Regina Calcaterra appeared in a New Yorker article by Ronan Farrow titled “Andrew Cuomo’s War against a Federal Prosecutor” written about a commission that closed down seven years ago. At 6:01 on Monday morning, Regina received an email from Ronan Farrow and his fact checker providing her twelve hours to respond to queries from this article they have been working on for weeks, if not longer. The article was already written and getting input from Regina was something that Ronan Farrow had to do, but clearly did not care to do as reflected in the published article. His bias resides with not only in how he excluded portions of Regina’s answers where she stated could be verified by documentation, but also with the fact that Regina’s responses were inconvenient for his sources Danya Perry & Kathleen Rice.
In an effort to share Regina’s response, provided below is an email exchange between Ronan and Regina.
From: Regina Calcaterra
Good [Evening] Ronan and David,
As stated in a previous email I understand your deadline is being imposed upon me after a significant length of time you spent working on this upcoming article, with sources you are familiar with. Nevertheless, I have provided responses and/or questions below to your earlier email and include context which I have yet not shared publicly.
Prior News Coverage is Not Fact It is important for you to know that during the time of reporting on the Moreland Commission and even after its closing, I was unable to defend myself in the press. I did not have a press operation in place at the Moreland Commission that was separate and apart from the Governor’s office, and as events in question led to a federal investigation, my personal counsel advised me not to speak to the press during the course of the investigation.
There are quite a few things that were reported about me that are wholly untrue and/or are mischaracterized, at best. When I could not respond to media inquiries, other actors, which include your sources. could and did say whatever they chose, and their statements were deemed as fact. Statements were routinely confirmed by sources with their own agendas, and this includes items reported in multiple New York Times articles, the New York Daily News, etc., that were then repeated by other media outlets as true. In fact, there have been many moments where I have learned about events purportedly taking place at the Commission – both true and false – from media broadcasts and articles. Indeed, I did not learn of the Governor’s decision to disband the Commission until I heard it announced on the radio, along with the other members of the public.
As are result, your fact checker David and you should understand that just because something was reported in the New York Times, it does not mean it is fact and this coverage should not give you comfort to repeat these statements in your article, now that you reached out to me.
I have worked to move past the circumstances of a job I did not want to stay in and the accusations arising from it with grace and dignity by choosing not to speak on the record. Moving past this difficult time means that I just had to move on and let what I experienced go. I suffered significant trauma from the ridiculous and untrue things that were reported by “sources” with their own agendas, as well as the federal investigation.
Additional Mentions of Me I expect that you have much more material in your article that mentions me, so I would like the opportunity to learn of all these instances with a reasonable time to respond. I have not yet spoken at length publicly about my role with the Moreland Commission and since I am now being asked to do so, I do want to make sure that I have the opportunity to do so appropriately. However, your limited timeline does not allow me to do so, while I balance the rest of my responsibilities.
Responses:
Responses to your queries below are based upon my recollections from seven to eight years ago.
1. That, in July 2013, you complained to colleagues that the commission’s efforts to scrutinize and subpoena JCOPE would anger the second floor. We further report that you called chief of investigations Danya Perry about the same matter and shouted at her, demanding that she tell everything as it happened so it could be reported to the second floor; and that you then summoned Perry to your office, where Larry Schwartz screamed at her via speakerphone for not understanding political sensitivities. Do you have any comment?
a. At the start of the Moreland Commission (“MC”), in an effort to obtain prior complaints filed against the legislature that were not ultimately investigated, Danya Perry and I agreed that it would be best to gather this information from JCOPE. We both agreed to have the subpoena issued. I was in full support of this, regardless of the Governor’s Office’s views.
2. That, in August 2013, a colleague informed Perry that you and Schwartz were attempting to recall process servers in the midst of serving subpoenas to Walmart and FedEx. Sources involved assert and records from the time show that this was out of concern that subpoenas to those companies, which were connected to Cuomo, would look bad for the governor. Do you have any comment on this?
a. My recollection is that both WalMart and FedEx were in fact served with investigatory subpoenas from the Moreland Commission and such issuance was supported by the Commission’s chairs. I further recollect that the subject matter of these subpoenas involved potential lobbying activity by these companies, generally related to tax credits and labor issues. As evidenced by the Commission's own documents and communications, the Commission served well over 100 investigatory subpoenas to a host of entities during its existence - entities that included politically active corporations and real estate developers, as well as sitting legislators from both major political parties.
3. Late in the same month, after Perry complained about interference to the commissioners at a briefing, sources say you were witnessed “torching” her in reports back to the governor, and that you lunged at Perry with teeth bared and screeched at her in anger. Do you have any response to this?
a. As drafted, this language is tremendously sexist and I find it unlikely that the same characterization would be used to describe a male, if he held my role at MC. Please advise whether your sources actually stated I “lunged ….with teeth bared and screeched with anger.” We are both writers, and this type of language may be sufficient for a novel, but not for news reporting. If you are seeking a response, please advise if all of your sources stated the exact same thing, the amount of sources you have or if this is just your description? Then, I will respectfully respond. Further, it is true that Ms. Perry and I often disagreed professionally on various aspects of the Commission’s efforts as colleagues will certainly do from time to time. I could easily cast the behavior of others in a similar light, but have not publicly responded to these incorrectly one-sided characterizations and exaggerations until this point, ie I can say others approached me with teeth bared and screeched anger as well.
4. In a meeting in early September including yourself, Schwartz, Perry and Cuomo, the governor said that no criminal cases would come out of the commission and that was not the purpose. The governor also said subpoenas were distracting and prescribed what he wanted the report to look like. Do you have any comment on this meeting?
a. I recall a meeting did occur with named parties, but I do not recall the specific dialogue that took place.
5. We report that the commission’s chairpeople twice selected independent ethics attorneys to help author a preliminary report but were overruled by you. Instead, a junior staffer on the governor’s team, [named removed], was selected. Do you have any comment on this? Why was Crohn insisted upon over more experienced independent attorneys?
a. I encouraged the use of an independent report writer early on and believed that to be the correct course of action. In fact, I reached out to Zephyr Teachout, after she testified at an MC hearing to determine if she was interested. However, the Governor’s office wanted to have a role in the selection of the person charged with drafting the report – and [name removed] efforts to do so were the end result.
6. We report that you were monitoring the activities of Perry and other commission officials and reporting back to Cuomo in early 2014. Several staffers present at that time assert that they believed their emails were being intercepted and reviewed and that documents were taken from their desk. One eyewitness recalls seeing you, after hours, looking into trash cans and desks, apparently for documents. Do you have any response to this?
a. I have no idea how to intercept emails. Please elaborate on how I purportedly intercepted emails, as I have no knowledge of how to intercept email communications sent from one person to another.
7. We also report that you were involved in cutting short K2’s contract in December 2013, and quote staffers at both the commission and K2 who claim that this was done because their work was beginning to draw unwanted attention to the governor’s allies. Do you have any response to this?
a. My concerns about renewing K2 had no involvement with what you described as “unwanted attention to the governor’s allies.” I specifically recall a series of concerns surrounding the retention and continued use of K2 that were not raised in your query. As the initial sole source contract for data analytical services for K2 came to a close (these services were not procured subject to an official RFP process), staff members voiced a series of performance issues related to K2 that were memorialized. Additionally, I was well aware of troubling conflicts of interest pertaining to K2, as they concerned both staff members and Commissioners in addition to performance issues articulated by staff members. These concerns were provided in Moreland Commission memorandums and emails to [the] all relevant stakeholders that were involved in the procurement process. These documents can verify my response.
Thank you for your consideration.
Kindly,
Regina Calcaterra Calcaterra Pollack LLP [email protected] (212) 899-1766
From: "Farrow, Ronan"
Hi Regina. Just an update, we have an hour and a half to incorporate any input you provide. We would very much like to do so. Thank you once again.
Ronan
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 2:23 PM Farrow, Ronan
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 12:02 PM Regina Calcaterra
I am confirming what I advised you over the phone. You likely have worked on this story for weeks and you provide me 12 hours to respond. This is your deadline that you are imposing on me. I run a law firm where almost daily there are legal deadlines we need to meet. You will receive a response in writing today, but I ask that you to be patient based upon your limitation and my obligations.
Thank you for your consideration.
Kindly,
Regina Calcaterra Calcaterra Pollack LLP [email protected] (212) 899-1766
______This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may include privileged or other wise confidential information. Federal and state law governing electronic communications apply. If you received this message in error, or have reason to believe you are not authorized to receive it, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender by e -mail. This email, including any attachments, could possibly contain viruses. The receiver assumes all responsible f or checking and deleting any potential viruses.
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Kortava, David" < > Date: August 9, 2021 at 2:29:54 PM EDT To: rcalcaterra Cc: "Farrow, Ronan" < > Subject: Re: Time sensitive request for comment
Hi Regina, I just left you a voicemail. We are closing the article tonight; please call as soon as you're able. My cell . Best, David
On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 6:02 AM Farrow, Ronan < > wrote: Dear Regina,
I hope this finds you well. The New Yorker is preparing to publish a story about the Moreland Commission and Governor’s handling of it, in which you are featured. Much of what we report accords with previous reporting in the New York Times and elsewhere. We welcome any input. We will need any responses by end of day (6PM EST) today.
In the story, we report:
• That, in July 2013, you complained to colleagues that the commission’s efforts to scrutinize and subpoena JCOPE would anger the second floor. We further report that you called chief of investigations Danya Perry about the same matter and shouted at her, demanding that she tell everything as it happened so it could be reported to the second floor; and that you then summoned Perry to your office, where Larry Schwartz screamed at her via speakerphone for not understanding political sensitivities. Do you have any comment?
• That, in August 2013, a colleague informed Perry that you and Schwartz were attempting to recall process servers in the midst of serving subpoenas to Walmart and FedEx. Sources involved assert and records from the time show that this was out of concern that subpoenas to those companies, which were connected to Cuomo, would look bad for the governor. Do you have any comment on this?
• Late in the same month, after Perry complained about interference to the commissionioners at a briefing, sources say you were witnessed “torching” her in reports back to the governor, and that you lunged at Perry with teeth bared and screeched at her in anger. Do you have any response to this?
• In a meeting in early September including yourself, Schwartz, Perry and Cuomo, the governor said that no criminal cases would come out of the commission and that was not the purpose. The governor also said subpoenas were distracting and prescribed what he wanted the report to look like. Do you have any comment on this meeting?
• We report that the commission’s chairpeople twice selected independent ethics attorneys to help author a preliminary report but were overruled by you. Instead, a junior staffer on the governor’s team, Alex Crohn, was selected. Do you have any comment on this? Why was Crohn insisted upon over more experienced independent attorneys?
• We report that you were monitoring the activities of Perry and other commission officials and reporting back to Cuomo in early 2014. Several staffers present at that time assert that they believed their emails were being intercepted and reviewed and that documents were taken from their desk. One eyewitness recalls seeing you, after hours, looking into trash cans and desks, apparently for documents. Do you have any response to this?
• We also report that you were involved in cutting short K2’s contract in December 2013, and quote staffers at both the commission and K2 who claim that this was done because their work was beginning to draw unwanted attention to the governor’s allies. Do you have any response to this?
Our fact checker, David Kortava, is copied. He is at and I am at . We are both available should you have any questions.
Thank you very much.
Ronan
-- David Kortava The New Yorker 1 World Trade Center, NYC 10007 Office (WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal): Mobile: