• if two people have sex, and one gets paid, that's prostitution and illegal

• if two people have sex, and they both get paid, and it's videotaped, and the tape is sold to others, that called adult entertainment and it's not illegal

According to Scott Horton( H/T FoxholeAtheist):

Note that this prosecution was managed with staffers from the Public Integrity Section at the Department of Justice. This section is now at the center of a major scandal concerning politically directed prosecutions. During the Bush Administration, his Justice Department has opened 5.6 cases against Democrats for every one involving a Republican. Beyond this, a number of the cases seem to have been tied closely to election cycles.

So far it sounds like a simple (although expensive)prostitution case

Jane Hamsher asks some interesting questions @firedoglake

That this has happened does not tarnish his actions as a crusader with regards to the misdeeds of Wall Street. It doesn't negate the very real good that Spitzer did for lots of people with regards to his position as Pitbull for the People of NY.

Everything I've read says he was investigated based on his financial transactions -- cash withdrawals -- in response to reports from his bank(s) to the IRS.

As you've pointed out elsewhere, the Mann Act has been used by federal prosecutors against principals in interstate or international prostitution rings.

But why do you think they're even considering charging Spitzer, a customer, under the Mann Act?

Why are you ignoring, at least in this post, the pain-fully obvious possibility that (absent a plea involving his resignation) they are going to charge him, as the ABC News report says, with structuring -- a species of money-laundering -- under 31 U.S.C. § 5324(a)?

As a former prosecutor of organized crime money-launderers, Spitzer was certainly aware of the $10k+ currency transaction reporting requirements.  He also, at least per all of the press reporting, went to great lengths to deal only in cash, not using Amex or wire transfers.  He appears to have deliberately -- albeit unsuccessfully -- manipulated the system to stay of the feds' financial radar screens, which (as you know, Jeralyn, and Spitzer did too) have been given much more attention post-9/11.

If he's been deliberately trying to evade the federal regs, that's "structuring" -- a federal crime wholly independent from the underlying prostitution or Mann Act.  It's a crime that is only incidentally related, in fact, to whatever went on with the callgirls.

Even many people who believe prostitution should be legalized anyway (like me) find the governor's behavior outrageous. It is practically a guarantee that this prostitution ring has ties to organized crime, leaving him open to blackmail - which is a much more serious matter with an executive official like an attorney general or governor than with a legislator who is one vote among many.

Also, as attorney general Spitzer was infamous for using obscure old laws to put away his targets, especially securities people. And, he busted a couple of high-end prostitution rings himself, accompanied by heavy publicity. The hypocrisy is so thick he should just resign right away to avoid doing damage to the party, especially this year.

   I'd agree that a federal prosecution either for prostitution, financial structuring/money laundering, interstate travel,  or racketeering would be serious overkill.

  He should resign forthwith though. The suggestion above that because he is now Governor and no longer AG or a prosecutor somehow lessens either the hypocricy or the risk of being subject to coercion to use his offices for the benefit of those with dirt on him is absurd. There's also the quaint notion that it's wrong to engage in criminal acts even without hypocricy or creating risk of extortion, and that elected official should be held to some minimal standard of personal conduct which excludes deviously plotting to commit criminal acts.

  Attempts to portray HIM as the victim are desperate nonsense as well. The only thing of which he is a victim is his own behavior.  The real victims are his wife and kids.

For the greater good, he needs to resign NOW.

Then we can say, "Our guys resign, yours think it's all good."

  One might speculate that a pattern of relatively small sums of money being transferred in a short period of time from/through  various accounts to a specific account raised suspicion of concealment but there are I suppose many other possibilities.

Since that weasel Mukasey got in on the strength of Schumer (D-NY) endorsing him, it would be interesting to know if the topic was covered in the private conversation he and Schumer had before Schumer gave Mukasey  the big thumbs-up.

However, in the Village, innocent bystanders are in short supply. And surely Spitzer is not the only member of the New York-Washington, DC axis taking advantage of Amtrak's fine Northeast Corridor service for an out-of-town tryst.

And I would bet that many Villagers who are Shocked, shocked! today are at the same time checking their own personal phone, email, and financial records very, very carefully, particularly those involving out of town stays.... especially during the campaign season. Eh?

Personally I don't give a rat's butt if Spitzer was paying for sex or not. I've always thought, so long as the prostitute is of age, not a victim of the slave trade and willing it's no body's business but the stupid man caught with his britches down and the poor family members that have to be humiliated along with the nitwit too stupid to keep his pants zipped. (Yeah, I do mean Bill Clinton too.)

However, if Spitzer tries to tough this out it will be a non-stop Republican talking point. We all know how the media and much of the public likes sex scandals. If Spitzer truly cares about his party and his family he will resign immediately.

Morgan Chang
65 Wall Street
New York, NY 10005
(646) 299-5708

The bust of the prostitution ring was announced in a March 6 press release.  There are multiple archived "who is" records for the domain since 2005 (as per www.whois.sc), and it seems the registrant record was altered in some way on March 6, March 8 and March 9.  Makes makes me wonder if the Wall Street address was put in as a dig at Spitzer.  

However, failing to meet a public standard of morality while putting other people in jail for the same behavior is another matter entirely.

however, i thought that's what made the democratic party superior to the republicans?: our people do the right thing.

"Austin, TX Mayor Will Wynn was charged with assault two days ago. Today, he admits it and says he has been in anger management counseling for a few years. The assault stems from an incident outside his condominium when a man made fun of his name. Wynn says he let the guy "push his buttons."

Conspiracy buff theory:

1. Get rid of Democratic governors (Siegelman for example).  
   
2. Get Republican governors in place.
   
3.  Appoint Republican-loyal Secretaries of State who oversee the election process.  
   
4. Corrupt the election process in favor of Republicans.

US Political Prisoners:  Democratic governors?

  If a politician defrauds people in his "private life" should that be considered irrelevant to his holding office? If he slaps his wife or girlfriend? Abuses his children? Produces child porn? etc...

  Unless, one is either  claiming that due to an anomolous law one lacked intent to commit a crime or that the anomoly renders the law applicable to the offense unconstitutional, it is of little significance whether  a person's defenders don't like the law.

Now, should the feds pursue a simple prostitution case just because the prostitute traveled from state to state? There is nothing to suggest that the prostitute was coerced or was forced into this business (in fact, she was making more per hour than just about every lawyer in town). The original Mann Act of 1910 was really meant to outlaw forced prostitution (and was known as the "White Slave Traffic Act.")

Here's the actual language of the Mann Act.

For those that don't want to read it all, here's the first sentence.  Judge for yourself:

That any person who shall knowingly transport or cause to be transported, or aid or assist in obtaining transportation for, or in transporting, in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or in the District of Columbia, any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery

Sounds like it fits the current case, no?

Here's section 2 from which the above came from:

SEC. 2. That any person who shall knowingly transport or cause to be transported, or aid or assist in obtaining transportation for, or in transporting, in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or in the District of Columbia, any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose, or with the intent and purpose to induce, entice, or compel such woman or girl to become a prostitute or to give herself up to debauchery, or to engage in any other immoral practice; or who shall knowingly procure or obtain, or cause to be procured or obtained, or aid or assist in procuring or obtaining, any ticket or tickets, or any form of transportation or evidence of the right thereto, to be used by any woman or girl in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or the District of Columbia, in going to any place for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose, or with the intent or purpose on the part of such person to induce, entice, or compel her to give herself up to the practice of prostitution, or to give herself up to the practice of debauchery, or any other immoral practice, whereby any such woman or girl shall be transported in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or the District of Columbia, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, or by imprisonment of not more than five years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.

But suppose for a moment that he is charged under the Mann Act. Some might decry that a statute intended to deter human trafficking would be used against a "John" of the sort who is rarely prosecuted for being a customer of a prostitute. These observers would have a point.

Then again, Mr. Spitzer himself is intimately familiar with the prosecutorial tactic of dusting off old laws and repurposing them. When he became New York's Attorney General in 1999, he seized on the 1921 Martin Act and wielded it as a club against some of the biggest firms on Wall Street. The Martin Act was originally passed to facilitate the prosecution of "bucket shops" that took advantage of small-time investors, but its use became relatively rare decades ago. It should have been repealed.

However, the Martin Act was convenient for Mr. Spitzer's purposes because of the low bar it sets for bringing cases and the ability it afforded him to bring preliminary injunctions without even having to file a complaint first. Violations bring stiff civil and criminal penalties and, most important, do not require prosecutors to prove criminal intent. The law had been used primarily to pursue pyramid schemers, pump-and-dump operations and other unambiguous frauds, but Mr. Spitzer saw in it a way to exert enormous leverage over the Wall Street firms whose research practices he wanted changed. By using the Martin Act, Mr. Spitzer could more easily coerce settlements from his targets, who feared the law's low bar in court.