OH! So Spitzer Was Specifically Targeted by the Feds --->

[Stephanie]

They really went after him. Wow! Earlier reports seemed to indicate that he got swept up in a larger investigation, but now it appears that the investigation was all about him. WTF.

Official: Cash triggered Spitzer probe
By AMY WESTFELDT, Associated Press Writer
5 minutes ago

NEW YORK - Gov. Eliot Spitzer's role in a prostitution scandal grew out of a public corruption inquiry triggered by his movement of large amounts of cash from several bank accounts to one that operated by a call-girl ring, a law enforcement official said Tuesday.

Spitzer was the initial target of the investigation and was tracked using court-ordered wiretaps that appear to have recorded him arranging for a prostitute to meet him at a Washington hotel in mid-February, the official said.

The official spoke to The Associated Press condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation.

The case started when banks noticed the frequent transfers from several accounts and filed suspicious activity reports with the Internal Revenue Service, the official said. The accounts were traced back to Spitzer, prompting public corruption investigators to open an inquiry.

Attorney General Michael Mukasey was made aware of the investigation because it involved a high-ranking political official.

--snip--

Charges against Spitzer have not been decided and it depends mostly on "how aggressive the U.S. attorney wants to be," the law enforcement official said. Charges could including anything from Mann act violations to banking violations to possibly wire fraud.

[ScreamingMeemie]

1. It is not out of line for banks to file CTR's and SARs on large cash

transactions. In fact they are required by law to do so.

Whatever the case, Mr. Spitzer broke the laws he prosecuted. How stupid can one be? Or arrogant. It's anyone's guess.

[BrklynLiberal]

3. Stupid and arrogant...a career ending combination...

[madokie]

14. I'm with you on that

[pnwmom]

44. But they're talking about an amount less than $5,000.

That's the part I don't get.

[ScreamingMeemie]

48. It doesn't have to be an amount sometimes. It can be the transfer

of the same amount several times to the same place, if it causes suspicion. And we are not sure of the amount. We only know what the hooker cost. SAR do not have to have a dollar amount. The are used to report a suspicious transaction, whether it's 5 dollars or 5 thousand.

[Winterblues]

51. So is prostitution a federal crime

Was the money his to spend? What sort of Federal Crime is there? Why is the Just Us Dept trying to figure out what to charge him with? I was under the impression that prostitution laws were strictly local...It is not a crime to spend money yet is it?

[ScreamingMeemie]

52. It can be reported on an SAR if it is suspicious enough.

Some things that we reported on (because we were required to or face time in the clink) were frequent transactions of similar amounts (mostly those that would total over $10,000 in a week's time as a way to get around a CTR), frequent wire transfers to the same accounts, if those accounts were not readily recognizeable (i.e. brokerage), large wire transfers from customers holding small balance accounts etc. But this was long before 2000 even. An SAR is not a report of illegal activity; it is a report of suspicious activity.

[Freddie Stubbs]

57. Transporting someone across state lines for prostitution is a federal crime

Apparently he bought her a train ticket.

[LanternWaste]

59. I believe it became a federal matter after Spitzer arranged

I believe it became a federal matter after Spitzer arranged for her to cross state lines.

[pnwmom]

67. But why would transfers of $2K or $5K, or whatever, raise suspicion?

If they weren't trying to nail him with something in the first place?

[ScreamingMeemie]

68. If it is frequent and similar and not to a recognized source (i.e. brokerage firm) it will

raise a bank's suspicion, because we are taught to be suspicious. Sad but true. I had to spend a week in loss prevention as part of my training. One becomes almost paranoid, and lots of times with good reason.

[Mike03]

72. You are right IMHO

My bankers call me when I engage in spending behavior that is out of character, and I don't condemn them, I thank them.

They are doing their job.

[HamdenRice]

2. I'm leaning toward believing it was to prevent his funding the fight over the Senate

He was on the verge of taking the Senate. The "bribes" they were worried about were probably suspected illegal campaign contributions either to Democrats in districts that Repubs might lose, or even payments to Repubs to switch.

An analysis is here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2988882&mesg_id=2988882

[xchrom]

4. quelle surprise. oh and recommend.

[0007]

5. Wire taps and FBI investigation does make one suspicious

of what else was going on. Warrantless Wiretaps come to mind.

[ScreamingMeemie]

7. Wiretaps Spitzer, himself, lobbied for.

In 2004.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

10. That really is Karma in action.

[KittyWampus]

29. so fucking what. you keep repeating this but fail to say anything relevant.

[ScreamingMeemie]

50. So fucking what. Nice to see that (thankfully) a few here are able

to throw aside reason and become the very hypocrites they despise. Very hard for there to be a conspiracy unless Mr. Spitzer wanted to be set up. Read the article. He pushed for it. He prosecuted it and now he must live with it. It is time to clean house. I won't defend these bastards on either side of the aisle anymore. It sickens me that anyone would. :hi:

[LanternWaste]

60. Seems relevant to me in that he may have...

Seems relevant to me in that he may have gotten hoisted by his own petard.

[Occam Bandage]

8. The wiretaps were court-ordered. Take off the tinfoil.

[pnwmom]

45. Tell that to Don Siegelman.

Court ordered doesn't mean legitimate, not under the Bush administration and its Department of Injustice.

[pnwmom]

46. Tell that to Don Siegelman.

Court ordered doesn't mean legitimate, not under the Bush administration and its Department of Injustice.

[JDPriestly]

70. The bank transfer(s) set this off.

The amounts transferred were not that large. That is the strange thing here.

[Occam Bandage]

6. Politicians moving large blocks of cash trigger investigations. He was idiotically transparent.

[Stephanie]

12. I'm not defending him.

But yesterday I heard it was an IRS investigation, I heard it was the prostitution ring that was targeted, at one point I heard it was related to the Gambino crime family. Now it seems it was all centered around Spitzer from the beginning. Quite a different story.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

16. I've seen nothing indicating "large blocks of cash". Where are you getting that from?

Speculation?

[Occam Bandage]

17. Er, the first line of the OP?

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

21. The amounts specified has been several thousand. That's hardly "large blocs".

Billions misplaced constitutes "large blocs" (like what the Pentagon did with all those billions - just "lost" it).

The banker I spoke with said they don't typically report anything under $10K. Now, another lady on here is saying banks will report pretty much ANY amount?

Why is this story being so sensationalized? Oh, nevermind. IT'S ALL ABOUT SEX, SEX, SEX -> America's favorite obsession. But, we fail to prosecute war crimes and misuse of billions of tax dollars. Geez.

[Occam Bandage]

23. Because he was a politician. The bank noticed that

a high-profile politician was moving large blocks of money into a single account. They had reason to believe (correctly) there was some sort of corruption at play here, and reported it to the IRS. The IRS opened an investigation.

This has nothing to do with the Pentagon, the war, or taxes. It has little to do with sex. It has to do with yet another politician who thought he was above the law.

[Oleladylib]

9. He made his own bed on this one..I voted for him..but when ego takes

the front seat and the gaul that he thought it would be okay with we progressive demos in NYS makes me want to send the moving truck.

[chelsea0011]

11. Stop it. You are all killing me. HE GOT CAUGHT!!!!!!!!!

And if he wasn't participating in illegal activities none of this would have happened.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

18. Whether or not this was initiated as another political persecution is relevant. nt

[chelsea0011]

25. Persecution??????????????

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

28. He was the target. Feds got a warrant to secure bank records via Emperors Club escort.

The fishing expedition by the feds did not lead to any prosecution of him per the initial investigation. The reason may be due to the way the feds MIShandled this political assault.

Instead, the public is getting info that he was tied to a prostitution ring.

[acmavm]

20. Absolutely amazing, isn't it?

[rpannier]

24. AMEN!!!

Corrupt prosecutor

He knew better

As they say in Monopoly
Go to jail. Go directly to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect 200 dollars

F*CK Spitzer

[flyarm]

32. he was a target..banks don't turn over info unless blocks of $10,000. bucks get moved ..

he did not move any blocks of $10,000.00...so he was a deliberate target...that ought to bother each and every american in this country..

maybe you don't move money around and are very navie..but many americans do..

his privacy was possibly invaded..if indeed the bank turned him over to the IRS for moving less than $10,000. bucks..

there are two side to every story..how about we wait to find out what really happened here..

and perhaps ..you might be next..have you moved say $3,000 in your bank account?

because Spitzer supposedly moved $3000. and $4,000. way under the bank reporting amount of $10,000.

something stinks here to high heaven..but go ahead have your nazi type rant ..that he was guilty ..

maybe, just maybe he was set up??????????? Maybe , just maybe , he was a target?


ahhh but that never happens in this country now does it????????

how about a certain Governor in a prison.. in say..Alabama..

there are many ways for a government to trap people in this country.. deliberately trap them..

it is called abuse of power.

fly

[ScreamingMeemie]

54. Not true. Not true at all. You are thinking Currency Trasaction Report.

There is also a Suspicious Activities Report, in which smaller transfers can be recorded. It was originally intended to nab those attempting to circumvent the CTR.

[slackmaster]

61. MrsGrumpy is teaching the truth about this

Structuring a series of transactions to avoid filing a CTR is in fact a crime.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

13. Was he or WASN'T the initial target? That anonymous official better get his damn story,...

,...straight!!!

If Spitzer was the initial target, why weren't charges brought against him rather than the so-called "prostitution ring"?

Also, I want to know the identities of those OTHER NAMES on the charges filed against that "ring"!!!

[goodhue]

15. Yes, it appears he was the initial target

But it doesn't really make his conduct any more acceptable.

[acmavm]

19. Damn. See if it was me I'd figure if I was gonna be Mr. Law and

Order, I'd not be doing shit that I was putting people in jail for. And if I was one of those pushing for wire taps, I'd not be doing my liason arrangin' over the telephone. And if I was a high profile Dem, I'd figure they'd be trying to get me on something.

But hell, that's just me.

[rpannier]

22. Call the wahhhhmbulance

A career prosecutor who knew he was engaging in illegal activities got caught

F**K him

He needs to join those he sent to jail for the same offense

No sympathy for this corrupt former prosecutor from me

[flyarm]

26. Not so fast.you have to move blocks of $10,000. for banks to notify IRS..

and it seems Elliott did not..so was he a deliberate target..that would be illegal ...and it would be like nazi germany and it would be abuse of power..so hold on to your shorts..and wait for the facts to be flushed out here...

yes it was stupid and arrogant of Elliot..but *hes government may have out stepped it's bounds here..is this the nazi type government we are now living under? and want to live under...and could you be next? have you ever moved any money from one account to another..you know to pay your taxes say..or to purchase a house/car..or major item..house repairs...so do you realize that now if you are the enemy to the state..your bank will now be turning you in and the IRS and FBI can swing down on you..because maybe you gave money to the Dem party?? and they don't too much like that ..now do they......??

I can not believe my eyes of what i am now seeing at a democratic message board..so have all of you lost your minds..or are you so willing to now give up your and my rights? Have you so easily been conditioned....i guess so...how pitiful.

My husband and i move blocks of money alot..we live in two places so we have to and we move money when we have to pay taxes..in big chunks..so you think it is aok for our bank to turn over our records or notify the IRS if is is under $10,000. amounts..wtf is happening to people in this country..what pitiful slobs we have become..

first they came for Spitzer....and you didn't give a rats ass...how they did it..or why...

remember that..


http://firedoglake.com/2008/03/10/some-questions-about-the-spitzer-incident/

Some Questions About the Spitzer Incident
By: Jane Hamsher Monday March 10, 2008 5:39 pm



ABC is reporting that Eliot Spitzer came under the attention of the Feds because his bank reported "suspicious money transfers" to the IRS. The Justice Department brought it to the FBI's Public Corruption Squad, who looked into it and found that payments were made to a company called QET, which did business as The Emperor's Club.

All kinds of questions arise here:

1. Why would the bank tell the IRS and not Spitzer himself if there was a suspicious transfer? Spitzer is a longtime client, a rich guy and the governor. We're talking thousands of dollars here, not millions. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense that they spotted a "suspicious transfer" made by the governor, and that this is how things began. It's possible it was just ordinary paperwork the bank had to file with the government whenever some particular flag was raised, but if that's the case, why did the DoJ go to DefCon 3?

2. What is a USA doing prosecuting a prostitution case? This isn't normally what the feds spend their time with.

3. Mike Garcia is a Chertoff crony. Sources familiar with the investigation say that he sent a prosecution memo to DC two months ago asking for authority to indict a public figure (Spitzer). Which means they had their case made long before the wire tap of February 13. Why did they then include this line from that conversation in the complaint?

LEWIS continued that from what she had been told "he" (believed to be a reference to Client-9) "would ask you to do things that, like, you might not think were safe -- you know -- I mean that...very basic things...."Kristen" responded: "I have a way of dealing with that...I'd be like listen dude, you really want the sex?...You know what I mean."

This salacious detail does not seem like it's necessary to make their case, and appears to be added for no other purpose than to destroy Spitzer's career.


more at firedoglake...

[Occam Bandage]

31. That would be for banks to HAVE to notify the IRS. Banks can notify on any suspicion of wrongdoing.

A politician quietly moving cash is suspicious. Their suspicions were justified.

[flyarm]

34. oh bullshit..

my hubby and i move more money than that on a monthly basis almost..that is a crock of shit..

hell i spend that on a shopping spree..wtf are you talking about..maybe you don't ..but i do! and so do all my friends..so maybe not in your world..but it is in many peoples world.

Particularly in a Governors world..

think a little out of the box will ya?

have ya seen what purses cost at Saks lately???????

$2 grand easy!

oh pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeee...

Gee i went to Costco yesterday spent $1,200.

Then went an got prescrib sunglasses..another $800.00


so ya think my bank ought to call in the IRS???????????

oh and i paid cash..with cash out of my debit card...woo hoo..i must be a bad guy!!

i never thought i would see this crao from dems..wow we have really sunk to new levels.

I thought we were all innocent until "proven" guilty.

We do not have all the facts on Gov Spitzer..

he may be guilty and he may have been entrapped..lets wait to see what happens..

did he do soemthing innappropriate..he said he did..

he admitted that..

but we do not know all the facts.

fly

[Occam Bandage]

35. Are you a politician? And do you transfer that money directly into other people's accounts?

If the answer to either of those is "no," then the situations are slightly different. There are a few legitimate reasons for a politician to be quietly funneling money into someone else's account, and many illegitimate reasons. It's certainly suspicion enough to investigate.

[flyarm]

37. self delete.

[JDPriestly]

73. Spitzer was a wealthy man before he became a politician.

His family has a foundation. He takes expensive trips. I don't have the kind of money he has, but I know people who do. When you have a lot, you spend a lot. That's the way the world works. That's what is keeping the money moving today. Wages are low. Capital returns are high for those in the right places.

Spitzer's payments, even if they added up to many tens of thousands, were not that remarkable. How much do you think the upper crust New Yorker pays for rent, for restaurant tabs, etc. per month.

I live near a wealthy area of Los Angeles County. Some of the residents in that area pay their gardeners and other servants more than I pay for my whole house and my utilities in a month, maybe even two. And some of those gardeners and other servants are illegal. But nobody prosecutes those wealthy employers.

I don't deny that Spitzer may have violated the law, but a lot of people pay their gardeners and housekeepers and nannies more per month than he paid this woman. Yet, those payments don't seem to attract IRS attention. There is something fishy here.

[EFerrari]

65. You absolutely nailed it, fly.

Christ, my family moves money in those increments all the time.

This is political and it's bullshit.

Last night Letterman said what I said. We couldn't get bin Laden with wiretaps but, hey, we got Spitzer!

:grr:

[ScreamingMeemie]

69. If you have moved the same amount, frequently, I would say a report

has been filed. They do not notify you of that event.

[JDPriestly]

71. Spitxer wasn't quietly moving cash. He paid by check -- quite openly.

Spitzer was not trying to hide the transactions. He even paid in advance. He was stupid, and he has hurt his family, but no one thinks that McCain or Giuliani should have resigned their offices when they had affairs. And let me tell you, a mistress can cost a guy like McCain or Giuliani a lot more than the prostitute(s) cost Spitzer. In addition to the cost of paying for the quiet, safe trysting place, there is the huge amount of alimony that you pay your wife when you get caught.

Spitzer's conduct was irrational as was Giuliani's and McCain's. And he did it in a place in which it was criminal. As someone pointed out, had he gone to certain parts of Nevada, his conduct would have raised an eyebrow, but that is all. It's very sad. He will pay a huge price for this. Let that be a lesson to all you guys: Don't go to prostitutes. Take a mistress, preferably a rich one. And remember, Benjamin Franklin advised young men to take older women as their mistresses.

http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bdorsey1/41docs/51-fra.html

Nothing new under the sun. How many wives did Solomon have?

And didn't David send the husband of the beautiful woman he admired to the front of the battlefield so that it would be more likely the troublesome husband would be killed? These kinds of hijinks have been going on for a very long time.

[suffragette]

38. Something that glared out at me

In Spitzers situation (from http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/11/51123/3435/851/474082):


The money ended up in the bank accounts of what appeared to be shell companies, corporations that essentially had no real business.


IN KBR's situation (from http://www.boston.com/news/world/articles/2008/03/06/top_iraq_contractor_skirts_us_taxes_offshore/?page=1):

Top Iraq contractor skirts US taxes offshore
Shell companies in Cayman Islands allow KBR to avoid Medicare, Social Security deductions

March 6, 2008
CAYMAN ISLANDS - Kellogg Brown & Root, the nation's top Iraq war contractor and until last year a subsidiary of Halliburton Corp., has avoided paying hundreds of millions of dollars in federal Medicare and Social Security taxes by hiring workers through shell companies based in this tropical tax haven.

When Texas pipe-fitter Danny Langford applied for unemployment compensation after being let go by Service Employers International Inc., he was rejected, he was told, because he worked for a foreign company.
LEFT IN THE LURCH
More than 21,000 people working for KBR in Iraq - including about 10,500 Americans - are listed as employees of two companies that exist in a computer file on the fourth floor of a building on a palm-studded boulevard here in the Caribbean. Neither company has an office or phone number in the Cayman Islands.

The Defense Department has known since at least 2004 that KBR was avoiding taxes by declaring its American workers as employees of Cayman Islands shell companies, and officials said the move allowed KBR to perform the work more cheaply, saving Defense dollars.

But the use of the loophole results in a significantly greater loss of revenue to the government as a whole, particularly to the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. And the creation of shell companies in places such as the Cayman Islands to avoid taxes has long been attacked by members of Congress.


So, the moving of large amounts of taxpayer's money to shell companies by KBR is lauded by the Defense Dept (never mind the detrimental consequences of this to the public and the workers) while Spitzer's much smaller, personal movements of it are investigated?

This is equal justice?

ETA: forget to copy and paste an item - it's there now

[BadgerLaw2010]

39. No you don't. You routinely move sub-$10K blocks, that will flag as suspicious.

Basically, the Feds know that everyone knows about the $10K money laundering rule, so they have other flags to catch stuff that isn't five figures at once.

$9,999.00 was the classic one, but there are a bunch of flags. Banks cannot say exactly what they are, of course, but if you think this is some arcane or new procedure, you are just ignorant.

[nashville_brook]

40. "I can not believe my eyes of what i am now seeing at a democratic message board" -->

my thought exactly. the blind authoritarianism, and black/white irrationality here is truly alarming.

what i don't see, on the part of the authoritarians, is the least little concession that IF this was a cherry-picked, political lynching, THEN they would as loudly denounce that as the hypocrisy. instead, they a priori dismiss a political motivation (despite Seigelman) as "tin foil hattery." that's not good reasoning, and yet they swing "reason" around like a dead cat trying to find a barn.

look folks, it's both. he was a hypocrite AND he was targeted for going after Bruno. lets be grownups about this and hold TWO (yes 2!) whole ideas at the SAME TIME (you can do it, it only hurts for a little while).

i know it feels mighty good to puff yourself up with righteous indignation about the hypocrisy -- enjoy it. ignoring the other half of the equation makes you no better than the fascists who mounted this investigation. be their huckleberry if you must. i'll sit this one out.

[flyarm]

43. icould not agree more..many weatlhy people move blocks of money..

every day..

maybe there is just simplistic understanding of that here..i don't know..but Spitzer was and is a wealthy man..why would a bank target him for moving the amounts of $3,000 and $4,000?

something doesn't pass the smell test here...just saying..

http://firedoglake.com/2008/03/10/some-questions-about-the-spitzer-incident/

I am not saying spitzer didn't do what he admitted to..i am just saying ..he may have been a deliberate target..a revenge target perhaps..??

hell one of my house payments is more than both of those amounts combined...and i am not bragging but trying to make people here understand for wealthy people that is chickenfeed.

my girlfriends spend that in a single shopping spree in Neimans and Saks....buying purses and cute shoes.. for their oh so spoiled and loved daughters ..and i would bet their hubbies flip money around the accounts to cover it.

[ScreamingMeemie]

55. And many wealthy people are the subjects of those reports, every day.

I used to fill them out.

[JDPriestly]

74. Then why aren't they prosecuted for hiring their illegal nannies

and maids and gardeners, etc.? They are violating the law when they hire illegals.

[spanone]

27. this will be a year of 'revelations' i suppose....the justice department is on a roll

[flyarm]

30. no..the * nazi's are working their way through their enemy's list before they leave!

and it seems many dems are willing to sit back and let it happen without using their brains or looking into what is really happening..the dems now ..it seems ..are ready to jump on the salacious ..rather than waiting for some damn facts or looking for facts..

so who is next??????????..you?? me???????who??????

first they came for the ALABAMA Governor..

then they came for Spitzer......

fly

[Erebus67]

33. Could be that the sum of the transfers were enough

If the banks are required to report transfers over $10K perhaps they are also supposed to look for attempts to avoid these reports. Such as several transfers in a certain period of time that adds up to $10K or more.

I am sure that people trying to hide criminal activity have thought of breaking the transfers up into smaller increments to attempt to avoid being reported. And I would assume that the IRS and banks have thought of it too and probably look for that kind of activity. I wouldn't be surprised if it's automated by now. Actually with the number of transfers that occur in a day it would have to be automated, no one could possibly keep track of that manually.

[flyarm]

36. you need to go to your bank and ask your bank..do your own checking to see if it is under $10,000.

[BadgerLaw2010]

41. They most certainly are required to look for attempts to evade $10K+ reporting.

Organized criminals have been trying to evade CTR flags since the 1980's.

[flyarm]

47. yes .so lets ask where was the IRS when Blackwater scammed us saying their employees were

sub-contactors there by scamming the American people out of their taxes?

Why isn't the IRS investigating the Mortgage industry scams??????????


where was the IRS when Blackwater was vetted as qualified to be awarded small business contracts, hmmm no one asked..how is this company is getting hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts… and they claim they are a small business?

Why is the the IRS investigating hookers..and Governors..when billions and billions are missing in Iraq???????????

just wondering????????

oh andAgent Mike..and IRS..i am going shopping today..there may be a block of money moving in my accounts!!

fly

[EFerrari]

49. We're watching you, missy, and those al Qaida Spring lines at Saks.

lol

[nashville_brook]

42. eggsactly.

[robbedvoter]

53. But, unlike Cheney, it wasn't hushed:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_gustav_w_070524_dc_madam_scandal_wid.htm

Consider this: WMR is now reporting specifically who at ABC News' 20/20 became fully aware of not only Cheney's use of the escort service, but dozens more "high profile" names - culled from the phone records only since 2002 (the escort services full records go back to 1994). ABC's crack team was reportedly gagged by their bosses after concerned calls from the White House. This would be amazing if true, yet no White House denial has been forthcoming as of this writing...

Why are democrats celebrating and orgasming over this?

[seabeyond]

56. no it doesnt sound like he was targeted but movement of money was targeted

and led to spitzer. the guy should not have been breaking the law. this is the repercussions. no excuses

[JDPriestly]

75. Wrong, seabeyond.

Such transactions are reported when the bank chooses to do so. Spitzer is not popular in the financial world. The transactions were not that large although they were apparently rather frequent. That's not why they attracted attention. It was most likely Spitzer's name and political affiliations that caught the attention of the IRS (if you want to believe the official story on what happened). There is much, much more to this story than meets the eye. As I have pointed out to several posters, wealthy people pay their nannies, their cooks, their maids, their chauffeurs, their personal secretaries, their masseurs, their hairdressers, their gardeners and a range of other service personnel very large amounts of money from time to time, and they don't get into trouble -- although many of the people they hire to render these services are illegal and although the wealthy employer sometimes is not paying all the taxes that should be paid on the employment income. I'm not wealthy, and I don't do this, but it is not difficult to spot instances in which this is may be done if you live in a really major U.S. city.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/182921.php

A lot of guys must be quaking in their boots right now. If Spitzer was the only client of this "service," then that is very strange. And if he isn't, you can bank on the idea that most of the clients were prominent men whose names you would or will recognize. And let's hear their names. I'm enough of a gossip hound to want to know what other celebrities are involved.

Remember the Heidi Fleiss scandal. I wasn't paying a lot of attention at that time, but I believe at least one other celebrity was "outed" for paying for her services.

[Thepricebreaker]

58. Karma is a BITCH he used to do the same shit to the people he went after. He was just like them.

[EFerrari]

63. Could you provide at link or a source for that? Thanks.

[ScreamingMeemie]

66. It's been posted all over the forum...

Some have just chosen to not read it.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07E4DA163BF937A25757C0A9629C8B63

[EFerrari]

62. Alan Dershowitz was just on MSNBC and said the NYTs story

is b#llshit. He said that banks don't randomly look at amounts that small and he said that the criminal lawyers he's talked to all say this case smells.

[ScreamingMeemie]

64. I'm going to go with what I know from my time as a bank employee,

filling out those forms. Alan Dershowitz did not work with us at the time if I recall. Standard ops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_Secrecy_Act#Suspicious_Activity_Report_.28SAR.29

Suspicious Activity Report (SAR)
Any cash transaction where the customer seems to be trying to avoid BSA reporting requirements (e.g., CTR, MIL). A SAR must also be filed if the customer's actions indicate that s/he is laundering money or otherwise violating federal criminal law. The customer must not know that a SAR is being filed. These reports are filed with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network ("FinCEN").

FinCEN:

http://www.fincen.gov/reg_main.html

[petronius]

76. Nobody is claiming the bank "randomly" looked at the transactions

However, when a suspicious pattern is detected in a series of transactions, then a closer look is taken - that's what is being reported.

At this point, we know that Spitzer did something sleazy and hypocritical. We don't know that he was set up or otherwise treated improperly. When evidence to support the second claim shows up, I'm sure DU will condemn the feds as roundly as many of us condemn Spitzer...

[EFerrari]

77. Oh, please. The amounts he transferred were nothing to write home about.

No one would have even blinked unless SOMEONE WAS TARGETING HIM.

[petronius]

78. You can say it as often as you want, and use as MANY CAPS AS YOU LIKE

However, until there's a shred of evidence to support the notion of a targeted or illegal investigation, suspicion and speculation are nothing to yell about (with the sole exeption of the leaking of Spitzers name - the insider who did that should be punished).

Sometimes things are exactly what they appear to be - politicians do sleazy things and get caught without any sort of nefarious Roveian maneuvering. Until there's evidence to the contrary, I think it's pointless to see more here than what's on the surface. When (if) that evidence appears I'll be as pissed as the next guy, but until then... :shrug:

[EFerrari]

79. Sorry, no sale. The idea of the Gonzalez Justice Department

actually enforcing the law instead of going after political opponents is just silly.

Stephanie, HamdenRice and SoCalDem all have put up threads showing that this was no accident. You can chose to check them out or not.