Newt Gingrich won't get to play with all his swamp friends at the White House, but that doesn't mean he's going quietly into the night. Yesterday, the former House Speaker threw some Twitter shade at Mayor de Blasio over stop-and-frisk, claiming Anis Amri, the Tunisian-born terrorist responsible for Monday's fatal truck attack in Berlin, would not have been found in New York because of the de Blasio administration's policing tactics.
Amri, 24, was shot dead outside Milan on Friday, four days after he killed 12 people and injured 49 others at a Christmas market in Berlin. Amri was found during a routine police check in a Milanese suburb, and Gingrich claimed yesterday that stop-and-frisk—which was ruled unconstitutional in 2013, before de Blasio was elected mayor—would have caught him had he been on the lam in our area.
Under DeBlasio rules the Tunisian terrorist from Berlin would not have been stopped by Italian police. Time to back NYC police over DeBlasio
— Newt Gingrich (@newtgingrich) December 24, 2016
The de Blasio administration was quick to point out that Newt's an old relic who'd be better off as a permanent fixture in his favorite museum. "Newt doesn’t know what he’s talking about," mayoral spokesman Eric Phillips told the Post. "The last time Newt was in public office the nation was in the throes of a historic crime wave. His next Contract with America should require him to learn something about effective policing."
Phillips also hit back on Twitter:
.@JPeterDonald that, too. Key to NYPD's effectiveness: it's got all 5 pitches and can throw them all for strikes.
— Eric Phillips (@EricFPhillips) December 24, 2016
During his campaign, now-President elect Trump teased bringing stop-and-frisk back, claiming the tactic "worked very well in New York." De Blasio has pointed out it did not. "The unconstitutional use of stop-and-frisk didn't make us safer," de Blasio said soon after Trump was elected. "It was not only morally wrong, it actually did not make us safer."