Posted on 07/21/2007 10:08:18 PM PDT by advance_copy
In the first hour, Ian chats with Deborah J. Palfrey, the 'D.C. Madam' who had all of her assets seized by the IRS.
She picked a good place to complain about a gov’t cospiracy!!
I have more sympathy for her than Tammy Faye... At least her customers got what they paid for. ;)
Paulfrey on being called “DC Madam”: “I have been called far worse.”
Ian asked her about having her assets seized by the IRS. Madam says the government froze all her money and left her penniless. “They kept pushing and pushing for me to plea out.”
This interview may be leading to an effort by some in the government to get hold of dirt on people in DC (such as elected politicians).
Why exactly does the government care what she and her clients were doing?
From what she said, the government got a search warrant after she closed her “business” and then wired $70k to Germany where she was buying a condo and was planning to “retire”.
I don’t know if the g-men were all that off base. Someone running an escort service in DC (whose clientel included at least one U.S. Senator) all of the sudden deciding to move out of the country... There could be far more to the story than she’s letting on.
An interesting angle I haven't considered..
Yet they don’t publicly out terrorist supporters in this country.
Do you have to be an a** on every thread?
I’m no fan of Tammy Faye, but your stupid comments are getting annoying. The woman just passed away. At least show some class, even if you didn’t care for her.
“I’m no fan of Tammy Faye, but your stupid comments are getting annoying. The woman just passed away. At least show some class, even if you didn’t care for her.”
Are you stalking me across threads?
Guess what bubba. In life, sometimes you will run into opinions that you don’t like.
The solution isn’t to seek out more words from the people you don’t like, and then call them names because you availed yourself of them.
Pretty pathetic - asking someone to show class while calling them an ass. How about taking a little of your own advice to heart - stalking and name calling are not too classy.
Palfrey: “The girls were instructed not to engage in any illegal sexual behavior... I told these girls not to behave in any criminal fasion, they signed a contract.”
If she paid the taxes due on the income she made I have no problem with her “occupation”. I think the thought of her leaving the country along with her “little black book” scared the bejesus out a lot of high profile clients.
I’m sorry. Did I miss something in the link? Was there something about Tammy Faye that I didn’t see?
I didn’t know her. But, on PTL, in 1975, her voice singing songs of praise were a major help to me, as I was losing a child. Please do not ridicule that or sell short what she was able to do for so many others. Thank you.
“Don’t flatter yourself. As if your comments were worth the time. I just read through the thread about Tammy’s death, and this thread was at the top. You, had to make a stupid comment about Tammy Faye, on a totally unrelated story. I calls them as I see them. Total lack of class.”
You’re right, in signing off your message as “Total lack of class.”
Palfrey mentions other "candidates" - Dick Morris, Harlan Ullman (sp?).
Oh, I thought it was just the Tammy thread...
But now I see you are over here disciplining this thread as well.
I'll be careful over here.
Oh, man. Her trial, if it comes to that, is gonna be a hoot.
What amazes me is that they are trying to punish her for compromising behavior on their part. Sounds just like big government to me.
I’ve got to question whether it was a legal “escort service” as she claims. If the prosecutor has one or two girls who worked for her that claim she quietly encouraged them to sell sex, she is toast.
I don’t think there’s any doubt that she was running a prostitution ring. The fun is going to begin when more of the phone numbers get traced and she starts calling people as defense witnesses.
>>>What amazes me is that they are trying to punish her for compromising behavior on their part. Sounds just like big government to me.
So there are no laws against prostitution ? There are no federal laws that cover interstate activities in support of prostitution and conspiracy to commit ? Guess again. We’ve had those since the days of small government.
I salute the lady’s imagination and ingenuity in manufacturing a myth that being charged under decades old statutes make her the biggest martyr since Cindy Sheehan against the evil Bush and Chaney regime. She is an absolute guardian of the constitution, I’m impressed. Someone crackpots can rally around, as being on Coast to Coast attests.
And ps, the earlier post slamming Tammy Faye was very shabby. I seem to see a lot of posts like that these days. And not only from people who signed on in December 2006.
She's going to have a subpoena list a mile long. AFAIK, her defense team can make their information public if they so choose. This could be developing into a real hot potato for DC.
Say what?
You haven’t even posted on this thread. Yet, you’re calling me out?
Sheesh. What lame trolls you two are.
Colleen Rowley (former FBI agent who investigated 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui) is on now. She’s a Bush-hater and a Huffington Post-blogging PNAC conspiracy nut.
Not sure about the guardian part, but it looks like she means to vigorously exercise her Fifth Amendment right to "a compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence".
I remind you, in order for there to have been a crime committed, there must be a victim. The common element of all criminal law is, that, without a victim there is no crime. This is usually the case when you find yourself charged in actions brought by a government agency or bureaucrat, in the interest of the state or “the common good of the community.” In many of these cases, there is, indeed, no victim. No victim, no crime.
Not everyone that listens with an open mind is a crackpot. There is a reason C2C is the #1 overnight radio program. Youmay not agree with all the ideas brought forth on C2C, but it does delve deeply into stories and the people relating them. Guests such as Dr. Michiu Kaku, the world's leading scientists in string theory (e=mc2), aren't exactly crackpots.
You cannot accurately assert that there is no victim in the crime of prostition. There are the wives and children of the johns, the parents and other loved ones of the whore.
It’s not as though there is a victim in every act of prostitution, everybody involved directly and indirectly may be perfectly fine with it.
But there is not a victim in every act of DUI, either. Yet we as a society cannot allow it, because it is a danger to the society overall. The same is true about prostitution.
Finally, it is a little-understood fact that the law does not exist for the benefit of a victim. The law acts on behalf of the state in order to maintain the well being of everybody.
Prostitution (at least in DC) is against the law. That does not mean somebody gets hurt every time it happens. But prostitution run rampant in DC or anywhere hurts everybody.
She is giving both the First and Fifth Amendment a workout!
How does one explain all the whores and whore mongers in Congress?
>>>but it looks like she means to vigorously exercise her Fifth Amendment right to “a compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence”.
And who deprived her of either? That has no bearing on the red meat she is throwing out for the conspiracy kooks, trying to change the focus from her indictment as a pimp, into a Rosie O’Donnell type moonbat carnival.
>>>Not everyone that listens with an open mind is a crackpot
Of course they aren’t. I think its main audience component is people who just enjoy the freak show, similar to Rosie on the View. But the ones who ARE, that’s the basic target audience in the pimp lady’s campaign to muddy the water on Coast to Coast and any other sympathetic venue she can find.
Again, I salute her. It’s clever. Reminds me of mafia boss Crazy Joe Gallo’s campaign against the FBI, crying to the press it was a racist anti-Italian conspiracy to charge him with Cosa Nostra crimes. His storyline was by fighting the charges against him he defended all Italians and stood up to the real (Italian hating) government criminals. He led protest marches with thousands of well-wishers and became a hero to the crackpots of the day. Worked real well for him too, up to the point rival Mafiosi gunned him down at one of those same rallies.
Maybe the pimp lady will learn from his mistake and avoid calling for DU/Moveon/Coast to Coast listener rallies.
One last thought, she suggests the government wanted her phone numbers to blackmail people. Does anybody think they couldn’t have gotten them from the phone companies?
I agree. Read my tagline!
It does promise to be a circus. Nevertheless, I'm not conviced it's a bad legal strategy.
One last thought, she suggests the government wanted her phone numbers to blackmail people.
Are you sure she said that? I understood her to say that government agents told her defense team that people had been referred to her agency by unspecified parties for the purpose of later blackmail.
The Clintons run the IRS, so one interpretation is
that Palfrey is a threat to their return to the White House.
Not sure why, since of the thousands of men on the list, 100% are Republicans. [/s]
I believe that the problem is giving obsessive-compulsives unlimited taxpayer dollars to indulge their disorder...
I remember a thread from years ago where they were discussing where the best-looking women in the country tended to end up.
There was a lot of talk about Los Angeles and Las Vegas, but someone in the know fingered Washington, DC as the place to find the drop-dead knockouts.
Now, why would THAT be? ;-)
Yes, actually I do assert that there is no victim in the act of prostition. Ther act itself cannot legally be criminal, as all parties directly involved do so consensually. Neither party is forced into the act against their will.
Where Prostitution is perceived as a crime is actually where it is a violation of a Legislative Decree. Under section 1-103 of the Uniform Commercuial Code, any party charged with a violation of such a Legislative Decree has the right to object to the Decree, the right to maintain their Common Law rights, and to maintain that they are not a party to the Decree.
As for your assertion that "the wives and children of the johns, the parents and other loved ones of the whore" are the victims, what if both parties are single consenting adults? When you make those who are not direct parties to the act a part of the act, you're using your prejudices to justify socialist concerns for society to mandate the actions of others, in violation of their Liberties.
If anything, the spouses, children, etc. of people involved in prostitution are victims of infidelity, not victims of prostitution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.