Stand By Your Super Delegate.
March 11th, 2008 at 05:43pm Leo Pusateri
Well, as anyone who hasn’t been living under a rock knows by now, New York’s Democratic governor Eliot Spitzer finally got a taste of his own medicine. At first, I really wasn’t going to post on this, thinking that it’s New York’s problem with which to deal; but what I really found noteworthy in terms of national politics is the relative silence of a national candidate for POTUS, namely one Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Herself a longstanding party on the receiving end of marital infidelity, Hillary could have done herself and the women’s movement a lot of good by coming out full bore at the outset of this scandal by decrying Spitzer’s actions.
But once again, as was the case of her reactions (or lack thereof) to the multiple indiscretions perpetrated by her husband, Hillary remains silent. And for the same reason. Knowing full well that a divorce from Bill Clinton would be a divorce from her ever gaining the power she so desired; Hillary is no doubt likewise conflicted regarding the severing of ties to Eliot Spitzer.
For Spitzer, aside from being a scumbag, is also a democrat Super Delegate. Committed to voting for Hillary.
And truth be told, the Clintons, being the quintessential Machiavellians that they are, have never been ones to allow nefarious backgrounds to get in the way of their stated objectives.
So if the causes of feminism, and of women being treated as objects once again have to take a back seat to Hillary’s presidential aspirations, so be it.
The end, after all, justifies the means.
UPDATES, by Matt Margolis: Spitzer to resign tomorrow?
Gov. Eliot Spitzer is set to resign Wednesday, sources tell CBS 2 HD political reporter Marcia Kramer, but insiders say he’s going to use the resignation as a bargaining chip to cut a deal with federal prosecutors and he won’t step down until that happens. The talks have been going on since Tuesday morning.
The governor’s fate rests in the hands of two people: U.S. Attorney Michael Garcia and Michele Hirshman, the head of his legal defense team. The deal they cut will determine Spitzer’s future.
Criminal law experts say Spitzer will definitely have to resign the governorship and that what’s involved in the deal is key.
The Associated Press reports “Spitzer’s running tab for the trysts could have been as high as $80,000.”
Robert Stacy McCain has more…
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Corruption, Democrats
23 Comments
1. Brian (Boston) | March 11th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Personally, I could care less about someone’s private sex life, whether it be Spitzer’s or Vitter’s. I do find it odd that the only comment she made was “…I am sending my best wishes and thoughts to the governor and to his family.” Then again, she went through the same thing with Bill.
Have you read “Il Principe (The Prince)” by Niccolo’ Machiavelli? The Clintons are not Machiavellian by any means.
2. Canuckguy | March 11th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
LEAVE HILLARY ALONE!! (to be whined in a loud banshee voice)
Poor Hillary, I guess its the classic case of being caught between a rock and a hard place.
3. Leo Pusateri | March 11th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Yes, I have.
And yes, they are.
4. Darva Conger | March 11th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
“I’m thinking, ‘Holy cow, we can’t get Bin Laden … but we got Spitzer?”
–David Letterman
5. Michael | March 11th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Methinks you are being too harsh on the Hildebeast. Within minutes of the news story breaking about Spitzer, Ms. Clinton had every reference to him and his endorsement scrubbed from her web site as if he never existed. I think one of her staff is out right now shopping for 10 foot poles.
6. FmrMarine | March 11th, 2008 at 6:16 pm
DC
Actually we COULD have had bin laden, 2 or 3 times……Except ole B!@W job - billy was diddling monica with a cigar, and depositing DNA on her blue dress in the oval offica.
spit s her got himself in dodo, TOUGH, paybacks are a B!T@# !
He used to PROSECUTE prostitution rings.
OH by the way BB,
transporting prostitutes across state lines is a FELONY,
just like your God klintoon, it WASNT the sex, it was the CRIME perpetrated during, or after, that landed BOTH in trouble.
7. Herkimer X. Arbuthnot | March 11th, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Mrs. Clinton would be well advised to “no comment” on this issue. Because it involves an ongoing investigation; interstate transport for the purpose of prostitution; interstate transference of funds for the purpose of illegal activities; and a situation which opened a sitting executive to possible extortion it easily isn’t a simple matter of personal sexual preference.
For reasons of decorum as well as legal implications, not to mention a super-delegate’s vote, I hereby allow Mrs. Clinton to say, “We are praying for the Spitzer family during these tough times, and have no comment on the investigation or Mr. Spitzer’s career.” Then walk away humming Love Potion Number Nine”
8. plainjane | March 11th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Simply a sad post and sad commentary on the breath and depth of the Republican party. Garbage!
9. phnx | March 11th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
jane, any observations on Spitzer?…since that was the topic.
10. Timothy Horrigan | March 11th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
I don’t know if Hillary got her power JUST from marrying and staying married to Bill Clinton. She has served two terms in the Senate. She was a de facto White House Chief of Staff.
And, she is a pretty skillful campaigner, although not as skillful as Barack Obama. She has spent more time in high office than Obama… for that matter more than Romney or Bush II (4 yrs each as governor.) And in contrast to Romney and Bush, who were mediocre governors, she has been an effective Senator. (She has been arguably much more effective than Obama…. although I personally prefer Obama as a Presidential candidate.)
As for McCain… yes McCain has a lot more experience in the Senate than either Clinton or Obama. But if lots of experience in the Senator was what we wanted from a President, Joe Biden would be the frontrunner right now.
11. phnx | March 11th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
” she has been an effective Senator” Timothy can you enlighten us to her many achievements in the senate? We are all ears oops…that’s Obama.
12. Leo Pusateri | March 11th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
Geeze.. I see that I’ve touched the nerves of quite a few troll lib posters here.
I must be getting pretty close to the truth.
Thanks.
13. Almiranta | March 11th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Leo’s posted many excellent threads and this is another.
Yes, the Dems would like to bleat “it’s JUST about SEXXXXXXXX !!!!! like they did with Bill’s various indiscretions, but it’s not.
Poor janie—trying to hard to turn this into, what was she whining?—a “..sad commentary on the breath and depth of the Republican party…”
?????????????
Has janie EVER gotten within spitting distance of a real, cogent, thought? As I don’t read every post, I acknowledge that maybe she has—but never in one I have read.
Janie, darlin’, you need to go back and take a look at the absolute vitriol with which you and yours went after a couple of Republicans when they never even had physical contact with anyone—Foley, Craig, both pilloried by the likes of you, one for talking dirty to an adult who initiated the conversation and the other who never even SAW the person he was supposedly attempting to seduce, sight unseen, via some evidently highly erotic toe-tapping.
But here we have a governor, a former attorney general, one who ran as a prim and proper highly ethical moral crusader, one who actively prosecuted prostitution rings and in so doing acknowledged their frequent connections to organized crime, not only actually coming into contact with a person in an illegal act but evidently trying to get her to engage in “dangerous” sexual activities, paying to transport her across state lines for the purpose of same, breaking a whole slew of laws as well as being a john—-
and janie thinks this is a reflection on the REPUBLICANS???????????????
Though what it has to do with Republicans breathing still escapes me. Breathing deeply? Depth of breathing? Though it’s not any goofier than the other stuff janie comes up with.
Yes, I know, in DemLand, one cannot observe the illegality of an act without first being overcome by rage and loathing for the person in question, making the observation an act of HATRED. At least this is the claim when a Lib is found dirty and comments are made by conservatives.
On the other hand, conservatives are fair game, and who really cares if the mud being thrown has any basis in fact—-it’s all so relative.
14. clark smith | March 11th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
I think she feels quite the opposite. Marital infidelity is the last thing the Clintons want to talk about.
If I were a prosecutor, I’d be laughing my keister off if he thought for a second that I’d buy that as a bargaining chip. I’d be saying to his defense team, “You’re kidding me, right?! Your client’s political career is toast! No deal.”
15. Kahn | March 11th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
The governor will end up being forced to testify against the operators of the prostitution ring. In return, like all the other “clients” he will not be charged or he’ll be charged with a misdemeanor. He faces a very serious charge under the Mann Act that is a Federal beef. So being a good lawyer and having used this same tactic himself, he’ll cave and testify.
Unless he lies, there will be no charges or there will be light charges. He was not the target of the investigation, the ring leaders of the prostitution ring were.
At least this is what I think will happen and what I think should happen.
16. Doug | March 12th, 2008 at 2:03 am
Uh, Kahn, I thought he was the target of the investigation. Wasn’t it his suspicious transfers of cash that caused the bank to notify authorities (like they all are supposed to do)? Then, wasn’t it those authorities who realized that it was the Gov’s account who had to notify the agency in charge of investigation public officials on the take? Who knows what else they will find or have already found, but know they can look through all of his financial information for any mob ties, crooked dealings, etc. They aren’t going to wrap this guy up so quickly if they go looking for more, they just might find something.
17. Brian (Boston) | March 12th, 2008 at 7:31 am
Leo, The Prince is a guide to maintain power by distracting the public, mostly through false threats and use of the military force.
While the Clintons may be trying to distract the public, which politicians isn’t, they are not trying to enact what is mentioned in the book.
Brian
18. Kahn | March 12th, 2008 at 9:31 am
Doug,
That may have started it. They do keep an eye out for suspicous money transfer patterns. But I thought they were also already investigating this ring? It actually doesn’t matter too much.
Transferring funds to pay for whores is not a crime. The target of the investigation and the people who will be charged are the prostitution ring leaders. They were running a major criminal enterprise. Their crimes fall under RICO,the Mann Act, Tax Evasion laws, and others. Thats who you have to go after. The governor, though an important political figure, isn’t that important to the prosecutors. Or at least he should not be.
Look, I don’t know Spitzer from Adam except that he was in the same Amtrak Acela car with me a couple of months ago. Apparently, lots of people hate his guts and the Democrat Party in New York is not standing by him. That is the political fall-out. Justified? I don’t know. Personally, if I was him I would not resign. I hear his own party now saying he can’t govern and should leave - not my call.
But criminally, the prosecutors will go after the ring leaders and threaten Spitzer and the other “clients” with prosecution if they refuse to testify. Since Spitzer did the inter-state thing and his charges would be under the Mann Act, then he would be one of the easier people to pressure because of the serious felony charges they could bring against him.
19. MorrisMajor | March 12th, 2008 at 10:29 am
If Clinton got up and trashed Spitzer, this entry would be reading like “Hillary turns on her friends to curry favor with social cons and Republicans like the slimey snake she is ……….”
As far as Spitzer goes, good riddance. Not only is what he did just sleazy and illegal, I can’t respect anyone who’d squander $4300 on one night of sex when perfectly respectable whores can be had in NYC for $100
20. Kahn | March 12th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Morris, well it takes two to tango.
For every married man out there fooling around there is a married woman or a future married woman willing to ignore his marital status. Maybe Hillary’s and other “feminist” silence on this signifies that whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Maybe it means they feel marriage isn’t all that important and they feel free to sleep around also.
Since they won’t say, I can read whatever I want to into it.
21. Casper | March 12th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
“Not only is what he did just sleazy and illegal, I can’t respect anyone who’d squander $4300 on one night of sex when perfectly respectable whores can be had in NYC for $100″
Even better, he could have just stayed home and had sex with his wife.
22. Joe | March 12th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
All I know is if it comes to divorce-time he will be paying a hell of a lot more than $4300 and he will be the one bending over.
Let the Governor David Paterson-era begin sooner rather than later.
23. FmrMarine | March 12th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
casp
“Even better, he could have just stayed home and had sex with his wife.”
Maybe the Lt. Governor was taking care of that.