting wasteful programs like that one, President Obama and Jim Himes are allowing cuts to important programs and services," NRCC Communications Director Andrea Bozek said in the statement targeting Connecticut Congressman Jim Himes. “Rather than trying to scare Americans, Obama and Himes should agree to responsible cuts to wasteful Washington spending.”

The sequester was designed to promote a debt reduction with the assumption Democrats and Republicans would work on a compromise to avoid the severe cuts. However, the two parties have been unable to reach an agreement on a budget plan with Democrats favoring debt reduction through tax increases and Republicans pushing to cut spending on government programs. The NRCC statement was meant to highlight wasteful programs and used examples taken from Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn's "Wastebook 2012," which lists allegedly "outdated and outlandish projects" financed by the government.

One of the versions of the NRCC statement focused on New York Congressman Steve Israel. The title was, "Obama and Israel Agree: Protect Martian Menus and Robotic Squirrels While Scaring American Families With Threat of Cuts." We certainly never thought we'd see an email from a Republican organization containing the phrase "Obama and Israel Agree" in any capacity.

Read the full version of the NRCC statement below.

"Obama and Israel Agree:

Protect Martian Menus and Robotic Squirrels While Scaring American Families With Threat of Cuts

Billions of Dollars Allocated for Wasteful Programs

WASHINGTON – A total of $325,000 to fund research on robotic squirrels. Another $99,000 for taxpayer-funded vodka, whiskey and gin. Nearly $1 million for NASA to develop a “Mars Menu.”

With President Obama’s $85 billion sequester set to take effect, those are just a few of the programs Obama and Steve Israel are so committed to protecting that they are willing to gut important services instead.

Just this week, President Obama spoke about the need to prioritize and make smart decisions – and now Obama and Israel have shown American families that their priority is protecting wasteful Washington spending.

“Most Americans will never get to order off the ‘Mars Menu’ that their taxpayer dollars are funding, but instead of cutting wasteful programs like that one, President Obama and Steve Israel are allowing cuts to important programs and services,” said NRCC Communications Director Andrea Bozek. “Rather than trying to scare Americans, Obama and Israel should agree to responsible cuts to wasteful Washington spending.”

President Obama, In Newport News, Virginia, Tuesday Said We Needed To Prioritize Our Spending Choice And Make Smart Decisions. “You step back and you say, what is it that's important -- our child's education, making sure they're healthy, making sure we can get to the job, keeping our house repaired? And then you say, here are the things that aren't so important and you cut those out. You prioritize, and you make smart decisions. Well, we should be doing the same thing.” (President Barack Obama, Remarks, Newport News, VA, 2/26/13)

Federal Officials Have Freed Hundreds Of Illegal Immigrants In Several States Due To Obama’s Sequester. “Several hundred illegal immigrants have been released from detention centers in Georgia and other states, federal officials confirmed Tuesday. They said the releases were made to cut costs in advance of automatic spending cuts that are scheduled to take effect Friday.” (Jeremy Redmon, “Feds Free Illegal Immigrants In Georgia, Other States,” The Atlanta-Journal Constitution, 2/26/13)

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano Will Furlough 5,000 Border Patrol Agents. “Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano warned Monday that her agency would be forced to furlough 5,000 border control agents under mandatory spending cuts, likely allowing more illegal immigrants into the country and potentially compromising national security.” (David Nakamura, “Napolitano Warns That Sequester Would Affect Border Security,” The Washington Post, 2/25/13)

TSA Agents Would Also Be Furloughed. “There could also be longer security lines at airports because of anticipated furloughs of Transportation Security Administration workers. In addition, deplaning from international flights could be slower because Customs and Border Protection agents are expected to work fewer hours.” (Matthew Wald, “Federal Spending Cuts Threaten Delays In Air Travel,” The New York Times, 2/21/13)

Obama’s Sequester Will Cut Medicare By 2 Percent. “With the imposition of at least some of them appearing more and more likely, here's a look, by the numbers, at Washington's self-imposed budget austerity (aka ‘sequestration’ or the ‘sequester’) … 2% - Cuts to Medicare if sequestration takes effect.” (Amy Roberts, “By The Numbers: Automatic Spending Cuts,” CNN, 2/19/13)

Up To $902 Million Will Be Cut From Loan Guarantees To Small Business In The Sequester. “With the imposition of at least some of them appearing more and more likely, here's a look, by the numbers, at Washington's self-imposed budget austerity (aka ‘sequestration’ or the ‘sequester’) … Up to $902 million - Reductions in loan guarantees to small businesses if sequestration takes effect.” (Amy Roberts, “By The Numbers: Automatic Spending Cuts,” CNN, 2/19/13)

The Federal Government Awarded $99,000 To A New York Distillery. (2012 Waste Book, Office Of Senator Tom Coburn, Accessed On 2/27/13)

It Cost The Federal Government $1.6 Million To Develop A Video Game Based On A Fictional NASA Mission. (2012 Waste Book, Office Of Senator Tom Coburn, Accessed On 2/27/13)

The Federal Government Spent $947,000 On Researching Food To Serve On Mars. (2012 Waste Book, Office Of Senator Tom Coburn, Accessed On 2/27/13)

$697,177 Was Used To Develop A Musical On Climate Change And Biodiversity. (2012 Waste Book, Office Of Senator Tom Coburn, Accessed On 2/27/13)

The Federal Government Spent $325,000 To Develop A Robotic Squirrel. (2012 Waste Book, Office Of Senator Tom Coburn, Accessed On 2/27/13)"

(Photo: Getty)

Three members of New York City's congressional delegation have signed on to a letter vowing not to back any White House bargain to avoid the $85 billion in automatic budget cuts known as the sequester that includes cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Both parties have been at an impasse over the cuts with Democrats favoring debt reduction through tax increases and Republicans wanting spending cuts. President Barack Obama has repeatedly expressed a desire to make a deal ahead of the March 1 deadline that includes both tax increases and proposals to reduce the costs of social programs. Now, Congressmen Jerry Nadler, Jose Serrano and Nydia Velazquez have all signed the pledge promising not to back any deal including the compromises being called for by the White House.

"Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are the great bedrocks of our middle class society and, together, constitute an essential safety net for millions of Americans," Mr. Nadler said. "I will fight like hell against any deficit plan that cuts these programs or fails to address our immediate jobs problem. It is unconscionable for Republicans to ask those who can least afford it – seniors, kids, our most vulnerable families – to sacrifice even more and shoulder a disproportionate burden. I do not support anydeal that cuts Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid benefits."

The letter signed by the trio of New York City House members was originally authored by Florida Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson and California Democratic Rep. Mark Takano. In the letter, they describe cuts to Medicare and Social Security as almost universally opposed by voters. With Mr. Nadler, Mr. Serrano and Ms. Valzquez on board at least 20 House members have signed the letter.

"We write to let you know that we will vote against any and every cut to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security benefits--including raising the retirement age or cutting the cost of living adjustments that our constituents earned and need," the letter says. "Finally, Americans agree that there is more that must be done to require the rich and giant corporations to pay their fair share. Indeed, it is their patriotic duty to do so. As you negotiate with Republicans, you deserve to know that millions of Americans and the below signed Members of Congress stand ready to fight for the principles listed above."

Several large progressive groups are pushing for more members of Congress to sign the letter including the Working Families Party, Moveon, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Democracy for America, CREDO Action and Social Security Works. They are also soliciting signatures from their membership to demonstrate support for the tough stance against cuts. This morning, the WFP sent out a letter to supporters urging them to sign on and noting "only three New York Representatives have signed the letter so far."

"We commend Representatives Nadler, Serrano and Velázquez for showing some backbone and standing up to protect New York's working families," Working Families Party founder Bill Lipton said in a statement. "After a decade where incomes have stagnated and sunk, New Yorkers cannot afford to have the benefits they have worked hard for cut back. We need to do more to protect our retirees and the most vulnerable, not less."

United participation from House Democrats is crucial to any potential budget bargain as a Tea Party bloc has committed to fighting tax increases. Because of this, a compromise would have to include participation from most Democrats and non-Tea Party Republicans. For his part, Mr. Serrano described the current climate is Washington as including an "obsession" with harmful cuts in his statement announcing his participation in the letter.

"Washington's current obsession with cuts must end. As the President has said, we cannot cut our way to prosperity. This is especially true of our safety net programs," said Mr. Serrano. "Cutting them unduly harms working families and retirees, provides no economic benefit and still asks nothing of the wealthy. I cannot support deficit reduction that targets these middle class mainstays."

(Photo: Facebook)

Jeff Kurzon, the managing partner of Manhattan law firm, says he's ready to run for Congress and challenge  Nydia Velázquez in the Democratic primary next year.

"Hi," Mr. Kurzon says on his recently-launched campaign website. "My name is Jeff Kurzon. I am a 36 year old attorney and have lived in both ends of District 7: from Bushwick in Brooklyn to Little Italy in Manhattan. I am a proud American with diverse roots ranging from Armenian to English, Irish and Scottish descent. My mother, a former social worker, now runs a small publishing business. My father is a retired physician who served in the U.S. Navy. I am Catholic, however, I respect all forms of spirituality that strengthens us as humans and connects us to each other and God."

Mr. Kurzon announced his campaign today in a press release sent out this morning. Although he didn't mention Ms. Velázquez by name, he criticized business as usual in Washington and corporate PAC contributions.

“Wealth and income disparity in our country is on an unsustainable course that needs to be reversed," he said in a statement. "Our politics fueled by corporate PAC spending are broken and no longer represent the values of the American people. We cannot let the interests of a few dictate the welfare of everyone.”

Mr. Kurzon certainly has an uphill battle ahead of him, however. Ms. Velázquez easily beat back a strong challenge from veteran Councilman Erik Dilan last year, decisively winning all parts of the tri-borough district except Mr. Dilan's base in northern Brooklyn and Hasidic Williamsburg. Without the backing of the Brooklyn county establishment--which Mr. Dilan had--it could be an even harder electoral slog for Mr. Kurzon.

Congressman Joe Crowley singing along to "Call Me Maybe" at the Today Show. (Photo: NBC)

Comedy Central host Stephen Colbert was the surprise guest this morning at the House Democratic retreat and his appearance included quips about his sister's House bid in North Carolina and a "dramatic" duet of the Star Spangled Banner with Queens Congressman Joe Crowley. Sadly, Mr. Crowley's office told us they don't have video footage of the comedian and congressman performing, but Mr. Crowley did offer up a complimentary appraisal of his partner's performance.

"All I can say is Stephen Colbert can be my back-up singer anytime," he said.

His duet with Mr. Colbert isn't Mr. Crowley's first musical moment. The guitar-playing congressman once taped a singing robocall. He has also served as a bandleader at various fundraisers, and, perhaps most memorably, was filmed rocking out to a performance of Carly Rae Jepsen's tween pop hit "Call Me Maybe" at a Today Show taping last summer.

Nikki Finke during her days in Mr. Koch's office as depicted in a 1974 New York Times engagement notice.

Former New York Mayor Ed Koch has had an influence in Hollywood as well as the Big Apple. Before coming to City Hall, Mr. Koch spent eight years in the House of Representatives. One of his staffers was Nikki Finke, who went on to become one of the most influential and feared reporters in the entertainment industry and, according to Ms. Finke, her time working with the future mayor in Congress helped inspire her to become a journalist. 

Politicker spoke to Mr. Koch yesterday about the upcoming release of Koch, a documentary about his career that hits theaters February 1. During the interview, we asked him if he recalled working with Ms. Finke.

"I remember her," he said.

However, Mr. Koch was not aware his former staffer had gone on to become a big name in Hollywood.

"I didn't know, I mean I think she went to a magazine when she left us," he said. "Isn't that nice."

We also filled Mr. Koch in on some other aspects of Ms. Finke's career including that she has a reputation for being rather reclusive and has rarely been photographed.

"A recluse?! She was a very pretty woman," he said with audible surprise. "I don't remember other than that. She was very nice, but nothing special."

In Hollywood, Ms. Finke is known for aggressively responding to those who cross her or get in the way of her constant stream of scoops. Mr. Koch said he had no way of knowing whether not Ms. Finke displayed the same toughness as a young woman.

"She may have been tough, but she was an intern or a--she was not a major figure in my office where she could be tough," he explained.

Ms. Finke told us she was "shocked" Mr. Koch remembered her.

"I'm just very flattered that he even remembers me," she said, adding, "He was an incredibly sweet man."

According to Ms. Finke, working in Mr. Koch's Washington office was her "first job out of college."

"I was just out of Wellesley, I was an ex-debutante. I was a very different person in those days than I am now, I was very sweet, I really was," said Ms. Finke. "It was so exciting. I had my own parking space. ... He had great offices. ... It was very exciting, you know, and every now and then, somebody would ask you to go to the House dining room. I mean, it was really exciting and you felt like, 'Oh my god.'"

Ms. Finke believes Mr. Koch's aides may have hired her because he was hoping to secure donations from her family. If this was indeed the reason behind Ms. Finke's hiring, it was misguided since Mr. Koch's Democratic politics were not a fit with her parents.

"I was always a knee-jerk liberal. But here's the funny part, this is the money quote, I think they hired me thinking that maybe my family would give him money," Ms. Finke said. "They didn't realize, nobody asked me, my parents were Republicans."

Though Mr. Koch remembered Ms. Finke, he got one detail wrong--she wasn't an intern. A 1974 New York Times engagement notice for Ms. Finke referred to her as a "staff assistant" in Mr. Koch's office.

"I was a staffer, probaly the lowest level staffer in the entire thing," she recalled. "I wasn't a receptionist, I would sort of like do anything. I had been editor-in-chief of the college newspaper of Wellesley and I think what they thought was when they hired me that I could help them with press releases, because he really cared about the press, and I could do a little bit of baby legislative stuff."

Working on Mr. Koch's communications team helped Ms. Finke decide to aim for a career in media rather than politics. She said seeing the power reporters wielded in Washington was "absolutely" a big part of what inspired her to be a professional journalist.

"At that point, I wanted a career in politics. I was a political science major and I wasn't really thinking about journalism, but when I saw the way Ed and his staff would genuflect to journalists, I went, 'Oh, I want to do that,'" Ms. Finke explained. "You know, the minute a journalist called him, he jumped on the phone."

After her time on Mr. Koch's staff, Ms. Finke took a job with the Associated Press. However, she wasn't done with Mr. Koch and his team.

When Mr. Koch first ran for mayor in 1977, Ms. Finke said she was working on the A.P.'s foreign desk in New York. Based on her experience in Mr. Koch's office her bosses there decided to have her cover his campaign. This apparently allowed her to accomplish her goal of commanding respect and attention.

"There was a lot nervousness inside the campaign over 'What did I know when?'" she said with a laugh. "His staff was, like, terrified. That was very funny."

Charlie Rangel (Photo: MyFox New York)

Earlier this week, Congressman Charlie Rangel made headlines when he blasted the lack of diversity in President Obama's Cabinet. In a roundtable with reporters yesterday evening where he weighed in on a variety of topics, Mr. Rangel also criticized the Republican Party for not being diverse enough. Mr. Rangel brought up the issue while he discussed his belief the country needs to be more open to immigrants and posited there are many conservative opponents to immigration reform because the G.O.P. and its constituents are not sufficiently diverse.

"All you have to do is take a picture of Republicans and a picture of Democrats and it's as though you're talking about two different countries," Mr. Rangel said.

Politicker asked the congressman for his take on the African-American members of the Republican Party. Specifically, we brought up a controversial recent New York Times editorial that argued black Republicans are "more tokens than signs of progress" because "modern-day Republicans have deployed blacks to undermine black interests." Mr. Rangel said he hadn't seen the article, but added he doesn't think it's fair to claim African-American Republicans don't act in the interests of their community because there aren't enough black Republicans to evaluate their actions.

"I think that's so unfair. First of all, I didn't read the article, but if you're talking about the record of black Republicans, there are not that many of them to reach a scientific consensus," said Mr. Rangel. "You know, who are you talking about? Jackie Robinson? Colin Powell?"

Mr. Rangel went on to comment on the "handful" of African-Americans he's encountered in the G.O.P.

"Theres so few. It would be unfair, if there are black Republicans out there that are decent, compassionate, humane people, to be judged by the handful that I've met," the congressman said with a laugh, before adding, "That was mean wasn't it?"

Mr. Rangel went on to point to Reverend A.R. Bernard, an influential African-American pastor who's mulling a run for mayor on the Republican line, as evidence there may be "nice" black Republicans he hasn't met.

"Maybe I don't go to the right places to meet those people," said Mr. Rangel. "I was surprised by Reverend Bernard. He said he was a Republican. Well, obviously the nice Republicans are not out of the closet, but I had no idea he was a Republican."

Charlie Rangel (Photo: Getty)

Congressman Charlie Rangel sat down with a small group of reporters yesterday for a wide-ranging discussion at his office. One of the main topics was the brewing battle over the debt ceiling and Politicker asked the congressman for his take on the idea President Barack Obama can avoid a fight with congressional Republicans who won't raise the debt cap by having the Treasury Department mint a $1 trillion coin.

"I'm working on the design, one for the president and one for me," Mr. Rangel said with a smile.

We wondered whether that meant he wanted to see his portrait depicted on the coin.

"No, I want one of the coins," the congressman responded as the assembled reporters laughed. "The president gets one, he puts it in the treasury. I get one, I keep it. Makes sense to me."

Earlier in the conversation, Mr. Rangel criticized Republicans who have said they will not vote to raise the debt ceiling without spending cuts because he said they are solely focused on slashing "so-called entitlements" that are social programs for "vulnerable" portions of the population.

"They're still going to come back and talk about spending. Theres' a lot of money still left, but it appears as though the Republicans are targeting entitlements, entitlements, entitlements. I'll leave it up to you as to why, if you owe $16 trillion and you're trying to cut back spending that you would find out what part of the community is the least able to defend themselves against cuts," said Mr. Rangel.

He went on to describe Republicans' focus on cutting entitlements as being against the religious principles of many conservatives.

"It seems almost unchristian. Especially those who run around saying they're guided by, 'What would Jesus do?,' to pick Social Security, which is a supplement for pensions for the aged....To pick Medicaid, which you take when you have to be two things to be eligible; you have to be sick and you have to be poor," Mr. Rangel said. "Then, of course, the last thing is Medicare, which means that you have to be old and sick. Now, with all of the programs that we have, it seems as though that the ones that we're concentrating on are these three so-called entitlements."

Mr. Rangel also weighed in on the idea President Obama could also dodge the debt fight by unilaterally raising the ceiling using authority given to him by a provision in the 14th Amendment. President Obama has said his lawyers were "not persuaded" that this approach would be legal.

In Mr. Rangel's interpretation of the amendment, the president does indeed have the authority to unilaterally raise the borrowing ceiling. Though he said he doesn't "see how it could be unconstitutional" to bypass the debt debate with the 14th Amendment, Mr. Rangel said he would defer to President Obama and his lawyers on the issue.

"I'm not going to go against constitutional scholars," said the congressman. "But I'd be proud of the president if he found constitutional support that he believed in. I'd say, 'Right on.'"

Though President Obama has dismissed the idea he would use the 14th Amendment to raise the debt ceiling without an agreement from Congress, he has also said he doesn't plan to negotiate on the issue. Mr. Rangel said he's not sure what the president's ultimate strategy will be for raising the debt ceiling without congressional support, but he's looking forward to watching it all play out.

"He had said that he is not going to negotiate the debt ceiling, so I have no idea what that means, but I'm going to be a spectator to that one boy," Mr. Rangel said. "I'm going to have a front row seat."

Hakeem Jeffries (Photo: Facebook)

Now that he's arrived on Capitol Hill, freshman Congressman Hakeem Jeffries has been appointed to the Budget Committee. The Budget Committee is chaired by Paul Ryan and, in an email to supporters announcing the appointment, his campaign sounded rather excited about the possibility for Mr. Jeffries to directly tangle with the former Republican vice presidential candidate.

"I have some important news. Congressman Jeffries was recently appointed to the powerful Budget Committee. This committee will again be chaired by Rep. Paul Ryan, and therefore be the battleground in the fight to preserve social security, Medicare and Medicaid," the email said. "Congressman Jeffries will fight hard to save these programs."

Mr. Jeffries has also been appointed to the Judiciary Committee. In the email to supporters, his campaign said they expect he will be able to "address pressing issues such as gun violence prevention and comprehensive immigration reform" as part of the Judiciary Committee.