posted
"Gov. Eliot Spitzer, the crusading politician who built his career on rooting out corruption, has told senior advisers he was involved in a prostitution ring, The New York Times reported Monday. In a public statement, Spitzer apologized to his family and the public but did not elaborate on the reported links to a prostitution ring."
posted
Previous post was eaten by the internet monster so I'll say this shortly:
I've always liked Spitzer, and I thought he was an amazing Attorney General who ended a long line of AGs who didn't give a crap. He was considered a champion of the peope for awhile in his quest to root out crime and corruption, and based on his previous service, and the fact that I like him, I'm going to withhold judgement until we get more facts in.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Spitzer's performance as governor has been less than stellar when it comes to ethics.
Last year, Spitzer faced a lot of fire over his own "troopergate" in which some of his aides were found to have ordered State Troopers to help dig up dirt on a Republican leader in the legislature.
posted
To be honest I haven't really paid much attention to him since he got to the governor's mansion. My opinion of him his based on his AG service. But I figured there had to be a reason for going from winning the election by like 50 points to have an approval rating in the 40's. The troopergate thing doesn't look like that big a deal. I don't live in New York so I don't know how they feel about it, but, I'm going to assume that isn't the only thing he's done to piss people off.
He has to get at least SOME credit from his AG days though doesn't he?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
On a kind of side note. I think it's pretty cool that if Spitzer does resign they would have American's first blind governor. I think that's an awesome achievement.
Posts: 106 | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by DarkKnight: I wonder, Lyrhawn, would you be outraged if this was a Republican governor?
Well since we don't even know what happened yet, it's hard to be outraged. I've said thus far that I'm giving the benefit of the doubt until we know what actually happened, at which point, if he really did something horribly wrong, then yeah, I imagine I'll be pretty angry and very disappointed.
If it were a Republican and we didn't have any idea what happened, I'd wait before saying anything negative about them. The only real thing that'd change is my personal feelings about how much I wish it weren't true.
How about you?
Edit to add: Actually, now that I think about it, if you want to take it down a notch, I'm pissed beyond believe at Detroit's democratic mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. I want him out of office, I'd like him to be in jail, and hell, nowhere near southeast Michigan would be nice too. He's corrupt, he's a liar, and I don't believe a thing he says.
But I'm guessing you'll come up with a reason for why that doesn't count.
posted
Well, I am not sure what to think of this. It is not like he went to a massage parlor where many girls are trafficked or held against their will.
I see this (the prostitution part) as purely between him and his family. Now if public funds were used or he lied to investigators, that is something else.
I guess the libertarian in me says, "So what? Make it legal. It's two consenting adults."
If it was legal it would take out much of the demand for trafficking and other heinous sex crimes where a "ring" seems more mafiaish and scary.
On the other hand he made his career breaking up prostitution rings so there is a sort of cosmic justice in his fall. Juicy for the public and unfortunate for his family.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lem: I see this (the prostitution part) as purely between him and his family. Now if public funds were used or he lied to investigators, that is something else.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this illegal in NY? Whatever your stance happens to be on the current state of these laws, I would say that it is definitely a public matter when the governor of a state commits a felony.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by DarkKnight: I wonder, Lyrhawn, would you be outraged if this was a Republican governor?
When I read this news story, the very first thought I had was "how long will it take DK/BC/RL to start with the 'omg we should be making a bigger deal about this but no one will cuz its teh democrats' commentary?"
quote:Originally posted by lem: I guess the libertarian in me says, "So what? Make it legal. It's two consenting adults."
While I wholeheartedly agree that prostitution should be legalized, until it is, Spitzer is still a politician breaking the law, and should be punished accordingly.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:While I wholeheartedly agree that prostitution should be legalized, until it is, Spitzer is still a politician breaking the law, and should be punished accordingly.
If it's proven that Spitzer broke the law, this is precisely how I will feel about the situation. How are first time offenders for hiring a prostitute generally punished? I think locally it's a three strike rule for Johns. I don't know New York's rule, or I guess if he broke the law in DC, I don't know their law either.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
She crossed state lines to meet him, making this a federal crime, a little worse than picking her up off a street corner.
The outrage comes from who he is: not just the NY governor, but a man who ran on his ethics who has publicly attacked prostitution. Hypocrisy makes the papers, whatever your political party.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:How are first time offenders for hiring a prostitute generally punished?
I don't at all buy into the notion that he should be punished (legally, I mean-not just politically) as a normal first-time offender.
He's not a normal first-time offender. Whatever his level of crime, they should throw the book at him.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: It is not like he went to a massage parlor where many girls are trafficked or held against their will.
As someone who managed a massage therapy practice for 11 years, I'd like to ask educated people not to conflate it with worse than prostitution. I guess that's why so many people assumed Heath Ledger was up to something immoral when he died.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pooka, there a significant number of entities calling themselves "massage parlors" where trafficked women are forced to work as prostitutes. lem qualified that he wasn't speaking of all massage businesses, but only "massage parlor where many girls are trafficked or held against their will." Such places exist.
quote:If it was legal it would take out much of the demand for trafficking and other heinous sex crimes where a "ring" seems more mafiaish and scary.
I'm not sure it would. It's legal to hire domestic servants, and people are still trafficked for that.
quote:The outrage comes from who he is: not just the NY governor, but a man who ran on his ethics who has publicly attacked prostitution. Hypocrisy makes the papers, whatever your political party.
This is a key point. His efforts against prostitution rings are a big part of what got him elected - less so than his Wall Street suits, probably, but it was still a significant factor.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's hard to believe a sitting NY governor could be convicted of the Mann Act. It's like a 30s screwball comedy or film noir (it was referenced occasionally in 30s and 40s films, which is the only way I've heard of it.)
According to one article, he could also be indicted for structuring, using transactions less than $10,000 to avoid IRS scrutiny of illegal acts.
I share Lyrhawn's admiration of Spitzer's record as NY AG. Wall Street cheered, literally, at this news, because he'd come down so hard on some crooks in finance and insurance. Too bad he couldn't do as well as governor.
posted
Didn't Spitzer prosecute a couple high profile prostitution rings while AG? One has to wonder if he was just clearing out the competition for his "hook-up" buddies.
Posts: 6 | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this illegal in NY? Whatever your stance happens to be on the current state of these laws, I would say that it is definitely a public matter when the governor of a state commits a felony.
I wholeheartedly agree. I think he should be punished for breaking the law. Personally I am not *gasp shock awe.* He was not a regular John and his political and social punishment will most likely be more extensive.
I just think he should of used his influence before this happened to legalize it. Perhaps the public would never accept that tho.
Regarding massage parlors....I am not talking about the rank and file of licensed parlors. I am talking about Asian ones where the girls live there and greet you in skimpy clothing and take you to back rooms for services.
I saw a special on MSNBC on how the girls live and where they get them from and it was very sad. I was shocked that sex slavery existed so extensively in America.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: The outrage comes from who he is: not just the NY governor, but a man who ran on his ethics who has publicly attacked prostitution. Hypocrisy makes the papers, whatever your political party.
Yep. It should be investigated to the fullest extent. If the charges are true, it's terrible.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like the idea of a law saying that it is illegal to hire a prostitute but not illegal to be one.
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pooka: I guess that's why so many people assumed Heath Ledger was up to something immoral when he died.
That, and the movie about gay cowboys.
Personally, I find it a bit refreshing to see some corruption from a Democrat. Helps shore up my long held belief that most politicians are corrupt, and not just most conservative politicians.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
I think he is human, with human failings, just like the rest of us. As unfair as it is, people in high government offices do need to 'punished' more than an ordinary citizen. Punishment doesn't necessarily mean jail time but they should resign, or be asked to resign.
quote: Edit to add: Actually, now that I think about it, if you want to take it down a notch, I'm pissed beyond believe at Detroit's democratic mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. I want him out of office, I'd like him to be in jail, and hell, nowhere near southeast Michigan would be nice too. He's corrupt, he's a liar, and I don't believe a thing he says.
But I'm guessing you'll come up with a reason for why that doesn't count
That does absolutely count.
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think it's unfair at all for people in high government office to be punished more harshly than an ordinary citizen.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
At least he's not saying that the FBI got it wrong, that he is the victim of a police conspiracy, or that its his opponents out to get him, and he won't be using an airport bathroom ever again.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure this has been brought up, but another reason for Spitzer to step down is to avoid inevitable questions about the role of taxpayer dollars and public servants in his recreational activities.
He has a security detail. Where were they? Did they aid and abet the activity?
Was any of his travel and lodging paid with taxpayer funds?
Etc. etc. etc.
Just in case there's any confusion on my attitude, I was a fan of most of Spitzer's work going after Wall Street in the Enron era.
According to news reports, some of the Democrats in NY have already called for Spitzer's resignation. I'm guessing that the holdouts are just giving him a grace period before they join in.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:GOP to Push for NY Gov Impeachment By MICHAEL GORMLEY – 18 minutes ago
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — Pressure mounted Tuesday on Gov. Eliot Spitzer to resign because of a prostitution scandal, with a top state Republican threatening to push for impeachment proceedings if the governor doesn't step down in 48 hours.
The state "cannot have this hanging over their heads," said Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco.
The scandal erupted Monday, when allegations surfaced that Spitzer, who built his political reputation on rooting out corruption, spent thousands of dollars for a night with a call girl named Kristen at a glitzy Washington hotel.
Spitzer, a first-term Democrat, remained hidden from public view Tuesday, and his plans regarding his political future weren't known. Three New York newspapers called for his resignation, and the New York Post called him "NY's naked emperor."
Spitzer hadn't yet decided whether to resign and hadn't set a timetable for a decision, according to two Democratic officials close to Spitzer and the state's lieutenant governor, David Paterson. The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the discussions.
To get articles of impeachment to the floor, Tedisco would need support from the Democratic majority in the Assembly. If the measure passed there, it would still need at least two-thirds approval of the combined vote of the Republican-controlled Senate and the nine-member Court of Appeals to proceed to trial.
It's hard to see how Spitzer can govern with this hanging over his head. He can't make public appearances or face the press.
According to a couple of news outlets, it looks like a majority of New Yorkers think he should resign.
What good does he accomplish for the citizens of NY by staying on?
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
One possibility is that he is withholding his resignation until a plea is worked out with federal and state prosecutors. Many pleas by government officials include a requirement that the official resign. If Spitzer resigns without a plea deal, he has less to bargain with and might face stiffer punishment.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that the majority of people just see this as an unsavory scandal, but when it comes right down to it, prostitution is a form of organized crime.
Maybe the organizers of The Emporers Club pay their taxes, but given how this situation was discovered (FBI analysis if peculiar transaction activity), it would seem not.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: He has to get at least SOME credit from his AG days though doesn't he?
Actually, his AG days are the reason why he's toast.
I don't consider it any of my business whether somebody sees a prostitute, and I don't think it ought to be the government's business either. Mr. Spitzer notoriously felt otherwise, and I confess that I am filled with glee to see that he's effectively being brought down specifically because he's held to a black-and-white moral code in general, and even more specifically because he targeted prostitution in years past. Serves him right.
Posts: 884 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I listened to NPR talk about this for most of the day and I keep going back and forth on what I think should happen to Spitzer as punishment for this.
And I think after having a day to compose my thoughts, I'm down to this: It appears from the information at hand that he very likely is the "Client 9" being discussed. I give him credit for coming right out and admitting he was wrong and he didn't try to stonewall, he didn't try to blame, he fessed up (though not explicitly, which is probably a smart move from a personal stand point). Beyond my feelings of punishment, I'm pretty pissed at him personally. While it's my opinion that prostitution should be legal, it currently isn't and he broke that law, pretty hypocritically given his history. I'm incredibly disappointed in him too. I always viewed him as a sort of People's Pitbull. He was relentless in going after corporate corruption and crime, and regardless of whether or not I like the law, or he likes it, he violated it. That might not mean as much because I'm not even from New York, but that doesn't change the fact that I held him in high regard and feel a bit burned by it.
As for how I think things should proceed from here...that's tougher. I don't think he should go to jail. It's a victimless crime (that ought to spark off an argument there, which I'd rather avoid in this thread, but in THIS case, it's how I feel), it's a crime that is very rarely prosecuted, and for that matter that never gets the kind of attention that his is getting (I mean beyond the obvious fact that he's a major political figure, I mean in even starting the investigation). Assuming there are no charges against him, I think him resigning is his choice and his family's. I don't really have a feeling one way or the other on that one, though I think I lead towards resigning. He made a mistake, it's unfortunate that what could have been a fantastic career, maybe even a shot at the presidency someday has been taken down, but he's the one who did it, beyond whatever politically motivated sources that are behind all this, it doesn't absolve him of guilt.
Having said all that, I'm very, very curious as to how this whole thing got started. I want to know what the bank was doing looking into his personal finances, how the FBI investigation got started, how the wiretaps were approved and why, etc. It looks very suspicious and there seems to be some ambiguity, and I want to know what happened. I don't think, no matter how tainted this investigation may end up being, that Spitzer gets a pass because of it, but I'd still like to know. Him being wrong doesn't necessarily make they way they did it right.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Pooka, there a significant number of entities calling themselves "massage parlors" where trafficked women are forced to work as prostitutes. lem qualified that he wasn't speaking of all massage businesses, but only "massage parlor where many girls are trafficked or held against their will." Such places exist.
While this is absolutely true, hoi polloi has a fair bit of difficulty making the distinction. Clarification -- even apparently excessive clarification -- is a good and necessary thing.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it's fairly disturbing that any particular woman should be considered worth $1,000.00 an hour. And as long as he pays it, does she really have any choice about who she sees? How is this, then, consent? A woman who is being paid for sex is not a woman giving consent, by my definition.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nope, they are being compelled by circumstance. How many of them would choose to spend 8 hours standing on their feet, leaning over boiling oil, and listening to people's thoughtful ruminations on what combo meal they want?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
For the kind of high priced call girls we're referring to here, I don't see the argument pooka. We're talking about women who make six figures for having stellar figures. Models aren't victims of circumstance. Neither are these women. Both of them could choose to work at that Burger King if they wanted to, but they want to make more money, so they choose to be extremely high priced prostitutes.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Erm, presumably they like it? (You might want to be more specific)
quote:Originally posted by pooka: I think it's fairly disturbing that any particular woman should be considered worth $1,000.00 an hour. ...
In these cases, I suspect that much of the premium is paid for anonymity. (To put it bluntly and in economic terms, a woman with a significantly lower rate may find it more rewardable blackmailing an AG rather than continue with their profession)
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Naw. And any of you who "know" me, know that I am a big fan of sex. But, good heavens don't there seem to a lot of stories about really promising men who defeat a lot of that promise by doing something stupid? Seriously, is one's promising career, reputation, legacy as, say, president, possibility of becoming president and so forth worth what often seems to be pretty tawdry sex? I'm sure women do plenty of cheating, the ones in the public eye seem to be smarter about it, though.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it has more to do with there being far fewer women in public office and far more attention on the men's sex lives.
There've been sex scandals for both genders going back thousands of years, literally. The only things that have changes are our sensibilities towards sex.
I'm not sure how many of the men that have had sex scandals in the last decade that you could really descibe as promising though.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Having said all that, I'm very, very curious as to how this whole thing got started. I want to know what the bank was doing looking into his personal finances, how the FBI investigation got started, how the wiretaps were approved and why, etc. It looks very suspicious and there seems to be some ambiguity, and I want to know what happened. I don't think, no matter how tainted this investigation may end up being, that Spitzer gets a pass because of it, but I'd still like to know. Him being wrong doesn't necessarily make they way they did it right.
quote: The case started when banks noticed the frequent transfers from several accounts and filed suspicious activity reports with the Internal Revenue Service, the official said. The accounts were traced back to Spitzer, prompting public corruption investigators to open an inquiry.
posted
There was a good NPR interview on how banks rank the suspiciousness of particular transactions. Politicians automatically receive extra scrutiny.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sounds fishy to me. I still want to see more details, and I imagine they'll come out over the upcoming weeks and months.
Edit to add: Dag, when was that interview? I was listening to NPR today on the way home from work. I think Talk of the Nation was on, and they were discussing a variety of things related to the case, but one of the guest speakers was talking about how, first of all, it was incredibly unusual that there'd be wiretaps involved with a prostitution case. I guess the banking question would clear that part up, but what's involved with suspicions being raised in that regard?
I'd love to hear that interview.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
