Skip to main content

On my Diary Why Eliot Spitzer was taken out - The true story? 03/23/08, I pose as a question that there may be another narrative on why he was possible targeted for other motives rather than the apparently accepted one of his stupidity and arrogance as the reason given on why he was found out/caught, with ample visible indications that he was the best ally his enemies would hope for in support of this view.

To lay down the first element on why this episode deserves a closer look, I offered the Op-Ed piece by Eliot Spitzer published 02/14/08 on the Washington Post headlined Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime, where he accuses the Bush Administration of aligning itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers via the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), by asserting:

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye.
Since the Op-Ed piece was published on Feb. 14, it can be safely assumed that he wrote it on/or before Feb. 13 in order to be published on the 14.  

According to the Spitzer episode timeline compiled by the, it can be deduced that on Feb. 13, Spitzer... (Cough) 'performed' two 'activities' which are key in this saga, he wrote or just submitted for publication his Op-Ed piece (This event may have occurred earlier), and  checked into Room 871 on the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C.

Following the same timeline, two significant events occurred on Feb. 14, his Op-Ed was published and he (Spitzer) testified in front of a congressional subcommittee about regulations on the bond industry. These two events are cited as the catalysts which precipitated the execution of the judicial/legal aspect of the ongoing campaign to 'get him',  this effort was spearheaded by a nefarious, and very good at what he did, old GOP operative/consultant with resources and connections named  Roger J. Stone Jr.

This episode is reminiscent to many, of the events that led to the Wilson/Plame affair, where the Bush Administration and their allies, retaliated against them for a) dispelling the G. W. Bush SOTU 2003 address with his assertion in his infamous '16 words' claiming that Iraq was  pursuing the purchase of nuclear materials (Yellow Cake) from Africa (Niger), in his now famous Op-Ed Published on Sunday, July 6, 2003 by the New York Times "What I Didn't Find in Africa", b) to stop Valerie Plame, a NOC CIA Operative, and her network of contacts, from continuing their research/investigations on the roles played on the funding of terrorism,  production of nuclear weapons and WMD in general by Banks and Financial Institutions in the Middle East specifically, and c) send a warning that there are repercussions for causing trouble for the Bush's Administration's, that many believe are, criminal activities.

Eliot Spitzer set the stage, according to many, for him to become a target of the forces and their allies behind the predatory lending practice in the mortgage industry which, as is well known, precipitated a crisis on that market, by leveling more charges and disclosing how the Bush Administration used the OCC to act against consumers rather than helping them as was the intended reason for it's existence.

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis. This threat was so clear that as New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 states in attempting to fill the void left by the federal government. Individually, and together, state attorneys general of both parties brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that were engaged in predatory lending practices. Several state legislatures, including New York's, enacted laws aimed at curbing such practices.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge? As Americans are now painfully aware, with hundreds of thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure and our markets reeling, the answer is a resounding no.

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye.

Let me explain: The administration accomplished this feat through an obscure federal agency called the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). The OCC has been in existence since the Civil War. Its mission is to ensure the fiscal soundness of national banks. For 140 years, the OCC examined the books of national banks to make sure they were balanced, an important but uncontroversial function. But a few years ago, for the first time in its history, the OCC was used as a tool against consumers.

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal government's actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules.

For the ones who think I'm wearing my tin foil hat, I understand because the case is still thin - but wait!  The plot thickens.

Subsequent to the posting or my previous Diary, I was privately alerted by a fellow Kosak to the existence of two Letters To The Editor published as a two page item on The Washington Post refuting Gov. Eliot Spitzer claim/charges, the first one dated March 6, 2008 - coincidentally the day before the date when Federal prosecutors inform Spitzer he is named in their investigation into a high-priced prostitution ring. He is referred to as "Client 9" in federal documents. - which was on FRIDAY, MARCH 7, the second letter is not dated but it was published the same day, March 6.

 The significance of these letters with the headline "Misplaced Blame in the Loan Crisis" will become apparent when you learn who submitted them, the first one is signed under  JOHN C. DUGAN, Comptroller of the Currency - Washington and the second one by JOHN D. HAWKE JR., Washington  - The writer was comptroller of the currency from 1998 to 2004.

Here is another interesting item.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 14, 2008   Comptroller Dugan Responds to Governor Spitzer
WASHINGTON — Comptroller of the Currency John C. Dugan issued the following statement today, responding to comments from New York Governor Eliot Spitzer:

Since there was a PRESS RELEASE with a response to Spitzer's Op-Ed on the same publication day from the Controller, it brings up two questions screaming for answers, 1. why were there two Letters to the Editor, by the current and former Comptrollers making essentially the same points than the Press Release published the day before Spitzer was informed that he was named in a Federal Investigation? 2. Who asked/suggested that the Comptrollers submit the Letters?

You can see for yourself or read below and then go back to verify.

Letter on Page One:

Misplaced Blame in the Loan Crisis

Thursday, March 6, 2008; Page A20

In his Feb. 14 op-ed, "Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime," New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer tried to blame the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), which regulates national banks, for all the current problems caused by subprime loans. Nice try, governor. The facts tell a very different story.

The overwhelming majority of the subprime loans causing so many problems today, including the most predatory loans, were originated by state-regulated mortgage brokers and lenders. That's a fact, and here's another: The OCC doesn't regulate those brokers and lenders; that's the job of the states. The national-bank preemption that Mr. Spitzer complained about -- recently upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court -- did nothing to handcuff state efforts to prevent lenders from making loans that borrowers had no reasonable prospect of repaying.

More facts: The OCC extensively regulates national banks' activities, including mortgage lending. We established strong protections against predatory lending years ago, and we enforce them rigorously. And we have been a recognized national leader in addressing problems that can arise from such nontraditional products as "payment option" mortgages.

The results: Predatory mortgage lenders have avoided national banks like the plague. The abuses that consumers complain about most -- such as loan-flipping and equity-stripping -- are not tolerated in the national banking system; nor are the looser lending practices of the subprime market.

Effective regulation of subprime mortgage lending is a job for both federal and state agencies. But the most urgent need today is for the states to use the authority they already have to effectively regulate the institutions that caused most of the problems.


Comptroller of the Currency


Undated Letter on Page Two:
Misplaced Blame in the Loan Crisis

Eliot Spitzer's tirade against the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency so profoundly muddles the law of federal preemption that one wonders whether he has read the many cases -- including those in which he was a losing litigant -- that have applied this rule for almost 200 years.

The rule derives from the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution and is quite simple: The states have no authority to interfere with the operations of nationally chartered banks. For Mr. Spitzer to characterize the OCC's enforcement of this rule as "an unprecedented assault on state legislatures" is nonsense.

The OCC has a good record on predatory lending. When the OCC put out the regulation that Mr. Spitzer attacked, we included strong provisions addressing such lending. The OCC was also the first federal banking agency to sanction banks for engaging in unfair and deceptive practices in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and it maintains a world-class ombudsman and consumer assistance office that has helped myriad bank customers in their dealings with banks.

Mr. Spitzer was also off the mark in repeatedly characterizing the OCC's actions as those of "the Bush administration." I was appointed comptroller by President Bill Clinton for a term that carried into the next administration, and the OCC's actions during my tenure were those of the OCC alone.

At no time did we receive any direction from anyone in the Bush administration with respect to our enforcement of the long-standing rules on preemption.



The writer was comptroller of the currency from 1998 to 2004.

Being the trusting and gullible person that I am, I did what comes natural to me, I investigated further.

Based on the Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG) reports on their "OCC WATCH" page, on the surface, the statements by both, the current and the former Comptroller of the Currency, appear disingenuous, or if you prefer, less that candid.

Gov. Spitzer complains that notwithstanding the right of the States to enact tougher laws against predatory lending, the OCC refers to the "Visitorial powers" and invokes the preemption rules to stop/block states from instituting tougher legislation to protect consumers in their individual states.

 The comptroller of the currency agrees with the governor with the states rights, but denies any interference by the OCC


On this page, we maintain links to some significant documents (court decisions, legal briefs, journal articles, Congressional documents) about the OCC. Suggestions welcome.

Featured link: See the cover story in the Fall 2001 issue of the journal New Rules,  "Rogue Agencies Gut Out State Banking Laws" by Stacy Mitchell. "The only reason you're not afraid of the Office of the Comptroller of Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision is because you don't know what they do. Called indentured servants to the national banking industry, they are dismantling the state regulatory system piece by piece, with nothing more than a polite scolding from Congress."

Recent Congressional Oversight Hearings On The OCC

    * Bank Secrecy Act Failures of Supervision by the OCC: House (2 June 04) Senate (3 June 04)
    * On the OCC Preemption Rules: Senate (7 April 04) House (1 April 04) and (28 Jan 04)

General Powers of State Officials (including the recent OCC preemption rules)

31 January 03 OCC (link to press release) seeks to broaden preemption authority by amending so-called Visitorial Powers in rule change proposal out for comment for 60 days: "The proposal also provides clarification of the OCC's current regulation concerning the scope of the agency's "visitorial powers" over national banks. "Visitorial powers" refers to the authority to examine, supervise, regulate, require information from and take enforcement action against a bank. Addressing questions that have arisen concerning the scope of this exclusive authority, the rule provides that the OCC's visitorial powers over national banks are exclusive with respect to activities that are expressly authorized or recognized as permissible for national banks under Federal law, including the OCC's regulations and interpretations. The proposed rule also provides that, while courts can exercise visitorial powers by issuing orders or writs compelling the production of information or witnesses, this exception cannot be used by the states as a means of inspecting, regulating or supervising national bank activities."

See November 02 advisory from OCC to national banks advising them of sweeping nature of OCC authority and urging them to contact the OCC before responding to any inquiries or requests from state officials. In at least one news story, OCC Chief Counsel Julie Williams referred to the sweeping letter, which broadly asserts OCC authority and attempts to minimize states' rights, as nothing more than a "gentle reminder" to the state officials who seek to enforce their stronger laws. Most observers believe that the letter was a direct response to an information request that California State Senator Jackie Speier, Chair of the Senate's Insurance Committee and a leading consumer privacy champion, had sent this fall to a number of national banks, seeking information about their privacy practices. The banks have also been carping to the OCC about aggressive enforcement actions by state Attorney Generals when national banks or their affiliates or operating subsidiaries have been found in violation of state or federal predatory lending, deceptive practices or other laws. See, for example, 27 state settlement with Citibank over privacy violations.

4 April 03 USPIRG, CFA, National Consumer Law Center and National Association of Consumer Advocates join AARP brief to Supreme Court urging court to uphold 11th Circuit ruling that state law claims against payday lenders and other predatory lenders are not preempted by National Bank Act. OCC, of course, on other side. On 2 June 03, the Court ruled that claims against these predatory lenders could be removed to federal court.

8 April 03 EPIC and USPIRG file comments opposing OCC's proposed visitorial rule change preempting all state enforcement of consumer protection and privacy laws against national banks and their subsidiaries.

January, 2004 the OCC issued two related and sweeping rules, one preempting nearly all state and local consumer laws (the "preemption rule") [69 Fed. Reg. 1904 (2004)] and the other restricting nearly all enforcement powers of state regulators and attorneys general (the "visitorial powers rule.") [69 Fed. Reg. 1895 (2004)] over national banks, and incredibly, their state-licensed operating subsidiaries, which are not banks. Link to House Financial Services Committee Oversight Subcommittee hearing. Link to Senate Banking Committee Oversight Hearing.

28 July 04 Federal judge rules that case against Bank of America for failing to inform employers of liability regarding check-cashing fees can be heard in state court. Bank of America had claimed all lawsuits against national banks were completely preempted. Press release from attorney for class action plaintiffs here.

11 Aug 04 OCC and sister agencies file brief supporting bank appeal of district court ruling upholding landmark California financial privacy law, SB1. Not surprisingly, the OCC doesn't think states can protect their citizens from unfair affiliate sharing, but in a disappointing move, the usually pro-privacy, usually pro-state authority Federal trade Commission signed on, too. The district court opinion by U.S. Judge Morrison England is here. It fully agrees with the position long set forth by the state and consumer groups that the Fair Credit Reporting Act exempts affiliate sharing from its regulatory scheme. FCRA preemption means states cannot change that and regulate affiliate sharing under the FCRA. But the Gramm Leach Bliley Financial Modernization Act is a comprehensive, albeit weak, financial privacy law, and it clearly gives states the right to enact stronger laws, such as SB1, championed by State Senator Jackie Speier, to regulate affiliate sharing (as well as third-party sharing, not a subject of the litigation).

This is what Gov. Spitzer was referring to in his Op-Ed, the last factor to be included is the information you already possess, the Bush Administration is bailing out the Corporations and not helping the working people who bought homes and are losing them or lost them already.

I don't think they'd like to hear more Governors or District Attorneys in different states  following Governor Eliot Spitzer's example.

A good article to read Eliot's Mess - The $200 billion bail-out for predator banks and Spitzer charges are intimately linked By Greg Palast
Reporting for Air America Radio’s Clout
March 14th, 2008

Want another wrinkle on the fabric? Do this pre-set Google searches with the following keywords:
- Eliot Spitzer Mossad CIA
- Eliot Spitzer Emperors Club Mossad CIA
- McCain Spitzer Mossad Emperors Club CIA

I report my findings, you make your conclusions.

(I'll leave for another Diary, a more comprehensive narrative , yes, I know that there have been prior Diaries posted on this issue here, here, here and here, plus others which touch parts of it or other angles, but I assure you, that if I decide to post it here, mine will not be a duplicate because there is a lot more to this story, albeit it may contain some unavoidable repetitive information for the narrative's even flow and continuity)

Originally posted to Tranny on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 03:21 AM PDT.


After getting all this background info, do you still or now think that there is value to the story as the real reason for going after him?

50%41 votes
12%10 votes
28%23 votes
8%7 votes

| 81 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Even it it turns out to be nothing (12+ / 0-)

    It is an interesting story that raises many questions.

  •  See also... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    valadon, Pluto, C Barr

    "I was so easy to defeat, I was so easy to control, I didn't even know there was a war." -9.75, -8.41

    by RonV on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 03:42:15 AM PDT

  •  If you post a comment saying that (8+ / 0-)

    you have no sympathy for Spitzer, you are missing the point of this diary.  This is not about defending his actions with a prostitute.  This is about the Bush administration using the Justice Department as it's political tool to take down those who oppose it's agenda.  As an alternative to the official timeline of an investigation started because of Spitzer's questionable financial transactions, see this article about Republican operative Roger Stone notifying the FBI of Spitzer's sexual proclivities last November.

    moderation in everything ... including moderation

    by C Barr on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 04:17:36 AM PDT

    • (0+ / 0-)

      moderation in everything ... including moderation

      by C Barr on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 04:19:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Im very familiar with Stone's background (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lysias, conchita, Pluto, Lashe

      going back to the Nixon's Administration.

      I read about all of his sex stuff and some of the people he associated with for this activity

      I don't know for certain what is behind the events leading to Spitzer's problem with the Feds, that is why I say in my Diary that it should be looked into further, because it is about finding as much as we can about what is really behind this episode.

      Much as my mind tells me that there is Bush's people involvement, there is no proof of it, yet.

      Based in the past 7 years history, I'm not holding my breath to learn 'the truth'

      Gov. Spitzer doesn't need my sympathy nor am I offering it, he did lots of good work on behalf of consumers as a DA, I'm thankful for it and I celebrate it, and as far as I'm concerned, sex for money or free outside of the marriage, concerns only  the three parties involved.

      And in any event, it is an interesting story, it has a very varied cast of characters, issues, events, etc.

  •  Sorry... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mndan, unterhausen, brouski

    ...the Spitzer case absolutely fits the profile (lots of money spent by idiots willing to cross state lines to spend it on illegal activity) that the FBI is fantastically interested in since such investigations and following the money can lead to netting some pretty big fish, whether those "fish" are politicians, organized crime figures, or drug dealers.

    Look:  there are Democrats who are beset and besieged by the Right who deserve every effort a Progressive can muster in defense.  Eliot Spitzer isn't one of them.  He is, tragically, a scumbag who sold out his wife, his family, his state, and us, his party, by his actions.  I cannot muster sympathy; I can only muster feelings of betrayal.  I hope he enjoys prison.

    •  they wanted to take him down (0+ / 0-)

      there is no question about that.  I'm not sure why people are obsessing about this op-ed.  Does it really expose the Bush administration to any blame that they should be concerned about?  I'd say they might even like it, they can get Cheney to give a press conference where the answer to every question is, "So?"

      •  Expand your perspective (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        and you'll see why they wouldn't want a lot of people see how they were screwed and that the people doing the screwing, are not only going to get away with a very predatory way to do 'business', but the Bush Administration is rewarding them with money.

        With McCain touting himself as Bush III, that wouldn't be very helpful during the campaign.

        That's not the only aspect that appear once the view is expanded.

    •  Prison for betraying his wife? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lysias, conchita

      Oh please.

      If he was anyone other than Spitzer, they wouldn't even be wasting any time trying to prosecute him.

      Otherwise we'd have half the males in this country in jail for adultery.....

    •  No one is asking you to muster sympathy (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      conchita, DorothyT

      Your point about the FBI investigation is well taken.  But Spitzer's take down enables the squelching of any investigation of the shenanigans which have led to the looting of our economy leading to a world wide financial crisis with the potential to rival the great depression.  This is a big deal.

      moderation in everything ... including moderation

      by C Barr on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 05:48:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  How? (0+ / 0-)

        If Spitzer had genuine information and evidence of criinal activity, that does not dissapear with his aaarrest.  Neither do his staffers nor the lawyers working for NY State.  So how does teh arrent of this one man suddenly end all threat of investigation?

        Take your fear and shove it, it ain't workin' on us no more.

        by Quicklund on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 07:07:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The arrest is for distraction... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          as you can see, you focus on the arrest and his sex activities, that's what a lot of people focus on, that was the idea, that's how the Administration works, kind of a sleight of hand, they make what they want us to see in order to have us not look at 'the trick'

          That's why it is important to focus on what is behind the story and just dismiss the sex part of it, if he broke the law, he'll be dealt with, it has nothing to do with us.

      •  Yes it is, but (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        that's why we must continue to push to go behind what we are being told and let people know what is the real story and why we should get involved.

        Thank you for reading and I'm sorry it took me so long to answer your comments, (Long story)

        Please forgive me if I sounded a bit snappy this earlier, I was, I'm sorry - it has to do with the (Long story)

  •  The Kremlin Broke the True Story (5+ / 0-)

    ...a day or two after it happened.

    But then, what kind of moron in America would fall for yet another pee-pee based scandal? Who would still fall for one of those "terror" warnings right before an election anymore?

    (Besides American voters, I mean.)

    For me, it's easy. I just follow the dollar -- because that's how I earn my living.

    This was written before the Carlyle Group failed. And before Bear Sterns. More than 5,000 hours of warentless wiretaps were involved.

    March 11, 2008

    New York Governor ‘Destroyed’ Over Threat To Probe 9/11 Attacks On US

    Reports consuming the US propaganda media organs and political elite today are centering upon the charges leveled against the Governor of New York, Eliot Spitzer, and who is said to have paid for the services of a high priced prostitute.

    FSB reports circulating in the Kremlin today, however, point to a much more sinister effort behind the toppling of Governor Spitzer as he had just begun a new probe into Larry Silverstein, the owner of the World Trade Center brought down in the September 11, 2001 attacks upon the US, and the Bush Families Carlyle Group.

    The focus of Governor Spitzer’s investigation, these reports state, revolve around the growing crisis embroiling the Carlyle Group as it nears total collapse and is facing insolvency due to Larry Silverstone’s withdrawal of over $14 billion from the embattled groups coffers, and which could see the loss to New York States already troubled massive pension fund of over $10 billion....

    Prior to his taking office as New York States Governor, these reports continue, Mr. Spitzer, as a prosecutor, had long targeted the United States Banking System for their vast theft of money from the American people, and had won billions in judgments against Bear Stearns, Credit Suisse First Boston, Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Salomon Smith Barney and UBS Warburg.

    It is more than interesting to note, too, that these are the exact same International Banking Giants who are now reeling under the Global assault against them, with Bear Stearns becoming the latest victim, and as we can read as reported by Britain’s Independent News Service:

    As Governor Spitzer becomes yet another victim to vast power of the West’s war, political and media elite assault against him, and by their introduction of sex charges against him, as they have done to so many of their adversaries in order to destroy their credibility, the truest warnings of these events to the American people will no doubt be lost, again.

    There used to be a time when warnings were prudent to be given to the American people so  that they could, in some small measure, protect themselves, but, and sadly, those times are now gone as these people have nearly completed their descent into the abyss of total slavery to their masters with virtually no knowledge of the horrific future that lies before them.  

    Fascism ought to more properly be called Corporatism since it is the merger of state and corporate power. - Mussolini

    by Pluto on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 05:22:52 AM PDT

    •  I read of how Silverstein's dealings (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      regarding the World Trade Center preceding 9/11 worked out quite well for him once the towers fell.

      moderation in everything ... including moderation

      by C Barr on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 05:41:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Another anti-Spitzer article today in the NYT (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pluto, C Barr

      This time about state rival Joe Bruno. Front page.

      The very imperfect Eliot Spitzer makes it unfortunately too easy to discount his courageous investigations. Thanks to all for this diary and comments.

    •  There is much, much more to this (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      conchita, Pluto

      I'm glad so many of us are interested in looking deeper on this episode.

      There is so much more, I will continue to follow on this and push to go further, in spite of the calls by many to drop it.

      How good you have your signature about Corporatism, but it was not Mussoline the author of it, here is a little more on that, it was actually coined by Giovanni Gentile.

      "Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." Giovanni Gentile
      (Benito Mussolini, affixed his name to the entry, and claimed credit for it.)

      •  Thank You (0+ / 0-)

        but it was not Mussoline the author of it, here is a little more on that, it was actually coined by Giovanni Gentile.

        I appreciate the info.

        I've wanted to change my tag long ago -- but as each day passes it seems to speak louder.

        Fascism ought to more properly be called Corporatism since it is the merger of state and corporate power. - Mussolini

        by Pluto on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 03:30:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It is one of my signatures too (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          In my comcast account, I have three signatures that I use, I love pieces of wisdom or a good msg.
          here are come of my signature options:

          "Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." Giovanni Gentile
          (Benito Mussolini, affixed his name to the entry, and claimed credit for it.)

          This is one I composed to the most compact what it was out there on these two subjects:

          "Tolerance is the presumption of superiority, acceptance is a manifestation of love"

          I love Bill Moyers:

          "Charity is commendable; everyone should be charitable. But justice aims to create a social order in which, if individuals choose not to be charitable, people still don’t go hungry, unschooled or sick without care. Charity depends on the vicissitudes of whim and personal wealth; justice depends on commitment instead of circumstance. Faith-based charity provides crumbsfrom the table; faith-based justice offers a place at the table."
          -- Bill Moyers

          And this is the one I use with my Outlook Express outgoing messages:

          "You must be the change you wish to see in the world."
          Mohandas Karamachand Gandhi

          "We are the ones we have been been waiting for"

          A Poem for South African Women

          (by June Jordan)

          In Commemoration of the 40,000 women and children who, August 9, 1956, presented themselves in bodily protest against the "dompass" in the capital of apartheid. Presented at The United Nations, August 9, 1978

          "Viva Obama / Aurora Song / Aurora Video"
          "Yes We Can, Si Se Puede!" - Email GrassRoots4Obama
          "March 1st, Int'l Women of Color Day"
          "El Rinconcito de Aurora"

  •  Losing the govenorship isnt going to STOP (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    conchita, Sharon in MD, Pluto

    Spitzer from pursuing this story IF it is pursuable,  losing his License to Practice Law wouldnt stop him either.  Taking him down for purely political reasons would JUST make him even more determined to take down those who took HIM down...  that is the kind of person Spitzer is soooo if someone thought a SEX Scandal was going to shut Spitzer up they are dumber then Spitzer was for thinking he could have his prostitutes and none of his enemies would raise an eyebrow.

    Spitzer was 'taken out" because he left the door WIDE OPEN and the right drove a streamroller through it...  BUT if this story is valid it will mean SPitzer now has MORE TIME to focus on this CRIME.

    "THE SURGE IS WORKING" is the 2008 replacement for "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED"

    by KnotIookin on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 05:42:22 AM PDT

  •  Well Tranny, this diary has scrolled off the page (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    conchita, DorothyT

    Thanks for your good efforts on this.  Your diary is a valuable resource.  I'm very saddened that so many can only focus on the fact that Spitzer is a cheating scumbag, while losing sight of the bigger picture.  Thanks again for your efforts.

    moderation in everything ... including moderation

    by C Barr on Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 07:06:16 AM PDT

    •  I thank you for efforts too (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I think that this time, the sleight of hand they love to do so much, may not work this time.

      During this election it is more important to expose what the opposition has been doing and what a new Bush Admin. will do, anytime I can, I put in the same phrase Bush and McCain, with the latter as Bush III

      We must increase the DIN on their misdeeds.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site