Posted on 03/11/2008 8:27:37 AM PDT by jdm
As political corruption goes, news that New York Governor Elliot Spitzer consorts with high class call girls is pretty low on the sin-o-meter. It was, however, a shock to learn a man mentioned in some circles as presidential material could have been so careless and stupid.
Just what possesses a man who has everything going for him to become enmeshed in such an embarrassing scandal?
We see it time and time again and ask the same questions over and over. The fact of the matter is, these politicians exist in a political (and social) system that makes them feel entitled to break the law, play around on their wives, and use their elected position to sate their appetites. In Spitzer’s case, we have no idea how long he has been visiting prostitutes. He may have been doing it all his married life.
As the product of a wealthy family that carries its own set of entitlements, Spitzer’s dalliances as governor might be explained as simply an extension of the entitlement he felt as a rich man’s son. And his hubris in believing no one would ever find out is part and parcel of a powerful politician’s sense of invulnerability – a fool’s belief in their own indestructibility.
It all caught up with the soon to be former New York governor yesterday:
The federal investigation of a New York prostitution ring was triggered by Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s suspicious money transfers, initially leading agents to believe Spitzer was hiding bribes, according to federal officials.
It was only months later that the IRS and the FBI determined that Spitzer wasn’t hiding bribes but payments to a company called QAT, what prosecutors say is a prostitution operation operating under the name of the Emperors Club.
As recently as this past Valentine’s Day, Feb. 13, Spitzer, who officials say is identified in a federal complaint as “Client 9,” arranged for a prostitute “Kristen” to meet him in Washington, D.C.
The woman met Client 9 at the Mayflower Hotel, room 871, “for her tryst,” according to the complaint. Client 9 also is alleged to have paid for the woman’s train tickets, cab fare, mini bar and room service, travel time and hotel.
The suspicious financial activity was initially reported by a bank to the IRS which, under direction from the Justice Department, brought kin the FBI’s Public Corruption Squad.
One of the more delicious ironies of this entire matter is the fact that Spitzer led the feds to the prostitution ring through his suspicious money transfers rather than the feds catching him as a result of any investigation into interstate prostitution. In short, Spitzer brought the world down on top of himself by his own actions – a truly biblical happenstance.
The comparisons to Republican politicians caught up in similar circumstances are being denied by liberals in the most uproariously amusing fashion imaginable. World Famous Sock Puppet Lambchop supplies the jaw dropping explanation:
But how can his alleged behavior—paying another adult roughly $1,000 per hour to travel from New York to Washington to meet him for sex—possibly justify resignation, let alone criminal prosecution, conviction and imprisonment? Independent of the issue of his hypocrisy—which is an issue meriting attention and political criticism but not criminal prosecution—what possible business is it of anyone’s, let alone the state’s, what he or anyone else does in their private lives with other consenting adults?
With all of the intense hand-wringing abounding, it’s very difficult to discern the standard being applied here. Are any public officials who commit adultery engaged in such morally intolerable behavior that they ought to resign, because that didn’t seem to be the standard back in the 1990s? Or is that any illegal behavior of any kind—no matter how serious or frivolous, whether victim-creating or victimless—merits resignation? If a political official smokes pot, or gambles in a poker game, or commits adultery in a state where adultery is a crime, are they now so morally beyond the pale that it is time for them to go? Is that the standard here?
Evidently, only Republicans who engage in these affairs are evil. Here’s Lambchop on Senator David Vitter after that hypocrite got outed:
So, to recap: in Louisiana, Vitter carried on a year-long affair with a prostitute in 1999. Then he ran for the House as a hard-core social conservative family values candidate, parading around his wife and kids as props and leading the public crusade in defense of traditional marriage.(HT: Reihl)
Then, in Washington, he became a client of Deborah Palfrey’s. Then he announced that amending the Constitution to protect traditional marriage was the most important political priority the country faces. Rush Limbaugh, Fred Thompson and Newt Gingrich supported the same amendment.
As always, it is so striking how many Defenders of Traditional Marriage have a record in their own broken lives of shattered marriages, multiple wives and serial adultery. And they never seek to protect the Sacred Institution of Traditional Marriage by banning the un-Christian and untraditional divorces they want for themselves when they are done with their wives and are ready to move on to the next, newer model. Instead, they only defend these Very Sacred Values by banning the same-sex marriages that they don’t want for themselves.
Lambchop is very careful in his dismissive piece on Spitzer to point out the hypocrisy (on one level) of the governor who prosecuted prostitution rings while US Attorney. That’s a pretty shallow analysis when you consider Spitzer’s entire campaign was based on his adherence to a higher ethical standard than his opponents as well fostering the belief that he was a dedicated family man. I guess just as long as you support gay marriage, you get a virtual pass from Mr. Lambchop who has had a change of heart about politicians and prostitutes now that a Democrat is in trouble.
What a tool.
In the end, the Vitters, the Foleys and the Spitzers of the world have one thing in common; an inability to resist the temptations that go with holding high office and a moral blind spot when it comes to justifying their own behavior. One might add that politicians who continue to abuse the public trust by not holding themselves to a higher personal standard than the rest of us must believe that they will never get caught. Perhaps many never do and the ones who make the front pages of newspapers are simply careless and stupid.
All the more reason to employ a healthy cynicism when supporting any politician – even one who claims to represent “change” and proclaims himself a new kind of politician practicing a new kind of politics. An informed citizenry in a democracy looks at its leaders with a jaundiced eye and sees beyond the claims of moral superiority to make a decision based on what they see of a candidate’s judgment and experience. Hero worship will only lead to bitter disappointment and the revelation that their man on a white horse has feet of clay.
They are, after all, human. And that might be the best reason to vote for them in the first place.
I feel sorry for the wife and children. Elliot, you jackass!.
That is one strange bribe. If Spitzer was suspected of taking bribes it would be becuase he was depositing large sums of CASH into his bank account not withdrawing large sums of Cash.
That cannot be the reason.
Sex. Duh.
Without knowing more details about the cash transfers, there are a couple of simple scenarios that make sense. They basically all revolve around transferring sums more than $10,000. Federal law requires that all transfers over $10K be sent to the Feds -- this was originally meant to catch drug dealers.
Meaning, all checks, wire transfers, credit card charges, etc., are sent to the Feds. My guess is that they look for repeated transfers and try and tie the transfers to legitimate business events -- paying a vendor, etc.
My guess is that Spitzer was moving hundreds of thousands per year. And this naturally stood out in the Fed's system, both because of the amount and his position.
The routine check revealed no business reason to transfer the money, nor gifts to children, relatives or charities, etc.
So if Spitzer was just moving his personal money to an offshore or blind account, and the Feds couldn't access where the money went after that, they would naturally assume that something was being covered up. Pretty simple.
Public servants shouldn't be shuffling money around unbeknownst to the public. It's the appearance of conflict which is the issue here. Also, their investments need to be placed in blind trusts so they can't be accused of profiting from decisions they make. This is standard practice now. Recognizing such, if a state Governor is moving money to invisible accounts then this would definitely merit an investigation, routine at first, to find out what's happening.
Sex and a sense of entitlement. Sociopaths continue to push the envelope until they get caught.
The theory could be that he was taking cash and depositing it into various accounts, then transferring the money to other accounts or persons.
my wife wasn’t cooking tonite so i picked up a burger on the way home...
99% of today’s elitist politicians are equally as power-hungry, egotistical, and arrogant. All politicians think they’re above the law. The voters need to clean out the corrupt career politician-infested legislatures of all our states as well as the Nation’s capitol.
99% of today’s elitist politicians are equally as power-hungry, egotistical, and arrogant. All politicians think they’re above the law. The voters need to clean out the corrupt career politician-infested legislatures of all our states as well as the Nation’s capitol.
Clean house of every one of the power-hungry slimballs. We can do it - yes, we the people have allowed them to give themselves powers, raises, health programs, perks, short work weeks and they WORK FOR US!!! Hello, anybody home????? Time to cut them loose.
“news that New York Governor Elliot Spitzer consorts with high class call girls is pretty low on the sin-o-meter”
Now, this I disagree with. It is not low on the sin-o-meter!Such behavior corrupts the wedding vows that I assume he took when he married his wife. It also destroys family binding. There can be no understanding of the pain that both his wife and daughters are feeling today - humiliation along with such hurt and disappointment. So enough of the “stupid” stuff and bring on the condemnation for such behavior. Being stupid is not a sin, but commiting adultery is.
Ask Ted Kennedy.
Its gonna get much worse imo, and be very ugly before its over...
LFOD...
Its gonna get much worse imo, and be very ugly before its over...
Maybe so, but everything worthwhile is worth fighting for IMHO. So, I’m hanging in there.
Amen. Our ancestors and those that sacrificed to protect and defend this great nation are turning in their graves. We are living a national disgrace created by Liberals and RINO’s and those who choose to stay clueless. IMO, history is repeating itself, e.g., the 1930’s in Europe. Our enemies will come knocking again. The stakes are higher; our children and grandchildren’s futures are at stake as well as our freedom.
To believe that Spitzer was unaware of the law that requires banks to turn in transfers of 10,000 dollars or more is unbelievable. Of course he knew better than to do that. Rush Limbaugh was was getting cash out for Drugs and he always took less than 10 thousand. The prosecutor had to get a court order to examine Rush's account.
Spitzer, Rush and every other bank client with lots of money on deposit knows the BANK HAS TO TURN THEM IN IF they did a single transfer of at least 10,000 dollars.
Guess what .. if you have a lot of money on deposit every bank I have dealt with .. at the time of making a large deposit.... warned me about the 10,000 dollar law. From Bank Of America to a single office bank with less than 20 million in deposits, it is always the same. They go out of their way to warn the depositor that he should never withdraw 10 grand or more.
Banks follow the law to the letter and not one step more. If they ever turned in a customer when they were not required to do by law, and the customer turned out to be innocent you can bet that banks large depositors would go to another bank in a heart beat...that is if they found out. And the innocent depositor's attorney would threaten to file a law suit and publicize it. To keep the word from getting out that they had turned in someone with out legally being required to do so, they would have no option but to pay millions to keep the person they turned in silent. Onecould quickly become an fired bank president. And every bank president gets so informed.
No one would leave large sums in a bank that would turn turn them in to the FBI when the Bank was not required to do so.
THERE is zero WAY THAT SPITZER WOULD TRANSFER 10 GRAND OR MORE. He was buying a 1,000 dollar hooker plus expenses... She cost 3,200 bucks and he put a deposit down on the next one for a total of over 4 thousand bucks. He had the money sent to the Mayflower Hotel. I is not likely to have been the first time he had done that.
Prostitution rings demand cash in advance. You can't repossess sex and they can't sue for non payment. And the Johns only pay when the gal shows up ready for sex. Pay anyone but the hooker and the hooker may not actually show up. And hookers find out early that if they let someone else get the money, they may not get paid.
I think either a major stockholder or a major customer of the bank had a reason to want Spitzer's rear end taken down. I suspect on several occasions the bank was instructed to send the money to a hotel. It would not be hard to hire a private eye to check that out. A hundred bucks to each of the hotel bell hops, room service waitresses, room maids.. etc, would reveal what Spitzer was doing in the rooms. One of them just might have gotten one of his marked bills as a tip.
If a major player in the bank knew for a fact that Spitzer was doing hookers,and presented it to the board of the bank, and said do something or my money gets withdrawn, or a member of the board of the bank had proof of what Spitzer was doing and wanted Spitzers rump, the board would then, off the record of course, decide to have the bank management turn Spitzer in.
There is no way a president or any other bank officer would turn in a client they had no personal reason to turn in unless required to do so by law. There is no way that Spitzer did a 10,000 dollar or greater transfer. Somebody high up in the bank wanted his rump and the bank had to know what he was doing before they turned him in.
It is not likely they revealed that they knew what he was doing to the law. More likely they implied he was being blackmailed or worse. A Governor being possibly blackmailed would require an investigation. Hiring a hooker for a few nights would not.
But bet the farm the bank knew what Spitzer was doing with the money before they turned him in.
That is not probable cause of anything and certainly not illegal.
No part of that in itself is illegal! I have done it lots of times. For example If I am buying something and the seller wants the money in an account so he knows I have it. I don't want to give him the right to examine one of my main bank accounts so I transfer just the funds required to a new bank account and give him access to look at the contents of the account at any time up to the closing. I could open an escrow account but this is often easier to do. Some sellers demand an escrow account. But that is still a transfer of funds.
I once sold my stock in radio station of which I was President, and its major stock holder. I sold it to a minority stock holder. I was to receive all the savings account deposits of the corporation as well as cash for my stock.. So I closed the corporate savings accounts and then transfered that money to one of my personal accounts at closing.
The buyer then paid me for my stock and I transfered that to another personal account. Then I transfered both sums in these personal accounts to two personal money market accounts. And then transfered one of these accounts, less taxes, to my stockbrokers account which he used to to buy assorted stocks in my name. The banks I am sure reported the transactions, but nothing I did was even close to being illegal. It was totally legal.
They would have to have probable cause that the transaction was likely to be illegal and then get a judge to so rule. Just the act of a transfer to cash or to other accounts is never enough to do anything. He could have just been hiding the cash in his mattress. Getting cash and transferring it through a hundred other accounts is not by itself illegal. And if that is all they have, getting a court order to examine account details or look deeper is not going to be granted. If all the law has is money transfered from account to account,that will not get a court order to examine the accounts or much of anything else.
There is no real way to really follow cash once it is withdrawn. And withdrawing cash is not illegal. Some auctions especially car auctions require cash, certified checks, or casheirs Checks for purchases. Dealers and collector's don't know what price they will be paying at auction so the payments are often made partly with certified checks and the remainder with cash. Collectors may quite often pay the entire price with cash.
That is not illegal either. If a dealer is going to several auctions to buy lots cars he may have withdrawn a lot of cash. That is not illegal either.
Some businesses traditionlly operate with cash. Grocery stores pay nearly every thing with cash. Every individual owned grocery store that bought radio time from one of my radio stations always paid in cash.
It is not at all unusual for an small grocery store or carryout to withdraw thousands of dollars every week to pay for new stock.
The law has to have probable cause that the person is doing something illegal before they can take action to get wire taps and other ways of investigating.
If the congress will not give Bush the right to wire tap a suspected terrorists with out a court order, what do you think the chances are on getting a wire tap on the Governor of New York without probable cause.
It does not happen.
I understand that. All I was doing was constructing a hypothetical scenario for reporting the withdrawals because to someone, there might be a suspicion of bribery. The possibility was that he was taking money under the table and depositing it in various accounts and then transferring it out later.
That being said, this didn't turn out to be about bribery anyway. What happened though is that his actions raised some suspicions about unlawful conduct which turned out to be well founded, as evidenced by his own public admission.
"The law has to have probable cause that the person is doing something illegal before they can take action to get wire taps and other ways of investigating."
Well, as a factual matter there was a wiretap and he was snared as a result of it. You need to contact him and volunteer to be his attorney. He needs to know that what was done could not be done legally. About now, he needs all the help he can get.
While Im regularly accused of not realizing that the USA is still the greatest nation ever founded...under GOD...[being better than the rest of the world really aint that hard these days]
I constantly think that my grandchildren wont see the same thing, historically or otherwise, lest we commence taking back our freedoms.
Way too many folks that think beccause we arent chained to our lives in the literal sense like the chi-coms that we are still 'free', and dont have a reason to be 'revolutionary'
small example in southern Indiana last weekend when 12 inches of snow brought several counties to declarations implementing 'state of emergeny' and ordering 'citizens' to stay off public roads...
Im not sure if frogs have sweat glands, but they sure do get sleepy in the jacuzzi...
LFOD...
Not TAKING bribes. GIVING.
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.