Reactions Differ Widely on Federal Probe of Bradley

The Justice Department’s criminal investigation of Mayor Tom Bradley spawned a range of reaction from elected officials and the city’s political establishment on Thursday, some shrugging it off as one more twist and others predicting that it will fan the firestorm surrounding the mayor to near-fatal proportions.

Few--if any--city political figures, however, believe that the mayor will be forced from office unless criminal indictments are lodged against him. And Bradley’s longtime supporters contend that they have sensed the beginnings of grass-roots rallying in favor of the embattled five-term Democrat.

The Times reported Thursday that the Justice Department has opened preliminary criminal investigations of Bradley and House Majority Whip Tony Coelho (D-Merced) in connection with their financial dealings with the investment firm of Drexel Burnham Lambert.

Details of the investigation are not known, but a central issue is whether Bradley and Coelho, who have acknowledged that they made investments through Drexel, received preferential treatment. Coelho and Bradley have each said they did nothing wrong.

For Bradley, the development followed continuing investigations by the city attorney’s office and the Securities and Exchange Commission, and it presented a sober reminder of what is expected to be months of uncertainty at City Hall.

Privately, the Bradley controversy has left council members either diving for cover to avoid publicly criticizing the mayor or shaking their heads in dismay. “The easiest thing to do politically is to watch what happens and hope,” one Democrat cracked.

Councilman Robert Farrell, one of the mayor’s staunchest allies, said Thursday that he believes the Justice Department probe was politically motivated by “a Republican Administration smarting from some of its heroes getting caught with their hands in the cookie jar.” He was apparently referring to Reagan Administration officials who had been accused of wrongdoing.

“In my partisan mind’s eye, I see this as part of other things going on in Washington,” said Farrell, referring to the ethics probe of House Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.). “They are playing games.”

Farrell, who like the mayor is black, said earlier that he believes press coverage of the mayor’s financial ties has been sensational and provoked by a racially biased press corps.

Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky, however, issued a more cautionary statement.

“I don’t think we should prejudge anything,” he said. “I sense this is a very preliminary step that may come to nothing.”

The reaction of City Hall staff members, lobbyists and political operatives, like that of the council members, differed widely.

‘Like a Snowball’

“It’s like a snowball rolling,” said one prominent Democrat, who, like most of those interviewed, spoke only on the condition that they not be named. “It gets to be one thing after another. It means he’ll have to go through hell for another 3 1/2 years.”

Said an influential City Hall lobbyist: “All by its lonesome, it’s newsworthy. But cumulatively, it’s devastating.”

A longtime political consultant, however, suggested that the damage will be isolated to Bradley’s image and not spill over into his political strength.

“All that’s happened is that a guy who was thought of as having dignity has become . . . like all the others,” said the consultant.

And, warned one City Council staff member, “no one seems to know what it really means. . . . It’s difficult to understand whether they’re looking at it from the Drexel side, or the Bradley side.”

Polls taken since the Bradley controversy erupted earlier this spring--including a Times survey--have shown a pronounced decline in the mayor’s citywide support. Furthermore, the allegations against Bradley have hit the mayor directly in his political strength--the sense of personal integrity he brought to office and maintained for 16 years as mayor.

Character Issue

“I think he’s especially vulnerable to these charges because his character has never been an issue,” said Arnold Steinberg, a Republican public opinion pollster whose recent survey showed a decline in Bradley’s popularity.

“And even if the charges prove exaggerated or untrue, he is still tarred by them. And I think things will never quite be the same.”

Steinberg and others say Bradley’s political base--the black community and organized labor included--remains firmly in support of the mayor.

“Mayor Bradley’s die-hard supporters don’t care about this,” Steinberg said. “But when you go beyond the base and the gray area, those people are running away and there is no deep loyalty there.”

An indication of the base support came from James Wood, the assistant secretary-treasurer of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor--and a Bradley ally. Wood said union leader William Robertson has been speaking out on behalf of Bradley at local union meetings.

Labor Support

“There’s no contradiction (to Robertson’s statements),” Wood said. “Nobody stands up and says, ‘Hey, Bill, don’t you think we ought to hold back’. . . . Within the labor movement there is no erosion of support for Mayor Bradley.”

The mayor does face one potential test of his political strength. Today, Bradley is scheduled to receive the City Council’s final budget. As in most years, the mayor is likely to veto some council additions and subtractions to his initial budget proposal, and the veto override votes will be closely watched.

“If the council overrides (his veto) on everything, then this is a real problem,” said the staff member, who was doubtful about the chances for a full override.

A spokesman for the city attorney’s office, meanwhile, said the federal investigation will have no impact on the city’s probe, although local investigators will probably be in touch with their federal counterparts.

In another development, Bradley on Wednesday added another attorney to his team of lawyers, according to Dan Fogel, who is also representing Bradley. Steven D. Miller, an expert in federal securities law, will beef up the mayor’s defense team in an area where the new investigations are focusing.

The Justice Department decision to open preliminary investigations of Bradley and Coelho followed an unusual bi-coastal disagreement within the department. In Los Angeles, U.S. Atty. Robert Bonner reportedly concluded that the available facts did not warrant preliminary inquiries.

However, sources said that in New York, acting U.S. Atty. Benito Romano concluded that facts developed in his office’s long-running investigation of Drexel warranted inquiries into transactions with the investment firm by Bradley and Coelho. But Romano’s office lacked venue to pursue the investigations because the transactions involving the two Democrats took place in Los Angeles.

To resolve the issue, sources told The Times, the Public Integrity Section studied the two cases and concluded that it should take jurisdiction.

On Wednesday, a Bradley spokesman said the mayor had “no knowledge of any such investigation. Bradley on Thursday told United Press International that he has not been contacted by any investigative agency, but he would cooperate if he is.

“I have said that I will cooperate with the agencies that are legally authorized to conduct the inquiry,” Bradley said. “I am totally confident of vindication when that is over.”

He added he would make no further comment unless the “inquiry drags out for an undue length of time.”