<p>Demonized? Isn’t that a little extreme, even for you, Razorsharp? I mean, Spitzer just screwed a call girl. Bush screwed the entire nation, and I don’t see you “demonizing” him.</p>
<p>Because abject hypocrisy in a politician is a very unattractive thing, particularly when you’ve held yourself up as the example of moral rectitude, and it is later discovered that you’ve been engaging in the very things you’ve condemned others for. Once you’ve lost the support and confidence of the electorate, you may as well step down. You’re done.</p>
<p>As I said, I’m no fan of Eliot, but I’m curious about these related claims of him prosecuting people engaged in prostitution. What cases were these? Was this part of his battles with organized crime? I do not recall his involvement in this type of case. He was known for his organized crime prosecutions, particularly against the Gambinos, and then later in his career, most for his zealous pursuit of securities fraud and corporate white-collar crime. If anyone can provide a link, I’d be interested to read about these cases.</p>
<p>
You just can’t let your hatred of Bush out of any discusion, can you? Funny how you are willing to say Bush screwed the entire nation, but you let all of the Democrats who backed his position off the hook. Not much objectivey there.</p>
<p>As for Spitzer, he shoud be treated with the same arrogance and bullying that he used on others. And that amounts to demonizing him. Spitzer is a horrible man. I just hope he gets prosecuted the way he prosecuted others.</p>
<p>The link from abc regarding origins of the investigation. If accurate, one might presume a lower amount of cash activity might have lengthened the time to discover</p>
<p>[ABC</a> News: It Wasn’t the Sex; Suspicious $$ Transfers Led to Spitzer](<a href=“It Wasn't the Sex; Suspicious $$ Transfers Led to Spitzer - ABC News”>It Wasn't the Sex; Suspicious $$ Transfers Led to Spitzer - ABC News)</p>
<p>Its interesting because I don’t think banks have to report transactions unless they are 10,000 or more, but the BSA seems to allow reporting of anything suspicious.</p>
<p>[Bank</a> Secrecy Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_Secrecy_Act]Bank”>Bank Secrecy Act - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>Spitzer created a lot of enemies it seems, in his general approach towards people. Who knows. Maybe some poor disrespected bank manager is the guy who nailed him. Certainly there were venerable personalities that he showed no respect. see below. </p>
<p>[The</a> Wall Street Journal Online - Extra](<a href=“http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007713]The”>http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007713)</p>
<p>Reagan, Bush and Bush collectively drove the national debt up from 32% of the GDP to close to 70%. They are the only presidents since WWII to increase the debt as a percentage of the GDP. Nobody else. I don’t “hate” Bush - I just acknowledge that he’s the third in a series of republican presdents who have royally screwed America.</p>
<p>Clinton didn’t royally screw us though? Is your determining factor debt compared to gdp?</p>
<p>
Here are two examples of Spitzer and prostitution:</p>
<p>[18</a> Arrested in Lucrative Prostitution Ring Out of Staten Island - New York Times](<a href=“http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C01E1D91438F93BA35757C0A9629C8B63]18”>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C01E1D91438F93BA35757C0A9629C8B63)
[Candidate</a> Spitzer Returns $100,000 In Tainted Campaign Contributions - August 18, 2006 - The New York Sun](<a href=“http://www.nysun.com/article/38145]Candidate”>http://www.nysun.com/article/38145)</p>
<p>Earlier, I mentioned that for me, if this was just about a politician’s sexual encounters, I feel it is not our business…it is so common too…and nobody should resign over it. </p>
<p>However, I have read that he has prosecuted other prostitution rings and so it seems to me that trust in a politician who is charged with enforcing laws that he is possibly breaking himself is now broken. That seems to be the issue. </p>
<p>I admit to not following Gov. Spitzer and only know what I have read in news accounts and so I don’t have the “proof” to cite. </p>
<p>CCN reports:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, this seems to be an issue in this way. His sex life is his own personal problem but this involved a prostitution ring and apparently he has sought prosecution of such rings in the past. Public trust matters in such instances (if this is all true).</p>
<p>Time to dust off the Scarlet Letter. Once again life imitates fiction.</p>
<p>haha yeah i read about this on Yahoo, what the heck?</p>
<p>Interesting hearing Congressman King (NY) talk about this prostitution ring as being more than that (that it had ties to organised crime) and how Spitzer left himself open to blackmail, etc. I just can’t fathom how he thought he wouldn’t be caught. Last night they had McGreevey’s “estranged” wife on, and she was defending Mrs. Spitzer standing there next to him, saying that she felt she needed to be there, too, for her husband, regardless of his betrayal. My attitude to that is, “Don’t drag me down in the mud with you, bud. You did this to yourself!” Of course my alltime favorite is Carville, saying that its not really a big deal. Is anything a big deal to that man?</p>
<p>dke, standing there could have been a smart business decision for herself. She did not look too happy to me. My H and I were talking about what their evening must have been like at home. Perhaps more than few Excedrin moments. I feel sorry for her and for their 3 children.</p>
<p>razorsharp, thank you for the links. I thought it was probably part of the investigations of the Gambino family but hadn’t heard specificially about those. I would imagine that they were a very small part of all those years of prosecutions of the Gambino clan. </p>
<p>Regardless of what people think of Spitzer, I find it wrong to be questioning his wife appearing with him at yesterday’s press conference. None of us here have any idea what it is like to be in her position as the wife of a very public figure. I, too, saw the interview with McGreevey’s ex. Her reasoning was not simply to be there for her husband. She said that, in her own case, she made the determination after thinking of her daughter and knowing that in the future, her daughter would understand that that was perhaps the worst day of her father’s life, and Mrs. McGreevey wanted her daughter to know that her mom had been there for him. I think that’s a reasonable and understandable reason. People jumping on Silda Switzer and making ridiculous claims about her probably doing it for the money, etc. are cruel.</p>
<p>I tend to agree with Kluge here. There are far worse things that politicians are doing than paying a woman for sex.</p>
<p>Banks are apparently attuned to amounts such as $9,600, $9,400, etc. being transferred, amounts which are just under the “trigger” limit of $10,000. The bank saw that amounts of money in that range were leaving Mr. Spitzer’s accounts and that’s what triggered a call to the IRS. He moved money into dummy or “shell” corporations, from one to another, and eventually transferred the money to the Emperor Club’s account. If he was just seeking the services of a prostitute, he would probably not be in legal trouble. It’s the money transfers and the fact that he paid her expenses to be transported across State lines which will be his downfall.</p>
<p>Adultery’s a pretty big no-no in my book, whether its paid for or not. She sure didn’t deserve it. I’m not a sophisticated European like the type Dershowitz admires!</p>
<p>I don’t think it is cruel. I think that it is smart. Why shouldn’t she stand there for possible extra money if she wants to? I am sure that she has her 3 daughters in the forefront of her mind. The only thing cruel, was what he did. She did nothing wrong, and has nothing to be ashamed of, so why not stand there.</p>
<p>Momof3, I was reading that same thing in the Times this a.m. Am I right in thinking that ?? he was using state funds to pay this woman?</p>
<p>Re Silda Spitzer: Over the years, she has doubtless had some great, shining moments as the spouse of a wealthy political superstar. I feel terrible for her, but I don’t think it’s so unjust that she should have to stand next to her husband for this decidedly un-shining hour. One way or another, I doubt any of his behavior is a complete surprise to her. You pays your money, you takes your chances.</p>
<p>Quote: "dke, standing there could have been a smart business decision for herself. "</p>
<p>Business decision? Maybe she has her own political aspirations… :o Seems a precedent has been set. She is after all Harvard educated, etc.</p>