Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Eliot Spitzer never ceases to entertain
If you forced yourself to page A23 of today's New York Times, you stumbled across the most amusing article in the issue: "My Time is Precious": Spitzer Sets the Tone During Inquiry on Leaks. Seven months after resigning the New York governor's office in disgrace, Spitzer broke wind in the face of the New York State Inspector General, who was interviewing Spitzer in connection with an investigation of Spitzer era corruption. Yesterday, the IG retaliated by, well, releasing the transcript of that interview to the media. From the Times:
“I am very conscious of the failure of those within the chamber these days to observe even a modicum of legal principle, ethical conduct, or respect for others who have held the office,” the former governor said.
Mr. Spitzer then alternated between asking Mr. Fisch to ask him a question and cutting him off before he could, according to the transcript.
“My time is precious, Judge. What is your question?” he said, but then cut him off again, and criticized P. David Soares, the Albany district attorney, for “generalized incompetence” and for comments that Mr. Soares made in a report into his administration’s dissemination of travel records of the former Senate majority leader, Joseph Bruno.
Then he told Mr. Fisch: “I would like to see your questions so that my time is not taken up unduly, and I do not like questions about whether or not I’m surveilled.”
"My time is precious"? When you are working for your father because you failed at your real career? That's Bill Clinton-caliber arrogance, right there.
The actual transcript is here, and while the Times article reinforces the now virtually universal impression that Spitzer is a jerk, you have to spin through the transcript to get the full sense of his personal douchebaggery. He's smart -- watch him turn each question around as any prosecutor under investigation would do and testify to the unsurpassed ethics of everybody he ever hired -- but it is hard to imagine that anybody who read this would vote for him again.
4 Comments:
By 
, at
Wed May 20, 08:11:00 AM:
From Link:
What follows is a revised version of something I posted here about Spitzer awhile back. Given that Spitzer keeps coming up, I thought it worth noting.
I thought Spitzer would stay away from public view -- if only for his family's sake -- but he seems intent on working his way back into the politics and has been getting some fawning media coverage to do so. He and his enablers have been twisting the facts about his involvement with Wall Street -- and AIG in particular -- to make himself look like a hero, which he wasn't.
Spitzer should never have any kind of power. He's proven incapable of handling it. He's a sociopath ... enabled by a too rich dad. Unfortunately, you have to kill this monster with a stake through his heart. Spitzer didn't just hurt himself -- he set back the reform movement in New York by a decade ... now we'll have to wait for Shelly Silver to die a natural death.
What follows is true, but not reported well by MSM except in part by the Wall Street Journal. I know of the detail because while this was happening, my day job made me a Martin Act nerd.
******
New York has the Martin Act, which predates our federal securities laws. Understand that no regulated company ... like a bank or insurance company ... can survive being charged under the Martin Act -- even if innocent, you're put out of business. You can bring Martin Act charges with minimal proof. It gives the NY AG a license to kill. Spitzer abused it.
The back story to AIG is that Spitzer first went after Hank Greenberg's son Jeff, who was CEO of Marsh & McLennan. The charges were vague, as Eliot was attacking an accepted insurance industry practice by threatening criminal charges. How did this come to pass?
Connect these dots: Michael Cherkasky used to be Eliot's boss when Eliot was a young prosecutor. Cherkasky became CEO of Kroll, a high-end detective agency. Marsh & McLennan bought Kroll. Within a year, Eliot uncovered "dirt" on Marsh & McLennan and threatened to bring Martin Act charges ... even though there was no dead body on the floor ... there wasn't even a complaining witness ... I wonder who tipped Eliot about the "dirt." As part of the settlement, Eliot insisted that Jeff Greenberg be ousted ... and looked with favor on Cherkasky replacing him as CEO.
Hank Greenberg reacted to this, which made him the next focus of Eliot's wrath. Spitzer threatened to indict AIG unless the board fired Hank Greenberg. Many -- myself included -- believe that AIG wouldn't have gotten so over-extended in credit default swaps had Greenberg not been ousted.
Cherkasky wasn't an isolated case. The price of many an Eliot settlement was to hire an Eliot crony into a cushy well-paid legal oversight role. Thus, Eliot & Co were no better than a mob-run extortion ring.
Nothing that Eliot went after as New York Attorney General was a root cause of our financial collapse. To the contrary, Eliot wanted to sue national banks to force them to make more subprime loans -- but federal courts said he didn't have jusrisdiction.
I actually have more, but I think this shows what Eliot's about.
By , at
Wed May 20, 12:12:00 PM:
In CNBC's continuing effort to humanize the clowns of the left, they've been having Spitzer on to editorialize lately. Goolsby is tough enough to take, and Axelrod, but Spitzer? Bleh; what a stain he is.
By , at
Wed May 20, 03:18:00 PM:
Spitzer seems to be reverting to the old Eliot: a bully and hypocrite.
Too bad. He talked quite a good game of atonement and redemption. But you have to play that game not talk it.
Until he was caught with the whore he was a rising star in the Thugee Sect of Politics USA.
Men can change themselves. His loss if he hasn't.
K
By , at
Thu May 21, 12:35:00 PM:
He will be back - mark my words. IT will be when the Right returns to some form of power and the Left will need some tough talking guy who has to show that he is "man-enough" to take on those "horrible" Republicans. In a sense when the Left requires a set of balls they will prop him up as their guy; all the while knowing that they probably have more of the stinky orifice near the testicles and not the real deal.
