NY Gov. Eliot Spitzer Is Linked to Prostitution Ring

[NYCe]

wooowie, wooowie.



ALBANY - Gov. Eliot Spitzer has informed his most senior administration officials that he had been involved in a prostitution ring, an administration official said this morning.
Mr. Spitzer, who was huddled with his top aides inside his Fifth Avenue apartment early this afternoon, had hours earlier abruptly canceled his scheduled public events for the day. He scheduled an announcement for 2:15 after inquiries from the Times.

Mr. Spitzer, a first term Democrat who pledged to bring ethics reform an end the often seamy ways of Albany, is married with three children.

Just last week, federal prosecutors arrested four people in connection with an expensive prostitution operation. Administration officials would not say that this was the ring with which the governor had become involved.

But a person with knowledge of the governor’s role said that the person believes the governor is one of the men identified as clients in court papers.

The governor’s travel records show that he was in Washington in mid-February. One of the clients described in court papers arranged to meet with a prostitute who was part of the ring, the Emperors Club VIP on the night of Feb. 13.

Mr. Spitzer appeared on a CNBC television show at 7 a.m. the next morning. Later in the morning, he testified before a Congressional committee.

An affidavit filed in federal court in Manhattan in connection with that case lists six conversations between the man, identified as Client 9, and a booking agent for the Emperors Club.

He had a difficult first year in office, rocked by a mix of scandal and legislative setbacks. In recent weeks, however, Mr. Spitzer seemed to have rebounded, with his Democratic party poised to perhaps gain control of the state Senate for the first time in four decades.

Mr. Spitzer gained national attention when he served as attorney general with his relentless pursuit of Wall Street wrongdoing. As attorney general, he also had prosecuted at least two prostitution rings as head of the state’s organized crime task force.

In one such case in 2004, Mr. Spitzer spoke with revulsion and anger after announcing the arrest of 16 people for operating a high-end prostitution ring out of Staten Island.

“”This was a sophisticated and lucrative operation with a multitiered management structure,” Mr. Spitzer said at the time. ”It was, however, nothing more than a prostitution ring.”

Albany for months been roiled by bitter fighting and accusations of dirty tricks. The Albany County district attorney is set to issue in the coming days the results of his investigation into Mr. Spitzer’s first scandal, his aides’ involvement in an effort to tarnish Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno, the state’s top Republican.

[JohnnyWalkerBlackLabel]

lol maybe now his ratings will go up
this ain't shit compared to when he tried to give illegal aliens driver's licenses........

[NYCe]

If it's true, he's done. This isn't The Wire, lol.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the emperors club escort site that was busted last week.

[thx1138]

prostitution and politics = the world's oldest professions.

[hugochavez]

Good thing I'm not a public office holder.

[JohnnyWalkerBlackLabel]

isn't he a super delegate?
hmmmmmmmmmmm

[Odelay]

$5,500 per hour! :shock:

Ouch!


isn't he a super delegate?
hmmmmmmmmmmm

LMAO! :lol:

[hugochavez]

isn't he a super delegate?
hmmmmmmmmmmm

If he resigns (and he is expected to by the end of today), he will no longer be a superdelegate. His successor Lieut. Gov. David Patterson will not only replace him as governor, he'll also replace him as superdelegate.

[TSCURIOUS]

I've always said Democrats have more fun. He's an idiot anyhow for all the reasons previously listed.

[BrendaQG]

Wow when I heard this all I thought is " That'll put paying 200 for my time in perspective."

Seriously though. He should only resign if he thinks he will be impeached. While he is inoffice he can escape prosecution more or less. Time fades memories, and after some years a much less splashy showy trial could benefit him.

[Cuchulain]

What a dope. He's made an awful lot of enemies on Wall Street through his many investigations of corporate corruption. He should have known Dubya's Justice Dept., who've been targeting more Democrat than Republican officials at a ratio of about 6:1, would be looking for any opportunity to get him. A promising career shot to hell.

[Quinn]

Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy! (You would be hard pressed to find an elected official with more enemies anywhere.) Given his incessantly hypocritical moralizing of others, the man, if he can be referred to as such, deserves whatever fait befalls him. This is a poetic ending to one of New York’s more disastrous governorships.

-Quinn

[BrendaQG]

He should only resign if he thinks he will be impeached. While he is inoffice he can escape prosecution more or less.

Wrong, he can still be charged with soliciting.


I did not say he would not be charged. I said he could escape prosecution more or less. (dont put in correct words in my mouth then get on my back about the words you put there.)

As the executive branch of the government he can invoke certain rights and privillages while he is in office that you and I do not have. Those right and privillages can at the very least delay a trial until he is no longer governor.

I am assuming that NY's constitution is anything like that of Illinois. Here the governors who have gone to prison do exactly what I said this Spitzer guy will probably do. Delay. This isn't going to go away anytime soon.

[Oli]

I said he could escape prosecution more or less.

As the executive branch of the government he can invoke certain rights and privillages while he is in office that you and I do not have. Those right and privillages can at the very least delay a trial until he is no longer governor.

I am assuming that NY's constitution is anything like that of Illinois. Here the governors who have gone to prison do exactly what I said this Spitzer guy will probably do. Delay. This isn't going to go away anytime soon.

This is going away. Doesn't matter what his executive powers are, he's being charged with a FEDERAL crime, not a state one. He will resign, at the latest, by Thursday. The Republicans are about to start impeachment proceedings.

Quinn's right, few elected officials have pissed more people off on their way up than old Elliot, that hypocritical piece of shit. Man, you can almost hear the cheering and laughter from Wall St. up here in Ct. :wink:

[BrendaQG]

That the charges are FEDERAL mean nothing. The governor of Illinois before the one we have now was George H. Ryan. He is now in FEDERAL prison. He was under investigation for as long as he was in office. FEDERAL investigation. All while he was in office he avoided prosecution.

We Illinoisans have been through this with a governor. We are going through this with our current governor too. (I guess that run of the mill corruption is not a big a deal as a sex scandal).If Spitzer plays his cards right he could delay the day of reckoning.

You say he will resign no latter than Thursday. Earlier today it was reported he would resign by noon today.

Trust me. If he does not resign by this time next week the national press will have something else to beef on. The pressure to resign will mostly dissipate. This can be made into a local NY scandal and not a national circus. That is the goal. NOT for him to beat the wrap. Just to delay it for a while.

[trish]

The man's going down and rightfully so. I applaud his career as a prosecutor fighting securities fraud and corruption on Wall Street. But now that he's shown himself to be a hypocrite his career in the public light is down the toilet and he knows it. Good-bye Eliot Spitzer; you fought the good fight and slipped down the dark side. Americans can tolerate any kind of scandal but a sex scandal; and no one can tolerate a hypocrite. Okay I overstated my case. The 30% who still approve of the Bush administration, Larry Craig and the Rev. Haggard have a lot of tolerance for hypocrisy, God bless 'em.

[Oli]

That the charges are FEDERAL mean nothing. The governor of Illinois before the one we have now was George H. Ryan. He is now in FEDERAL prison. He was under investigation for as long as he was in office. FEDERAL investigation. All while he was in office he avoided prosecution.

We Illinoisans have been through this with a governor. We are going through this with our current governor too. (I guess that run of the mill corruption is not a big a deal as a sex scandal).If Spitzer plays his cards right he could delay the day of reckoning.

You say he will resign no latter than Thursday. Earlier today it was reported he would resign by noon today.

Trust me. If he does not resign by this time next week the national press will have something else to beef on. The pressure to resign will mostly dissipate. This can be made into a local NY scandal and not a national circus. That is the goal. NOT for him to beat the wrap. Just to delay it for a while.

Your comparison to the former Governor of Illinois is faulty. The pressure to resign will only grow. Trish, as usual, hit it on the head. Spitzer, through his work as Attorney General, claimed the moral high ground and wielded it like a rapier against friend and enemy alike. This scandal has cut the ground out from under him. No Democrat was on record today supporting his continuation as Governor, and the Senate will begin impeachment proceedings Thursday according to Joe Bruno, Majority leader in the Senate. He's toast.

[BrendaQG]

perhaps :-/ We will know in a week how this ball will really bounce.

Reading up on this scandal. This "emperors club" website... how much of this is bull shit? Maya (http://web.archive.org/web/20070129132607/www.emperorsclubvip.com/Companions/MayaKate/MayaKateX.html)

Other of thieir models claim to be quite educated and accomplished young ladies. I want to say that's bull shit. But then their are many educated HHA's who have done that kind of work.

[LAGent4ts]

Karma is alive and well in NY. As far as this headline grabbing a hole, the people who really got hurt by his wall street witch hunts were the investors in pension funds, Joe lunchbox stockholders and employees, not the senior executives. I feel bad for the kids and the wife. Too bad for him NY is not a no fault state because he is loaded and adultery is viable cause in NY.
And not likely he will slip out of a fed rap...check out the Mann act and transport across state lines. A fit ending for a real sanctimonious prick

[trish]

the people who really got hurt by his wall street witch hunts were the investors in pension funds, Joe lunchbox stockholders and employees, not the senior executives.

those pensions were already vanishing. by the time joe lunchbox retired he would've found his pension long ago emptied by corporate raiders. it's true, white collar criminals always get off with a relative slap across the knuckles. that's because there are always suckers willing to defend them. never-the-less, i agree that Spitzer's proven himself to be an idiot and a hypocrite. The sooner he's out the better.

[Oli]

He's resigning today at 11:30, to be effective Monday.

[BrendaQG]

Yeah I heard. Looks like I was wrong but. This effective Monday busitness looks suspicious.

Under the plan, the transfer of power in Albany would take place "within days but not immediately is my understanding," a prominent state Democratic source said. Two sources close to the governor's office later said Spitzer will step down by Monday. (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/12/spitzer/index.html)

I would not yet rule out a Larry Craig like Manuver. Where he would pledge to resign then "reconsider". Granted these charges are more serious. That dose not mean he would not tryu to keep his job. (And the pressure for Craig to resign has diminished not increased as he as hung in there. He was just as much of a moralizer and all that. Mabey NY'ers just dont take shit.)

[BrendaQG]

You seem to think politicians are always on the level, at least once they are caught. You have to know that in that little head of his wheels are furiously turning. He will try to get out of this somehow.

[hippifried]

A stiff dick has no concience.

[q1a2z3]

He should have had a lackey make the appointments for him and use a phony name. Wow the dollar must have dropped a lot in value to be spending so much on hookers. Are they only accepting euros or gold now? LOL


<===== A reason to get tested for HIV.

[BrendaQG]

Supposedly this is the myspace of Kristen. (http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=69041220)

@ Braveman

Well it depends on the fine details of the case against him. Their will certianly be a trial but don't bank on it happening "right away". Lawyers have ways of delay delay delaying even in federal cases. If the fed's case is not a strong as they make it sound or they made a significant enough mistake he could beat the rap. Then make a polotical comeback. That can only happen if he hangs in there. Take Bill Clinton. Would he be as influential if he has resigned when he was impeached by congress? He hung in there, went through the trial of impeachment in the senate, and beat that rap. I don't see why it's impossible for him to do likewise. (his big problem really isn't the law right now it is 70% voter disapproval in the latest polls.)

[BrendaQG]

I have read up enough on that case and know enough political history to know that politicians can and have came back from things like this.

Consider U.S. Grant (Yeah the civil war general). He ran for and was president for a while. His administration was plagued with corruption. Their were trials and convictions of many of his cabinet members. It could never be proved just what he knew but of course he had to know. He lost his re-election bid in a landslide. He came back and ran for president again. Now he didn't win but that he even came close says allot. The public has a short memory for scandal. Because as soon as some other juicy tidbit come up whatever was the big buzz before goes away.

Need another example one more contemporary.

Consider the case of Marion Barry (sp?) . Surely if as you think the public is so long memoried and unforgiving you would not need a reminder of him. Back I think it was in the late 80's early 90's he was caught on camera doing crack. He as Mayor of Washinton DC at the time. After that he resigned, he went away for a while...... then latter he was elected Mayor of Washinton DC again.

There are many other examples of people making a comeback from scandals this bad.

[Oli]

I have read up enough on that case and know enough political history to know that politicians can and have came back from things like this.

Consider U.S. Grant (Yeah the civil war general). He ran for and was president for a while. His administration was plagued with corruption. Their were trials and convictions of many of his cabinet members. It could never be proved just what he knew but of course he had to know. He lost his re-election bid in a landslide. He came back and ran for president again. Now he didn't win but that he even came close says allot. The public has a short memory for scandal. Because as soon as some other juicy tidbit come up whatever was the big buzz before goes away.

Need another example one more contemporary.

Consider the case of Marion Barry (sp?) . Surely if as you think the public is so long memoried and unforgiving you would not need a reminder of him. Back I think it was in the late 80's early 90's he was caught on camera doing crack. He as Mayor of Washinton DC at the time. After that he resigned, he went away for a while...... then latter he was elected Mayor of Washinton DC again.

There are many other examples of people making a comeback from scandals this bad.

Perhaps you should stick to mathematics.

Ulysses Grant was a 2 term President 1869-1877. As the 22nd Amendment wasn't ratified until 1951, Grant could run for a third term, which he quietly attempted in 1880, seeking the Republican nomination, finishing close to eventual President James Garfield.

The people of D.C. got what they wanted when they re-elected Barry, as he has continued to have trouble with both local and federal law enforcement. And the people of D.C. wonder why things don't improve.

[BrendaQG]

@oli. Read what I wrote carefully. Don't say you did because you would not write what you wrote if you had. I said Grant lost his reelection bid. If one has been elected to an office and one runs for that office again it is still called re-election.

@braveman

I'm not being stuborn you are by basically defending the findings of a jury of sheep. The scandals I cited are comparable to this one. They blew over, life went on, this will be no different. If Spitzer is half the politician he is said to be he will be back, if he even actually leaves.

Oh and yeah bitch I got a better phone than the one I had before. Tell me did you ever get Mimi's cock out of your ass?

[Oli]

@oli. Read what I wrote carefully. Don't say you did because you would not write what you wrote if you had. I said Grant lost his reelection bid. If one has been elected to an office and one runs for that office again it is still called re-election.

As I said earlier, stick to math nimrod. I did read what you wrote and, after shaking my head at the convoluted syntax, realized it was incorrect. Here, read it for yourself:


Consider U.S. Grant (Yeah the civil war general). He ran for and was president for a while. His administration was plagued with corruption. Their were trials and convictions of many of his cabinet members. It could never be proved just what he knew but of course he had to know. He lost his re-election bid in a landslide. He came back and ran for president again. Now he didn't win but that he even came close says allot.

Now, you imply that U.S. Grant ran for President 3 times. He, according to you, won once and lost twice, once in a landslide and once in a tight race.

Here's what really happened. In 1868, U.S. Grant was nominated unanimously by the Republicans and defeated Horatio Seymour of N.Y. for the presidency. In 1872, he was unanimously renominated and defeated Horace Greeley, who ran on both the Democratic and Liberal Republican tickets, in a landslide. After 2 terms, with the strong stench of corruption, Grant left office. In 1879, a group of Republicans asked him to stand again for President. As the nominating process didn't include popular vote primaries but caucuses controlled by local and state party leaders, three men emerged as front runners, Grant, John Sherman and James Blaine. 1880 was an historic convention as it took 35 odd ballots before Grant was defeated by the eventual nominee and President, James Garfield, after both Blaine and Sherman withdrew and threw their support to him.

So, unlike you said, Grant never lost an election. He was defeated in the nominating process, which was not an election.

[mimiplastique]

@braveman
t Mimi's cock out of your ass?


WHAT DO I HAVE TO DO WITH A CONVERSATION ABOUT POLITICS ????
LETS NOT FORGET YOU DID A WHOLE SPREAD FOR BLACK T GIRLS ,... FOR 50 DOLLARS .... CARRIED ON LIKE A GOD DAMN FOOL AND THEN DIDN'T EVEN GET USED ....
AND ONLY BLACK PEOPLE FLAUNT CELL PHONES IN OTHER PEOPLES FACE AND WASN'T IT YOU WHO CLAIMED NOT TO BE BLACK AT ALL ...
AHHHH THE CONTRADICTIONS OF A MUSLIM TRANSSEXUAL PROSTITUTE ....... LEAVE MY NAME OUT OF YOUR BEARDED MOUTH BLACK BOY !!!!
OR I'LL JUST GIVE REINA THOSE PICTURES OF YOUR HPV INFESTED ASS WITH THAT COCK OF YOURS THAT ONLY MAKES YOU 27 DOLLARS ON YOUR BEST DAY !!!!!!


SHALL WE CONTINUE ????

[BrendaQG]

Oh yeah and I'm sure your cock is rock hard at all times.

[BrendaQG]

Bull. I said Grant did not win his bid to be reelected after it was revealed just how corrupt he was. Which oli unwittingly confirmed in his effort to contradict me.

Some of you should really get off the fucking bandwagon and think for a bit about all of this. Every anlyst I have heard on Cable TV and Radio says this.

Prosecuting him for violating the Mann Act. Not likely as this law hasn't been used in a case like this in decades.

Prosecuting him for money laundering: As long as he spent his own lawfully obtained money he would be clear of that.

Prosecuting him for "structuring" (Paying for an illegal transaction in a way meant to hide it): That is what the feds might be able to get him on. It depends on his transactions.

Prosecuting him for being a John. That could happen. Compared the the things mentioned above it would be a slap on the wrist.

You don't have to take my wrod for it. Watch this. (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/crime/2008/03/13/am.banfield.intv.cnn?iref=videosearch)

[guyone]

Prosecuting him for using his campaign funds for his sex romps - Bye Bye Spitzer!

[Oli]

Bull. I said Grant did not win his bid to be reelected after it was revealed just how corrupt he was. Which oli unwittingly confirmed in his effort to contradict me.

I was trying to correct you, not contradict you.

But, as you and facts apparently don't reside in the same neighborhood, I'll go through your statement line by line, and show you how you are wrong.


Consider U.S. Grant (Yeah the civil war general). He ran for and was president for a while.

This statement is correct. U.S. Grant was both a General in the Civil War and the 18th President of the United States (1869-1877)


His administration was plagued with corruption. Their were trials and convictions of many of his cabinet members. It could never be proved just what he knew but of course he had to know.

This statement is mostly true. There were many scandals in the Grant Administration. The most famous being the Whiskey Ring scandal, in which 3 million tax dollars were stolen with the help of government officials. It is an assumption to say that Grant had to know what was happening.


He lost his re-election bid in a landslide.

This is a false statement. U.S. Grant ran for elective office twice, in 1868 and 1872. He won both elections.


He came back and ran for president again. Now he didn't win but that he even came close says allot.

This is another incorrect statement. Grant did not actively pursue the Republican nomination in 1880, unlike 13 other candidates. Suffice it to say, again, the nominating process is very different than it is today. I've explained this earlier and don't feel like repeating it.

The example you posted was factually wrong. If you lack the integrity to admit when you're wrong, to modify your position when new information is presented to you, then any further discussion with you is pointless.

BTW-Spitzer's political career is over.

[BrendaQG]

Again, wrong, wrong, wrong. Do you even read what you post?

Fact: grant was elected in 1868.

Fact: Despite corruption scandals, which were widely publicized during his first term, Grant was reelected in 1872.

Do you dispute either of the above facts?

Oli is correct, you are wrong. My advice is, stop while you're behind. The more you post, the more you show your ignorance of American history. Again, before you post do a bit of research on the "internets."



Bull. I said Grant did not win his bid to be reelected after it was revealed just how corrupt he was. Which oli unwittingly confirmed in his effort to contradict me.

FACT: Grant ran for election a third time and was not reelected in part because of the corrpution scandals.

FACT: Grant having the corruption scandals in his first term and still being elected toa second term proves my point. A scandal does not mean the end of a politician.

FACT: Braveman you lost the point a long time ago. That's why you resorted to trying to personally insult me.

FACT: Spitser and his conversely are not going away any time soon. (see the thread NYCE created regarding McGreevy. Their is still more crap coming out of that debacle.)

[chefmike]

:roll:

:deadhorse

:sleep