March 11, 2008
Spitzer Expected to Resign; State GOP Will Seek Impeachment If He Doesn't
Governor Eliot Spitzer is expected to resign, according to top aides who spoke to the NY Times. It's unclear when the resignation will happen, but Lieutenant David Paterson is working on a transition.
The State GOP is threatening to impeach Spitzer if he doesn't step down in 48 hours. A spokesman for Republican minority leader James Tedisco said, "The governor has 48 hours to resign or articles of impeachment would be introduced.
There are many ridiculous things about Governor Spitzer's solicitation of "high-class" prostitutes (using his own cell phone, his betrayal of his family, getting a hotel room in his friend's name but with his own address). But what the federal officials may nail him for - and what started the inquiry into the prostitution ring - were "suspicious money transfers" that feds initially thought were bribes but turned out to be payment to the prostitution ring. Forehead meet heel of hand!
A bank alerted the IRS, which then, after getting permission from the Justice Department, started to dig into Spitzer's finances with the FBI Public Corruption Squad. A Justice Department official said, "We had no interest at all in the prostitution ring until the thing with Spitzer led us to learn about it."
The investigators found that Spitzer was sending money to a variety of shell companies set up by the Emperor's Club VIP prostitution ring. Officials think that Spitzer will be charged with "structuring," which per ABC News, "involves creating a series of financial movements designed to obscure the true purpose of the payments." A former federal prosecutor told the Daily News, ""Who knew better than him that this money was going to further a criminal enterprise?"
And Spitzer's words in an interview two years ago may haunt him: "Never talk when you can nod, and never nod when you can wink, and never write an e-mail because it's death. You're giving prosecutors all the evidence we need."
Update: Newsday reports Spitzer had solicited call girls at least 7 times over the past several years. Besides the tryst in DC, there was also one in Florida (multi-state investigation!).
Photograph of Spitzer heading to his Fifth Avenue apartment by Louis Lanzano/AP
|
That must've been a sweet moment for Tedisco. I'm shocked he didn't say "Spitzer's going to resign or I'll f---'n steamroll his ass."
Did he get the hotel room in his name or the name of his friend, George Fox? Or did he use the Fox name with the Emperor's Club? I read that he used Fox's name for something or another.
(sigh)
What is it with the GOP and Impeachment? That's so 90's!
Love it when the GOP tries to take the Moral "High" ground...
Ha, David! I'm sure Republicans in Albany are gonna be popping the champagne corks for days. They'll be parading their righteousness for all the world to see. I should stay sleep for the next five days.
Pretty sure he used the name George Fox with both the Emperor's Club and at the hotel. Newspapers said he used the name at the hotel with his own Fifth Avenue address. Not sure who Spitzer was traveling with to DC or how he paid.
Yes, he did use his friend's name (I even mentioned that yesterday!) but he put down his own Fifth Avenue address. And according to the tapes, he told the booker that he got the hotel room in his own name.
DISGRACE!
Ah, thanks for the clarification, Jen.
A blogger at Daily Kos brings up some interesting points about the wire transfer investigation and the subsequent leak of Spitzer being "Client #9."
AND, he met with the prostitute on Valentine's Day. Explain that one to the wife-o.
What a loser scumbag.
There isn't much interesting in that Daily Kos blog other than desperation. Just to start the writer doesn't seem to know the difference between a US Attorney at the Attorney General.
Whatever you say, EastRiver.
why
why
why
do these wives stand by these jerks side, if even for the moment???
Whoa, really? Why do they stand by their sides? Really?
Agree with EastRiver here. The Daily Kos blog is pretty lame... for instance it says
What's wrong with this version of the story? At least one thing seems to be glaringly wrong: This wasn't money moving INTO Spitzer's accounts, as it would be if the crimes involved were bribery, political corruption, or "something inappropriate involving campaign finance." This was cash moving OUT of Spitzer's accounts -- based on everything we've heard, from his personal accounts. Uh, how about extortion? the writer claims to be a former DOJ lawyer, but seems pretty clueless
EastRiver: The writer is a former DOJ lawyer. I think they know the difference (methinks you read a bit too fast).
But either way, similar to McGreevey, I don't think it's in Dems best interest to get into the details of how this was uncovered. It happened, and there appears to be no dispute in that regard.
Love it when the upper echelon of society get a big fat one right up the pooper when they deserve it, period. This has nothing to do with the GOP, this guy fucked up .
I was thinking the same thing about the wives. Why don't any of these sleazy creeps have the fortitude to stand up on their own?
I think the most interesting part of the Kos story is how did the information on Spitzer got out in the public in the first place. Anybody know? (And so glad to see EastRiver and Eyekantspel team up again. You guys are great together!)
kearnj, Oh absolutely Spitzer screwed up and deserves to be put out on the street, but it still amuses me to no end when the GOP starts taking the Moral High Ground.
Granted on the NYS scale, not so much, but Nationally, in the last year alone, The GOP has been a comedy of gafs.
Oh, And while I think they were gunning for him for purely political reasons, Spitzer did this to himself.
It does have something to do with the GOP. If this were a Republican caught with his pants down, they'd be walking on eggshells about the whole mess. The GOP has a deserved reputation for being always and exactly as hypocritical as Spitzer is.
EastRiver: The writer is a former DOJ lawyer. I think they know the difference (methinks you read a bit too fast).
You're right, I did. I skimmed from one line to the next where he quoted the words "United States attorney general" (no caps) and compared it the next paragraph where he said "Attorney General of the United States". Somehow I dropped out the word "general". My bad.
But Elderta's cynical "whatever" just goes to show that some people are desperate to believe anything. Nowhere in that piece does the writer tell us exactly how many money transfers there were and when the Feds got a warrant. But we are to believe they didn't have the evidence to get a warrant and/or that any evidence gathered must be tainted. Hey, that might all be true but I can't tell that from what he wrote. If he is so knowledgable about the banking system he should explain what sort of information the bank first reported. Surely if they know he's removing money from his own account they know where it is going. Does the government need a warrant if that information is simply turned over to them?
"how did the information on Spitzer got out in the public in the first place. Anybody know?"
As I understand it (and that certainly could be incorrect), Spitzer was informed on Friday that he was caught up in the probe, and one of his aides leaked to NYT on Monday after Spitzer met with them. The current NYT story says law enforcement officials disclosed it, but I think they're glossing over in order to protect their source. Either that or I'm just misremembering things from yesterday.
I think the most interesting part of the Kos story is how did the information on Spitzer got out in the public in the first place.
Spin. Spin. Spin. Nothing in DC stays secret. Surely you know that. Should it have been leaked? No. But I'm not sure when it was leaked to the press relative to when Spitzer was notified (sometime Friday) to when he told his staff (Sunday) to his press conference.
(And so glad to see EastRiver and Eyekantspel team up again. You guys are great together!)
I'm not intentionally teaming up with anyone but it's nice to see you're still being incredibly partisan.
I'm sure Republicans in Albany are gonna be popping the champagne corks for days.
Two days ago they could look forward to a '10 election against an impotent (metaphorically, anyway), ethically compromised, and otherwise vulnerable incumbent. Now they're going to face up against a governor who, lo and behold, is not an asshole. What big star of state politics do you think they'll find to run this time? Jeanine Pirro?
I don't see what they should celebrate. The real takedown of Spitzer's happened over the last year; as soon as he resigns he ceases to be a liability for the Dems. How much more effective is Paterson going to be at stumping for state senate candidates?
The only reason I can think of for Spitzer's wife to be up there with him is that he was thinking he could actually remain as governor and that this might somehow help his future political career. He maybe didn't realize fully at the time just how over his career is.
Now, why SHE would do it I can't really say, except that maybe she really likes being the governor's wife and wants to help him stay in office. Otherwise, if she knew he was toast, what's the point.
EastRiver.... I guess you haven't seen where I want Spitzer to go buh-bye. My whatever is to YOU, my friend, as I know that you are willing to see only one side of any story... yours. I said there was some interesting points, which you immediately dismiss while on your high East River pedestal.
I'm not desperate to hang on to Spitzer. Over the last year, I've grown weary of him. I've argued with other Democrats over this today who say it's "nothing but sex." It's more than that. But I guess that's your definition of partisan. Whatever, EastRiver.
Who's money paid for Spitzer's habits? His or ours?
EastRiver.... I guess you haven't seen where I want Spitzer to go buh-bye. My whatever is to YOU, my friend, as I know that you are willing to see only one side of any story... yours. I said there was some interesting points, which you immediately dismiss while on your high East River pedestal.
I really don't understand why you're coming at me and now you're adding personal insults. All I said was that I didn't think you're Daily Kos link added much to the story because it is entirely innuendo. That's all I said. If that's being on a pedestal so be it. Despite what you think I am willing to see any side of the story. I'm not so sure you are because you're reading Daily Kos which is incredibly partisan on a good day and that article in particular gives you one side only and you seem to buy into it completely. If it comes out that the Feds did something unethical or illegal I would totally accept it. And you're repeated "whatevers" are really childish and just go to show that you don't want to hear from anyone that doesn't march 100% lockstep with whatever you think. Whatever, Elderta.
i wouldnt be surprised if we find out the state republicans (bruno) had something to do with the investigation into spitzer... it doesnt seem the other "8" have been looked at so closely.
I don't see what the big deal is. The only wrong he has done is by his wife. No one is perfect and we are all sinners!! His wife may have stood by him because it is her husband and they have 3 children together. Did anyone ever think of the logical answer?? They have been married for a long time, there is no telling what anyone would do unless they are in that situation. Do not judge, only God can do that. We are all so quick to condem but yet we have so many of our own skeletons. This is about power between the Republicans and democrats. They don't give a hoot what he did, all they care about it throwing dirt on a democrats name for their own political party gain. Get a clue people!
I don't see what the big deal is. The only wrong he has done is by his wife. No one is perfect and we are all sinners!! His wife may have stood by him because it is her husband and they have 3 children together. Did anyone ever think of the logical answer?? They have been married for a long time, there is no telling what anyone would do unless they are in that situation. Do not judge, only God can do that. We are all so quick to condem but yet we have so many of our own skeletons. This is about power between the Republicans and democrats. They don't give a hoot what he did, all they care about it throwing dirt on a democrats name for their own political party gain. Get a clue people!
EastRiver: Right. I'm not defending the arguments.. some interesting points are raised, but really at this point it's all speculation because the public does not have the evidence.
To me there are two intriguing but ultimately irrelevant(imo) questions: 1) Did the IRS flag the transactions only because the person making them was a governor? 2) Would the AG have let the investigation proceed if it was a GOP governor?
If the answer to 1 is yes, and assuming this all involved Spitzer's personal money, I'd be a little concerned that a governor's personal financial transactions are subject to more scrutiny than any other citizen, though I do understand that there are good reasons for this additional scrutiny. I generally don't like the idea that you have to give up your private life to seek an elected office.. but that's another issue entirely.
And as I said above, this all really doesn't matter, since he's basically admitted to doing it.
I don't see what the big deal is. The only wrong he has done is by his wife. No one is perfect and we are all sinners!! His wife may have stood by him because it is her husband and they have 3 children together. Did anyone ever think of the logical answer?? They have been married for a long time, there is no telling what anyone would do unless they are in that situation. Do not judge, only God can do that. We are all so quick to condem but yet we have so many of our own skeletons. This is about power between the Republicans and democrats. They don't give a hoot what he did, all they care about it throwing dirt on a democrats name for their own political party gain. Get a clue people!
No one wants to impeach GWB no matter how many people he kills, but the minute someone sticks their wang in someone else it's all IMPEACH! IMPEACH!
No one wants to impeach GWB no matter how many people he kills, but the minute someone sticks their wang in someone else it's all IMPEACH! IMPEACH!
Invade a country under false pretenses? No problem. Consenting adults exchange sex for money? Impeachment!
Spitzer probably though he was invisible. I really though he would be a great governor for NY and turn things around in this state for the better.
(And so glad to see EastRiver and Eyekantspel team up again. You guys are great together!) Elderta must be wearing her conspiracy glasses today.
Politburo,
My understanding is that Spitzer got extra scrutiny because he was a high ranking public official. I don't know how many people meet that criteria. As for whether the AG would have let it slide if it were a GOP governor I don't know either. But if they did it would be wrong. Guy got caught red handed.
No one wants to impeach GWB no matter how many people he kills,
Some town in Vermont passed a resolution to charge him with war crimes if he ever steps foot there. And the US Congress has every right to impeach Bush. The action against Spitzer is being undertaken by the state GOP. See the difference? If the Democrats in Congress feel like getting off their asses and doing something productive they should go for it. I'm not holding their breath.
According to the Times, the wife argued against resignation. So yeah, I'd reckon she wants to hold on to whatever power/influence/status she has.
I agree with JenChungsBra as to why the wives stand by their louses.
I believe that the louse is in denial and has in their minds that there is a shred of a possibility that their careers will survive. fools. and so they have to have their wife appear to "support" the louse because without the support of the wife, the public would surely join the wife in abandoning the louse.
as to why she would do it. probably because as much as he's an asshole, she probably still loves the louse and knows how important the job is to him. she probably also believes and maybe hopes for a moment that something could be salvaged from the train wreck that has become her life.
Although in Hillary's case, I believe that she stood by Bill because she knew that she would need him for her political career. at least she's getting something out of the deal, and i think she knew that. everyone else is just screwed.
it's all a big farce, but i have to say, i am impressed with how perfectly CALM these wives all look. i would be a blotchy, clenched jaw and fist raving lunatic in that position.
I agree with JenChungsBra as to why the wives stand by their louses.
I believe that the louse is in denial and has in their minds that there is a shred of a possibility that their careers will survive. fools. and so they have to have their wife appear to "support" the louse because without the support of the wife, the public would surely join the wife in abandoning the louse.
as to why she would do it. probably because as much as he's an asshole, she probably still loves the louse and knows how important the job is to him. she probably also believes and maybe hopes for a moment that something could be salvaged from the train wreck that has become her life.
Although in Hillary's case, I believe that she stood by Bill because she knew that she would need him for her political career. at least she's getting something out of the deal, and i think she knew that. everyone else is just screwed.
it's all a big farce, but i have to say, i am impressed with how perfectly CALM these wives all look. i would be a blotchy, clenched jaw and fist raving lunatic in that position.
It's called being married and being comitted. FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE.
That is is wrong with this country. Too quick to say divorce and leave!
"According to the Times, the wife argued against resignation. So yeah, I'd reckon she wants to hold on to whatever power/influence/status she has."
uhmm could it be she wanted to support her husband, the man she married? They are people just like us folks and if she chose to stand by him, she is going to stand by him. What kind of wife would encourage her husband to "Quit"?
Of course you want to support your spouse, even if sometimes you have to bite the bullet. It takes a strong woman to be in the spotlight and marry political figures or celebrities and stand by their spouse.
I know it's crazy to you puritan types, but maybe the wife was cool with it. Heck, maybe they went together. Why do we assume that everyone fits into the male/female monogamy prototype?
NYTOTX,
You have to get a clue. God ain't judging shit, cuz it doesn't exist. And of course we can judge, we are humans. It's our favorite pasttime..
Spitzer put himself in a position where could have been bribed and extorted. His credibility is shot. This is not just about him, his wife, and 3 daughters. It's about thinking you are above it all. He just shat on you and you're eating it up. Nice dessert.
I am sorry but if I was married for years and years, and it doesn't even have to be "married" (so overrated)
it would take a lot more than catching my spouse cheating on me. Every woman is different, but personally when I have 3 daughters and a life with someone, I would be up for trying to work it out.
This whole thing has been incredible from the getgo...
The fact that it has still not registered in Spitz's mind that he must resign is really making for strange entertainment.
talk about Divorce..Divorce from reality
It's called being married and being comitted. FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE. That is is wrong with this country. Too quick to say divorce and leave!
oh, baloney. If the wife was an elected official caught hiring a prostitute, I'm guessing the husband wouldn't be there for the photo-op. On top of that, no one is saying she should immediately get divorced. Just that it's incredible that faced with this kind of story, so often a woman will stand by her man. The first instinct seems to be protect the family.
I know it's crazy to you puritan types, but maybe the wife was cool with it.
Then he should have come out and said so yesterday. That he didn't coupled with the looks on their faces pretty much says that your theory is probably not correct. I would have had more respect for him. I would have had lots more respect for Clinton if he had looked right in the camera and said, "Yeah, I got hummer from a fat chick that wasn't my wife. In the Oval Office. Once while I was on the phone with a member of Congress." I'm not saying Clinton should have been impeached but when you're being deposed and a lawyer starts asking odd question about interns and sex you should pretty much assume they know the truth already.
"oh, baloney. If the wife was an elected offici