Eliot Spitzer Linked to Prostitution Ring

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter chemisttree
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ring
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the allegations linking New York Governor Eliot Spitzer to a prostitution ring, as reported by the New York Times. Participants explore the implications of these allegations, Spitzer's past actions as attorney general, and the potential political fallout, including speculation about his resignation and its impact on the political landscape.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the credibility of the New York Times report, suggesting it could be misleading.
  • Others highlight Spitzer's previous strong stance against prostitution, questioning the contradiction between his past actions and current allegations.
  • A participant notes the potential political ramifications, including speculation about Spitzer's resignation and its effects on the Democratic Party.
  • Concerns are raised about the media coverage of the scandal and its overshadowing of other political news, particularly during election season.
  • Some participants reflect on Spitzer's character and past behavior as attorney general, suggesting he may face similar scrutiny as he did to others.
  • There is speculation about the implications of the scandal for potential political alliances, particularly regarding Hillary Clinton.
  • A participant discusses the strategic considerations for politicians involved in scandals, emphasizing the importance of party dynamics and public perception.
  • Another participant mentions the investigation's origins in a tax inquiry, suggesting that Spitzer's financial activities may have raised red flags.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of opinions, with no clear consensus on the implications of the allegations or Spitzer's future. Some agree on the seriousness of the situation, while others focus on the political maneuvering that may follow.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various aspects of Spitzer's political career and the nature of scandals, indicating a complex interplay of ethics, public perception, and party politics. The discussion reflects a variety of assumptions about the motivations and consequences of political actions.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in political scandals, media influence on public perception, and the dynamics of party politics may find this discussion relevant.

  • #91
chemisttree said:
You do realize that 'Florida' is not 'New York', don't you?
Crossing state lines to engage the services of a hooker is not a federal crime.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
jimmysnyder said:
Crossing state lines to engage the services of a hooker is not a federal crime.

Fleeing across state lines after the crime would be, though, wouldn't it? :rolleyes:

(wow, we're just begging for calls, now)
 
  • #93
jimmysnyder said:
Crossing state lines to engage the services of a hooker is not a federal crime.

Wrong. Google "Mann Act" and then review the details of the Spitzer case.
 
  • #94
BobG said:
Fleeing across state lines after the crime would be, though, wouldn't it?
I'm not sure about this one. I don't think it's a federal crime to cross state lines after having commited some other crime. Not even a federal crime. But I could be wrong.
 
  • #95
chemisttree said:
Wrong.
No, right. The Mann Act makes it a federal offense to transport the hooker across state lines. It is not a federal offense to cross a state line yourself. According to edward's post, it isn't known that Spitzer had done so:

edward's post said:
A Republican political consultant said on Sunday that his lawyers wrote a letter to the F.B.I. in November stating that Gov. Eliot Spitzer had patronized high-priced prostitutes during trips to Florida.

Spitzer allegedly did violate the Mann Act, but that was not the content of the Republican's call to the FBI.
 
Last edited:
  • #97
jimmysnyder said:
No, right. The Mann Act makes it a federal offense to transport the hooker across state lines. It is not a federal offense to cross a state line yourself. According to edward's post, it isn't known that Spitzer had done so:



Spitzer allegedly did violate the Mann Act, but that was not the content of the Republican's call to the FBI.

Yes, you are right. He probably didn't transport the 'goods' across state lines in Fl. I guess that makes it a little less disgusting. About Mr. Stone... How does he know so much about hookers?
 
  • #98
chemisttree said:
I guess that makes it a little less disgusting.
I doubt it, but it does mean that Stone did not notify the proper authorities.
 

Similar threads

News Patriot Act 2: Summarized by Alex Jones
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 253)
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K