It's clear that his ambiguous statement and his brief self-seclusion are designed to allow him to assess whether he could build a public coalition of support for him to stay. So far, I haven't heard any words of sympathy, not from Albany Democrats, national Democrats, or anyway. He clearly did not quite anticipate the earthquake that his disclosure has caused. He learned about his possible indictment on Friday, told his staff Sunday, went public yesterday, and then... the end-game isn't clear, but in an atmosphere where Democrats are close to retaking the state Senate, where national Democrats believe they have the edge on ethics, he may face pressure from unanticipated corners. On the other hand, perhaps the strength of the Democratic Party in New York in general and in the country has some to give to it, and can absorb a scandal like this without too much damage.
« Ferraro | Main | Just In Case You Were Wondering How Tasteful The New York Post Would Be... » Will Eliot Spitzer resign?11 Mar 2008 10:06 am Comments (10)
Here's the angle that might give him some wiggle room. The investigation may have started as "looking into political corruption" - but given the amount of E - mails and other information they had - at some point they knew it was JUST about sex. Yet they pursued it anyway - not because it was such an important crime that johns are prosecuted for all the time( they aren't) - but merely for political reasons - to get Spitzer. They didn't need to set up a sting with him as the john to get the "ring". So getting the ring wasn't the real target - the real target was Spitzer - to take him down. To threated him with prosecution and force him to resign. Spitzer looks bad, yes - but maybe or government looks worse. 
I see no possibility of his surviving this scandal. His reputation as Mr. Clean is what made him a political star here in New York and that's been completely erased. I've not heard a single voice in support of his staying. Not from friends, not from colleagues, not from committed Democrats. This wasn't a momentary indiscretion. This was a willful effort to circumvent the law. He exhibited terrible judgment. Spitzer must go.
I'm not sure why this scandal is getting couched in ethics. Eliot Spitzer broke the law. He may or may not be prosecuted for it. Depending on whether he is prosecuted, and depending on how serious people think the violation was, he might have to resign. But what exactly does it have to do with the public trust and ethics? He didn't take any bribes. He didn't give special consideration to anyone in the political arena based on any benefit they gave him. He didn't break any laws relating to politics (i.e., campaign finance laws, lobbying regulations, etc.). In terms of sex crimes, he didn't have sex with someone over whom he held power as a result of his official position (unlike Mark Foley with the congressional pages). Spitzer broke the law against prostitution, the same way Dick Cheney broke the law against negligently shooting people in the face. Cheney was not prosecuted; whether Spitzer is prosecuted remains to be seen, and whether he should be prosecuted is something people can debate. But although it's embarrassing that the vice president got drunk, went hunting, and shot an old man in the face, and it's an ethical breach in the sense that we expect everyone to follow the law and we consider it unethical to break the law, I don't think anyone looked at the Cheney incident as a breach of political ethics. To me, this is the same thing, and I think it's silly for people to put it in the same category as Duke Cunningham, Tom DeLay, Bob Ney, etc.
"...can absorb a scandal like this without too much damage." Without too much damage? HUH? He was caught on tape arranging for a prostitute to travel across state lines. That's a FEDERAL CRIME. How can he possibly stay on? His ability to govern will be nil, his continued presence at the top of the state's Democratic party will be a HUGE drag on the ticket in November, etc.
C.B. Todd expresses the Clintonian way: play the victim! Even Bill Clinton would have had difficulty withstanding prostitution charges with the number of recordings they seem to have. The part about wanting to engage in unsafe practices was particularly intriguing. It would be nice if someone who had been such a vocal advocate of upholding law would resign very quickly. That is clearly not his instinct.
Spitzer is through, Marc, and the fact that you think there's a chance he isn't makes me wonder if you don't know anything about politics in general, or just New York politics in particular. Here's why Spitzer is finished: 1. Hypocrisy, general. You can't have Elliot Ness, Mr. Clean patronizing high-dollar escort services. I find it humorous that several years ago I had to stop gambling online because Spitzer forced the banks to stop processing credit card transactions; evidently he felt that his own desires should be accomodated regardless. Basically it's a huge ethical breach. 2. Hypocrisy, specific. Spitzer, as AG, prosecuted prostitution rings. This, to me, is likely the most sordid element of this whole sordid scene. You just don't do it. 3. Spitzer has no natural political basis of support, and he's alienated plenty during his state political career. He has no allies. There will be no help forthcoming. Both of New York's senators hate him, he has few friends in the state senate, and as a former prosecutor, 4. A felony conviction will disqualify him from the governorship. 5. The sex was kinky and evidently rough. Plus the fact that his wife is beautiful, and the fact that her list of "won'ts" evidently didn't include his twisted desires just makes him look like that much more of a dick. 6. There is no plausible deniability here. He's on tape. There is no out. Goodbye, Mr. Spitzer.
Whoops, pulled a Marc, and my item 3 trailed off into nothingness. Nothing major omitted, just a reiteration of the fact that Spitzer has no friends, and I don't see him making any under these circumstances.
Do you trust a guy that a) who's job is to go after crime and b) who's private dollar go to support crime? This isn't some bimbo in the White House. This is like the director of Homeland security transporting illegal immigrants over the border... I will be glad when this "political busy-body" hits the fan. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
What the Bush administration has taught me is that as long as you're willing to be hated by large numbers of people, you can do pretty much anything you want as a chief executive until your term runs out.
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
| 
Copyright © 2008 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
It's crazy to do anything before the fallout's over and the information sinks in, I think a lot has to do with how far the prosecutors plan to go in this case. Also, if he can get a deal and stay in office he can point towards the NRCC's embezzlement scandal too. And recall Jack Abramoff and others.....
Posted by Rhoda | March 11, 2008 10:25 AM