"Why do they think they can get away with it ? (question to Brian Ross ABC)

[SoCalDem]

answer?

BECAUSE YOU AND YOUR NETWORK CHOSE TO NOT NAME THEM.. :grr:

he even said that "nothing will happen to the men involved"..

The odd thing is that a woman who meets a man and sleeps with him..and then he buys her nice gifts, or "loans" her money, is okay..even if the relationship is casual.

people have had affairs forever.. There are many well connected men who have girlfriends on the side..with fancy apartments, cars..you name it.. Does that make the women prostitutes?

But if someone sets up a business and "rents" women out to guys , it is prostitution, and any guy who hires them is breaking the law as well..

if the woman gets named, charged and fined, then I want the same for the man..

Am I asking too much?

[EstimatedProphet]

1. Nope, not at all

It's called justice IMO

[NewJeffCT]

2. You forget, though

Nobody in the history of the world had had an affair until Bill Clinton came along and made it okay for everybody.

While I think prostitution should be legal, if the law says it is a crime for both people involved, their names should be made public.

[Double T]

3. The laws inside the d. c. beltway have been 'changed' to protect.........

the privileged political criminals.

[KharmaTrain]

4. Are The Women Being Outted Or Prosecuted???

First...Ross is a sanctamonious ass...even if he's the one who outed Foley (or should I say he had it given to him by C.R.E.W.). On his defense, he did hire Justin Rood from TPM Muckraker and I'm sure that's who did a lot of the investigating...and I suspect had there been someone of "importance" it would have come out...or it may still be held back for some future "blockbuster".

That said...the ethics of the world's oldest profession has been debated since the first trick was turned. For me, it's a consentual thing...if these people all agree, then if a law has been broken, it's broken by both sides. Should Prositution be legalized? I think it should, but that's not the issue here...it's the fact at least the solicitation of sex for money is still illegal and those who partook in this knowingly violated the law...and some did so using our tax dollars. It's not Ross' place to play "morality cop" here...if someone has violated the law and he has proof...then they should be exposed.

But now the question comes into if there was a violation. It sounds like the defense will be that any sex that occured happened "off the clock"...not as a part of the "escort" or massage. This will be an interesting case to see play out. While Ross can play morality cop, if this case goes to trial, I suspect we'll see all those names as they'll be part of the public record. So just stay tuned...

:popcorn: