Tin Foil Hat alert... why was the head of the IMF arrested?

[nadinbrzezinski]

It is a sign to the IMF not to screw with us.

I heard that one in the Hartman show and I had to chuckle. Though it would make sense he'd have a diplomatic passport, in which case we could not touch him... alas he don't.

As I said, tinfoil hat alert...

Does it look nice?

[Common Sense Party]

1. Because he raped a maid?

Just a possibility.

[Hannah Bell]

14. raped? that usually = vaginal or anal intercourse. i didn't hear anything like that took place.

[11 Bravo]

16. OK, tried to force his dick into her mouth, and held her against her will. You cool with that?

[msanthrope]

171. It's not "rape-rape."

:wtf:

[MineralMan]

17. You're going to nitpick? How bizarre!

Forced fellatio is not a rape-equivalent in your eyes? Really?

How strange...

[REP]

22. Sodomy includes oral copulation. Forced sodomy is rape.

You're welcome.

[Hannah Bell]

102. then why didn't they charge him with rape?

[REP]

121. Laws and legal charges vary from state to state

[Hannah Bell]

122. well, according to the charges listed for the court case, they didn't charge him because there was

no rape.

there was

1. detention against the person's will
2. boob grabbing
3. crotch grabbing
4. failed attempt to take down pantyhose
5. forced touching of penis to lips twice.

the end.

[msanthrope]

161. Wrong--rape is genital to genital contact.*** Forcing his penis into her mouth--not touching lips,

got him the criminal sexual abuse charges...read the charge sheet. There's no mention of 'lips'--it's mouth.

http://twitpic.com/4yimwk


***In New York State.

But you keep telling us how forced oral copulation isn't "rape" per se...I guess Socialists can't "rape-rape."

[SidDithers]

26. Forced oral sex is rape too...nt

Sid

[Hannah Bell]

103. but they didn't charge him with rape, sid.

[msanthrope]

157. Because in New York State 'rape' means genital/genital. Contact of mouth to genital is

classified as criminal sexual abuse, as is genital/rectum.

But you go right ahead with the Rape Apologia for Leftists We Like(tm) and tell us how forced oral copulation isn't "rape-rape."

"Forcibly made contact with his penis and informant's mouth, twice"
http://twitpic.com/4yimwk

[Skidmore]

33. Oh, sweet Jesu.

[seabeyond]

37. wow. nt

[comtec]

42. I would not expect YOU of all people to make this argument

that aside...
These things are normally swept under the rug when it comes to millionaires and the heads of states ...er... IMF kind of things.

I wonder the real reason why this happened.

note : RAPE IS NEVER ACCEPTABLE AND IT IS GOOD THIS ASSHOLE IS GOING TO JAIL!!!

it's just that they are never held to pay the piper is all, and I find it curious.

[Hannah Bell]

76. things *are* normally swept under the rug. which is why my first assumption in a case like this is:

there's more to this story.

perhaps you aren't aware that strauss-kahn was in the process of reforming the imf in fairly substantial ways.

[comtec]

84. Ahhh that make perfect sense then

I wasn't aware, but I did figure it had to be somethings like that.

[msanthrope]

173. Right, He's a great Socialist Hero, reforming the IMF, thus, he was targeted....

Seriously???

[aquart]

178. Spitzer? Seriously.

[msanthrope]

168. I would. n/t

[snagglepuss]

43. He has scratch marks on his chest and medical officiers have stated they

have evidence of an attack.

[MineralMan]

64. I heard they had some DNA evidence.

Perhaps she spit the evidence on the carpet.

That should be an interesting facet of the trial, if it's true.

[Common Sense Party]

85. Truth be told, I haven't heard the details. But if it were my daughter,

if any guy is forcefully trying to shove his unit anywhere near her, I'm calling it rape. And may God have mercy on his soul.

[nadinbrzezinski]

86. And in the State of new york it is statutory rape

Some places in the south it is not.

[Hannah Bell]

105. and in nyc grabbing someone's boobs, genital area & touching their mouth "twice" with penis =

attempted rape.

[msanthrope]

162. Delete dupe

[msanthrope]

163. Nope---Criminal Sexual Abuse, from the forced penis/mouth penetration,

whereas in NYState, 'rape' is used for genital/genital contact...

But you can tell us all how forced oral copulation isn't "rape-rape."

[readmoreoften]

119. Yeah, something very much like that took place--he shoved his cock down her throat.

It really doesn't matter what hole they shove it in against your will. I mean, really. It actually doesn't even matter if it's a cock--a pipe, a fist, guns thrust into you in a sexual way will work just as well.

[Hannah Bell]

130. if you read the court documents you'll find he did no such thing.

no matter how much you enjoy saying those words.

there was no oral, anal or vaginal entry.

that's why there's no rape charge.

[msanthrope]

158. Do you have a cite for the court documents? n/t

[msanthrope]

160. "Forcibly made contact with his penis and defendant's mouth." Not her lips. Mouth.

http://twitpic.com/4yimwk

[Marrah_G]

152. Did you seriously just write that....................

[Name removed]

159. Deleted message

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

[msanthrope]

164. Socialists can't "rape-rape" I guess....n/t

[SpiralHawk]

2. Hmmm? I thot it was a sign not to screw with

people who do not of their own free will and choice want to screw with you.

We shall see if this ever gets sordid out by the aUtHoriTieS.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. He cited this corredtly as the tin foil alert

and I decided to put it here, since yes Virginia... if he found it on the interwebs, it will make it's way here.

[eleny]

4. Jeffrey Toobin pointed out that diplomatic immunity doesn't extend to all crimes

Toobin was interviewed by phone on CNN right after Strauss-Kahn was arrested.

Just an fyi since it was new info to me. :hi:

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Oh that is NEWS to me

I mean we have had diplomats expelled and not charged for minor offenses such as murder...

[aquart]

The IMF isn't a nation. Why would he have diplomatic immunity?

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. Because it is an international body

under the UN... like the World Bank. They have the same kind of status as UN people, that's why.

It's part of the Bretton Woods Agreement.

So my guess is that something like this went on.

We got the alleged rape... rape kit is done on an emergency basis... the allegation gets very solid... DA goes arrest him... but...

So calls were made to both his home government, chances are so high as the assistant leader of mission or the Ambassador in DC and the UN... and the diplomatic status was removed. THAT is when they went and removed him from an Air France plance. which technically is FRENCH national territory. Aircraft have the same status as embassies.

Still the tinfoil alert is kind of cute.

The few times I had to deal with diplomats, well our own people are far from efficient... and the Israelis were a real pain in the but... and slightly surprised I spoke Hebrew. Makes insulting the locals that much harder when they understand what you are saying. Trust me, the accident involving a consular vehicle WAS a pain in the damn rear (one of ours)... that car was rolling US Territory.

[snagglepuss]

47. I read that he doesn't have diplomatic immunity.

[aquart]

Doesn't make any sense to me at all, actually.

It's possible it was a hit job. But they can't get you on that kind of thing unless you DO that kind of thing. But it's possible that the information was stored until his removal was considered a good idea by people who will never have any conversations with such as me.

It feels odd. Anyone taking it for a victory is probably being suckered.

[JuniperLea]

11. Apparently he has a reputation for this in France...

Some of the comments over the weekend were interesting.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Yep, the French want him prosecuted

and a second whack after we are done... that struck me as... INTERESTING. I gotta wonder if that diplomatic status was pulled from under him.

[Hannah Bell]

110. lol. what a bunch of crap. "THE FRENCH"? every last one of them?

[aquart]

19. LINK? Juicy link?

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. Today in the morn in the MSNBC

Here is more, from NPR, he is a member of the Caviar Left, equivalent to our limo libs... and was going to run for the presidency.

[Hannah Bell]

112. there's no link, nadin. and your basis for the implied claim that "the french"

don't like the "caviar left" running for president is.....

what, precisely?

mitterand = "caviar left" for example.

he was a philanderer. he had a whole fucking secret family!

i was in paris when he won. i say lots of "french" out on the streets celebrating.

[snagglepuss]

45. guardian uk

[Hannah Bell]

106. that's not a link. that's the name of a newspaper.

[Hannah Bell]

87. he has a reputation for *rape*? more like for being a ladies man/adulterist i believe.

which is not uncommon in the french upper classes.

actually typical, or so i've heard.

[aquart]

179. Yes, because viral marketing hasn't been invented yet.

And comments cannot be salted on the internet.

[blondeatlast]

5. Because there was enough evidence that he committed a nonconsensual sexual act that

the NYPD risked the inevitable political blowback of arresting a VERY important, very wealthy, political figure?

This is the kind of guy that doesn't get arrested and led off in handcuffs; they usually get "have your attorney call my attorney and then we'll call the DA's office."

The NYPD and NYDA ain't amateurs--they've got something damn solid.

[aquart]

8. I presume that's a rape kit that WILL be processed? Immediately?

[Skidmore]

35. They collected DNA evidence but the nature of that material has

not been made public yet per an ABC newscast this morning.

[Hannah Bell]

134. given that the court documents don't charge rape, and the sequence of events

alleged is:

1) detaining maid against her will
2) grabbing boob
3) grabbing crotch
4) attempting to pull down pantyhose
5) forcibly touching penis to maid's lips "twice"

the end

i think the only dna evidence could be skin.

there is no allegation that he penetrated any orifice. or even got any of her clothing off.

charges: attempted rape, sexual abuse, "touching," forcible detention

[msanthrope]

166. Where, on the charge sheet, are her 'lips' mentioned? Show us how 'mouth' became 'lips' in your

attempts to minimize???


http://twitpic.com/4yimwk

[Scout]

169. BRAWK! why isn't he charged with rape? BRAWK! n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

174. Please the conures are not that obtuse

take my word on this, I live with two of them!

[aquart]

177. Are they allowed to make that public before jury selection?

I would think not.

[Hannah Bell]

13. "enough evidence" = the maid said so.

[blondeatlast]

15. There would be more than that to take this on.

SOME rape kits get done on the QT...

[Hannah Bell]

135. well, if you look at the charges there's no allegation of any kind of penetration.

so the "rape kit" is kind of beside the point.

[MineralMan]

18. It is enough to arrest the man. He will have a trial.

He can present any defense he wishes. Why, may I ask, are you defending this man? Would you have simply released him to fly back to France? Really?

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[MilesColtrane]

49. In related news:

Prominent Socialist politician arrested for sexual assault - Socialist Worker says...nothing

http://socialistworker.org/

[MineralMan]

60. He's a French Socialist?

Oh, well...that explains many things. Yes, it does. Socialists cannot commit sex crimes, therefore he must be innocent and MUST be set free. Yes, indeed. :sarcasm:

[joshcryer]

128. Yup, yup.

Far be it for a far left wing guy to have porno, even! Total conspiracy job!

[Hannah Bell]

75. give them a day or so. the us iso isn't necessarily on top of what sinos in the french sp are

doing.

it's not the same thing, you know.

[JVS]

129. The wikipedia article on this guy says that he's on the right wing of a center-left party.

So basically a French DLCer.

[Hannah Bell]

131. lol.

[blondeatlast]

31. With all due respect, only the justice system has to hold to the presumption of innocence.

The public does not. In fact, one can have an opinion on the guilt or innocence of one charged with a crime and still be selected for the jury.

The public can't adjudicate, but they can damn well have an opinion--remember that the prosecutors work for us (regardless of whether we favor the charged or despise them).

[joshcryer]

124. Any judge that allows a jurer who proclaims guilt or innocence of the accused...

...should and likely would be deseated. The jury process explicitly asks questions that determine the mindset of the jurer. If you in fact want to skip out of jury duty you can get away with it easily if you tell the selectors that you know of the case and believe the person to be guilty. (Only really works on criminal cases that are reported in the news.)

Just sayin', and I don't disagree with you about opinions.

[MineralMan]

59. And I have convicted nobody. I want this man to stand trial.

If he is innocent, he will walk free. If he is found guilty, he will go to prison. Rapists and sexual offenders who force people to perform fellatio belong in prison.

Why are you trying to get this guy off without a trial? Is he important to you in some way? This whole thing is the very first time I've ever heard of him. Do you not care about the charges against him? As a woman, you'd want to see him on trial, it seems to me. Maybe there's something of which I'm unaware. If so, tell me about it.

[joshcryer]

126. Indeed, it appears people here want him to be able to leave the country...

...and avoid any trial completely. Justice for the alleged victim be damned.

[Name removed]

136. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

138. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

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

[sabrina 1]

29. Saying we need more than the 'maid said it'

before we lock him up for life is defending the man?

What country am I in as someone below said.

[MineralMan]

62. He's not locked up for life. He's locked up to await trial.

He was denied bail because he is a flight risk, as he demonstrated by fleeing when he knew he was about to be apprehended. That's how we do this.

He gets to have a trial, and I'm sure he will have the very best defense money can buy. Nobody's convicted him.

Do you believe he should just be turned loose? Why? Would you feel the same way if some random person was arrested for a sexual assault? I find that very, very difficult to believe, so there must be some political reason you're suggesting that he should not be held to stand trial for these charges. I'd appreciate it very much if you could explain.

[sabrina 1]

81. Complete misrepresentation of my point.

I said nothing about detention while awaiting trial.

My comment was directed at the fact that so many people are certain he is guilty without a single fact available to them other than news reports that a maid has accused him of sexual assault and are willing to throw away the key based on what they think they know.

'Nobody's convicted him' you say! He certainly has been convicted in the court of public opinion which is the 'court', much of it right here, that I was addressing.

The rest of your comment has nothing to do with anything I said at all.

However, since you have made some pretty amazing assumptions about me:

Do you believe he should just be turned loose? em ... Why? Excuse me???

Would you feel the same way if some random person was arrested for a sexual assault? ehhhm ..

I find that very, very difficult to believe, so there must be some political reason you're suggesting that he should not be held to stand trial for these charges. well, maybe if you let me answer instead of you answering for me???

I'd appreciate it very much if you could explain.Why do you need my explanation, didn't you just answer on my behalf yourself???

It's possible you meant to respond to someone else, of course, since nothing in your comment relates to anything I said at all. Speaking of not being being convicted :eyes:

[joshcryer]

125. One can presume guilt without all the facts. To say there are no facts available is simply not true.

But I of course agree that for fairness he deserves a jury where all the facts are presented. Who knows, he may have been accosted by a cat that was loose in the hotel and the maid herself could be confusing him with someone else who has a long history of anti-social sexual behavior.

[sabrina 1]

150. My response, to which you are responding,

was to set straight the egregious impuning of my integrity by asserting that I am defending an accused rapist for 'political purposes'. I see you saw nothing wrong with that false accusation, rendering both your, and the person's who made it, opinion, worthless to me.

I, just so you know, never defend anyone for 'political reasons' when they are accused of crimes. I have defended all accused individuals, left, right, rich, poor, male, female as having the right to a trial before conviction and based on more than an allegation by an accuser. I find it appalling that there are members here who rush to judgement of another DUer simply because they state an opinion.

[muriel_volestrangler]

146. Since this thread, and this sub-thread *is* about detention before trial, you should have

It is you who seem to be answering the wrong posts. OP says "why was he arrested?" #5 says "because there was enough evidence (to get him arrested)". #13 says, apparently sarcastically, '"enough evidence" = the maid said so'; #18 says " It is enough to arrest the man. He will have a trial."

So, you see, this has been all about whether there was enough evidence for him to be arrested. Then you leap in with "Saying we need more than the 'maid said it' before we lock him up for life is defending the man? "

Your 'lock him up for life' is a strawman, for this sub-thread. It is you who is misplacing your posts, and then complaining when your strawman is noticed.

[sabrina 1]

151. Do you have anything to say to the commenter to whom I was

responding regarding his egregious accusation about me, personally, that I am defending an accused rapist for 'political reasons'?? You seem to be thorough at ferreting things out, yet you apparently missed that vile and false allegation which had zero to do with the issue and was a complete personal attack on my integrity?

For the record, since my integrity has been impuned in this thread and tacitly approved of now by two responders, I have defended every single person's right to the presumption of innocence regardless of their political afilitations, and ironically sometimes have been accused of being a traitor to the party when making the same defense if the accused is a Republican.

You jumped in here to respond to my post. The person to whom I was responding, changed the topic and made it about ME. I defended myself, as I will anyone, against such an egregious and false accusation.

Do you believe he should just be turned loose? Why?
Would you feel the same way if some random person was arrested for a sexual assault? I find that very, very difficult to believe, so there must be some political reason you're suggesting that he should not be held to stand trial for these charges. I'd appreciate it very much if you could explain.

Not only was I falsely accused, without a shred of evidence, of not caring about defending 'some random person' an allegation which anyone who knows me, would be astounded by, but I was accused of defending an accused rapist for 'political reasons'! And then an explanation for those crimes was DEMANDED of me by someone who had already charged and convicted me of this 'crime' and simply wanted a 'confession' it seems.

It's nice that you care so much about sticking to the topic at hand. I do too, and certainly would have responded to a comment pointing out why I should be responding to the actual reasons for the arrest.

But once the topic was changed to an accusation against me, sorry, I cannot let such a false allegation stand. I am surprised you missed the change of topic by the person to whom my comment was directed. Otoh, if you did not, I am surprised you would condone such a nasty attack on a fellow DUer. But I will assume you simply missed it as everyone is entitled to the benefit of the doubt.

[muriel_volestrangler]

153. You've brought it on yourself with your strawman argument

When you started talking about 'locking him up for life', you confused the argument that other people were having. The implication of your outrage ("What country am I in") is that you think there has already been a gross miscarriage of justice (because the argument was about what has already been done by the authorities - specifically, arresting him), and that MineralMan supports the miscarriage. So asking you if you think he should be turned loose, and why, is quite reasonable. Your comment of "what country am I in" is more of an attack on MineralMan than the questions he then asked of you.

[sabrina 1]

155. 'You've brought it on yourself'.

Wow, an old familiar refrain. Women always 'bring it on themselves' don't they?

As for the rest of your comment, it is completely without basis in fact. My comment was clearly directed at the rush to judgement here based only allegations always seen in these cases.

'Asking if you think he should be turned loose is quite reasonable'. No, it was not reasonable when followed by an assumption of what my answer would be and then an explanation, answering his own question, which involved a personal attack, and egregious and false one at that, on my character.

This is not new of course, when I defended in the same manner, the Duke Lacrosse players, like so many others in that case who were asking simpley that people not to jump to conclusions, similar attacks on people's characters were made.

As for this 'the implication of your outrage (outrage?? a comment to you denotes outrage??) is that you think there has already been a gross miscarriage of justice'. Just where did you find that? I know I certainly did not say it. I would say 'you must be a mindreader' except that if you were, you would not have made that assumption by any stretch of your imagination.

You are making stuff up, like the commenter I responded to. Completely fabricated from your imagination. There has been no trial and no conviction or acquittal so how on earth could there be a 'gross miscarriage of justice' either way?

You presume to leture others on 'sticking to the topic' and then veer off into wild theories about what you imagine people are saying and even worse, what they are thinking. If you are going to lecture others, take your own advice.

[muriel_volestrangler]

156. You think the man has already been locked up for life

Your arguments are nonsensical, and your "what country am I in?" comment was clearly outrage, directed at the DUer you replied to.

Stop whining.

[sabrina 1]

170. Don't tell me what I think. Ask me and I will tell YOU.

Again I have to correct a false statement, the man has clearly not been convicted, so he has not been 'locked up for life'. So, what are you talking about? Your are making even less sense than before.

'what country am I in' was a statement denoting sadness at what I was witnessing. Just as I felt in the Duke Lacrosse case, and as I feel each time someone who has spent years in jail on false charges of crimes they did not commit but so many were so certain they did, is released after finally being exonerated.

It is the reason I so fully support the Innocence Project. It is the reason why I will never ever jump to conclusions about anyone, until there has been a trial. Rich, poor, male, female, powerful or powerless, contrary to false allegation made by your friend MM in this thread.

If that is nonsensical to you, then I feel even more sad. To ask that people be given a fair chance to respond to charges made against them is now nonsensical. THAT is what my comment denoted, a sadness that this is the case.

Next time you want to know what someone means, ask THEM. You have been wrong now about practically everything, I have corrected you. You have supported false allegations against me, which strengthens my view that people should be very careful about making false statements about others. There is always someone who will believe them . In a way I suppose I should thank you for proving my point.

[MineralMan]

148. You were replying to a post of mine. Nowhere have I said

anything about his punishment. I mentioned his arrest in the post to which you replied. You're the one who brought up "locked up for life." I'm very careful with my posts. I never implied that he is guilty or should be imprisoned for a very long time. He is under arrest and will probably face a trial. Those are the facts, which are what I'm discussing.

As for my other comments, yes, they are exactly what I wrote. You have responded to them. Thank you.

Perhaps you replied to the wrong post, yourself. Who knows?

[sabrina 1]

149. What you did was attempt to impune my integrity by asserting,

yes, asserting, that I must be trying to defend an accused rapist 'for political reasons'. Inserting your own false opinion into a discussion of another DUer's motivations for expressing their opinions is against DU rules. Maybe you should be more careful with your posts. I did not alert on your post, as it was important to me that false allegations against me, already read by others, be corrected.

I defend the rule of law, and, to correct your false claim that I would not defend some 'random person' but only someone 'for political reasons' (a particularly vile claim which I would never make against another person btw) this is completely false as anyone who knows me, knows. I would appreciate an apology, since you had not a shred of evidence to back up those accusations. Thank you.

[MineralMan]

176. I asserted nothing. I asked you questions, which you answered.

If you feel that you were personally attacked, the alert button is on every post. Asking questions is not an attack, nor is it impugning your integrity.

[LooseWilly]

120. Persons arrested for sexual assault are released on bail all the time...

From a handy police PR report from April:

Peo. v. Anthony Thomas Falco (1-28-37), Daly City Police Department 288.5(A)/ 288(A)-12 Counts/288(C)(1)-6 Counts November 2008 To February 2010 73 Year Old Man Passing Himself Off As “Brother Tom” Stayed At a Friend’s Home In Daly City Three Separate Times Between 2008 And 2010; A Teenage Boy Resided At The Home And Suspect On Each Visit Engaged In Sexual Fondling Of The Victim, Approximately Six Separate Times On Each Visit By Suspect; A Family Friend Googled Suspect And Found He Was Wanted In Minnesota For Failure To Register And Called Minnesota Authorities Who Called Daly City PD; Det. Harrison Made Contact At The Home, Interviewed The Victim And Learned Of The Molestations; 12 Counts Occurred While Was Victim was 13 And 6 Counts At Age 14; Suspect Has Prior (2000) Conviction For Sexual Misconduct With Minors Using Same “Brother Tom” Approach (DDA Jennifer Ow)
-The case is set at 8:45 in Dept. 13, Criminal Presiding Judge Lisa Novak, for appearance of the designated new Private Defender Program attorney and to set a new jury trial date. On April 6, 2011 the motion of defense attorney Raymond Buenaventura to withdraw as counsel due to a conflict (he was recently appointed to the City Council for Daly City and will no longer handle any Daly City police department cases) was granted. The April 11, 2011 8:45 jury trial date was vacated and the case continued to this morning for appearance of the new attorney. There have been two prior jury trial settings since the superior court arraignment on August 13, 2010. The defendant is in custody on $1,600,000 bail. The defendant is represented by the Private Defender Program.

$1.6 million bail. If he had come up with the money, he'd be free pending the trial. Stories I've heard had Strauss-Kahn scheduled for meetings on Sunday in Germany, which means the flights weren't indicative of a "flight risk" so much as they were indicative of a "long commute".

The choice to hold a potential Socialist candidate for the French presidency without bail, when he is expected to announce a bid to run for office and also expected to trounce US ally Sarkozy... is definitely grounds for a spot of healthy suspicion. It's not like the French police wouldn't extradite him if his lawyer couldn't buy off this maid, whether he's guilty or not... though, speaking as a citizen of the country that harbors Kissinger, Nixon, Bush and Luis Posada Carriles—I'd feel pretty hypocritical arguing for the "Natural Law" requirements of extradition.

Just saying... this is irregular.

[Hannah Bell]

137. as is sarkozy's tight relationship with the US & its intelligence services.

and when i say tight, i mean that his half-brothers' mother is now married to frank wisner jr.

and his half-brother = carlyle group

[REP]

23. Defending the bourgeoisie against the proles? Where am I?

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dreamer Tatum]

32. Just assume he's a Republican...surely then you'd call him guilty nt

[Hannah Bell]

139. hardly. if he were a republican i just wouldn't post unless there was something i thought

suspicious.

i'm not part of DU's sex-obsessive group.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. I know, you do not take a man such as this down just because

I am just passing the tin foil alert... if they found it, it will make it's way here.

[AngryAmish]

7. Diplomatic immunity is complicated and I don't know much about it, but I don't think it applies

IMF is an UN body but I think immunity only goes for official acts...and I don't think the raping of a maid is an official act.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. Oh trust me, it is gets complicated

but not that complex. It usually is a carte blanche and get out of jail card. Why MOST diplomats, except those in the CIA, KGB, Military attaches, aka the official, unofficial spies, tend to mostly behave But NYC has a hell of a time with things like unpaid tickets.

No, not the same... but... getting a ticket for double parking in front of Macy's is not part of official duties either.

(in the course of my duties I had to deal with both US and Israeli Diplomats... and it was not a pleasant experience, MOSTLY)

[Skidmore]

34. It is my understanding from an earlier news report that he was

not in the country in any official capacity and therefore will be treated as any other ordinary person in accordance with the law.

[FreeJoe]

40. I don't know...

I don't know the details of how diplomatic immunity works, but I hung with a diplomat's son for a while back in the 70s. I asked him why he was so uptight about rule following when he was immune. He responded that the US couldn't use "cruel and unusual" punishment, but his dad had no such restrictions.

[Iggo]

9. IBTM.

Hey, NB. :hi:

[Modern_Matthew]

21. Throw 'em all in prison, for all I care. They've done a lot to ensure poor countries stay poor. nt

[RZM]

36. I highly doubt this is an elaborate scheme. It's probably about the accusation and not much else

Either he raped her or she's making it up for a non-tinfoil reason. Either are far more plausible than a vast conspiracy.

[seabeyond]

38. it is laughable, in a disgusting way, how we will defend the worst, if it meets agenda.

reading some posts thru out thread

[cherokeeprogressive]

58. Truer words were never posted on DU... n/t

[MineralMan]

68. +100

It's a good thing he's not a teacher, too. There'd be a jailbreak in the works already. :rofl:

[blondeatlast]

93. Sad but true. nt

[reorg]

39. it should certainly be worthwhile to find out what it might be

that may have pissed off some people. Nice article by Michael Whitney here:

The IMF chief certainly has enemies in high places who will be cheering his predicament. He had recently broke-free from the "party line" and was changing the direction of the IMF. His road to Damascus conversion was championed by progressive economist Joesph Stiglitz in a recent article titled "The IMF's Switch in Time". Here's an excerpt:

"The annual spring meeting of the International Monetary Fund was notable in marking the Fund’s effort to distance itself from its own long-standing tenets on capital controls and labor-market flexibility. It appears that a new IMF has gradually, and cautiously, emerged under the leadership of Dominique Strauss-Kahn." ...

Check this out from World Campaign and judge for yourself whether Strauss-Kahn had become a "liability" that had to be eliminated so the business of extracting wealth from the poorest people on earth could continue apace:

... “In an article today in the Washington Post, Howard Schneider writes that after the 2008 crash led toward regulation again of financial companies and government involvement in the economy, for Strauss-Khan ‘the job is only half done, as he has been leading the fund through a fundamental rethinking of its economic theory. In recent remarks, he has provided a broad summary of the conclusions: State regulation of markets needs to be more extensive; global policies need to create a more even distribution of income; central banks need to do more to prevent lending and asset prices from expanding too fast. 'The pendulum will swing from the market to the state,' Strauss-Kahn said in an address at George Washington University last week. 'Globalization has delivered a lot . . . but it also has a dark side, a large and growing chasm between the rich and the poor. Clearly we need a new form of globalization' to prevent the 'invisible hand' of loosely regulated markets from becoming 'an invisible fist.'”
...

Strauss-Kahn has been replaced by the IMF's number 2 guy, John Lipsky, former Vice Chairman of the JPMorgan Investment Bank. How's that for "change you can believe in"?

http://counterpunch.com/whitney05162011.html

[KoKo]

41. Because it appears he was a "Fucking Pervert" all these years...

You have another explanation?

[reorg]

44. well, most likely

those who are now very judgmental about this thing have never heard his name until yesterday.

[blondeatlast]

46. And that matters how? nt

[reorg]

48. with respect to the OP

it matters thusly.

[blondeatlast]

52. Rich fuckwits, even those who've (maybe) seen the light, are not

above creepy and/or violent behavior. If there weren't enough evidence to charge him, this would have been all neatly and very quietly swept under the rug. He's still a multimillionaire.

Please remember that the public does not have to hold the presumption of innocence. I dunno if he's guilty or not, but "maybe being on our side" is not a valid defense.

Edit to remove errant punctuation.

[KoKo]

53. Yep! +!

[reorg]

54. I share your skepticism towards the rich

but I'm often dumbfounded by the blind trust in authority displayed on this board.

"If there weren't enough evidence to charge him, this would have been all neatly and very quietly swept under the rug."

Really? How do you know this? Ever heard of Eliot Spitzer? Yes, there was "enough evidence to charge him" but apparently that wasn't the whole story.

[KoKo]

70. It's not about the "Money" it's about the Attitude of Entitlement!

Not all People with Money are Perverts or Entitled. Some do good works and live very frugally and under the wire in their wants and desires.

But, if you read any of the sites about the Wall Street Banksters and Hedge Funders who were so complicit in the Global Meltdown and Google their Names...you see multiple marriages, great wealth with many homes ..gated mansions and homes or Apts/Condo's in many countries, private multi-million art collections,private jets, yachts, and incredible access to world power, everywhere all over the world.

[KoKo]

50. lol's...I read financial sites, mostly...so I definitely know who he is.

If you were really interested I'd give you links about him.

Do YOU know WHO he is?

[Yo_Mama]

51. Given the severity of the charges

There will be physical evidence. I don't think there's any need to postulate a conspiracy.

It's not just lower-income people who do bad things, you know? Nor is it the first time this guy has been accused of this sort of thing. Apparently he's just been getting away with it.

The French press referred to it as a "morals" charge and commented that standards were lower in France - it's very possible that he just doesn't know that no means no.

[Taverner]

55. Seems pretty cut and dried to me: he tried to rape a housekeeper

These folks already think they own us, he was just taking it one step further

[Nevernose]

56. Had he been in DC, he might not have been arrestable.

Even for a serious crime like rape. However, because he was not in New York in any official capacity (unlike his fulltime residence in DC or on, say, a business trip), diplomatic immunity does not apply. Or at least that's my understanding.

[Bucky]

57. My understanding is that your understanding is wrong. That is, violent crimes aren't covered

At least not among non-rogue states. I remember there being a controversy a few years back when a Libyan diplo shot a gun out of the London embassy at protesters. England made it clear that such crime would be prosecuted and Libya had to smuggle the guy out along with a couple of people who could be proved to have helped him escape. But I never heard of a resolution on that case.

[nadinbrzezinski]

72. And we had to let go of a diplomat

Remember Pakistan and the CIA contractor but two months ago?

[Nevernose]

79. Your understanding certainly seems more rational than my understanding.

First, let me say that I'm not a conspiracy theorist, nor do I base my understanding of international law on "Lethal Weapon" movies. I really was just repeating something I'd read on the Internet(s) this morning (and the Internet couldn't ever be wrong, could it?).

A couple of questions, though:

1. What's to keep non-rogue states from trumping up charges against diplomats of rival nations? Say, for instance, the East Germans just arresting an American diplomat on an assault charge for whatever actual nefarious reason (and obviously during the Cold War)?

2. If the maid had not gone immediately public and had gone to the FBI instead of the NYPD, would we have even heard of this? Or would this have been covered up for "diplomatic" reasons? I think this is a legitimate and rather disturbing possibility.

[nadinbrzezinski]

116. Some answers

1. What's to keep non-rogue states from trumping up charges against diplomats of rival nations? Say, for instance, the East Germans just arresting an American diplomat on an assault charge for whatever actual nefarious reason (and obviously during the Cold War)?

We considered East Germany a rogue state during the cold war. That said... things like this usually are not done, because of the return in kind. You charge mine, I will charge yours, and we can play this game for ever. The few times things like that have happened, governments usually have under the table exchanges. In the real world what keeps everybody playing, rogue and non rogue... is the retaliation potential

2. If the maid had not gone immediately public and had gone to the FBI instead of the NYPD, would we have even heard of this? Or would this have been covered up for "diplomatic" reasons? I think this is a legitimate and rather disturbing possibility.


NYPD deals with this crap regularly... no, not rape, diplomats getting out of hand... so they know. If this ended up in the FBI, well the jurisdiction was NYC and not the FBI since this was a state matter, and a violation of state law. Since they have issues in NYC due to the UN... I am assuming the citizens usually go to the cops. I usually do not recommend a TV show, but Law and Order actually had a good episode that involved a diplomat. They actually played a little with number one.

[Bucky]

147. Hmmm

Honestly, I don't know.

1. I imagine what kept this sort of thing from happening in the Cold War was the same thing that kept Hitler from using poisonous gas attacks on France and Russia in World War Two--gentlemen in the rival states had signed agreements not to do so and the fear of retaliation kept them in line.

2. I have no idea about the particulars of the FBI's NY office. I don't doubt cover-ups happen, but I don't think they're quite so routine that they'd have an apparatus for muzzling a walk-in complaint.

[reorg]

63. Well, had he been a contractor of a foreign government agency

and killed a number of people on the open street, I'm sure many posters here would argue he was covered by diplomatic immunity and should be released immediately, or else retaliatory action must be taken ...

[blondeatlast]

66. "I'm sure many here..." depends on what you define as "many."

I don't doubt there would be a couple--but by no means all.

[Nevernose]

77. I didn't make any judgment in my post.

I was just saying what my understanding of the law was, based on what I read this morning. Nice allusion to Blackwater, by the way.

[Hannah Bell]

132. did people argue that in the blackwater case?

[reorg]

154. yes

I don't know how many went along with it all the way, but I remember one particular poster who made that exact argument several times, including the part about the retaliatory action.

[cherokeeprogressive]

61. Because he was ready to drop the dime on the HAARP program and how it caused

the earthquakes that resulted in the two tsunamis.

:crazy: :silly: :eyes:

[MilesColtrane]

96. LOL

Well played, sir!

[Philippine expat]

65. He has diplomatic immunity

when he is in the US on official IMF business, however this trip
he was in New York on personal business, hence no diplomatic immunity

[nadinbrzezinski]

71. You don't lose it that easily

From coverage, and yes this is inference on my part...it was taken away. We had him removed from French Sovereign territory...that is the Air France plane.

This is not tinfoil, but doing that is not that normal.

[malaise]

67. Did Sarkozy set him up

I saw something about him predicting this - in a French newspaper.

[seabeyond]

69. he knew he was a rapist? so all he had to do was put maid in his way?

and he knew the man would do this to her?

and EVERYONE is in on it.

[sabrina 1]

98. CNN reported tonight that he had warned Sarkozy about his

smear campaign against him and threatened to bring Sarkozy to court if the smears about his private life didn't stop. He had apparently said that he feared 'being set up' in an interview a while ago. Wolf Blitzer reported the story tonight.

If he was worried about being set up, then this has to be among the stupidest acts ever committed by a high profile person.

[nadinbrzezinski]

100. Given his ahem... field trips were a .... an open secret

in French Polite society... I' think it was more the ... sooner or later you will trip

[Hannah Bell]

107. lol.. nadin knows all the gossip from french "polite society"!!!!

[Odin2005]

73. BECAUSE HE IS A FUCKING RAPIST. End of Subject.

[seabeyond]

74. ya. that. nt

[Bodhi BloodWave]

78. can you point me to where he was convicted of that please? n/t

[blondeatlast]

92. Has George Bush been convicted of being a cowardly murdering opportunistic

torturer yet?

The public holds no duty to the presumption of innocence; we are allowed to hold our own opinions. I think GWB is as I described him, I think this "socialist" in name only multimillionaire has learned that the US holds different opinions about the "duty" of French African single moms than the French elite do.

[Hannah Bell]

140. then why didn't they charge him with rape?

[lightningandsnow]

80. Because he was accused of sexual assault?

And maybe it would be nice if we could actually BELIEVE SURVIVORS?

Also, it's notoriously difficult to get a sexual assault conviction. If this was a conspiracy why wouldn't they charge him with something easier to prove and get a conviction for?

[blondeatlast]

89. Good points all. You know the guy has uber-elite attorneys on his side;

if they didn't have something very sticky on him a very, very quiet deal would be made and he'd quietly be on his way home.

[Hannah Bell]

143. actually, it's interesting that the press is headlining "rape" & "sexual assault" charges

when those aren't the literal charges.

the charges are:

1) criminal sexual act
2) attempted rape
3) sexual abuse
4) unlawful imprisonment
5) forcible touching


http://www.scribd.com/doc/55574679/NY-Criminal-Court-Filing-Dominique-Strauss-Kahn

[Rebubula]

172. You amuse me

I cannot agree with most of your posts on a good day. You are consistent, but we often disagree.

However, your creative splitting of hairs to prove some tinfoil-hattery is nothing short of gymnastic. I am unsure of your point. I am guessing that you agree with the conspiracy theories??

[Gabi Hayes]

82. BURN him. he's as bad as that German guy who kidnapped the Lindbergh baby.

wait a minute......

[Generic Other]

83. The charges are so shocking...that a politician would act so is shocking...

It makes one wonder if he's just a typical uber class politician with a sense of entitlement that extends to sexually assaulting maids and assuming their silence and compliance. If this is so, it says much about French politicians' attitudes toward women and the sexual climate surrounding them. Remember when Bush wiped his glasses on a female producer's jacket on the Letterman show? The way they act suggests the ordinary people are simply objects to be used by this class of men.

Another possibility. He was framed. Remember Al Gore in Portland, Oregon not that long ago? There, it appeared a woman sought to take advantage of the situation to shake him down.

This French politician is a "Socialist." If we hear Andrew Breitbart was involved, we will certainly change our impression of the case.

Lacking any other information to the contrary, I tend to support the credibility of the woman's story given the fact that she reported it so quickly.

This is a scandal of epic proportions in France. This man was Sarkozy's main opposition. Many there believe he had a pattern of sexual behavior. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

As for my tinfoil hat, it is always within reach.

LOL.

[nadinbrzezinski]

90. Listenig to the BBC in the afternoon

there is a certain attitude and it was a screaming secret this man was a bon vivant who had a taste for women. Of course there is the in and out of wedlock scandals that would sink a career in the us, or at least used to.

We also have an issue of testosterone, power and money.

But yes, this was pretty much an open secret, how many times this man had... ahem sex on the side.

Now here is an interesting tidbit, the wife wanted him to run for office, but he wasn't so hot for it... so yes... they went to Freud for that one.

Regardless, you do not have such an influential man removed from French Sovereign territory just because... so they must have a pretty solid case. And framing somebody? From what the BBC was saying on the evening... Al Gore didn't have a history... this guy does. It makes you wonder though if there is also a cultural aspect here.

[MilesColtrane]

97. "We also have an issue of testosterone, power and money."

Testosterone doesn't make men cheat.

[nadinbrzezinski]

99. Perhaps, not the correct phrasing

but you think man is not abusing his power? Or that he does not have a sense of entitlement? By the way. the BBC went there as well

[MilesColtrane]

111. I was simply pointing out that most men have testosterone coursing through their veins, yet...

only some cheat or rape.

[nadinbrzezinski]

113. My apologies for not making it clear

and you are correct. Deviant behavior, which this is... is a really, thankfully, small minority...

[Scout]

165. but power, money AND testerone sure seem to make it easy n/t

[Hannah Bell]

118. sarkozy's stepmother (mother of his half-siblings) = now wife of (cia, aig) frank wisner jr.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Frank_Wisner

"Frank Wisner, Jr. was a big catch for Enron Corporation. His lineage is impeccable, since his father, Frank Wisner Sr., was a senior CIA official (from 1947 until his suicide in 1965) who was involved in the overthrow of Arbenz of Guatemala (1954) and Mossadeq of Iran (1953). Wisner Junior was well-known in the CIA and he worked as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and Under Secretary of State for International Security Affairs; his current boss, Kenneth L. Lay, Chief Executive Officer of Enron Corporation, also worked for the Pentagon during the US war in Vietnam. With 'economic espionage' as a task for the CIA (see PD, 12 October 1997), there is little doubt that Wisner used this instrument during his long-tenure as Ambassador in Asian nations. A Wisner staffer told InterPress Services this year that 'if anybody asked the CIA to help promote US business in India, it was probably Frank'.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Frank_Wisner


Sarkozy was the middle of three sons, but his father left the family when Sarkozy was 4, marrying twice more and fathering two more children. (The mother of those children, Christine de Ganay, went on to marry Frank Wisner II, the son of a celebrated spy and now U.S. special envoy to Kosovo. Her son, Sarkozy's half-brother, Oliver Sarkozy, is Joint Global Head of UBS Investment Bank's Financial Institutions Group in New York.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/world/europe/06iht-web-profile6.5587903.html


Sarkozy's half-brother, Olivier, was chosen by the Carlyle Group in March 2008 as co-head and managing director of its recently launched global financial services division.<15>

Christine de Ganay is the former wife of Pal. She is married to Frank G. Wisner, who recently retired from AIG. His father, Frank Wisner, Sr. worked for the Central Intelligence Agency and its predecessor the OSS, in charge of covert operations. It has been alleged that AIG, which financially collapsed in 2008, insures CIA facilities globally.<16>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_history_of_Nicolas_Sarkozy#Andr.C3.A9e_Mallah

[msanthrope]

175. Well, there's the CIA and UBS, but where's the Gates Foundation, the Bilderbergers

and the Illuminati???

[joshcryer]

88. LOL @ the defending of this creep.

:rofl:

[nadinbrzezinski]

94. Well I just brought here the tinfoil hattery regarding this

It is coming... sooner or later.

What shocks me was a comment about how this was not rape since there was no penetration. As an EMT I treated plenty of women, and yes MEN, who were raped. Some were penetrated, some were not... we never made any distinctions. If you say no... it means NO. And any forced sexual act falls in that category.

Of course LEGALLY there is that little matter of what jurisdictions think it is. Thankfully NY State agrees with the standard I taught my Medics, and followed with patients. Some people do not get this. I would suggest to them they spend a few nights (assuming they can) at the local crisis center.

And since I have gone into rape as a reality also for males let's use the opportunity to dispel some big myths.

1.- It happens to males

2.- It matters little if you are hetero, gay or bi. Or if you are a big hunk or a mouse of a man...

3.- The perpetrators are hetero, gay or bi... there is no higher proportion of either. This is an act of power and violence, not pleasure.

4.- Yes, like a prostate exam that happens...

5.- It is far more common than our society is willing to accept.

And no I will not defend this man, though he needs to go to a court of law, and be tried by his peers... ok that's gonna be difficult, how many multi billionaires are available?

[Hannah Bell]

145. if any forced sexual act is rape, then why isn't he being charged with rape?

um, because any sexual act isn't rape. not in law, and not in the common tongue.

[Scout]

167. BRAWK! why isn't he charged with rape? BRAWK! n/t

[BillyJack]

91. Hmmmm.....Curious indeed.....

Things aren't always as they seem, ....and yet....

This is most likely a multi-faceted story....too early to draw any 'conclusions' about what REALLY happened here, imho.

[nadinbrzezinski]

95. Yep, some of the things coming out from FRANCE

are amusing.

It is early... and it will develop. If I were into murder mysteries, that is writing them... this is the kind of case you definitely want to keep clippings from... a rich source of material just opened up

[woo me with science]

101. We don't know one way or the other.

It is certainly possible he did it. There are also very good reasons someone with resources to do it well might have wanted to frame him. If he wanted to commit rape, to do it in this particular way would be a remarkably stupid and self-destructive act for someone in his position.

The simple fact is that none of us know yet. I would not express outrage just because people are considering possibilities.

[nadinbrzezinski]

104. The BBC went ito the self destructive today

as is.. he had a reputation as a philanderer... which is what? common in France?

They posited that the wife wanted him to run but he was not too ahem hot for it. So yes, they said... and I quote. possibly a Freudian slip

[Hannah Bell]

109. what i was told by a japanese expat living in paris was that both the japanese

& french upper crust took discreet adultery for granted.

and in general not too concerned about it. "discreet". not flaunting it to the masses. not choosing inappropriate partners. etc.

this is what i was told. it accorded with what i'd read in 19th century novels, lol.

unlike nadin, i'm not privy to the insider gossip of the french upper crust, lol.

[Art_from_Ark]

114. There's "discreet", and there there's "discreet"

There was a famous case in Japan back in 1989 that involved a hapless prime minister named Uno who was brought down by the so-called "josei mondai" ("woman problem"). According to the news stories at the time, the unfortunate prime minister had a mistress, but she was not satisfied with the fringe benefits she was receiving from being the PM's Number 2, so she started talking to the media about it. The next thing you know, Uno's out the door.

[Hannah Bell]

117. that's "indiscreet". :>)

[suffragette]

115. Well stated,woo me with science

That's the way I view it, too.

[Hannah Bell]

144. a remarkably stupid & self-destructive act. as was calling the hotel to get his cell phone

after the act.

if i'd just assaulted the hotel's employee, i certainly wouldn't call the hotel.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[steve2470]

123. Strauss-Kahn wife famous in her own write (NY Post headline)

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/wife_famous_in_her_own_write_uhNO4nr9vfdEVBFdwCnz9J

The New York-born wife of Dominique Strauss-Kahn is no stranger to political scandal -- having covered plenty as one of France's highest-profile journalists.

Anne Sinclair, 62, has been a fixture on the French political scene for decades, first as a radio personality and later as the host of a popular TV news show that ran for 13 years. She's won four Sept d'or awards, France's version of the Emmy, and written more than three dozen books.

Born to French-Jewish parents who had fled the Nazis, she's also the heiress to an art-gallery fortune.

After high school, she left for France, eventually earning a law degree from the University of Paris. She became Strauss-Kahn's third wife in 1991. They live in a $3 million Georgetown home, which she owns, and have two apartments in Paris and a home in Marrakech, Morocco.

[nadinbrzezinski]

127. Oh my lord

Ok that tinfoil heart alert might have been a little early...

[Hannah Bell]

133. why? because she's a journalist? because they're rich? because she's jewish?

i don't get it.

[Hannah Bell]

142. because she was born in new york? c'mon, nadin, clue me in.