How did James Barracato obtain the Mayor's "60,000 emails"?

It Takes a Thief  aired on ABC for three seasons between January 9, 1968, and March 24, 1970.

Folks, I don't have the answer.

GA believes there can be two possible sources:
  1. One of the parties directly involved in the hospital sale ("leaked").
  2. The mayor's email account ("diverted")
One thing is certain.  No matter how 60,000 of the Mayor/HMHA's emails came to be in the hands of  Mason's "business partner" James Barracato,  he was not an "authorized recipient" of those emails.  Further, the email exhibits produced in Bajardi v Pincus,  demonstrate that Barracato and others who knew he possessed the improperly obtained emails (and did nothing) wished to use them to undermine the sale of the hospital to the single viable bidder, Holdco.

GA believes an investigation is warranted; questions need to be answered.

Who gave Barracato the 60,000 emails which Mason's "business partner" then gave to The Hoboken Reporter one month before the hospital sale closed?  Was the confidentiality agreement between parties illegally breached to undermine the successful sale of a public asset or were emails "diverted" from the Mayor?  60,000 is a lot of email; it would seem to span a period of months, if not years; the City's effort to sell the hospital began in (at least) 2010.

These are questions which GA believes need answers.

According to Barracato's braggadocio these 60,000 improperly obtained emails and the "shit" in them are rockets to launch at the Zimmer administration:

That was October 9, 2011.

Sometime prior to October 30, 2011, Barracato, the "shit"- peddler,  brought the "shit" on a disk to the Malibu Diner and gave it to reporter Ray Smith

Much to the consternation of the "shit"-peddler's associates, Smith's story was "sympathetic."


In other words, the trafficking of 60,000 improperly obtained emails during the sale of the hospital did not produce the "shit"-peddler's desired result.

Thank goodness for Hoboken.

Now, what happened and how does Hoboken prevent it from happening again?  That is why this needs to be investigated.


  1. Would those individuals with knowledge of illegally procured government property, in this case the mayor's confidential emails, be consider accessories to a crime? I'm not a lawyer but some could see that as aiding and abetting, right? What about the Hudson Reporter? Are they liable at all? Did their editor or publisher alert the Feds about receiving illegally obtained government communications?

    I look forward to the investigative, behind the scenes stories from political insider journalists like Al Sullivan and Augie Torres.

    1. Good Qs. I don't know the answers. But because the breach was on the magnitude of 60,000 emails, all to tank the sale of a public asset during bankruptcy proceedings with a $52M bond default at stake, 1,200 hospital jobs, potential tripling of taxes, and the city's credit rating on the line its critical to understand how this happened so it doesn't happen again.

      Not sure if anyone remembers, but the interest on the bond default would have to be paid the same year, hence the one-year potential tripling of municipal tax. That is what was at stake. The crisis was averted, thank G-d. But my view, we must find out how these 60,000 emails came into Barracato's hands and make sure that never happens again. There should be some kind of official investigation. In my opinion.

  2. Given the story written by Mr. Smith after he had the opportunity to review the 60,000 e-mails, it would seem that the e-mails reinforced the Mayor's side of the "story." The takeaway for me is that Barracato is actually stupid enough not to know shit from shinola.

    As for the HR - newspapers often get stuff from questionable sources. Prosecuting the press for receiving information about a matter of public concern would be a really bad idea since the press really does have an important role in creating accountability.

    Its not the receipt of the information that a newspaper should be judged by. It's what they do with it. In this case Ray Smith and the Hoboken Reporter acted appropriately and responsibly. They read through the materials, did not find whatever Mr. Barracato had claimed was in there, and wrote a fair story.

    1. Yeah, you're right. Dimwit should have selected a dozen instead of dumping 60,000 on Ray, although the same story would have been written. 60,000! That's 60 volumes of War and Peace. In any case, how did that dope get 60,000 Zimmer/HMHA emails?

      This is a matter of public concern.

    2. Getting "stuff from questionable sources" is one thing, getting stolen confidential government communication is something else. This ain't some good samaritan who gives a tip to a reporter because he feels his employer is breaking the law. This is a a guy who knowingly received stolen confidential government property and spread it around. Big difference.

      I'm not saying the HR should be prosecuted because they took the stolen property, I'm saying they have a moral, if not legal, responsibility to report that they got it to the Feds, and from whom.

    3. A ream of paper (500 sheets) is about 2" high, meaning 60,000 sheets would stack up to be twenty feet tall, and that's assuming each email was only one sheet! Yes, I know they were digital, but I wanted to create the visual.

      If Baracatto received stolen emails and knew he had a willing recipient in the Reporter, all collected at the behest of others, aren't all parties just as guilty as Ricciardi?

      Stoikovicz seems to have a pathological hatred of Zimmer and through her disrespectful comments toward the Masons, she appears to be using the Masons as a means of satisfying some vendetta.

  3. I can't wrap my head around these people suing you and Roman for calling them what they are. I hope you get every penny back and then some.

  4. Bradley/Chelsea Manning stole confidential government communications, gave them to a media outlet (Wikileaks) and ended up arrested, prosecuted and sentenced to 35 years in jail.

    One can dream.

    1. And each illegally obtained email is a separate offense.

    2. Was it ever revealed why Ricciardi got off so lightly on the email charge? I know the papers cited the health of his ex-wife and son, but was that it? Any chance he got such a sweet plea deal by cooperating and naming names?

    3. Rumor is he's working for the FBI now

  5. I doubt the FBI hires guys like him with a criminal record but doesn't mean they've got no use for hm either.


Post a Comment