Manhattan Editor: Schneiderman's Drunken Sexual Abuse Was an 'Open Secret'

May 13th, 2018 5:41 PM

Now-former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's serial and often violent mistreatment of women chronicled on Monday at The New Yorker is yet another example of scandalous behavior which was widely known among leaders in both the Democratic Party and the media elites that somehow never surfaced in public for years (a few of many additional examples would include former Today Show host Matt Lauer, former PBS/CBS newsman Charlie Rose, and retired NBC Nightly News anchor Tom Brokaw).

The Empire State's chief law enforcement officer's abuse of women was so widely known that an associate editor at the center-right Manhattan-based City Journal predicted Schneiderman's ultimate demise six months ago.

Seth Barron made that prediction in mid-November:


Barron appeared on Tucker Carlson's Fox News show Wednesday evening to discuss that prediction, the significance of Schneiderman's ability to avoid public accountability for so many years, and how the skeletons in his closet arguably affected his prosecutorial priorities:


TUCKER CARLSON: Seth Barron is Associate Editor of City Journal. He predicted, in public, on Twitter, that Schneiderman would be exposed as a creep, and he said it last November.

Yesterday, he tweeted this: "How did I know this and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio didn't?"

Great question. We've asked him to come on and explain. Seth Barron joins us tonight.

Seth, how did you know that? That was a remarkably prescient tweet.

SETH BARRON: Thanks, Tucker. You know, to me, it was just kind of, I thought it was just an open secret. I'd heard stories and rumors about Schneiderman for years.

I'd been told by least three or four different people since maybe 2009 that he is into rough sex with women, that he likes to date his staffers and is a little pushy with them, that he tried to kidnap a reporter and wouldn't let her out of his car on the way to — he said he was taking her to his apartment.


BARRON: So I sort of assumed that this was just, you know, common knowledge, more or less. Now I'm not deeply involved in Albany politics or in New York City Democratic circles. I'm an editor for a moderately conservative magazine.

CARLSON: So you're not exactly in the loop at the highest levels of progressive New York, is what you're saying.

BARRON: No, no, exactly. So that's why it seemed strange that everyone was saying, "Oh my God, this is the craziest thing we've ever heard."

CARLSON: But it's clearly not. I mean, so you raise a really, I think, central question, which is, if you heard about it, is it plausible that the Governor of the state, one of his closest allies, presumably one of his closest friends, had never heard of it?

BARRON: It seems implausible to me. I mean, it seems implausible to me that any elected official in New York State hadn't heard it.

I don't know what I can say. I mean, Andrew Cuomo has been steeped in New York State politics for 40 years. He basically has a private army. He keeps tabs on everything and everyone. He's extraordinarily paranoid.

CARLSON: Yes, I know.

BARRON: So I would imagine that he would know everything that everybody's up to at all times.

CARLSON: He's a thoroughly bizarre person. I've dealt with him. No, that's exactly the word that comes to mind, and I don't use it lightly. He's paranoid. He's a control person, there's no doubt.

So this is a little strange though, because Schneiderman was the Attorney General. He wasn't just some functionary. He wasn't the night city editor at the Daily News. I mean, he was the chief law enforcement officer of the state. So if there was the suggestion that he kidnapped somebody, you would think that one of his peers would follow up on it.

BARRON: Well, you might think so. But at the same time, the New York State Attorney General has unique powers, and is an immensely powerful figure. I don't think any attorney general in the — any state attorney general across the country — has the power that you New York Attorney General does.

However, if you noticed over the past few years in New York State and New York City, there's been a lot of corruption investigations.


BARRON: But he has not been leading them. They've all been largely done by the feds. There's trials going on in Albany right now over — Sheldon Silver's going to be retried. A number of Cuomo's associates just were — Joe Percoco was just convicted. This was federal. And in New York City, investigations of Bill de Blasio were largely being done by the federal government.

CARLSON: It's kind of funny. Meanwhile, this guy's suing everyone about global warming. (Laughs) I get it,

BARRON: Global warming, or coming up with ways to have pardon-proof indictments of Trump associates, or suing the vitamin industry. Yeah.

CARLSON: Meanwhile, the cesspool around him goes unaddressed. Seth, thank you for that dispatch from New York. Not heartening, But fascinating.

BARRON: Thanks, Tucker.

The interview raises at least two otherwise unexplored issues:

  • The New Yorker's Schneiderman exposé does not mention any incident or victim similar to the one Barron described involving Schneiderman allegedly trying "to kidnap a reporter." This victim may be the fifth victim Fox News's Kimberly Guilfoyle has claimed to have spoken to — or there may be a sixth victim.
  • Schneiderman's abusive actions may have influenced his priorities as a prosecutor, causing him to decide to stay uninvolved in efforts to prosecute corrupt Empire State politicians because doing so might cause them to go public with the grisly accusations about his personal life.

In a Thursday column at Townhall, Derek Hunter asked the obvious question, and put forth the most logical answer:

... how is it that no one in the media heard anything about either of these men (Schneiderman and disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein — Ed.) until their stories were reported? How was it “news to them”? It is, after all, the jobs of these people to observe, to gain information, then disseminate that information to the public, particularly information about the powerful and politicians.

... the media elite are too close, too friendly with the people they cover, specifically liberal politicians, to cover them honestly.

Even if they were only acquaintances, no one wants to be the skunk at the garden party. Operating in the same social circles pollutes the relationship between journalist and politician, even (I would argue "especially" — Ed.) when they agree politically. That means rumors are ignored or laughed off, no matter how many times they’re heard or their source.

It’s highly unlikely the people on cable news who clutched their pearls over Farrow’s stories were doing it because they were blindsided by the allegations, but more likely they were shocked someone reported them.

Cross-posted at