|
Banned
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rekna
First, What Spitzer did was wrong and he should resign. Second, Craig and Vitter should follow. No self respecting person can call for the resignation of one of these without calling for all three anyone who does is blinded by politics and is the reason that this country is in the shitter.
Second, it is concerning that it took a whole week for the FBI to leak Spitzer fopah but took years to leak Vitters.... There is definitely a problem created by this administration of trying to use its office in order to further its political party illegally. From selective prosecution to stacking the justice department this administration has done far more to hurt this country than any terrorist ever has.
|
Rekna, there were ten "Johns" included in the indictment 47 page telephone conversations transcript. Spitzer's Feb. 13 to Feb. 14 "transaction" consisting of 5 phone calls, takes up five pages of the 47 total. Why, since he is not charged yet with any crime, are only Spitzer's conversation transcript and identity made public?
This seems to be a Bush partisanized DOJ "Op". Here is how they work it. So far, the government sources "speak on condition of anonymity". They trickle out contradicting "morsels", observe the weak points in their "tale", and then deny whatever crap that they've spewed that fails to float...observe:
Last friday, before Spitzer was thrown in the "mix", the investigation was reported to have been initiated in "2006":
But more recently, they've advised to the NY Times that it began by accident, with Spitzer's money "transfer" to a "shell company". If the invetigation began with the prostitution "ring" in 2006, the FBI, once alerted by the IRS, would quickly know what the company was that received the wire transfer.
All of the other accounts, including the following article, and in the details included in the indictment, fail to describe any wire transfer payment from Spitzer. All we have to do is note the denials and revisions in coming articles.
Quote:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/03072008...ers_100827.htm
5G/HR. HOOKERS
EMPEROR GALS GOT A KING'S RANSOM FOR SEX: FEDS
By JENNIFER FERMINO and CHUCK BENNETT
March 7, 2008
...The operation started to unravel after one of the hookers agreed to become a confidential source for the FBI in late 2006..
|
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/ny...nquire.html?hp
Revelations Began in Routine Tax Inquiry
By WILLIAM K. RASHBAUM
Published: March 11, 2008
....There, in the Hauppauge offices of the Internal Revenue Service, investigators conducting a routine examination of suspicious financial transactions reported to them by banks found <h3>several unusual movements</h3> of cash involving the governor of New York, several officials said.
The investigators working out of the three-story office building, which faces Veterans Highway, typically review such reports, the officials said. But this was not typical: transactions by a governor who appeared to be trying to conceal the source, destination or purpose <h3>of the movement</h3> of thousands of dollars in cash, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The money ended up in the bank accounts <h3>of what appeared to be shell companies,</h3> corporations that essentially had no real business.
The transactions, officials said, suggested possible financial crimes — maybe bribery, political corruption, or something inappropriate involving campaign finance. Prostitution, they said, was the furthest thing from the minds of the investigators.
Soon, the I.R.S. agents, from the agency’s Criminal Investigation Division, were working with F.B.I. agents and federal prosecutors from Manhattan who specialize in political corruption.
The inquiry, like many such investigations, was a delicate one. Because the focus was a high-ranking government official, prosecutors were required to seek the approval of the United States attorney general to proceed. Once they secured that permission, the investigation moved forward.
At the outset, one official said, it seemed like a bread-and-butter inquiry into political corruption, the kind of case the F.B.I. squad, known internally by the designation C14, frequently pursues.
But before long, the investigators learned that the money <h3>was being moved</h3> to pay for sex and that the transactions were being manipulated to conceal Mr. Spitzer’s connection to payments for meetings with prostitutes, the official said.
Then, with the assistance of a confidential informant, a young woman who had worked previously as a prostitute for the Emperor’s Club V.I.P., the escort service that Mr. Spitzer was believed to be using, the investigators were able to get a judge to approve wiretaps on the cellphones of some of those suspected of involvement in the escort service.
The wiretaps, along with the records of bank accounts held in the names of the shell companies, revealed a world of prostitutes catering to wealthy men. At the center was the Emperor’s Club, which arranged “dates” with more than 50 beautiful young women in New York, Paris, London, Miami and Washington.
But its finances moved through the shell companies — the QAT Consulting Group, QAT International and Protech Consulting — which held bank accounts into which clients wired their payments, according to court papers in the case.
One of the booking agents, a woman named Temeka Rachelle Lewis, 32, told a client that wiring his payments to QAT Consulting was safe because it would show up “like as a business transaction,” according to an affidavit filed in federal court the case.
But the transactions proved to be anything but safe for Mr. Spitzer, who, aides said on Monday, was weighing possible resignation.
Last week, Ms. Lewis was one of four people charged by federal prosecutors in Manhattan with operating the prostitution ring. Also arrested were Mark Brener, 62, who is accused of heading the operation; Cecil Suwal, 23, who is said to have managed it day to day; and Tanya Hollander, 36, who worked part time as a booker.
The affidavit, which was unsealed on Thursday when the four were arrested, details the secretly recorded conversations that officials said captured Mr. Spitzer’s efforts to arrange a Washington meeting with a prostitute on Feb. 13. It also describes the young woman’s report to the booking agent on her encounter with the governor, shortly after it was concluded.
(Page 2 of 2)
The affidavit does not name the governor, <h3>nor does it name any of the other 10 men described as having purchased sex through the operation. Instead, it refers to them by number, with Mr. Spitzer, according to two law enforcement officials, listed as Client 9.
Mr. Spitzer’s cited rendezvous with the prostitute on Feb. 13 occupies five pages of the 47-page affidavit.</h3> The document recounts parts of a half-dozen conversations Client 9 had with Ms. Lewis, the booking agent, in the roughly 24 hours leading up to his meeting with the prostitute at the Mayflower Hotel.
They discussed whether his deposit would cover the young woman’s travel expenses, whether <h3>his payment had arrived — apparently by mail or overnight courier</h3> — and how she would be admitted to the hotel room he had reserved in Washington. At one point, when the booker tells him it will be a woman who went by the name Kristen, Client 9 said, “Great, O.K., wonderful,” according to the affidavit.
During the last conversation, he asked Ms. Lewis to remind him what Kristen looked like.
The conversations, according to the affidavit, were among more than 5,000 telephone calls and text messages that the federal authorities intercepted during the course of the investigation into the prostitution ring, which began last October. Investigators also seized more than 6,000 e-mail messages, bank records, and travel and hotel records, and conducted physical surveillance...
|
This entire section of the indictment documenting Spitzer's transaction supports the idea that he intended to make his payment untraceable....mailing cash to the prostitution service's address with no return address on the package.
So how does this practice...client 9 comments that he mailed payment, "same as in the past", come to the attention of the IRS through routine, legitimate means... Spitzer was a prosecutor, not one who would easily permit his payments to QAT to be traced back to him?
Quote:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/package...-complaint.pdf
PDF viewer pg 34
b. February 13, 2008, Interstate Transportation
From New York To Washinqton, D.C.
73. On February 11, 2008, at approximately 10:53 p.m.,
TEMEKA RACHELLE LEWIS, a/k/a "Rachelle," the defendant, using the
6587 Number, sent a text message to CECIL SUWAL, a/k/a "Katie,"
a/k/a "Kate," the defendant, at the 3390 Number. In the text
message, LEWIS wrote: 'Pls let me know if [Client-9's] 'package'
(believed to be a reference to a deposit of money sent by mail)
arrives 2mrw. Appt wd b on Wed." (Call 3728C). SUWAL sent a
text message back to LEWIS, stating: 'K." (Call 3731C).
74. On February 12, 2008, at approximately 2:37 p.m.,
TEMEKA RACHELLE LEWIS, a/k/a 'Rachelle," the defendant, using the
6587 Number, called a prostitute who the Emperors Club marketed
PDF viewer pg 35
using the name "Kristen." During the call, LEWIS left a message
for "Kristen" that the "deposit" had not arrived today, but that
they should be able to do the trip if the deposit arrived
tomorrow. (Call 9324R) . At approximately 4 : 03 p.m. , LEWIS
received a call from "Kristen." During the call, "Kristen" said
that she had heard the message, and that was fine. LEWIS and
"Kristen" then discussed the time that "Kristen" would take the
train from New York to Washington, D.C. LEWIS told "Kristen"
that there was a 5:39 p.m. train that arrived at 9:00 p.m., and
that "Kristen" would be taking the train out of Penn Station.
LEWIS confirmed that Client-9 would be paying for everything -
train tickets, cab fare from the hotel and back, mini bar or room
service, travel time, and hotel. LEWIS said that they would \
probably not know until 3 p.m. if the deposit arrived because
Client-9 would not do traditional wire transferring. (Call
9362) .
75. At approximately 8:12 p.m., TEMEKA RACHELLE LEWIS,
a/k/a "Rachelle," the defendant, using the 6587 Number, received
a call from Client-9. During the call, LEWIS told Client-9 that
the "package" did not arrive today. <h3>LEWIS asked Client-9 if
there was a return address on the envelope, and Client-9 said no.
LEWIS asked: "You had QAT . . .," and Client-9 said: "Yup, same
as in the past, no question about it."</h3> LEWIS asked Client-9 what
time he was interested in having the appointment tomorrow.
Client-9 told her 9:00 p.m. or 10:OO p.m. LEWIS told Client-9 to
call her back in five minutes. (Call 9460R) .
76. At approximately 8:14 p.m., TEMEKA RACHELLE LEWIS,
a/k/a "Rachelle," the defendant, using the 6587 Number, called
MARK BRENER, a/k/a "Michael," the defendant, at the 0937 Number.
During the call, LEWIS told BRENER that Client-9 had just called
about an appointment for tomorrow, and that he had around $400 or
$500 credit. SUWAL said that she did not feel comfortable saying
that Client-9 had a $400 credit when she did not know that for a
fact. SUWAL and BRENER talked in the background about whether
Client-9 could proceed with the appointment without his deposit
having arrived. (Call 9462R). At approximately 8:23 p.m., LEWIS
called Client-9, and told him that the 'office" said he could not
proceed with the appointment with his available credit. After
discussing ways to resolve the situation, LEWIS and Client-9 I
agreed to speak the following day. (Call 9467R) .
77. On February 12, 2008, at approximately 9:22 p.m.,
TEMEKA RACHELLE LEWIS, a/k/a "Rachelle," the defendant, using the
6587 Number, sent a text message to ''Kristen." In the text
message, LEWIS wrote: 'If D.C. appt. happens u will need 2 leave
PDF viewer pg 36
NYC @ 4:45pm. Is that possible?" (Call 9515R). "Kristen" wrote
back: "Yes." (Call 9516R) .
78. At approximately 3 : 2 0 p.m., TEMEKA RACHELLE LEWIS,
a/k/a "Rachelle," the defendant, using the 6587 Number, received
a call from Client-9. During the call, LEWIS told Client-9 that
they were still trying to determine if his deposit had arrived.
Client-9 told LEWIS that he had made a re'servation at the hotel,
and had paid for it in his name. Client-9 said that there would
be a key waiting for her, and told LEWIS that what he had on
account with her covered the "transportation" (believed to be a
reference to the cost of the trainfare for "Kristen" from New
York to Washington, D.C.). LEWIS said that she would try to make
it work. (Call 9636R). At approximately 3:24 p.m., LEWIS, using
the 6587 Number, called CECIL SUWAL, a/k/a "Katie," a/k/a "Kate,"
the defendant, at the 3390 Number. LEWIS explained to SUWAL what
Client-9 had proposed. SUWAL told LEWIS she would call her back.
(Call 9642R) . At approximately 3 : 53 p.m., MARK BRENER, a/k/a
"Michael," the defendant, using the 0937 Number, called LEWIS at
the 6587 Number. BRENER and LEWIS discussed the problem about
Client-9's deposit. (Call 9654R). At approximately 4:18 p.m.,
SUWAL, using the 3390 Number, sent a text message to LEWIS at the
6587 Number, stating: "[Plackage arrived. Pls be sure he rsvp
hotel." (Call 9659R) .
79. At approximately 4:21 p.m., TEMEKA RACHELLE LEWIS,
a/k/a "Rachelle, " the defendant, using the 6587 Number, called
"Kri~ten.~Du ring the call, LEWIS told "Kristen" that the
package had arrived, and that "theyu (believed to be a reference
to MARK BRENER, a/k/a "Michael," and CECIL SUWAL, a/k/a "Katie,"
a/k/a "Kate," the defendants) just got the mail. LEWIS told
"Kristen" to get to Penn Station and call her when she picked up
her tickets. (Call 9661R) . At approximately 4 :48 p.m., LEWIS
sent a text message to "Kristen," stating: "TRAIN INFO Departing
from Penn St. Arriving 8 Union St. Washington, DC NYC to DC Train
# 129 Dep. 5:39pm Arr. 9pm." (Call 9G79R). At approximately
4:54 p.m., LEWIS sent another text message to "KristenItts tating:
"TRAIN INFO Return trip DC to NYC Train #84 Dep. 2/14 8:35pm Arr.
ll:57am." (Call 9683R).
80. At approximately 4:58 p.m., TEMEKA RACHELLE LEWIS,
a/k/a "Rachelle," the defendant, using the 6587 Number, received
an incoming call from Client-9. During the call, LEWIS told
Client-9 that his package arrived today, and Client-9 said good.
LEWIS asked Client-9 what time he was expecting to have the
appointment. Client-9 told LEWIS maybe 10:OO p.m. or so, and
asked who it was. LEWIS said it was "Kristen," and Client-9 said...
|
Last edited by host; 03-10-2008 at 10:43 PM..
|