The Bushies didn't bring down Spitzer - a "large New York bank" did.

[JackRiddler]

What was he thinking?

The Spitzers have a real estate empire. They are a super-rich family, members of "the top one-percent." It seems incredible that someone with Eliot Spitzer's brains, position and long experience at the power game couldn't use a trusted family confidante to pay for his whores in cash.

According to today's stories, it was "his bank" that called the feds. The Times lead reads: "Last summer, employees at a large New York bank detected something suspicious..." Banks are required to report individual movements of more than $10,000 in cash, but Spitzer's payments were structured to avoid that. A suspicious transaction report was therefore filed with the IRS at the discretion of the unnamed bank's unnamed "employees."

They may have well guessed what would happen, once the fully partisan Bush Justice Department got word that the cash movements were Spitzer's. Of course wiretaps would follow. By the time a second unnamed bank also filed a report (again, which bank and on whose discretion is still unsaid), the Feds were already listening.

So here's the speculation: Did bank executives gain Spitzer's trust and intimate that any business he wanted to do through them would pass as kosher? Did the governor have a relationship with the two banks, one that went beyond keeping his private accounts with them? Did people at these banks know each other? Perhaps, as a rising member of the power elite, Spitzer believed the banks knew he could do favors for them, and therefore felt secure transacting his hanky panky through them.

And then they told the feds, perhaps fully aware of where the money was going.

If that's how it happened, he could hardly turn on his now former friends at the bank. All that was left for him was to walk the plank of public contrition, in the hope the feds agree to let him resign without an indictment. (Just the kind of deal he'd work out, if he was still the Attorney General.)

These are weird times for many a "large New York bank." Rumors swirl that Citibank may not have the reserves to handle call-ins on its debts. Spitzer's public blow-up on Monday was sandwiched -- not necessarily as a master plan, but surely in a happy serendipity -- between the weekend predictions of a stock market dive, and the Tuesday morning flood of new liquidity from Bernanke's Federal Reserve.

More water down the bottomless hole.

The myth of Spitzer as the Antichrist of Wall Street has a grain of truth, sort of like the myth that the Clintons are progressives. The point is, everyone on Wall Street believed Spitzer was their enemy, just like right-wingers think the Clintons are communist agents. And Wall Street is cheering Spitzer's demise, which comes as the euphoric icing on the Fed moves that have once again brought a market surge just when all signs pointed down. Euphoria is an intangible, but markets thrive on it. Someone in a position to guess both events were coming to start off this week -- for example, the executives of a "large New York bank" with an inside line to the Fed -- could have made an enormous killing.

All great fun for the Ponzi scheme that passes for our financial system, but the times remain as weird and as perilous as they have ever been. Let's see what they come up with to avoid next week's crash!

[aquart]

1. It's so cool that you believe what you read in the papers.

I mean, somebody has to. I guess.

[JackRiddler]

5. Do you prefer to believe what you know a priori?

And did you read before you posted?

[Ghost Dog]

33. I've never seen this poster reply to any questions on this board. n/t

[burythehatchet]

44. aquart is a busy person. S/He only has time to read the subject line and form

a world view. S/He will also denigrate anyone whose world view might differ slightly.

Its way past time to lead aquart to the Ignore cage.

[DCKit]

86. And all this time I thought I was being too harsh and paranoid. n/t

[aldo]

108. Well, the presstitutes are good at their job

Of course, many people will believe them

[ingac70]

2. He brought himself down...

skank nasty hypocrite that he is.

[Birthmark]

12. I couldn't agree more

And that hurts because not long ago I had tremendous respect and admiration for Spitzer.

[ingac70]

14. I used to think he was great myself...

until troopergate and such. This stuff is the straw that broke the camel's back.

[Birthmark]

15. Yup. There's only so much hypocrisy allowed...

[The Straight Story]

3. Could be worse, he could have been smoking in a bar and a patron called the cops instead of a bank

:)

[JackRiddler]

49. Depending on the bar...

the cops would have joined in. :smoke:

[screembloodymurder]

119. Maybe Spitzer was just singled out to teach others to keep their mouths shut.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021302783.html?nav=hcmodule

Predatory lenders just hate being called hypocrites by one of their own.

[Canuckistanian]

4. Pull the other one

If banks were to drop a dime on every "suspicious activity" they ever saw from their wealthy clients, they'd need to hire another 5000 people to keep up.

Funny how a VERY WEALTHY, VERY FAMOUS DEMOCRAT was singled out.

[JackRiddler]

8. Yes indeed...

But it was the bank that dropped the dime, possibly knowing exactly who the client was and what would follow once it got to the Bush DOJ, no?

[How to be positive]

19. married with children

he's still a guy with a wife and 3 teenage daughters. doesn't this seem kinda gross? (go easy on me I'm a newbie)

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[girl gone mad]

36. WTF?

Hookers are here so we don't have rape?

So why do we still have rape?

[BB1]

48. uh... let me see. Prostitution is ILLEGAL?

.

[LanternWaste]

75. One has much more dire consequences than the other.

"Prostitution is ILLEGAL?"

Both are illegal. One has much more dire consequences than the other. Therefore, when confronted with the choice of the two, the original question still seems valid; "why do we still have rape?"

[girl gone mad]

80. And rape isn't?

There's some wacky logic going down in this thread.

[JackRiddler]

63. (Glad to have hit the alert on that one!)

[babylonsister]

6. If he had an (R) behind his name, do you think this would have happened? nt

[JackRiddler]

7. Probably not.

Some (R)'s have been hit with similar misfortunes.

Did you read the post?

[babylonsister]

13. Yes, and I do wonder about the man and the timing, and the times we

are living in.

[fernsibal]

16. warrantless wiretapping

of your political enemies---it disturbs me no end

[JackRiddler]

17. This was not warrantless...

although it was a "political enemies" operation.

But who fed the information to the Bush regime? Spitzer's "large New York bank" did, at its own discretion.

[Leopolds Ghost]

27. It was warrantless in sense that simply withdrawing large amt of cash is unconstitutional grounds

for suspicion of wiretapping under the 4th amendment.

Under this fascist policy, anyone who closes out their bank account can be wiretapped.

[BadgerLaw2010]

67. Um, no. Many an organized criminal has found this out the hard way.

There's nothing unconstitutional about seeking a warrant to investigate someone with suspicious cash transactions. And there is nothing illegal or "tainted" about said warrant stemming from said suspicious bank activity.

[GenDem]

43. Vitter and Craig

have R's behind their names yet both have remained in office. It doesn't seem that Spitzer will survive. I find that interesting, too.

[Supersedeas]

50. interesting comparison

[JackRiddler]

54. Vitter and Craig...

Will not survive their next elections.

They also weren't caught quite like this.

They're also not in executive positions.

You have a point, certainly: No one started removal proceedings against them. This may show us a difference between Republicans (who will always go after their target) and Democrats (who apparently prefer to be targets).

[Selatius]

9. He was monumentally stupid if he cut his bank in on his private dealings that way.

The second a bank is involved, voilà, there's a paper trail. If you read my bank statement, 90 percent of it is nothing but ATM withdrawals, but that's because of a mechanism I use to enforce fiscal self-discipline.

[AZCat]

10. I like to make the weirder purchases on my bank card...

just to screw with whatever "profile" they have of me.

[JackRiddler]

11. Yes, but he's not you...

You see, I figure you and I are both grunts down here. HE thinks he's the governor, and maybe he's all chummy with the bank executives who probably contributed to his campaign (and to his opponent's in equal measure) and who are giving him a wink and a nod.

[BadgerLaw2010]

64. Asking your bank to launder money for you is fucking stupid no matter who you are.

[TML]

18. HSBC?

You mean "The World's Local Bank"?

[JackRiddler]

21. My bet's on Citi. If this was a novel, no doubt. nt

[TML]

23. I Saw It On CNN This Evening

They showed an image of an HSBC branch, but I don't know if they were the bank or not.

[JackRiddler]

24. Hmmm...

Could be the tip-off, could be blowing it out their ass. I'm sure we'll know the banks soon enough - hundreds of people already do.

[JackRiddler]

26. No you are right! - One of the banks was HSBC...

I didn't notice the Times story had a second page, sorry. In one of the last paragraphs it's said that HSBC was one of the two banks.

As written up in the Times, which makes it sound as though bank employees simply went about their routine business and discovered Spitzer's weird transactions incidentally, it is nevertheless clear that the bank executives had the option of NOT filing a "Suspicious Activity Report" (these things are referred to as SARS) on Spitzer, because none of the individual money transfers exceeded the limit that would have required SARS. It was done at their own discretion.

It is inconceivable that Spitzer of all people wasn't fully aware of the laws involved, and of the dangers to him of moving these funds through banks. Yet he went ahead and did it with apparent impunity. That's what has me convinced he must have thought he could trust his bankers. Why did he trust them? Possibly because he had buddies, that's why. What other other logical explanation is there, when he had the option of doing it with wads of untraceable cash? It's either that he was led to believe it was safe, or else (if you want to go there): He wanted to be caught, he had an inner self-destructive drive. It's not impossible - many people do!

But again, as covered in the Times, the banks could have in this case chosen not to report on the Spitzer accounts, this was not automatically triggered by the law.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/nyregion/12legal.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion&oref=slogin

The Reports That Drew Federal Eyes to Spitzer

By DAVID JOHNSTON and STEPHEN LABATON
Published: March 12, 2008

WASHINGTON — Last summer, employees at a large New York bank detected something suspicious: Gov. Eliot Spitzer was moving around thousands of dollars in what they thought was an effort to conceal the fact that the money was his own, federal officials said on Tuesday. They said the apparent sleight of hand kept the transactions small and removed his name from deposits. The governor’s actions prompted the bank to file alerts known as Suspicious Activity Reports with the Treasury Department, which were reviewed by I.R.S. agents on Long Island, the federal officials said.

(...)

Last July, suspecting that Mr. Spitzer might be involved in some kind of public corruption, the Treasury Department referred the banks’ reports to a section of the Manhattan federal prosecutor’s office that usually handles cases involving official wrongdoing. The case was not turned over to the criminal unit, which would usually investigate major prostitution rings.

The officials said that no one knew at first the nature of QAT’s business

--(NOTE: FOR SURE? WHO HAD THE QAT ACCOUNTS?)

or why Mr. Spitzer seemed to be trying to hide what appeared to be payments to the mysterious company that seemed to have no real business. Investigators at the bank were said to have thought it could have involved organized crime.

(...)

According to a complaint unsealed last week in the prostitution case, one of the banks was HSBC, a large international bank with American headquarters in New York. Linda Recupero, a spokeswoman at the bank, declined to say what involvement the bank may have had in the inquiry.

Under the Bank Secrecy Act, all financial institutions are required to file currency transaction reports with the federal government for any deposit or withdrawal of more than $10,000.

---(WHICH SPITZER APPARENTLY AVOIDED)

In addition, financial institutions are required to file the Suspicious Activity Reports with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, an agency of the Treasury Department, if they believe that money is involved in a crime.

A federal regulation requires the banks to file the reports when they believe a crime involving at least $5,000 may have been committed. The reports are filed to a computing center run by the financial agency in Detroit, which then decides which agency should investigate them.

Dale P. Kelberman, a former federal prosecutor in Baltimore who has had experience with the financial reporting statutes, said the motivation in moving money around would be critical in any decision about whether the law was broken. If the governor was simply trying to conceal his activities from, say, his wife, it would be considered different from trying to deceive federal authorities. “There are innocent reasons for structuring transactions that need to be considered,” Mr. Kelberman said.

(...)

[WillowTree]

20. SPITZER brought down Spitzer.

Sheesh!!

[JackRiddler]

22. Well, duh.

Nevertheless, it takes a village of bankers and DOJ hitmen to raise a headline. Some of us want to know the story.

[EFerrari]

25. We're going to find out this wasn't the case.

It's not that the man wasn't stupid.

It's that banks don't bother with the amounts he was moving.

Watch.

[JackRiddler]

28. But they did in this case...

Why?

[EFerrari]

29. The Bush Justice Department had two mandates.

To track voter fraud -- which you and I know is code for vote suppression, and to track "public corruption" -- which we might assume to mean data mining to bring down Democrats.

The banks didn't initiate this. They were more likely tasked with watching Spitzer's activities by the "Justice" Department. If you were a bank, would you say no to them?

I don't even feel the need to get out my foil. It's just par for the course.

[defendandprotect]

30. Agree . . . . I think he was targeted -- he's made many enemies on Wall St ---

however, Spitzer gave them the means to destroy him ---

I also agree that the bank wouldn't have initiated this -- it was his money --
I'm sure they like having his account ---

I too think it was observation, something from his security people maybe --- and
then wiretapping his conversations ---

A naive Spitzer . . .

[screembloodymurder]

120. Absolutely.

He was a target and an object lesson.

[JackRiddler]

51. Which brings me back to what prompts my line of thinking...

Okay, so Spitzer, like, he lives in the early 21st century Bush regime. And he is a VERY SMART man. He knows the system well.

He is the nation's best-known AG and he knows exactly what happened with the US Attorneys. He can't be unfamiliar with the Siegelman case. He's close to the Clintons, and he knows what they've gone through.

AND he KNOWS he has a lot of enemies. In fact, he made a whole bunch of new enemies during his short history as Governor. He's well aware that he and Bruno are trying to bring each other down. He's even had Bruno investigated (legally, far as I know). And he announced that "I am a fucking steamroller!"

All of which brings us back to this: HOW doesn't he KNOW that he's a target?

What the hell is he thinking? Peanuts or not, he MUST know the risks of his own behavior (meaning the transactions, not the visits to Kristen et al.).

What could possess him to "structure payments" through his local HSBC branch when he can just withdraw cash in small increments and have a family confidante -- a bagman, in the vernacular -- deliver cash to Aruba or whatever other route QAT wants.

This is what prompts me to think he thought he had cover. He was confident.

One option is incredible hubris, arrogance. "I am a fucking steamroller," no bank will screw with me. Wouldn't be the first time. Or a secret desire to be destroyed. Not without precedent.

Another option, the one I am advancing in this Speculative Classic DU Thread, is that he's friends with a bank executive and he thinks they're tight and trustworthy. Or a group of them. A group of them who may have even initiated him to the world of QAT. Many possibilities here. Campaign contributions. Small favors. Nods to have state departments prioritize a given concern or meeting. A chummy atmosphere.

Then they screw him. Because they live in the 21st century, they know the Bush regime is hunting for the heads of Democratic politicians, they see an advantage in screwing him, etc. etc.

Let's see which is the REAL bank, the one that filed the first report. HSBC does not qualify as "a large New York bank." It's largest in the world, I believe, but the New York Times is unlikely to describe it as "a New York bank." That would means it's the "second bank" in the news story.

[Ghost Dog]

59. And they just knifed the very respectable CINC of CENTCOM, after all.

Need to move on, they calculate, looks increasingly like.

:-(

See poetic comment: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2994887

[JackRiddler]

60. If there is a distraction here, though...

It's probably aimed at getting attention off the $200 billion scam, and the wobbly pyramid that is Wall Street.

[defendandprotect]

31. Maybe they were asked to do it by some powerful people . . . ?

[JackRiddler]

52. Yes, that's the idea...

And maybe the powerful people who got the ball rolling weren't at DOJ -- maybe they were inside the bank in the first place?

Here's another aspect: low-level bank employee sees something in SPITZER's accounts. And then what? Files a report on her/his own discretion, without anyone on a higher level being consulted?

[defendandprotect]

61. Not likely . . . for many reasons . . . amounts too low . . .

plus Spitzer, I would imagine, would have been a valued customer ---
and, it wasn't odd money coming into his accounts --- HE was moving the money out ---

We KNOW that Bushco has corrupted the DOJ . . .
We KNOW that Bushco works on retalliation . . .
We KNOW that Bushco controls banks in very corrupt ways --- i.e., re protecting predatory lending ---
See Spitzer comments from 2/14/08.

A low level employee would act against a very wealthy customer of a bank --- ???
Don't think so --


However, that doesn't change the issue ---
Spitzer has harmed the party -- the people --- the cause of fighting corruption --
and we call Bush a "moron" . . . ???

Maybe one day prostitution will be legalized --- but it is illegal now.
Will taxpayers want to pay to protect prostitutes --- to keep it separated from organized crime?

[JackRiddler]

62. Taxpayers currently pay to jail prostitutes...

Is that better?

How would taxpayers have to "pay to protect prostitutes," if it were legalized? Prostitutes would end up paying taxes. Shouldn't they enjoy the same health and policing services as other taxpayers?

[defendandprotect]

84. You are misunderstanding what I am saying .. ..

I am against jailing prostitutes . . . ESPECIALLY without jailing the John --- !!!

We would have to "pay" to protect prostitutes just as we pay to protect other business entities ---
and in the case of prostitution there are safety issues --- so there would be "policing services" . . . which I'm all for!!! What I asked was . . . would the public be for it ---!!!

Prostitution is also a profession which has been heavily connected to organized crime ---
Bada Bing --- !!! and the exploitation of females.

[JackRiddler]

93. One thing stands out in what you say?

"Prostitution is also a profession which has been heavily connected to organized crime ---
Bada Bing --- !!! and the exploitation of females."

And the big driving force behind this is that prostitution is illegal. This will never change long as the law punishes the prostitute and promotes a situation where exploited women have nowhere to turn.

Note that I do not support the libertarian extreme of an unregulated business and a "McHookers" on every block. It should be heavily restricted to a few zones in which it is legal, with a crackdown on unlicensed practitioners that penalizes the owners, not the workers.

[girl gone mad]

38. They also reported OxyRush's transactions...

which were of a similar amount (just under 10K).

[YankmeCrankme]

57. I may not be remembering this correctly, but

Didn't they look at those transactions after the maid got caught buying and she said she was doing it for Rush? So, it's not really the same or relevant.

"2 Oct 2003 - Reports surface that Limbaugh is being investigated by the Florida State Attorney General's office in Palm Beach County, for his abuse of Oxycontin, Lorcet and hydrocodone prescription painkillers. The source for the story is Wilma Cline, a former housekeeper and also alleged source of the drugs. She claims to have obtained Limbaugh 4,350 pills over a 47 day period. An unnamed source at the State Attorney's office confirmed the story to the New York Daily News.

18 Nov 2003 - Authorities tell ABC News they are investigating Limbaugh for money laundering violations, involving "30 to 40" just-under-$10,000 withdrawals from US Trust bank, structured to avoid Federal currency reporting requirements."

http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/entertainers/pundits/rush-limbaugh/

[BadgerLaw2010]

66. Um, banks do bother. They are required to by law.

Lots of people who don't have money or don't work in banking or can't read IRS rules that have been linked keep speculating there is some conspiracy, when knowledge of any of the above three easily explains everything.

If its $10K+, it's reported. And if you try to structure the transaction or make it anonymous, it's getting reported anyway.

[Ghost Dog]

34. Excellent summary there, JackRiddler.

I did notice yesterday morning (here in Europe) that, while in Asian stock markets there was said be to "hope" that the Federal Reserve would soon do something more to help financiers, but nothing very 'market-moving'; in European markets there appeared to be the same or slightly stronger "hope" and mention of "rumors", with markets adopting a wait-and-see' approach, holding steady until the Fed news broke, when there was a rapid 2% surge; in US markets there was a steady rise in market futures overnight which, shortly before market opening (and before the 'official' Fed news) became a 2% rise already, so that Wall Street opened already up around 2% on the basis of unreported 'off-market' or 'dark-pool' trading while Wall St. was closed. See eg. yesterday's Stock Market Watch thread.

I wasn't previously aware of Spitzer's 'wealth-bracket' position. As you point out, some people high up in NY banking must most definitely have been in the know. Would the kind of activity we're speculating about count as 'insider trading' and would the same be investigated and punished in the current circumstances? not likely, I guess.

recommended.

Edit to add:

[ozymandius]

35. Bravo!

The money trail will lead you to the bodies. That is a tangible fact with the empowered who seek more power. In this case, the trail uncovers Spitzer's achilles heel.

Facts say: Spitzer is a paradoxical figure. He is a wholly corrupt person who did something right for the world in his prosecution of Wall Street corruption. His reasons for doing so are not purely altruistic when you consider the whole of this man's personality. As a person, he is a piece of shit. As a prosecutor, he is pure genius.

[girl gone mad]

37. A guy who spends $80,000 on whores..

is not firing on all cylinders.

I doubt that he had reasoned through it to the point where he believed he had some unspoken agreement with the banks to keep it on the hush-hush.

[JackRiddler]

53. A guy who probably doesn't know his own net worth...

Can arrange to have these transactions in cash, no?

Let's say he doesn't have a vault full of cash. He could have "structured" cash withdrawals instead of these clever little transfers to QAT, on which he was caught. And had the cash delivered.

Imagine it like this: He has a relationship with bank executives. They're buddies. They have a history of small favors to each other. He trusts them...

[michaz]

39. He is a hypocrite!n/t

[HamdenRice]

40. He undoubtedly had a private personal relationship with his bankers

When you work on Wall Street, even in relatively grunt like positions, you often automatically get the priviledges of becoming a member of your bank's "private banking" division -- something I experienced at one point in my career. It's quite funny. You try to go to a teller, and they say, oh, I see you've been moved to the private banking division. You are ushered into a completely different office where you get to talk to an individual banker. You never wait on lines to withdraw funds or cash checks or whatever, because you go upstairs to the private bank tellers.

That's what happens to grunts on Wall Street.

A person of Spitzer's massive inherited wealth and power would undoubtedly have had private banking privileges. Even with the little glimpses I saw of grunt level private banking, I can scarcely imagine what kind of services Spitzer had. Undoubtedly, his bankers were well aware of, and helped structure, these transactions. Which means that yes, he was ratted out by people he trusted.

[DemReadingDU]

42. I never knew banks had an 'upstairs'

I come from small communities. All our banks have only 1 floor, not even a basement.

[JackRiddler]

58. Thank you Hamden...

Funny, when I go to the bank they tell me there's a special line for me in the basement!

[Senator]

41. Well, If You're Looking For "Banker Suspects" ...

... I'd be wondering about Larry Di Rita...

Later in 2004, Taguba encountered Rumsfeld and one of his senior press aides, Lawrence Di Rita, in the Pentagon Athletic Center. Taguba was getting dressed after a workout. “I was tying my shoes,” Taguba recalled. “I looked up, and there they were.” Rumsfeld, who was putting his clothes into a locker, recognized Taguba and said, “Hello, General.” Di Rita, who was standing beside Rumsfeld, said sarcastically, “See what you started, General? See what you started?”

Di Rita, who is now an official with Bank of America, recalled running into Taguba in the locker room but not his words. “Sounds like my brand of humor,” he said, in an e-mail. “A comment like that would have been in an attempt to lighten the mood for General Taguba.” (Di Rita added that Taguba had “my personal respect and admiration” and that of Rumsfeld. “He did a terrific job under difficult circumstances.”) However, Taguba was troubled by the encounter, and later told a colleague, “I’m now the problem.”

-- the "new guy" over at Bank of America.

It was Spitzer who found corruption in the mutual-fund business, used by more investors than any other vehicle for stock investments. Strong Capital, Janus and other companies allowed wealthy investors to rapidly move money in and out of mutual funds. This privilege was denied to regular investors and cost them money as transaction costs rose.

Bank of America and other companies went one better for hedge funds and other rich clients: According to regulators, they essentially allowed trades today at yesterday's price -- every investor's dream. That, too, hurt regular investors. That, too, would never have come to light if not for Spitzer.

But I suppose any bank might have some kind of score to settle with Spitzer.

My objection here is that the thread title implies that bankers can't be bushies.

---

[JackRiddler]

55. Sorry, you're right...

You say: "My objection here is that the thread title implies that bankers can't be bushies."

Oh no. I was just trying to get attention with the headline and draw some of it to this aspect of the story: that executives at the two banks (presumably "large New York bank" and "second bank" aka HSBC) may have initiated the sting on their own. As Bushies, quite possibly.

[Senator]

90. And you're right too

To use an attention-getting headline. So now I can withdraw my objection (and kick the thread).

---

[Jeffersons Ghost]

45. k&r

[GeorgeGist]

46. Lest we forget ....

Mr. Spitzer betrayed his soul first and foremost.

[The Stranger]

47. No, you tell the banks and bankers that they are going down with you.

If that's how it happened, he could hardly turn on his now former friends at the bank.

They reverse their polarity and use whatever influence they have to help Spitzer now, or they go down and burn with him based on whatever he knows.

[JackRiddler]

56. How do you figure?

"I have an important announcement to make. I have failed my family and the people of New York. And it was those fuckers Sam and Dave at the bank who screwed me! What a double cross! We had a deal, damn it!"

I mean, once it's a fait accompli, how does he improve his own situation, from a strictly self-interested perspective? Certainly not by doing what you are suggesting.

[mdmc]

65. banks...bfee...same thing

[ScreamingMeemie]

68. I'll tell my mom, a registered Dem, and a banker required by law

to follow the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970 that you think that. :hi:

[JackRiddler]

69. The Bank Secrecy Act requires reports on movements of $10 K or more...

A report based on suspicion due to smaller transactions (as was the case with Spitzer) is at the bank's discretion.

[ScreamingMeemie]

70. A bank is required to file an SAR ( I used to file these all the time)

if suspicious activity is suspected. If suspicious activity is found at a later date, and a crime is involved, there are stiff penalties and jail time for banks that did not file an SAR. They are filed all the time, on the big guys and the little guys.

[WitchyWoman57]

72. This is correct.

Spitzer was brought down by the exact same laws he himself used as a prosecutor. The bank was doing its job. Think about it...Spitzer moved lots of money - possibly as much as $80,000 - into a shell corporation. The only reason to do that is to hide where money is going. This is the governor we're talking about! It should raise ALL KINDS of red flags. Corruption? Black mail? I'm very glad someone was doing his job. Period.

[defendandprotect]

100. Yes, it is the Governor we're talking about . . . who we are saying fell into a trap

he would have well recognized --- ???

For one thing, Spitzer would have had to guess that a prostitution ring -- Emperor --- could be
susceptible to investigations from many other sources --

That the very "ring" he was dealing with might already be under observation by some law enforcement . . . !!!!

And he nonetheless spoke openly about having the prositute meet him in Washington, opening him
to prosecution under the Mann Act, which I guess he also wasn't aware of --- ???

[Ghost Dog]

82. So, when the bank's bosses go out to lunch with the Government's bosses

to discuss, you know, strategy and such. Under this law, who's supposed to report on whom, to whom?

(Or was this issue subsumed under a 'signing statement' we somehow missed?)

[theboss]

110. It was signed in 1970

Try to catch up.

[northzax]

116. right

now imagine you ask for three wire transfers in the amount of $4k each, to the same place, in one week. why would you pay for three transfers instead of one? oh right, to avoid the 10K reporting limit. same problem, though.

[librechik]

71. right. and the bushies didn't bring down the WTC. 19 guys with boxcutters did it.

we could argue about this forever. In the meantime the bushies are stealing your watch AND your pants.

[JackRiddler]

77. Okay, I'm sorry about the headline...

I wanted to highlight that the bank was the one making the decision that predictably got the investigation rolling.

Now we know it was Capital One and, apparently, HSBC.

I don't have the impression you read the post, by the way.

[librechik]

78. I read it, Jack.

And I still think it smells.

Read this analysis, for example, which follows your suggested timeline:
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/mar/12/campos-was-spitzer-targeted/

or there's this contrairian view, coming out of ABC, for heavens' sake
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/03/hbc-90002589

so I have not made up my mind what is going on here.

I just know I smell horseshit from Republican Clydesdales.

[JackRiddler]

79. I think those are both very good...

The first, Rocky Mountain News, is also clearly wondering what motivated the banks to report these peanuts transactions (which would not have automatically triggered a report requirement, contrary to what certain people posting here keep saying) by a guy in a family that's probably worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

Maybe I'm an unclear writer? I'm asking how the set up was done, and whether the banks had a conscious role in wanting to bring him down.

Scott Horton also seems to be poking around in the same place:

"The suggestion that this was driven by an IRS inquiry and involved a bank might heighten, rather than allay, concerns of a politically motivated prosecution."

[defendandprotect]

102. So, we're saying that Spitzer would probably have been on Bush's enemy list . . .

but Bush wasn't tapping Spitzer's phones all along . . . just in case Spitzer might do something dumb????

[JackRiddler]

73. UPDATE: Mark Brenner, Emperors' Club owner, worked for the IRS?!!

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0803/11/sitroom.02.html

I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

Right now, we're getting some breaking news on the Eliot Spitzer sex scandal and the IRS connection. Drew Griffin of CNN's special investigations unit is joining us right now.

You've been working your sources Drew. What are you picking up?

DREW GRIFFIN, CNN SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS UNIT CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, something that is very curious in the least. But certainly interesting at most and may explain why the IRS got on in this in the first place. Mark Brenner, he is the alleged ringleader of the Emperors Club, this prostitution ring that Eliot Spitzer, the governor, has been wrapped up in. We've just confirmed with the IRS that Mark Brenner, the supposed ringleader, was or is an enrolled agent with the IRS.

This is somebody who represents taxpayers in front of the IRS. That means he either studied IRS law and took the test or is possibly an ex-IRS agent with the tax company.

It certainly adds to the intrigue as to how the IRS actually began this investigation with money transfers and looking at how this money was going and eventually got to the point where they identified client number nine as being the governor of New York. But we are now confirming that Mark Brenner, the ringleader, is an enrolled agent with the IRS -- Wolf.

BLITZER: What an intriguing part of the story, Drew. Thank you very much. Drew is going to continue to work the story. I expect we're going to be learning a lot more about this investigation.

:crazy:

DISCUSSION THREAD
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2998477&mesg_id=2998477

[Thepricebreaker]

96. He changed jobs ;)

[defendandprotect]

103. And the alledged story is the info got to the IRS from a bank . . .

Of course, Spitzer would never have suspected that ANY prostitution ring might be under investigation and being watched . . . !!! ???

WHAAT are we saying here --- is it really believable?

[JackRiddler]

74. UPDATE 2: Republican lobbyist claims he knew in advance of Spitzer downfall

THREAD
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2998325&mesg_id=2998325

SOURCE
http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-nyhen125610573mar12,0,5345252.column

GOP schemer predicts more shakeups ahead
Ellis Henican
March 12, 2008

(...)

Yesterday was beautiful, bright and crisp in Albany, with just the earliest hint of spring. But before I could even make my way to the Capitol to gather up a new pile of reaction statements, my cell phone was ringing from a place even nicer than this.

The call-back number said 202, for Washington. But the sunny voice on the other end could only be in Miami. Yes, it was Roger Stone. And the exuberance in his voice made high-fiving Albanians sound almost morose. "I didn't make him go to a prostitution ring," said the most famous and ruthless Republican dirty trickster who still walks the earth. "He did that all on his own."

Stone said that even before I asked if his hand was somehow in Spitzer's latest trouble. I figured, somehow or another, it had to be. "No comment on that," Stone said. "I will say I knew it was coming. That's why I wasn't too upset about the results of the special election," where a Democrat grabbed a supposedly safe Republican State Senate seat, leaving Democrats just one vote shy of control.

Conversations with Stone often go like that. Always cocky. A little cryptic. Leaving you wondering about more. With a guerrilla-politics resume that goes all the way back to Richard Nixon, Stone's fingers have been in some of the most dastardly Republican schemes of the past 40 years, up to and including the Florida 2000 presidential recount. He helped rich guy Tom Golisano make high-priced mischief in the previous governor's race. He returned to Albany last year on the dime of Senate boss Joe Bruno. Desperate to keep his tiny Republican majority in the Senate, Bruno figured Stone could help. And he helped, until he had to quit when a voice that sounded awfully like his turned up making threats on the governor's father's voice mail.

(...)

Even though there's no evidence he sent the governor to a hooker or made the Bush Justice Department follow up on a banking tip, he's been energetically working to undermine the governor.

(...)

"My work isn't done there," he said.

"Just watch."

(...)

Copyright © 2008, Newsday Inc.

Dismiss it as bluster, but Stone's claim would be a confession to illegality on the level of at least, oh, paying for sex. Is Stone supposed to know about ongoing investigations before they are unsealed? Who are his friends at Justice?

[JackRiddler]

76. UPDATE 3: "Large New York bank" identified as North Fork Bank = CAPITAL ONE BANK as of March 10th

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/todays_must_read_294.php

Today's Must Read
By Paul Kiel - March 12, 2008, 9:55AM

How exactly did the feds end up snagging Eliot Spitzer? We've been asking the question since the story broke on Monday. Reports from a number of news outlets have been providing more and more details so that now, with the help of the feds' filings, it's possible to piece together a reasonably detailed timeline of how the investigation went down. So, without any more ado, here it is:

7/07: North Fork Bank in New York sends a Suspicious Activity Report to the Treasury Department about transfers in Spitzer's personal accounts. The "bank's report was triggered by Spitzer's attempt to structure a $10,000 cash transaction into three parts." Spitzer also reportedly asked the bank to "take his name off the wires." Treasury Department officials forward the report to federal prosecutors in Manhattan.

Fall, 2007: Another bank (possibly HSBC) sends Suspicious Activity Reports to the Treasury Department. "They showed that Mr. Spitzer and others, including people overseas, collectively deposited hundreds of thousands of dollars into an account of a company called QAT International Inc., whose business involved foreign accounts and shell companies and appeared to be vaguely related to pornography Web sites."

10/07: The FBI and the IRS-Criminal Investigative Division launch an investigation "focusing on an organization suspected of conducting prostitution and money-laundering crimes in the United States and Europe" -- i.e. the Emperor's Club VIP.

1/8/08: Investigators begin wiretaps of Emperor's Club managers.

1/26/08: The FBI stakes out the Mayflower hotel in Washington, D.C. “after concluding from a wiretapped conversation that Spitzer might try to meet with a prostitute when he traveled to Washington to attend a black-tie dinner.”

(MORE AT LINK...)

[defendandprotect]

104. Of course, Spitzer wouldn't have checked into this company before he used it --- ????

He just waded right in . . . ???

Using CASH evidently wouldn't have occurred to him --- ??

The fact that the prostitution ring itself could already be under survelliance wouldn't have
occurred to him --- ???

And, just to ensure that his law license is also lifted . . . he mentions inviting the prostitute
down to DC . . . because he's also so enamored with a prostitute that he doesn't remember the
Mann Act --- !! ???

Well, can a man's penis really override years of experience as a prosecutor --- ????

[JackRiddler]

81. UPDATE 4: Client Number Six Identified

.
Client Number Six is the Duke of Westminster, called the richest man in the UK.

This is getting pretty good.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2008/03/12/2008-03-12_richest_man_in_england_also_a_regular_of.html

Richest man in England also a regular of prostitution ring in Spitzer scandal

By LARRY McSHANE
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Updated Wednesday, March 12th 2008, 12:22 PM



Gerald Cavendish Grosvenor, the Duke of Westminster
(Photo: Melville/Getty)

The richest man in Great Britain was a customer of the same high-end prostitution service patronized by Gov. Spitzer. The Duke of Westminster, listed as the world's 46th richest person by Forbes magazine, hired four hookers over a six-week stretch in late 2006 and early last year, the News of the World reported last year.

Despite his incredible wealth, multi-billionaire Gerald Cavendish Grosvenor haggled with one of the Emperors Club girls for the cost of their date, according to the report.

Prostitute Zana Brazdek, then 26, described the 56-year-old Grosvenor as dull and demanding. "I thought his conversation was quite boring," the Lithuanian woman told the newspaper. "He talked about the Army, going to Afghanistan and bin Laden. And he wanted unprotected sex. I refused."

(...)

Like Spitzer, Grosvenor is married - and he has four children with wife Natalia. The duke had close ties to the royal family and is one of Prince Charles' best friends. Grosvenor also is Prince William's godfather.

The duke was an official in the ministry of defense, overseeing Britain's reservists - including thousands who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. He recently stepped down from that position due to the scandal and subsequent media attention.

(...)

[Zorra]

83. Finance a high class chain of brothels to bring down political enemies.

Damn, what a concept.

[JackRiddler]

85. Here is one person's scenario from another board....

Based on the IRS connection of Brener (this is how he's spelled in the complaint), a friend on another board speculates as follows:

Ok, I'm trying to wrap my head around this scenario. An IRS agent (former or otherwise) got an entrepreneurial itch and started a elite-style escort service, charging in the mid-four figures for services. This sounds like pure blackmail fodder from the get-go to me. Spitzer, who has been trying to force the monoline insurers into default, is introduced to the Emperors Club by someone, we don't know who. He pays via transfers out of his account at banks which in all likelihood have vast mortgage backed security holdings as all banks like HSBC do. These securities owe their phoney "AAA" ratings to the fact that they are insured by the monolines. HSBC (at Brenner's instigation? is the whole thing a front?) sends a Suspicious Activity Report on his structured payments to the IRS, and a wiretap is put in place by the FBI. Brenner stands to either go to jail, or profit greatly, or both. Further, a top republican dirty trickster intimates that the has involvement at some layer, and more is yet to come. The more to come part, I believe.
Is this close?

Again, speculative. Also, it was North Fork (Capital One) that got the ball rolling.

Again: Remember, the banks know they are dealing with Spitzer's accounts. The transfers did not trigger automatic filing. So they file at their discretion, on the basis of "suspicion" -- which is also covered in the law, but who decides what is suspicious? Remember, we're talking $80,000 for people in the hundred-million range, i.e. something that could just as easily have been passed off as routine.

And finally, always remember: Yeah, of course it's his unforgivable stupidity.

[Zorra]

87. Many, probably most, men think with their dicks - unforgivable stupidity is

the norm.

Again - starting a chain of high class brothels to trap political enemies - let's face it - it's already a reality.

There's a lot of people out there that are paid to be devious for profit and power - notably the American Enterprise Institute.

[defendandprotect]

105. Granted, it wasn't sex . . . but could Spitzer have been this great a thorn in the

side of Wall St/Banks --- and Bush/GOP because he was looking for a Democratic majority in NY State and seemingly moving to it --- and still be so stupid as to . . .

enter into engaging with a prostitution ring --- some of which he'd shut down ---
without giving it any thought ---

In fact, with conveniently talking openly about inviting the prostitute to DC which nails his
legal license?

Spitzer might not have wondered whether the organization was being watched --- ???

[defendandprotect]

88. Some of this Spitzer stuff may need room for rethinking it . . . ?? ??? ???

Governor Spitzer has long battled with the former comptroller for New York States Pension Fund, Alan G. Hevesi, who holds duel Israeli-American citizenship, and prompted a US Federal Probe that charged Comptroller Hevesi of using the over $100 billion of funds entrusted to him for the personal benefit of his friends and family, and to which Mr. Hevesi pled guilty for and paid a $5,000 fine.

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.

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1077.htm

Hevesi uses $100 billion o ffunds for his personal benefit and is FINED $5,000 ... !!! ????
WHAT???

The Carlyle Group is collapsing and Larry Silverstone was heavily invested in the fund and having
withdrawn now $14 billion . . . ???!!!!

[JackRiddler]

92. Perhaps you need to diversify your sources

This story takes a bunch of exciting elements and spins a tale, in my opinion. Plus look at the other stuff on that site!

Silverstein, not -stone, and before this story I've never seen a suggestion he was involved in Carlyle, let alone to the tune of $14 billion! I suspect that's just made up. Show me a source on his involvement that's actually based on financial documents. Silverstein and Spitzer were buddy-buddy and Spitzer treated 9/11 as case closed.

Hevesi managed $100 billion, but he didn't steal it! He's accused of having the state pay large sums - in the tens of thousands, that is (I may be misremembering) - for his disabled wife's transportation. The plea deal was generous so as to get him out of office (a typical deal when office holders are caught). Despite the scandal, he had won re-election, so he had leverage and got off easy. The idea that Spitzer was set up in a revenge plot on behalf of Hevesi is far-fetched, to say the least.

[defendandprotect]

95. Thanks for the comments ---

My overall point was in asking, "Is Spitzer really this dumb?" . . .
It's a question which is troubling me on second thought ---

There is much, obviously, to be looked at re 9/11 and Larry Silverstein ---
and every surrounding iota of what went down. So, it would be further disappointing in
regard to Spitzer to believe that he was not questioning it.

Thanks for the info on Hevesi ... still quite unusual, IMO.
And, seems to be more extensive use of the funds other than "family" --- extending to "friends."

Carlyle, of course, seems to be going down ---
I'd like to be optimistic that they think that the warprofiteering is reaching an end --
though I have no idea who is invested in this group still, or not.

I don't think that even this "source" is suggesting that there was a revenge plot vs Spitzer solely because of Hevesi --- obviously there is a mountain of work Spitzer has done which has created a long list of enemies on WallStreet/Banks --- for instance . . .

Prior to his taking office as New York State 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.

And, Spitzer also denounced Bush for his interference with state's efforts to protect consumers re predatory lending for housing ---

Additionally, the collapse of WTC tower 7 is also a large question having housed legal documents which would have been of concern to prosecutors -- and corrupt corporations.

[nolabels]

89. I read the thread to this point and didn't detect any speculation that......

was plausible on how he got involved in the first place. Did he engage in that type of behavior all his life or was it just a recent thing. Was he set up recently or set up some where back. Was he not set up and just somehow walked into picking up high price escorts?

[JackRiddler]

91. I think there is no doubt that in the first place he...

has to be a penis-driven fellow with ample hubris and arrogance for this to happen as it did. He fucked up, it's on his head. On another thread someone summed it up in a nutshell with a comment like, "as someone whose great grandmother was picked up six times for soliciting, if Spitzer had not wanted this to happen, he should have advocated the decriminalization of prostitution back when he was Attorney General."

But men who fit his personality profile are plentiful in positions of power, perhaps end up advanced under the present system because of the systemic corruption and the preference among the corrupt for others who are corrupt. So these kinds of scandals are going to happen over and over, set up or not. The extent to which this was a set up and why would still matter. Was there someone else behind it, and if so what was their advantage in this? Or was Spitzer just a total fool who was caught incidentally by the routine operations of banking and the law?

[nolabels]

94. I guess i really don't know enough about it to speculate but..........

then again. Was his family well to do and because of it was he inclined to high priced ones or was his money self-made. Yea, he was stupid but that being noted does not exactly lead to how it came about. I have not read the book "Confessions of an economic hit-man" but have listened to a few interviews by the author. The targeting of foreign leaders by blackmail through sex was planned in the time span of years and decades. Knowing this and how that so called domestic firewall against many practices (including torture) was just lip service why wouldn't Spitzer's predicament worth some interest?

It's sort of like the idea of people who owned Ford Pinto's and got burnt alive are sort of stupid because they should known a car manufacture would sell them out for a few more cents. They might have known but that doesn't explain how it happened

The facts on the ground seem too abnormal without some explanation on how. I also detect it to be flirting more with the element of fear than just some satisfaction with an element some weird sexual deviation.

[defendandprotect]

98. I think there are legitimate questions about this whole story . . .

and what we have is mainly speculation ....

both on his level of stupidity ---

and what caused him to make so many stupid moves --- ???

Evidently, Spitzer didn't know about the Mann Act, either . . .
and is openly arranging for the prostitute to meet him in Washington --- ????

Spitzer doesn't know that telephones and cell phones can be tapped?

E-mail can be watched --- ???

That an investigation into Emperor's services might have been triggered for some other reason
and was perhaps being watched --- and he could be caught in someone else's investigation --- ????

It keeps coming down to, how stupid was Spitzer --- ???

[defendandprotect]

97. True . . . was he investigating prostitution and offered a free ride --- ???

How does this happen when you've actually been involved in shutting down this kind of crime . . . ??

When you are someone who KNOWS the various ways that people get caught --- ???

[JackRiddler]

99. a wtf kick!

[JackRiddler]

101. And as for Spitzer and September 11th

Spitzer filed an amicus brief on behalf of Silverstein's argument in the WTC insurance cases that the September 11th crashes constituted not one but two events under New York State law, and that Silverstein was therefore entitled to double the payout.

Spitzer also mediated to arrange the final settlement on the insurance claims last year. He and his campaign contributer Silverstein appeared to be buddy-buddy.

Spitzer's office acknowledged in October 2004 the receipt of the 2004 "Justice for 9/11" citizens' complaint and petition citing probable cause and calling for a criminal investigation or grand jury to examine unsolved crimes relating to September 11th, including allegations of possible government complicity.

http://Justicefor911.org

They never responded to this initiative.

When I asked Spitzer about a September 11th investigation at a public meeting as AG (on the day he announced his run for governor!), Spitzer said his office would look carefully at the petition and respond (they didn't) but that otherwise, "I trust the 9/11 Commission." He called it an excellent report.

An important Spitzer staffer, Dietrich Snell, worked for the 9/11 Commission before joining the Attorney General's staff in 2004. Snell appears to have been one of the lead writers of the 9/11 Commission Report. While on the 9/11 Commission staff, he was the one who heard the claims of the Able Danger whistleblowers, five military personnel and contracters who stepped forward to say that their surveillance operation had in 1999 and 2000 located Mohamed Atta and three other alleged ringleader-hijackers of the 9/11 attacks as members of an al-Qaeda "Brooklyn Cell" plotting an attack in the United States. The Able Danger operatives' request to pass this information to the FBI was blocked by their superiors at Socom in Florida, their program was shut down, and the most prominent officer making the claims, Anthony Shaeffer, was suspended from duty due to an internal Pentagon investigation into charges that he had overcharged for phone bills by $67 and stolen pens. Snell was reportedly the 9/11 Commission staffer who rejected an investigation into the matter.

In 2006, when a Congressional subcommittee wanted Snell to testify on the 9/11 Commission's refusal to investigate the Able Danger story, Spitzer stepped in and said he would refuse to allow Snell to testify.

In short, there is no indication that Spitzer was interested in investigating September 11, despite ample occasion and opportunity thanks to his offices to aid the cause of truth, justice and disclosure.

[defendandprotect]

106. Okay . . . seems to be another indication of Spitzer's actual stupidity . . .

or his wanting to keep his campaign coffers filled with "buddy/buddy" money -- !!!

Rather than threatening a 9/11 investigation, Spitzer was frequently standing in its way ... !!!

hmmmm....

[aldo]

107. Don't kid yourself, it was a political hitjob

If it wasn't a politically motivated investigation how come they only gave out the identity of Client 9? Sure he played into it, his behavior was extremely stupid. The banks may have played a role but I doubt if it was an honest one. A SAR for a multi-multi millionaire taking out thousands or tens of thousands -- I don't think so. If they are going to target our big players with FBI investigations (speaking of which, the FBI is practically a professional blackmail organization. Did anyone get fired for attempting to blackmail MLK? No. Maybe this time they had photos, so Spitzer didn't dare stay and fight) it's time for us to ratchet up our game. I suggest starting by leaving behind the relatively innocuous term, MSM, and using the term presstitute instead. The presstitutes were players in all of this, calling it an involvement in a prostitution ring -- hell, he was just a client, keeping up the drumbeat for his imminent resignation, each day upping the ante, etc. We have a politicized, whored Offices of U.S. Attorney, FBI, and media. We should call them on it.

[JackRiddler]

109. The gist of what you're saying is true...

And it doesn't conflict with the OP, except maybe my provocative choice of headline. I'm pointing to the fact that the banks had to play along. They ratted him out on his peanuts money movements. Also, that he's an idiot or a sucker.

Now the question more arises: Who's this Brener?! IRS agent? Three passports?

FBI: Hoover's first task as an agent in the pre-FBI organization, I recently learned, was as the surveillance and containment officer for Marcus Garvey.

It never ends!

[JackRiddler]

111. That last note about Hoover and Garvey

Was not meant as any kind of comparison to the Spitzer case!

Rather, to point out that FBI has always had the function of political police, as you imply.

[JackRiddler]

112. UPDATE 5: Supposedly Spitzer started the probe himself...

So the way the full story is resolving in the papers at the end of the week is as follows:

When Spitzer asked Bank #1, North Fork/Capital One, to remove his name from payments to QAT, the front for Emperors Club, the bank responded that this was impossible and filed a SARS on him, which got the ball rolling.

And this brings us back to the question that kicked off this thread:

WHAT WAS HE THINKING?

He's the former AG and Sherriff of Wall Street, and now the Governor. He knows what he's doing is likely to trigger investigation by the sheer fact of him doing it.

This brings us back to two possibilities:

1) Incredible hubris, arrogance and feeling of invulnerability, masking something he knows will trigger his own self-destruction. This kind of behavior has precedents in the annals of politics.

2) He trusts someone at the bank to cover for him, for some reason. If so: Why? An arrangement with buddies at the bank would also have precedent in the annals of politics.

[PRETZEL]

114. Not sure if he started the probe himself,

from what I've been able to gather the feds were already investigating this prostitution ring
http://blogs.trb.com/news/politics/blog/Emperors%20Club%20Complaint%20-%20Redacted1.txt

What I think may have happened is that someone went to Spitzer and told him that they know that he's Client -9 and that they now have bank records to prove it. He's not under the original indictment into the prostitution ring. But what he now is under the microscope for "political" prosecution. He just might have felt that that is more damaging to him than any solicitation charges could ever be. He resigns now to save face and does damage control to both himself and the party.

[JackRiddler]

115. No, that's the current story as in the papers - he triggered the probe himself...

When he asked North Fork to take his name off a series of payments to QAT after the fact, they filed a SAR.

And that would be bizarre, from the Sherriff of Wall Street, who knows how SARS work and has used them himself to nail other wrong-doers.

IF TRUE (you're right if you think papers might get it wrong), then this behavior can be explained only only by
a) (semi-conscious) self-destructive hubris or
b) a feeling of trust that his personal banker would cover for him.

(I do presume he would have a personal banker at North Fork, given his wealth and position.)

Once again: Why would he trust the banker, when he makes such a request? Is the banker someone he thought of as a friend and confidante?

[yurbud]

113. kick

[JackRiddler]

117. weekend kick

[JackRiddler]

118. UPDATE 7: Spitzer's Last Words?

Well worth reading in light of what's happening right now on the credit and equity markets...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021302783.html

How the Bush Administration Stopped the States From Stepping In to Help Consumers

By New York Governor Eliot Spitzer
The Washington Post
Feb. 14, 2008

Several years ago, state attorneys general and others involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. Some were misrepresenting the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers' ability to repay, making loans with deceptive "teaser" rates that later ballooned astronomically, packing loans with undisclosed charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks. These and other practices, we noticed, were having a devastating effect on home buyers. In addition, the widespread nature of these practices, if left unchecked, threatened our financial markets.

Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem, the Bush administration looked the other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact, the government chose instead to align itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers.

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....

(...)

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.

But the unanimous opposition of the 50 states did not deter, or even slow, the Bush administration in its goal of protecting the banks....

When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judged favorably. The tale is still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing, in fact, that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers.

[JackRiddler]

121. UPDATE 8 (actually 7): Sunday Times reports AG Spitzer had gone after both banks.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3559410.ece

VERY LONG & DETAILED... lots of interesting stuff about Spitzer's career and also on the escort service.

I really suspect the main message here was: Don't fuck with Wall Street.

March 16, 2008
Toppling of the Luv Guv is ‘Wall Street revenge’
Eliot Spitzer’s downfall as governor last week may have roots in pursuit of wealthy bankers while state attorney-general

The beginning of Spitzer’s end can be traced to three banking transfers that left his personal account at the North Fork Bank in New York last spring and summer. For reasons that have not been satisfactorily explained, these payments totalling $15,000 attracted the attention of bank employees who monitor accounts for signs of suspicious activity.

(...)

Yet Spitzer is the son of a multi-millionaire property tycoon and has substantial assets of his own. The notion that as few as three payments from his account of less than $10,000 might be considered suspicious “raises as many questions as answers”, said Dershowitz.

(...)

It has since been established that both North Fork and HSBC were on the receiving end of Spitzer investigations in his days as attorney-general. In 2003 North Fork was obliged to refund $20,000 to dozens of home-owners after Spitzer claimed that the bank had been charging illegal fees.

(...)

No evidence has been produced that the bank reporting of Spitzer’s transactions was maliciously intended, yet Dershowitz and other commentators have noted that the system was designed to ferret out drug dealers, the mafia, terrorists and major financial fraud. “Once federal authorities concluded that the ‘suspicious financial transactions’ attributed to Mr Spitzer did not fit any of , they should have closed the investigation,” said Dershowitz.

Instead, they went after Spitzer with the raw, relentless enthusiasm that the governor had so often displayed towards his own targets in the past...