March 11, 2008
How Long?
As you probably well know by now, New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer has been caught in an investigation linking him to a high-priced prostitution ring as a client.
ABC News is reporting the interesting detail that it wasn't an investigation of the prostitution ring that led to Spitzer's downfall, but his shifting of funds that led to his bank calling in authorities for what they thought was the possible hiding of bribes:
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.
So it appears that Spitzer's bank called in the IRS over what it thought was money laundering (if I understand the account correctly, and I may not), and the IRS contacted the Justice Department, which tagged the FBI's Public Corruption Squad to run with the case.
This seems a pretty straightforward and logical sequence from my layman's perspective on how Justice might end up involved in the case. Bagging a governor for corruption—which apparently is what they thought they had at the beginning—seems to be a logical application of the FBI's Public Corruption Squad.
That the case turned out to be about prostitution instead of bribery seems to be a bit of a letdown, as noted by David Kurtz at TPM, who called it "anti-climactic."
Refer back to the ABC News story and you'll note that, "It was only months" into the investigation that the investigators were able to determine that Spitzer's money shifting was about covering up payments to the prostitution ring, and not hiding bribes. This brings up a logical series of questions that I've not seen many people asking yet.
- How long had Eliot Spitzer been procuring high-end prostitutes from the Emperors Club before his financial activity was deemed suspicious?
- Is his interest in the client side of prostitution a recent development, or is it part of an on-going pattern of behavior? If part of a on-going pattern of behavior, how long has Spitzer been using prostitution services, and has he patronized other services in addition to the Emperors Club?
- How was Spitzer introduced to the Emperors Club? Did he find the service on his own, or was he referred? If referred by others, is there the possibility that more politicians or business associates may be exposed in his wake?
These are some of the questions that come to my mind about this developing story, and it will be interesting to see if any information along these lines comes out as the scandal continues.
Update: Six years? Allah's got the roundup.
"...Spitzer has been caught in an investigation..."
I read elsewhere that he didn't get caught, as much as he triggered...
Posted by: Larry Sheldon at March 11, 2008 09:38 AM"--These are some of the questions that come to my mind about this developing story, and it will be interesting to see if any information along these lines comes out as the scandal continues.--"
I doubt Spitzer is going to out any of his business associates or political allies. The prosecution would have to cut him a deal to get that sort of info, and they typically only give deals like that to small fry for catching bigger fish. Not much bigger fish in the sea than a Governor of New York.
As for the second question, why do you care? If this was a one-time affair does that make the prostitution more ok than if he'd been a repeat offender? Kinda like asking the question, "If Eliot Spitzer got a speeding ticket, how many times has he broken the speed limit before?!" Odds are, if he's been caught hooking up with a prostitute once, he's not a complete stranger to the sex-for-money game. Needle in a haystack and all that. But ultimately, I'd be more concerned with political ramifications - were sexual favors ever traded for political opportunities? Have any of the Emperor's Club VIP escorts been offered special privileges or benefits by the governor's office? He was a former DA. Was the Club being deliberately ignored by his office? Was any other club or organization given similar benefits?
Ultimately, I'm just relieved that the DoJ is busting people for actual crimes, rather than pulling another Don Seigelman and throwing innocent people in jail.
Posted by: Zifnab at March 11, 2008 10:12 AMI am still trying to care about this development. "Politician hires prostitutes....story at 11".
As much as I think Spitzer's politics are completely wrong-headed and how many of his lawsuits while AG were self-promoting garbage, I just cannot get myself to care about his hiring prostitutes. And that he will resign as governor for something like that seems really weird.
Posted by: iconoclast at March 11, 2008 10:12 AMUltimately, I'm just relieved that the DoJ is busting people for actual crimes, rather than pulling another Don Seigelman[sic] and throwing innocent people in jail.
The way I recall it going down, it was a jury of his peers that found him guilty of one count of bribery, one count of conspiracy to commit honest services mail fraud, four counts of honest services mail fraud and one count of obstruction of justice, not the DoJ.
There may be some bias in his prosecution--I haven't followed the case in any detail--but like Spitzer, the prosecution had to have something to hang even a biased prosecution on, and a half million dollars in campaign contributions arranged by Scrushy--which I've never heard explained away by Siegelman supporters--certainly seemed to fit the bill.
Of are yo going to claim Siegelman is a completely innocent political prisoner?
I'd find such an argument quite interesting.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at March 11, 2008 10:26 AMReally? It's weird to place himself in a position where he could be blackmailed and expected to resign? It's weird that Spitzer of all people who prosecuted two similar prostitution rings in 2004 and sent people to jail for it having been caught in bed literlly with people doing what he prosecuted people for four years ago might be expected to resign? How is that weird?
Posted by: ldspossecomitatus at March 11, 2008 10:28 AMBeautiful. The Scott Horton fans are still here.
Horton put out a fantasy piece on Spitzer yesterday speculating that this was a Bush Administration inspired trap. Apparently those Tove mind control rays work so well that they convinced Spitzer to mail wads of cash to a pimp, take a train to Washington and then have prearranged sex and pay more cash to a prostitute there. Those rays have been getting better and better since Katrina hit off target. Horton's post proves again that he is a hack who does not think before he posts. He's got nothing on this except what is in his mind, BDS, and the same for Seigelman.
Posted by: daleyrocks at March 11, 2008 10:32 AMOn the one hand, this couldn't have happened to a more deserving individual. But on the other hand, I don't particularly think that either of the things listed, Mann Act violations or "structuring", should be Federal crimes. Mann Act? It's at least constitutional, with a connection to interstate commerce. Structuring? Not so much.
Posted by: Skip at March 11, 2008 11:58 AMAhh yes, there it is, "IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS, IT'S JUST PROSTITUTION!"
In the liberal world, this is not a crime, it's a resume builder!
What will Hillary say now? Remember,she is the one to trust to answer the phone at 3:00A.M. This happened in her state during her watch,supper delegate in all. Her silence renders her ad useless and conveys the coward that she is.
Posted by: mike191 at March 11, 2008 04:42 PMI neither support Spitzer nor his activities, however.... Are we talking about his own money here? And how much money was it that triggered the bank's investigation? Even once a week with a pro at those rates is probably less than $10k a month. Do you want the bank investigating you for moving your own money around? I, for one, am uncomfortable with the way he was caught.
Posted by: Christy at March 11, 2008 05:44 PMOf are yo going to claim Siegelman is a completely innocent political prisoner?I'd find such an argument quite interesting.
You really don't have to Google far to discover the details of the case. But I'll happily give you the basic rundown.
* First, there is the conviction itself:
Mr. Siegelman was convicted of appointing the businessman Richard Scrushy to a state hospital board in exchange for a contribution to a campaign for a state lottery to fund education. Elected officials, from the president down, appoint people who contribute directly to their campaigns without facing criminal charges.
* Then there were the convictions that didn't stick:
http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/specialreports/siegelman/storyV5SIEGELMAN04W.htm
Repeated attempts to prosecute the case fail after three judges recuse themselves or decline to hear the case. District Judge Clemon, who finally hears the case, throws out a number of charges, and before long the entire case is dropped when most of the prosecutors' evidence is ruled inadmissible.
* Siegelman is aquitted of 25 more counts against himself, and - after the jury deadlocks twice, amid allegations of jury-tampering - he his found guilty on 7 counts.
So, he got nailed on seven counts. Rocky, but he was stuck. If the charges are so shaky, surely he can appeal and have this whole matter cleared up, right?
Well, to appeal you need a transcript. Producing a transcript is the job of the judge (and his office), and said transcript has not been forthcoming in the months since the trial.
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/11/hbc-90001637
Why the hold-up? The judge - one Judge Mark Fuller - a political ally of the sitting Alabama Governor, has not gotten around to processing the paperwork. Meanwhile, Seigelman has been denied bail and repeatedly moved from Georgia to Texas to Louisiana, while investigations move forward into the various dealings behind the case.
And the case is like a who's who of GOP corruption. You've got Karl Rove and Alberto Gonzales with their hands in the investigation. Jack Abramoff and Ralph Reed bankrolled the sitting governor - Bob Riley - on his gubernatorial bid. Riley's press secretary, btw, worked for a stint as a fundraiser for Tom DeLay. USAs Leula Canary and Alice Martin, a pair of Bush appointed attorneys picked by Karl Rove - helped push the federal investigations as far back as 2002.
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/timeline_don_siegelman_1126.htm
The whole case absolutely reeks of political corruption.
Posted by: Zifnab at March 11, 2008 06:09 PMZifnab, what part of "jury of his peers" do you not comprehend?
The man was convicted by 12 men and women, not by a secret cabal led by Karl Rove.
As soon as you get that simple fact through the block of stone you laughingly call a head, we can discuss things like intelligent beings.
Posted by: C-C-G at March 11, 2008 06:38 PMZifnab - I've got a hint for you to stay a happier person. Don't believe everything Scott Horton writes.
Posted by: daleyrocks at March 11, 2008 07:52 PM"--Zifnab, what part of "jury of his peers" do you not comprehend?
The man was convicted by 12 men and women, not by a secret cabal led by Karl Rove.--"
Fourty-four state attorneys general would disagree.
http://blog.al.com/breaking/2007/07/former_attorneys_general_reque.html
"Zifnab - I've got a hint for you to stay a happier person. Don't believe everything Scott Horton writes."
This was covered in multiple papers, both local and national. Crazy as it sounds, Scott Horton was not the only reporter who noticed.
But please read up on the case before you plug your ears and start chanting "Jury of peers! Jury of peers!" I might be tempted to chant back "No underlying crime!"
Posted by: Zifnab at March 12, 2008 08:55 AMZifnab - Exactly how much do you think the Attorneys General of those other states really know about the case before signing that letter?
Why don't you chew on this article to relieve your conspiracy needs for a while:
http://blog.al.com/bn/2007/07/middle_district_of_alabamas_re.html
Posted by: daleyrocks at March 12, 2008 09:32 AMDon't worry, Zifnab, I've already figured out that you are so disconnected from objective reality that you're only good as a cat-toy.
Therefore, I will no longer even attempt a reasonable debate with you, but will merely snark and snipe at you.
And remember, you asked for it!
Posted by: C-C-G at March 12, 2008 06:46 PM
