Nice..... if the NY Times is correct then Elliot Spitzer has been implicated with involvement in a $5500/hour prostitution ring... well, not just prostitution, according to the company's web site it facilitated the introduction of wealthy businessmen with models and provided investment advice.
I guess it was kind of a "value added" shop...
Most fascinating thing about this article, is not once is it mentioned that Eliot Spitzer is a Democrat- not once that I found unless I glossed over it. NYT doesn't have a problem putting "Republican" somewhere in the first paragraph or headline in instances like Larry Craig or Mark Foley.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080310/ap_on_re_us/spitzer_prostitution
a lot of that had to do with the fact that
Mark Foley was chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, which introduced legislation targeting sexual predators and created stricter guidelines for tracking them.
and
Larry Craig was a supporter of the Defense of Marriage Act
both were republicans which pride themselves on demonizing homosexuality and both were found to be incredible hypocrites. So the fact that they were republicans was entirely relevant.
You are aware that Eliot Spitzer was instrumental in breaking up a prominent NYC prostitution ring as a prosecutor, yes?
Smacks of hypocrasy to me regardless of which political party. Point is, NYT isn't so quick to out Democrats and their various proclivities and perversions.
Sorry, but no whore is worth $5500....I don't care if she lays eggs of gold.
So much for good guy Spitzer.
Se what happens to bad sex lives? 'course I saw the wife beside him so I can understand.
$5500 prolly just to get a BJ and decide whether Yahoo was a good stock.
The world needs more head.
Hoodlum's right Conan.....big diff in party regards. But you are correct on hypocricy.
ethics ? what ethics ?....sheesh, who can you trust in power these days...
How come all these lawyers like the hos so much?
yeah but is a major part of the Democratic platform protecting americans from the evils of prostitution like a major part of the republican platform is protecting americans from the "so-called" evils of homosexuality?
i don't believe that the fact that elliot is a democrat has anything to do with the story, i do believe that Craig and Foley being republicans has a lot to do with their individual stories as points to an apparent hypocrisy within a platform of a major political party.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
Sorry, but no whore is worth $5500....I don't care if she lays eggs of gold.
So much for good guy Spitzer.
Se what happens to bad sex lives? 'course I saw the wife beside him so I can understand.
$5500 prolly just to get a BJ and decide whether Yahoo was a good stock.
The world needs more head.
Well now wait a minute, lets put this into perspective.
$5,000 to some of these guys is like half a days interest on their bank accounts.
NOW, how about a super hot model "whore" for that price?
Its the oldest profession in the world. It will never stop, and this isn't even a surprising story to hear about.
And to say that its the Dems... or Rebubs that only do this... LMAO.
quote:
Originally posted by Hawkins
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
Sorry, but no whore is worth $5500....I don't care if she lays eggs of gold.
So much for good guy Spitzer.
Se what happens to bad sex lives? 'course I saw the wife beside him so I can understand.
$5500 prolly just to get a BJ and decide whether Yahoo was a good stock.
The world needs more head.
$5,000 to some of these guys is like half a days interest on their bank accounts.
NOW, how about a super hot model "whore" for that price?
really, for that price it would have to be a hollywood actress like Charlise Theron or Lindsay Lohan. Or like a MAJOR model for Victoria's Secret.
For what all he was probably wanting done, probably wouldn't have taken more than half a hour tops.
Who says any of them know what they are doing.....Pamela Andeson now thats a diffrent story.....[:)]
quote:
Originally posted by hoodlum
yeah but is a major part of the Democratic platform protecting americans from the evils of prostitution like a major part of the republican platform is protecting americans from the "so-called" evils of homosexuality?
i don't believe that the fact that elliot is a democrat has anything to do with the story, i do believe that Craig and Foley being republicans has a lot to do with their individual stories as points to an apparent hypocrisy within a platform of a major political party.
So according to yours and FOTD's logic, being a Democrat makes it okay when you sneak around behind the backs of your wife and children to buy a piece of donkey, even after publicly prosecuting the trade, yes?
So it's somehow less of a crime or not such a big deal when a registered Democrat humiliates his entire family and a state by engaging in illegal activity with prostitutes?
Sheesh, if that makes it all kosher, why have I waited so long to register as a Democrat?
FWIW- 1 1/2 years later, still no criminal charges brought against Mark Foley.
They do mention that he is a Demoncrat in the story.
"Associated Press on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing inquiry.
The New York Democrat, identified in legal papers as "Client 9," met last month with at least one woman in a Washington hotel, the law enforcement official said."
quote:
Originally posted by bokworker
Nice..... if the NY Times is correct then Elliot Spitzer has been implicated with involvement in a $5500/hour prostitution ring... well, not just prostitution, according to the company's web site it facilitated the introduction of wealthy businessmen with models and provided investment advice.
I guess it was kind of a "value added" shop...
hahahahahahahahahahahaha.......
Why is someone's sex life relevant to their job as a public servant? Sergeant Stanley Wojohowitz - a great American - once said that you can't open a Sears catalog without finding something someone wants to sleep with. Does being privately kinky make any of us publicly incompetent?
Americans need to grow up and stop treating sex as a dirty, shameful act. They need to get past the adolescent Beavis and Butthead snickering, and realize that our leaders are no less human as the rest of us.
And if your idea of sex involves Craftsman power tools, well, enjoy yourself but try to keep the noise down.
nope not what i am saying at all
What I am saying is that both Mark Foley and Larry Craig come from a background and political party who makes it their business to legislate moral issues and in doing so protecting american families against the "so-called" evils of homosexuality. So when they become entangled in scandals involving homosexuality themselves then the fact that they are Republicans is completely and 100% relevant to the discussion at hand. Even more so because now the story shifts from individuals and their bad choices to an overall discussion about a republican party who advocates legislation against homosexual lifestyles when members of their own party are engaged in the same lifestyle that their party platform is hell bent on demonizing.
If the Democratic Party platform was closely tied to the prevention of prostitution in America as major party issue and if Elliot was a leading member against prostitution then i would say his party is relevant. The fact that the democratic party platform doesn't address at all the evils of prostitution or makes it a major wedge issue at election time means that if a democrat gets busted for prostituion the story ends there because there is no greater discussion of hypocrisy within the foundation of the democratic party.
Thats why I say it doesn't matter that he is a democrat.
Now if Elliot was a republican? then again it matters because it calls to task the legitimacy of the entire morals platform of the republican party because the republican party makes it an issue to legislate morality.
just my 2 cents
Nice spin. Why don't you just admit you're a registered Democrat and you'd be doing an end zone dance if it were a Republican?
It's pretty much a given that any elected or appointed official who breaks the law deserves scorn.
I think it makes it doubly bad when it's someone who has actually enforced laws regarding prostitution then turned around and used the services in another jurisdiction. Also as governor he does have a responsibility to enforce laws on the books. Sounds like this may just be the tip of the iceberg for Spitzer. Don't be surprised if other prominent Dems get sucked into his corruption as well.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by hoodlum
yeah but is a major part of the Democratic platform protecting americans from the evils of prostitution like a major part of the republican platform is protecting americans from the "so-called" evils of homosexuality?
i don't believe that the fact that elliot is a democrat has anything to do with the story, i do believe that Craig and Foley being republicans has a lot to do with their individual stories as points to an apparent hypocrisy within a platform of a major political party.
So according to yours and FOTD's logic, being a Democrat makes it okay when you sneak around behind the backs of your wife and children to buy a piece of donkey, even after publicly prosecuting the trade, yes?
So it's somehow less of a crime or not such a big deal when a registered Democrat humiliates his entire family and a state by engaging in illegal activity with prostitutes?
Sheesh, if that makes it all kosher, why have I waited so long to register as a Democrat?
FWIW- 1 1/2 years later, still no criminal charges brought against Mark Foley.
I never said that it was ok to be an adulterer. Unless, the wifie doesn't care.[:P]
Tore up over victimless crimes. Isn't our country wonderful. And they're building more prisons all the time to protect people from themselves.
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
Why is someone's sex life relevant to their job as a public servant? Sergeant Stanley Wojohowitz - a great American - once said that you can't open a Sears catalog without finding something someone wants to sleep with. Does being privately kinky make any of us publicly incompetent?
Americans need to grow up and stop treating sex as a dirty, shameful act. They need to get past the adolescent Beavis and Butthead snickering, and realize that our leaders are no less human as the rest of us.
And if your idea of sex involves Craftsman power tools, well, enjoy yourself but try to keep the noise down.
The only person that needs to grow up is YOU. I cannot believe you are so naive that you cannot see what is at issue here. Prostitution rings, which are illegal by the way (in case you did not know) invariably have nefarious characters that are engaged in money laundering, tax evasion, perhaps violent crime and, oh yeah, BLACKMAIL. Spitzer is the governor of New York and, in this position, would be an ideal extortion target. This is about making smart choices--clearly he did not. Oh, try selling this "dirty shameful act" crap to his wife and three daughters.
Having a little rectal-cranial inversion, Ed?
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
Tore up over victimless crimes. Isn't our country wonderful. And they're building more prisons all the time to protect people from themselves.
Eh, you were pretty torn up with Larry Craig. What was the exact headline? Something along the lines of "Another Nasty Bad Boy Repug." If the undercover agent in the other stall was into it, we'd probably have never known about it. [:P]
Point is, these people are entrusted with making and upholding our laws. They should be a good example for all to follow. We should expect no less out of them regardless of party affiliation.
I'm waiting to hear if Hillary might get implicated into some of Spitzer's other corruption issues which are being looked into. That's something which ought to give you a real chubby if true. Though the Clinton teflon will probably make it fall right off onto some minion's back. It is NEVER Bill or Hillary's fault.
Spitzer has not denied what he did. Craig can never fess up to being gay. He's a repug. Not a demorat.
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
Quote
The only person that needs to grow up is YOU. I cannot believe you are so naive that you cannot see what is at issue here. Prostitution rings, which are illegal by the way (in case you did not know) invariably have nefarious characters that are engaged in money laundering, tax evasion, perhaps violent crime and, oh yeah, BLACKMAIL.
I can see the rationale behind tax evasion when you're earning money through illegal means. But the money laundering, 'perhaps' violent crime, and blackmail seem more in line with a juicy movie-of-the-week powered by an over-active imagination. In all the prostitution busts I've heard of, these charges have never been pressed.
Ultimately, the solution is to legalize prostitution. Bring it under government regulation so it can be taxed and made subject to inspection. When the illegality is removed, the "money laundering, tax evasion, perhaps violent crime and, oh yeah, BLACKMAIL" no longer applies.
Of course, that implies having a reasonable, rational approach to sex, an approach that is sadly lacking in straight-laced America.
I think you all are missing the detail..."it was a high-class prostitute."
It reminds me of an old joke.
A husband and wife were having dinner in a posh restaurant when she noticed close friend Joe with an attractive woman at a nearby table. She asked her husband who the woman was. He said, "that was Joe's mistress".
The wife was shocked and started mumbling about how improper and immoral it all was. Suddenly, her husband was approached by a beautful woman who kissed him on the lips and walked away.
The wife demanded to know who the woman was. The husband explained that was "his mistress".
The wife then got real upset and said she wanted a divorce. The husband calmly replied, "But then, you will not have this wonderful life that I have provided you."
The wife thought about it for a few seconds, then said, "Ours is prettier."
Nope, Conan's right. He should resign, and he should be prosecuted.
And he's a hypocrite, of course. He's made a career out of crusading against all sorts of wrongdoing -- prostitution included -- and you can't do that if you're morally compromised yourself. Tis a shame, because I agreed with his politics and his progressivism, and thought that he took on the right people. And he took them on, which is more than most Dems in power positions can say. So, sad to see an important voice and a rising star commit hari kiri.
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
Nope, Conan's right. He should resign, and he should be prosecuted.
And he's a hypocrite, of course. He's made a career out of crusading against all sorts of wrongdoing -- prostitution included -- and you can't do that if you're morally compromised yourself. Tis a shame, because I agreed with his politics and his progressivism, and thought that he took on the right people. And he took them on, which is more than most Dems in power positions can say. So, sad to see an important voice and a rising star commit hari kiri.
Prosecuted? For being a john? Okay, what about Vitter (//%22http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070902030.html%22) then? Senator Vitter won't resign...should he? Should he prosecuted?
What's fair? Conan's wrong, the NY Times (which broke the story, incidentally) clearly mentions that he's a Democrat. They also hit the hypocrite angle because Spitzer is a "crime and ethics" guy. Seems like fair coverage to me.
He's a hypocrite, that's why it makes for interesting news. Even so, Spitzer is no worse, and arguably better, than a "family-values" Republican with a diaper fetish who regularly called the DC Madam when he needed his nappy changed. Vitter's flat-out gross, and if you have a problem with Spitzer, then you can't hold back on Vitter.
quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
Nope, Conan's right. He should resign, and he should be prosecuted.
And he's a hypocrite, of course. He's made a career out of crusading against all sorts of wrongdoing -- prostitution included -- and you can't do that if you're morally compromised yourself. Tis a shame, because I agreed with his politics and his progressivism, and thought that he took on the right people. And he took them on, which is more than most Dems in power positions can say. So, sad to see an important voice and a rising star commit hari kiri.
Prosecuted? For being a john? Okay, what about Vitter (//%22http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070902030.html%22) then? Senator Vitter won't resign...should he? Should he prosecuted?
What's fair? Conan's wrong, the NY Times (which broke the story, incidentally) clearly mentions that he's a Democrat. They also hit the hypocrite angle because Spitzer is a "crime and ethics" guy. Seems like fair coverage to me.
He's a hypocrite, that's why it makes for interesting news. Even so, Spitzer is no worse, and arguably better, than a "family-values" Republican with a diaper fetish who regularly called the DC Madam when he needed his nappy changed. Vitter's flat-out gross, and if you have a problem with Spitzer, then you can't hold back on Vitter.
Who said anything about holding back on Vitter? I thought he'd crawled back into the heating ducts a long time ago. But if there's a crime, he should do the time. And he should step down, too.
Conan's right in that Spitzer's a hypocrite. I can't tell you whether it was mentioned that he was a D or not, and frankly I don't care. I think keeping score in that way diverts from relevant issues here. And really if you DO want to go there, R sex scandals outnumber D sex scandals by a pretty wide margin. All's I'm saying is, I don't have patience for that kind of hypocrisy whether it's my side or the other guy's.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
I think you all are missing the detail..."it was a high-class prostitute."
It reminds me of an old joke.
A husband and wife were having dinner in a posh restaurant when she noticed close friend Joe with an attractive woman at a nearby table. She asked her husband who the woman was. He said, "that was Joe's mistress".
The wife was shocked and started mumbling about how improper and immoral it all was. Suddenly, her husband was approached by a beautful woman who kissed him on the lips and walked away.
The wife demanded to know who the woman was. The husband explained that was "his mistress".
The wife then got real upset and said she wanted a divorce. The husband calmly replied, "But then, you will not have this wonderful life that I have provided you."
The wife thought about it for a few seconds, then said, "Ours is prettier."
oh snap....that's a good one.
assume the position (on your knees)!
quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
Nope, Conan's right. He should resign, and he should be prosecuted.
And he's a hypocrite, of course. He's made a career out of crusading against all sorts of wrongdoing -- prostitution included -- and you can't do that if you're morally compromised yourself. Tis a shame, because I agreed with his politics and his progressivism, and thought that he took on the right people. And he took them on, which is more than most Dems in power positions can say. So, sad to see an important voice and a rising star commit hari kiri.
Prosecuted? For being a john? Okay, what about Vitter (//%22http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070902030.html%22) then? Senator Vitter won't resign...should he? Should he prosecuted?
What's fair? Conan's wrong, the NY Times (which broke the story, incidentally) clearly mentions that he's a Democrat. They also hit the hypocrite angle because Spitzer is a "crime and ethics" guy. Seems like fair coverage to me.
He's a hypocrite, that's why it makes for interesting news. Even so, Spitzer is no worse, and arguably better, than a "family-values" Republican with a diaper fetish who regularly called the DC Madam when he needed his nappy changed. Vitter's flat-out gross, and if you have a problem with Spitzer, then you can't hold back on Vitter.
FWIW, the story I linked has been edited throughout the day. When I initially linked to it, the story made no mention of Spitzer's political affiliation.
My personal belief is that someone who earned public trust and admiration by being tough on crime should not be participating in illegal acts. Being tough on prostitution and organized crime were two things which helped get him elected as Governor.
This deal is gaining traction and it's sounding more and more like he's toast with his Democrat bretheren.
I know very, very little of Vitter's situation and didn't read anything about diapers in that story. Ironically, the story you cited says Mrs. Vitter is a former prosecutor. You're right, it's an arguable point- it actually looks worse for Spitzer because he gained public trust by cracking down on the exact same criminal enterprise he was caught using.
Someone else had alluded to prostitution being a victimless crime. That is incredibly naive. Tell that to the parent, grandparent, sibling, child or friend of someone who has ventured down that path.
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
Nope, Conan's right. He should resign, and he should be prosecuted.
And he's a hypocrite, of course. He's made a career out of crusading against all sorts of wrongdoing -- prostitution included -- and you can't do that if you're morally compromised yourself. Tis a shame, because I agreed with his politics and his progressivism, and thought that he took on the right people. And he took them on, which is more than most Dems in power positions can say. So, sad to see an important voice and a rising star commit hari kiri.
Prosecuted? For being a john? Okay, what about Vitter (//%22http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070902030.html%22) then? Senator Vitter won't resign...should he? Should he prosecuted?
What's fair? Conan's wrong, the NY Times (which broke the story, incidentally) clearly mentions that he's a Democrat. They also hit the hypocrite angle because Spitzer is a "crime and ethics" guy. Seems like fair coverage to me.
He's a hypocrite, that's why it makes for interesting news. Even so, Spitzer is no worse, and arguably better, than a "family-values" Republican with a diaper fetish who regularly called the DC Madam when he needed his nappy changed. Vitter's flat-out gross, and if you have a problem with Spitzer, then you can't hold back on Vitter.
Who said anything about holding back on Vitter? I thought he'd crawled back into the heating ducts a long time ago. But if there's a crime, he should do the time. And he should step down, too.
Conan's right in that Spitzer's a hypocrite. I can't tell you whether it was mentioned that he was a D or not, and frankly I don't care. I think keeping score in that way diverts from relevant issues here. And really if you DO want to go there, R sex scandals outnumber D sex scandals by a pretty wide margin. All's I'm saying is, I don't have patience for that kind of hypocrisy whether it's my side or the other guy's.
I don't think we should expect more or less out of a politician's personal or business ethics based on party affiliation. Who really gives two ****s about which party has had more sex scandals? Why is the party affiliation even relevant?
As tax payers and citizens, we should collectively be pissed off at the corruption, fraud, waste, and moral turpitude which rips us off daily.
Democrat this, Republican that.. You guys are getting screwed and you don't even realize it.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
Nope, Conan's right. He should resign, and he should be prosecuted.
And he's a hypocrite, of course. He's made a career out of crusading against all sorts of wrongdoing -- prostitution included -- and you can't do that if you're morally compromised yourself. Tis a shame, because I agreed with his politics and his progressivism, and thought that he took on the right people. And he took them on, which is more than most Dems in power positions can say. So, sad to see an important voice and a rising star commit hari kiri.
Prosecuted? For being a john? Okay, what about Vitter (//%22http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070902030.html%22) then? Senator Vitter won't resign...should he? Should he prosecuted?
What's fair? Conan's wrong, the NY Times (which broke the story, incidentally) clearly mentions that he's a Democrat. They also hit the hypocrite angle because Spitzer is a "crime and ethics" guy. Seems like fair coverage to me.
He's a hypocrite, that's why it makes for interesting news. Even so, Spitzer is no worse, and arguably better, than a "family-values" Republican with a diaper fetish who regularly called the DC Madam when he needed his nappy changed. Vitter's flat-out gross, and if you have a problem with Spitzer, then you can't hold back on Vitter.
Who said anything about holding back on Vitter? I thought he'd crawled back into the heating ducts a long time ago. But if there's a crime, he should do the time. And he should step down, too.
Conan's right in that Spitzer's a hypocrite. I can't tell you whether it was mentioned that he was a D or not, and frankly I don't care. I think keeping score in that way diverts from relevant issues here. And really if you DO want to go there, R sex scandals outnumber D sex scandals by a pretty wide margin. All's I'm saying is, I don't have patience for that kind of hypocrisy whether it's my side or the other guy's.
I don't think we should expect more or less out of a politician's personal or business ethics based on party affiliation. Who really gives two ****s about which party has had more sex scandals? Why is the party affiliation even relevant?
As tax payers and citizens, we should collectively be pissed off at the corruption, fraud, waste, and moral turpitude which rips us off daily.
i'm really not pissed off that a guy got his
(cough, golly!) if he did it with his own money. now if it was shown that tax payer money was used, I just want to make sure the tax payers get their fair share too!
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
Nope, Conan's right. He should resign, and he should be prosecuted.
And he's a hypocrite, of course. He's made a career out of crusading against all sorts of wrongdoing -- prostitution included -- and you can't do that if you're morally compromised yourself. Tis a shame, because I agreed with his politics and his progressivism, and thought that he took on the right people. And he took them on, which is more than most Dems in power positions can say. So, sad to see an important voice and a rising star commit hari kiri.
Prosecuted? For being a john? Okay, what about Vitter (//%22http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070902030.html%22) then? Senator Vitter won't resign...should he? Should he prosecuted?
What's fair? Conan's wrong, the NY Times (which broke the story, incidentally) clearly mentions that he's a Democrat. They also hit the hypocrite angle because Spitzer is a "crime and ethics" guy. Seems like fair coverage to me.
He's a hypocrite, that's why it makes for interesting news. Even so, Spitzer is no worse, and arguably better, than a "family-values" Republican with a diaper fetish who regularly called the DC Madam when he needed his nappy changed. Vitter's flat-out gross, and if you have a problem with Spitzer, then you can't hold back on Vitter.
FWIW, the story I linked has been edited throughout the day. When I initially linked to it, the story made no mention of Spitzer's political affiliation.
My personal belief is that someone who earned public trust and admiration by being tough on crime should not be participating in illegal acts. Being tough on prostitution and organized crime were two things which helped get him elected as Governor.
This deal is gaining traction and it's sounding more and more like he's toast with his Democrat bretheren.
I know very, very little of Vitter's situation and didn't read anything about diapers in that story. Ironically, the story you cited says Mrs. Vitter is a former prosecutor. You're right, it's an arguable point- it actually looks worse for Spitzer because he gained public trust by cracking down on the exact same criminal enterprise he was caught using.
Someone else had alluded to prostitution being a victimless crime. That is incredibly naive. Tell that to the parent, grandparent, sibling, child or friend of someone who has ventured down that path.
NY State Democratic Governor Elliot Spitzer is a self-righteous hypocrite, who is now hosted on his own petard of sanctimony.
Good riddance to that arrogant prick who used the powers of his office both as NY State Attorney General and as Governor to not only persecute people, but to RUIN them.
No one says it better than today's editorial in the Wall Street Journal concerning the Rise and Fall of Elliot Spitzer:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120519359147125705.html
Stick a fork in him.
He's done.
[xx(]
Spitzer to resign (//%22http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/nyregion/11cnd-spitzer.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin%22). Guess that just leaves Vitter and Craig, huh?
No doubt he will resign, but it will be a shame if he does. What is ridiculous though is the republicans saying they will impeach him. Sorry but last time I checked getting a (special Hallmark greeting) is not an impeachable offense. Misuse of taxpayer dollars? maybe if they could prove it.
**** like this just shows how sexually dysfuncional this country is.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
No doubt he will resign, but it will be a shame if he does. What is ridiculous though is the republicans saying they will impeach him. Sorry but last time I checked getting a * is not an impeachable offense. Misuse of taxpayer dollars? maybe if they could prove it.
**** like this just shows how sexually dysfuncional this country is.
I've heard that the Feds stayed involved because of possible violations of the Mann Act, which I believe deals with paying for prostitution across state lines.
They were originally involved because his payments to the shell companies operated by the prostitution ring looked like a bribery attempt. If it was just everyday prostitution within NYC, it would've become a state matter, but the Feds are probably still involved because of the Mann Act accusations. Those are felony violations.
The question is... did she "Spitzer" or swallow?
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
No doubt he will resign, but it will be a shame if he does. What is ridiculous though is the republicans saying they will impeach him. Sorry but last time I checked getting a * is not an impeachable offense. Misuse of taxpayer dollars? maybe if they could prove it.
**** like this just shows how sexually dysfuncional this country is.
I've heard that the Feds stayed involved because of possible violations of the Mann Act, which I believe deals with paying for prostitution across state lines.
They were originally involved because his payments to the shell companies operated by the prostitution ring looked like a bribery attempt. If it was just everyday prostitution within NYC, it would've become a state matter, but the Feds are probably still involved because of the Mann Act accusations. Those are felony violations.
Well, that theory is wrong. Spitz got caught vis a vie the IRS! Then AG Mukaskey sent the dogs in once he saw what prize there was in the guv.
Spitzer Bust Provides Warning Regarding NSA Spying: Dave Lindorff
"I have no sympathy for New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, the hot-shot prosecutor of call-girl operations who was hoist on his own petard, as it were. I mean, what a jerk! And aside from the hypocrisy, what a fine message he was sending to his three teenage daughters about the role of women.
Having said that, Spitzer's bust should give pause to those in Congress who are ready to hand President Bush a free pass to continue his 6-year campaign of warrantless spying on Americans.
We now know from yesterday's Wall Street Journal article that the spying Bush has been doing through the National Security Agency since early 2001 has included vast computer sweeps of not just Internet and phone activity, but also bank and credit card transactions. These are sweeps of ordinary everyday people, with computers looking for odd transactions, or for codewords, or for transactions involving specific targeted organizations or addresses.
What nailed Spitzer, we now learn, was a series of bank transactions he had with the bank account of the Emperor's Club VIP callgirl operation.
Now reportedly, the IRS was conducting this particular investigation, which allegedly was investigating the Emperor's Club. Once the IRS discovered it had caught the New York governor in its web, it forwarded the case to the U.S. Attorney General's Office, where the FBI pursued it, apparently on the instructions of AG Michael Mukasey. The investigation moved from monitoring the bank to monitoring phones, and Spitzer was captured talking to the Emperor's Club dispatcher. Bingo. Promising Democratic political career ruined.
Now the monitoring of the Emperor's Club was reportedly done with a court-ordered warrant. That's fine. But this case shows us how people can get caught up by this kind of investigation really quickly.
Now imagine that instead of a call-girl operation, this had been a mosque or an international charity organization, and suppose you were someone who had made a call to ask about making donations to help the victims of the last earthquake in Indonesia? If that mosque or charity happened to be on the list of outfits being monitored by the NSA's computers, your call might well have been picked up. Then the focus would shift to your phone and your Internet server, and conceivably every communication you made would be watched.
This is the America we now live in. According to The Wall Street Journal, after a wave of national outrage forced the Bush administration to shut down its Total Information Awareness project at the Pentagon, Bush and Cheney simply moved their scheme to subject all telecommunications and bank transactions to computer monitoring over to the NSA.
Since none of this spying activity is subject to court supervision and warrant requirements, we are left having to trust the personnel at the NSA, the so-called Justice Department, and the president and his administration, not to abuse it.
Right. And think of the temptations!
Want to know what the House leadership strategy is regarding renewal of the NSA wiretap authorization? Want to know whether the Congress is serious about imposing a time limit on troops in Iraq? Just start monitoring their e-mails and phones.
Want to make sure Democratic members of Congress go along with a war on Iran? Just monitor their phones and e-mails and catch them in conversations that are suitable for a little blackmail.
Is this kind of thing happening? Well, I keep marveling at the cowardly behavior of leading members of Congress such as Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Judiciary Chair John Conyers. Maybe something is being held over their heads.
We know that the prosecution and conviction of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman was an administration hit on a popular Democratic official. Siegelman is now in jail. Ditto Wisconsin state employee Georgia Thompson. These blatant political prosecutions certainly weigh on the minds of all Democratic elected officials.
Who, after all, is safe in this kind of environment, where the Bill of Rights has been set aside?
Spitzer, who no doubt made use of phone taps himself in his day, and who was ruthless as New York's attorney general in bringing down many of his own targets, may well deserve what he is getting. But the way he was ensnared, via the secret monitoring of a bank's activity, and via phone taps, should put us all on guard.
With that kind of power, unchecked in the hands of an intensely political administration, it's almost a certainty that it is being used and used inappropriately for political ends."
DAVE LINDORFF is a Philadelphia-based journalist and columnist. His latest book is "The Case for Impeachment" (St. Martin's Press, 2006 and now available in paperback). His work is available at www.thiscantbehappening.net.
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
Quote
The only person that needs to grow up is YOU. I cannot believe you are so naive that you cannot see what is at issue here. Prostitution rings, which are illegal by the way (in case you did not know) invariably have nefarious characters that are engaged in money laundering, tax evasion, perhaps violent crime and, oh yeah, BLACKMAIL.
I can see the rationale behind tax evasion when you're earning money through illegal means. But the money laundering, 'perhaps' violent crime, and blackmail seem more in line with a juicy movie-of-the-week powered by an over-active imagination. In all the prostitution busts I've heard of, these charges have never been pressed.
Ultimately, the solution is to legalize prostitution. Bring it under government regulation so it can be taxed and made subject to inspection. When the illegality is removed, the "money laundering, tax evasion, perhaps violent crime and, oh yeah, BLACKMAIL" no longer applies.
Of course, that implies having a reasonable, rational approach to sex, an approach that is sadly lacking in straight-laced America.
Well here's your "juicy movie-of-the-week powered by an over-active imagination":
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny-stspitzerbank0312,0,4637246.story
quote:
Originally posted by bokworker
The question is... did she "Spitzer" or swallow?
that is awesome.
I've held my tongue on the issue thus far, but here is my take:
1. The Sex Life of a Politician is only relevant in his public life so far as it is either a reflection of his character (presumably he ran as an honest person, one who cheats on his wife is not) and/or a crime (perjury or prostitution). Running as an honest person and decidedly NOT actually being one may be the status quo, but it is still public business.
If, on the other hand, a single man is elected and sleeps with 35 consenting women and provides no compensation (money, political favors, etc) then it is not my business. Unless of course he pretended to be a chaste individual while running... then expose his lie I suppose. The hazards of running as a good morale person I suppose.
2. Foley and Craig committed no crimes. Foley broke ethical rules and Craig was arrested for trying to commit a crime (allegedly trying... I guess. Technically it is a crime, the crime of attempted crime). Neither is as clear cut as paying to sleep with a prostitute though they can all be viewed in a negative light.
3. I'd legallize prostitution if given the chance. You want to make money having sex, I want to pay for sex... sounds fair to me. Clearly it would have to be a regulated industry for health reasons and to avoid abuse (aka pimping, virtual slavery, children, etc.). But really prostitution laws are yet another failed attempt at legislating morality (quick, someone give me a bible verse banning prostitution).
But as it stands, it is illegal. And people current have criminal records at the hands of this man for the same act. So he gets no sympathy from me and deserves no leniency.
4. NY State does not specify what an "impeachable act" is as far as I can find. The impeachment clause is found in Artivle VI, section 24 of the State Constitution of New York (2004) and merely stipulates:
quote:
§24. The assembly shall have the power of impeachment by a vote of a majority of all the members elected thereto. The court for the trial of impeachments shall be composed of the president of the senate, the senators, or the major part of them, and the judges of the court of appeals, or the major part of them. On the trial of an impeachment against the governor or lieutenant-governor, neither the lieutenant-governor nor the temporary president of the senate shall act as a member of the court. No judicial officer shall exercise his or her office after articles of impeachment against him or her shall have been preferred to the senate, until he or she shall have been acquitted. Before the trial of an impeachment, the members of the court shall take an oath or affirmation truly and impartially to try the impeachment according to the evidence, and no person shall be convicted without the concur¬rence of two-thirds of the members present. Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, or removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any public office of honor, trust, or profit under this state; but the party impeached shall be liable to indictment and punishment according to law.
If the house votes to impeach, the Senate then gets to try the case. On what technical grounds, I have no idea. One of the House Members threatening to write up articles if he doesn't resigned cited conduct rendering him "unfit for office." So my guess is the terms are as vague as the State Constitution seems to allow.
FYI: Prostitution is just a misdemeanor in NY (assuming age of majority):
quote:
PENAL CODE § 230.04 Patronizing a prostitute in the third degree.
A person is guilty of patronizing a prostitute in the third degree
when he or she patronizes a prostitute.
Patronizing a prostitute in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.
[edit]
oh yeah:
Laws of NY http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/menugetf.cgi
Constitution of NY
http://www.dos.state.ny.us/info/pdfs/cons2004.pdf
Article citing "unfit for office":
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gLGmgMiUStW0JrSP9fNgi7Tlpd7g
- - -
AND, the prostitute was apperently $1,000. If the tab was $5,000 the guy should be impeached for paying for snuggle time with a prostitute.
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
Well here's your "juicy movie-of-the-week powered by an over-active imagination":
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny-stspitzerbank0312,0,4637246.story
So he paid out over $10,000 and broke it down into smaller amounts to avoid the bank reporting him to the IRS, and the bank reported him ANYWAY? Doesn't that strike you as wrong?
We're living in a police state.
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
Well here's your "juicy movie-of-the-week powered by an over-active imagination":
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny-stspitzerbank0312,0,4637246.story
So he paid out over $10,000 and broke it down into smaller amounts to avoid the bank reporting him to the IRS, and the bank reported him ANYWAY? Doesn't that strike you as wrong?
We're living in a police state.
And that is the real crime....end of story.
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
Well here's your "juicy movie-of-the-week powered by an over-active imagination":
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny-stspitzerbank0312,0,4637246.story
So he paid out over $10,000 and broke it down into smaller amounts to avoid the bank reporting him to the IRS, and the bank reported him ANYWAY? Doesn't that strike you as wrong?
We're living in a police state.
Just stop it ED. You sound more like a Spitzer apologist than some civil libertarian.
You're missing the point. If he did not pay out more than $10,000 in a single payment, he did not break the law. Yet the bank reported him to the IRS anyway. At that point, he had done nothing illegal (except for solicitation, maybe). It's disturbing that a bank would report the supposedly private transactions of a customer when that customer had done nothing to break any banking laws. The transactions were suspicious, but not illegal.
It should bother any right-thinking American when a bank informs on them in the absence of wrong-doing.
So the bank officers are government informers just like the telecommunications companies. What's next? Will we be informing on each other?
Oh, wait! They've covered that too:
http://www.infragard.net/
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
You're missing the point. If he did not pay out more than $10,000 in a single payment, he did not break the law. Yet the bank reported him to the IRS anyway. At that point, he had done nothing illegal (except for solicitation, maybe). It's disturbing that a bank would report the supposedly private transactions of a customer when that customer had done nothing to break any banking laws. The transactions were suspicious, but not illegal.
It should bother any right-thinking American when a bank informs on them in the absence of wrong-doing.
So the bank officers are government informers just like the telecommunications companies. What's next? Will we be informing on each other?
Oh, wait! They've covered that too:
http://www.infragard.net/
Inform on each other?
Rat out?
Ed, whatever happens the people deserve what they get. Weak leaders who are never held accountable. Bush butchered the Constitution and like sheep the people let him have his way. We have no one to blame but ourselves.
I think it matters that he was the governor. Any elected leader is sworn to uphold the law...now an ordinary Joe...he would be slightly different.
I also think being married makes a difference. If he is unfaithful to his wife, he is untrustworthy for other things as well.
I also think that because he had prosecuted prostitution before makes a difference. He surely made the argument in a court of law what prostitution does to other parts of society.
If he was an Ordinary Joe, single, and had no knowledge of the societal effects, it would still be wrong to me. I wouldn't condone it, but wouldn't condemn it either.
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
Well here's your "juicy movie-of-the-week powered by an over-active imagination":
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny-stspitzerbank0312,0,4637246.story
So he paid out over $10,000 and broke it down into smaller amounts to avoid the bank reporting him to the IRS, and the bank reported him ANYWAY? Doesn't that strike you as wrong?
We're living in a police state.
My buddy in the banking business says banks are required to report you if it is obvious you are trying to avoid the $10,000 limit by simply breaking up the payments to avoid the $10,000 limit.
So, blame the banks all you want, but it is their responsibility to report. Don't want the law in place, change the law.
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
Quote
Ed, whatever happens the people deserve what they get. Weak leaders who are never held accountable. Bush butchered the Constitution and like sheep the people let him have his way. We have no one to blame but ourselves.
I know I've contributed to topic creep here, and for that I apologize.
We elect our public officials in part because they offer a glowing, righteous image as honest men and women truly devoted to public service. Yet in our hearts we know that in private they're just like the rest of us,subjected to the same seven deadly sins and just as apt to yield to them. We pretend that our leaders are better, and we're 'shocked' when they're not. So we voters are partly to blame since we have unrealistic expectations.
I'm familiar with the adage that people get the kind of government they deserve. We have an authoritarian, almost Fascist administration in power. I say almost Fascist because it doesn't believe that all the people's needs are secondary to the state's; only the poor and middle class. What's disturbing is the number of people who readily agree that this is a good way to run a government.
I never had unrealistic expectations of Shrub. I realisticly expected a complete failure at the hands of a dry drunk.
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
I never had unrealistic expectations of Shrub. I realisticly expected a complete failure at the hands of a dry drunk.
Agreed. GWBush has been an abysmal failure as president.
He has lead the country, our military, and the Republic Party merrily off of a cliff.
A trillion dollars in treasure, 4,000 service members killed, thousands more maimed, and future $ Billions in liability for military retirees and disabled for the next 60 years.
He was successful in his core missions of helping protect his family's closely nurtured relationship with the Saud Family, so that the Saud Family can continue to fund thousands of Madrassahs, Mosques, and Imams world-wide, spewing their Wahhabist version of hate-filled intolerant Islam for the past 8 years of his presidency.
Despite our worn-out military killing mountains of jihadists, there are actually MORE jihadists fighting against the U.S. NOW than there were BEFORE the Iraq War.
That's hardly progress.
Iraq was a secular side-show, neutered by the 1991 war. Even the Pentagon study released yesterday said there were NO CONNECTION between Sadaam's Regime, his military or his intelligence services and Al Queda. NONE.
Saudi Arabia is the core problem in the war against Islamic Fundamentalism.
So, naturally GW Bush attacks Iraq.
And, there is that corollary benefit, hardly an accident, of inducing the threat of scarcity of oil, shooting it above $100 per barrel to aid both our enemies (Russia, Venezuela, Iran, Saudi Arabia), and the multi-national oil companies that put him in the Presidency.
He has also caused the death of his own political party.
A miserable, pathetic President.
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
Well here's your "juicy movie-of-the-week powered by an over-active imagination":
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny-stspitzerbank0312,0,4637246.story
So he paid out over $10,000 and broke it down into smaller amounts to avoid the bank reporting him to the IRS, and the bank reported him ANYWAY? Doesn't that strike you as wrong?
We're living in a police state.
yes this is pretty ****ed up. The fact that law abiding citizens have to report transfers of $10k+ is ****ed up. So if I want to move $10k+ from one account to another to prepare for a car purchase I have to tell the government? **** that!
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
Well here's your "juicy movie-of-the-week powered by an over-active imagination":
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny-stspitzerbank0312,0,4637246.story
So he paid out over $10,000 and broke it down into smaller amounts to avoid the bank reporting him to the IRS, and the bank reported him ANYWAY? Doesn't that strike you as wrong?
We're living in a police state.
yes this is pretty ****ed up. The fact that law abiding citizens have to report transfers of $10k+ is ****ed up. So if I want to move $10k+ from one account to another to prepare for a car purchase I have to tell the government? **** that!
It is not the reporting of the transaction that caused Mr. Spitzer the problem.
It was the INTENT of the transfer to conceal its true purpose.
You could transfer $100,000 in cash to buy something. It would be reported. If the cash transaction was legitimate, then there is no foul.
quote:
Originally posted by Wilbur
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
Well here's your "juicy movie-of-the-week powered by an over-active imagination":
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny-stspitzerbank0312,0,4637246.story
So he paid out over $10,000 and broke it down into smaller amounts to avoid the bank reporting him to the IRS, and the bank reported him ANYWAY? Doesn't that strike you as wrong?
We're living in a police state.
My buddy in the banking business says banks are required to report you if it is obvious you are trying to avoid the $10,000 limit by simply breaking up the payments to avoid the $10,000 limit.
So, blame the banks all you want, but it is their responsibility to report. Don't want the law in place, change the law.
This is exactly the point.
He's done.
Curious what $1000 per hour buys when top of the line is $5500?
"His credibility was in tatters both among Republicans and fellow Democrats after FBI wiretaps recorded him arranging a liaison at Washington's Mayflower Hotel with a $1,000-an-hour prostitute named "Kristin." "
What a $1000 bucks buys....
http://www.nystocktrader.com/kristen.jpg
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by Ed W
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
Well here's your "juicy movie-of-the-week powered by an over-active imagination":
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny-stspitzerbank0312,0,4637246.story
So he paid out over $10,000 and broke it down into smaller amounts to avoid the bank reporting him to the IRS, and the bank reported him ANYWAY? Doesn't that strike you as wrong?
We're living in a police state.
yes this is pretty ****ed up. The fact that law abiding citizens have to report transfers of $10k+ is ****ed up. So if I want to move $10k+ from one account to another to prepare for a car purchase I have to tell the government? **** that!
It is not the reporting of the transaction that caused Mr. Spitzer the problem.
It was the INTENT of the transfer to conceal its true purpose.
You could transfer $100,000 in cash to buy something. It would be reported. If the cash transaction was legitimate, then there is no foul.
Bottom line is if Spitzer hadn't been engaging the services of prostitutes, none of this would have happened.
There's no way to whitewash it or absolve it based on party affiliation. He ****ed up, it cost him his job. Pure and simple.
quote:
Originally posted by bokworker
What a $1000 bucks buys....
http://www.nystocktrader.com/kristen.jpg
eba dee ba dee ba dee
Do I hear $1200?? $1200?? Anyone??
Sold for $1000 to the esteemed Governor!
She's not bad looking, makes you wonder if that's strictly a latex transaction.
(http://www.nystocktrader.com/kristen.jpg)
I must say I've spent $1,000 in worse ways. Ever heard of Syntroleum?
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
(http://www.nystocktrader.com/kristen.jpg)
I must say I've spent $1,000 in worse ways. Ever heard of Syntroleum?
You haven't given up on Syntroleum yet have you? I'd stick it out awhile longer and see what this jt. venture w/ Tyson does for them. No earthly idea if their coal to light-ends is ever going to be feasible. I'm not sure where the breakpoint is for it to be cheaper than simply refining light ends from crude.
I'm not giving up, but soon I won't even have the choice. They are getting de-listed as their value has dropped blow $70mil for the requisite 10 day average after notice. They are also abandoning R&D for the most part and focusing on their Tyson deal.
Should have bought more into oil, strip mining and alcohol. Those never lose, dang alternative energies.
Back back to the hot hooker...
Here she is if anyone is interested..
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0312084kristen1.html
Oh, now people, how can you be so hard on someone who is the face of law and order?
Think of all the scum he's gotten off the street, how many drugs he's kept from the children...
...cant...do...it... hack, cough.
OK, someone got some serious revenge against this self-righteous slime. Not just phone records but Email, text messages, the works. It didnt just "happen".
They wanted him bad.
It's amazing what a good wiretap will turn up.
Sad, that young woman could do many other things, like model. She will get her 15 minutes and life will be grand and perhaps she can walk away from that life.
What amazes me is the cavalier attitude Spitzer must have had. He's been a prosecutor, he knows all the tricks and tools of the trade to get a conviction. For such an acerbic individual, he had to have known he's got political enemies who were just waiting for something to get him with.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Sad, that young woman could do many other things, like model. She will get her 15 minutes and life will be grand and perhaps she can walk away from that life.
From the sound of things, she's about to sell a boatload of her music. Certainly better than being found floating in New York Harbor.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by bokworker
What a $1000 bucks buys....
http://www.nystocktrader.com/kristen.jpg
eba dee ba dee ba dee
Do I hear $1200?? $1200?? Anyone??
Sold for $1000 to the esteemed Governor!
She's not bad looking, makes you wonder if that's strictly a latex transaction.
looks like a younger hot version of his "polished" wife.
Sounds like someone wasn't putting out at home. Shame he was driven to those means.