Thursday, March 13, 2008
A Real Investigation?
by Ken Houghton
In short, it was (and is) difficult to believe that the most prominent name involved was Eliot Effing Spitzer.
But Client #6 has been revealed, and he's none other than Price William's godfather, Gerald Cavendish Grosvenor. (Can you tell he's English?) And "Kristen" is much nicer about Spitzer than this:
Married, with four children.
Two down, eight to go.
One of the points that kept suspicions high was that "Client #9" was named, but Clients 1-8 and 10 (including, it is strongly rumored, a prominent New York area judge) remained anonymous.
In short, it was (and is) difficult to believe that the most prominent name involved was Eliot Effing Spitzer.
But Client #6 has been revealed, and he's none other than Price William's godfather, Gerald Cavendish Grosvenor. (Can you tell he's English?) And "Kristen" is much nicer about Spitzer than this:
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."
Married, with four children.
Two down, eight to go.
Labels: homeland security, just life, Politics, Sex
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
New York: The Blind Leading the Blind
by Ken Houghton
As of Monday, the New York State Governor will be a blind, black man.
Take that, Geraldine?
Ignore the Federal/State issues (fair enough), buy into the strange delusion that this is a "follow the money" issue, and ignore Larry Ribstein's points entirely (especially the ones here).
As of Monday, the New York State Governor will be a blind, black man.
Take that, Geraldine?
Labels: homeland security, Politics, Sex, the rule of law
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Ask the Right Questions; Find the Reality
by Ken Houghton
Not that Spitzer didn't do it, but, not to be subtle about it: you can't keep that high-end a business running with only one client.
Now, I know that no one would ever believe that the Bush administration—and certainly not someone who worked closely with Michael Chertoff—would ever do anything for purely political reasons.
But don't be surprised if that is exactly what happened.
As a side note, I got the chance to see the most famous person prosecuted under the Mann Act live last summer (thank you, Ruth), and it's difficult not to think that that prosecution also made the world a slightly nastier place than it should be.
UPDATE: Felix Salmon summarizes the power struggle that led to the prosecution, and is more optimistic about the results than I (but who isn't?).
UPDATE 2: Lance speak, you listen. But see also the comments from Velvet Goldmine and, especially, actor212:
UPDATE #3: See Reg at Beautiful Horizons, who appears to have noticed what Tom Tomorrow pointed out, and (via Felix) Justin Wolfers, who basically explains (without noting it directly) why David Vitter and Larry Craig are still in office.
Jane Hamsher and Digby have noticed what anyone who looked at the indictment would know: this is a political smear job.
Not that Spitzer didn't do it, but, not to be subtle about it: you can't keep that high-end a business running with only one client.
Now, I know that no one would ever believe that the Bush administration—and certainly not someone who worked closely with Michael Chertoff—would ever do anything for purely political reasons.
But don't be surprised if that is exactly what happened.
As a side note, I got the chance to see the most famous person prosecuted under the Mann Act live last summer (thank you, Ruth), and it's difficult not to think that that prosecution also made the world a slightly nastier place than it should be.
UPDATE: Felix Salmon summarizes the power struggle that led to the prosecution, and is more optimistic about the results than I (but who isn't?).
UPDATE 2: Lance speak, you listen. But see also the comments from Velvet Goldmine and, especially, actor212:
Ask yourself this, Lance:
Since when has $5G ever been considered "large sums of money"?
That would mean, the next time you buy a car and put a down payment down, the Feds ought to be allowed to look at it first.
UPDATE #3: See Reg at Beautiful Horizons, who appears to have noticed what Tom Tomorrow pointed out, and (via Felix) Justin Wolfers, who basically explains (without noting it directly) why David Vitter and Larry Craig are still in office.
Labels: homeland security, Politics, Sex, the rule of law
Sunday, June 03, 2007
(MSP Airport) Why Are We Still on Scary Threat Level Orange!!!1!
by Tom Bozzo
Just wondering, what TSA genius came up with the idea of re-screening passengers who have (1) been subject to a couple layers of pre-screening, (2) been through security in the EU, whence we've exported our stupid frackin' liquids restrictions, (3) otherwise been trapped in a widebodied tin can for 9 hours, then (4) disgorged into your supposedly sterile immigration and customs areas. Isn't there some totally unscreened air cargo still in the system towards which those resources might be better targeted?
Thanks to the NWA agent who directed me to put [liquid treat redacted] into my checked bag. I was only surly because my body clock is telling me it's 1 A.M. Should [liquid treat redacted] not make it to Madison intact, I'm blaming the frackin' government.
Update: Liquid treat made it to Madison just fine.
The perspective afforded by two decent nights' sleep leads me to think that the concern may be the possibility for passengers to shift items into carry-ons that are allowed in checked baggage but verboten in the cabin. Technically, passengers may be allowed to check a variety of weapons and potentially dangerous articles — though you might reasonably wonder why some of those articles (swords? sabers? firearms?) should be allowed in any form of baggage. The result is that, to offer a guess as to the order of magnitude, maybe 999,999 parts of a million of the effect of the regs falls on (mostly) harmless liquids.
Don't they realize it prevents them from re-raising the threat level the next time the WPE is in (even worse) political straits?
Just wondering, what TSA genius came up with the idea of re-screening passengers who have (1) been subject to a couple layers of pre-screening, (2) been through security in the EU, whence we've exported our stupid frackin' liquids restrictions, (3) otherwise been trapped in a widebodied tin can for 9 hours, then (4) disgorged into your supposedly sterile immigration and customs areas. Isn't there some totally unscreened air cargo still in the system towards which those resources might be better targeted?
Thanks to the NWA agent who directed me to put [liquid treat redacted] into my checked bag. I was only surly because my body clock is telling me it's 1 A.M. Should [liquid treat redacted] not make it to Madison intact, I'm blaming the frackin' government.
Update: Liquid treat made it to Madison just fine.
The perspective afforded by two decent nights' sleep leads me to think that the concern may be the possibility for passengers to shift items into carry-ons that are allowed in checked baggage but verboten in the cabin. Technically, passengers may be allowed to check a variety of weapons and potentially dangerous articles — though you might reasonably wonder why some of those articles (swords? sabers? firearms?) should be allowed in any form of baggage. The result is that, to offer a guess as to the order of magnitude, maybe 999,999 parts of a million of the effect of the regs falls on (mostly) harmless liquids.
Labels: homeland security, just life, Travel
Monday, May 21, 2007
"If My Boobs Aren't Sagging, the Terrorists Win"
by Ken Houghton
Between Caroline Spector's fear of underwire and Starving Representative Ryan being starved, it has been a banner week for the TSA—probably their best since Julia threw her pacifier.
Labels: homeland security, just life
