Saturday, September 08, 2007

Vitter lied when he denied the "New Orleans stories" 

Agitprop alerts us to this update from Larry Flynt's investigation into Vitty-cent. Flynt had Wendy Cortez undergo a lie detector examination concerning her sexual relationship with David Vitter, and she "passed the test with flying colors".

Recall what Vitter said in his public apology in July. Vitter vaguely admitted to "serious sins" in relation to the D.C. Madam's service. But he didn't fully come clean about his past reckless behavior. In fact, he lied about it. He misled Louisianans when he said that the New Orleans stories "are not true".

Then, his intrepid Senate Republican colleagues, who coordinated with such ruthless efficiency against Sen Larry Craig, applauded Sen. Vitter when he returned to D.C..

Labels: ,

15 comments DiggIt!


Not to golden rain on your parade but polygraphs are not, as far as I know, actually evidence.

This is because people can and do elicit positive responses when they are lying like a sack of shit.

It seems, according to my reading, that accurate readings depend of whether the subject has a conscience.

Given Vitter, Flynt and Jeanette's bias', I look for better conformation. None of the sources are exactly unimpeachable.

By Anonymous mominme, at 12:01 AM  

Wendy Cortez should give addresses where the meetings occured. They you ask Vitter point blank "have you ever been to 100 Main. Street? If so, for what?". That's how you paint Vitter into a corner in this scandal.

Talking about the sex and the lies only allows Vitter to repeat his lame "I have sinned" answers. If you ask about places (and dates, and facts) then Vitter looks a lot worse when he won't answer. You can't answer "Have you ever been to 100 Main St. ?" with "I have sinned".

This story needs more 'who, what, where, when' detail. I know the sex and lying are more exciting but it's not how you build the case against Vitter. Flynt is interested in the salacious aspects of the case. LA politicos and the legit press have to be more pragmatic and build a case like a prosecutor.

By Blogger joejoejoe, at 12:22 AM  

Not to golden rain on your parade but polygraphs are not, as far as I know, actually evidence.

I think the more interesting aspect of this is that Cortez/Yow/Ellis is cooperating with Flynt. The other shoe may soon drop.

By Blogger blogenfreude, at 3:16 PM  

"Not to golden rain on your parade but polygraphs are not, as far as I know, actually evidence."

That's false. Polygraph results can be admitted as evidence in certain jurisdictions in the U.S..

joejoejoe: Vitter has been asked a very specific question about Wendy Cortez. I've repeatedly posted about this exchange the Flaming Liberal had with Vitter on a radio show:

The "Flaming Liberal" called into the show and asked Vitter:

"Would you be willing to sign under the penalty of perjury an affidavit saying you have never had an extramarital affair and you have never known, met or been in the company of one Wendy Cortez?"

To which Vitter replied:

"Flaming Liberal thank you for repeating all these vicious rumors that my political enemies are trying to bandy about and those rumors are absolutely true and they really don’t belong in any political campaign and I’ve stated very clearly that they’re lies, but I’m not going to start jumping through hoops and taking orders from my political enemies who have absolutely no credibility. So, I’ll speak very clearly about that. I have in the past; I’ll continue to do so."

Vitty's not gonna answer specifics at this point, about addresses or anything else. We must use his previous statements-- especially his few substantial post-scandal statements-- to show that he's lying. The addresses of his rendezvous' are very well known.

Who: Vitter and whores
When: Since the early 90's until...?
Where: French Quarter, Canal St. and somewhere in D.C.
What: Pampered sex

By Blogger oyster, at 5:27 PM  

Vitty's not gonna answer specifics at this point, about addresses or anything else.

Exactly - he thinks he can just ignore it, like the Dear Leader ignores subpoenas. He thinks he can tough it out, but once Wendy (the other one) goes in front of a camera, he'll have to answer questions. She certainly wasn't working in D.C. at any point, so he'll have to stick his head up.

By Blogger blogenfreude, at 6:51 PM  

oyster - I've been reading your coverage for awhile and know that Vitter was asked before by a caller on a radio show. I guess I'm more mad at the press today for not asking the direct questions of Vitter than his weaseling out of them in 2002. Why aren't the T-P, AP, and the Washington Post asking him about it TODAY?

I really don't think much more is going to come out unless it's through the Palfrey trial because the modern press basically only asks for statements from politicians and almost never asks pointed follow-ups that challenge the truthfulness of the politician's original statement.

By Blogger joejoejoe, at 8:54 PM  

I've supported Vitter in the past, but frankly, the evidence here is pretty substantial. The madam, the prostitute, the prostitute's boyfriend, and a fellow Republican all reported knowlege (in two of those cases, personal knowledge) of Vitter's indiscretions at the Canal Street brothel.

Now, before Vitter fessed up to being on the DC madam's list, I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on this. Right now, his credibility is pretty low. A polygraph, while certainly not slam-dunk evidence, is hardly unconvincing -- although I must say that trust Larry Flynt very little. Still, I was convinced Vitter wasn't telling the whole story before, so this doesn't change much.

As for the different treatment Craig recieved, well, I've explained the reasons before, but I think three are most prominent here:

1) Craig pled guilty to a crime. Is that fair, since Vitter avoided that simply due to the statute of limitations? Maybe not, but it's certainly true that Vitter at least seems to have shaped up before entering the Senate, which was a mitigating factor.

2) Craig was trying to elicit anoymous sex in a public bathroom. For better or for worse, that elicits the "ick" factor a great deal more that using call girls and brothels. People tend to be less sympathetic when these things are out in public, where people could inadvertantly step in (an extremely weak, 'splitting hairs' argument in my mind).

3) The biggest reason -- Craig could resign without political consequences for the GOP (Republican governor), while Vitter could not. It's a fair consideration; it's one thing to take your own career down, but your collegues won't let you take the party down with you. I personally don't see anything wrong with that attitude.

By Blogger Owen Courrèges, at 9:57 PM  

Vitter is being obstinate because he can It's really that simple. Even after Flynt makes it clear that he has been lying about "those New Orleans stories", (and I believe he will) Vitter will not have to answer for it politically.

Louisiana is going to go big-time Republican during the next two or three election cycles for several reasons:

1) The GOP has been organizing to take advantage of the large number of term-limited legislative seats. Vitter will not derail that.

2) The flood has made New Orleans an irrelevant whipping boy in State politics.

3) The voters want CHANGE, DAMMIT! more or less regardless of what that CHANGE entails.

Because of this, Vitter is completely immune to anything outside of a criminal prosecution as long as he continues to be a stubborn asshole. And, well, that just seems to be his strength.

By Blogger jeffrey, at 10:57 AM  

You forgot one reason:

4) The State Dem Party is beyond douchey.

By Blogger oyster, at 11:24 AM  

Vitty-cent's not going anywhere until after Piyush is elected governor. The day after he's sworn in, the Senate leadership will drive the same bus that rolled over Larry Craig back around the corner and Mitch McConnell and Trent Lott will push Vitty-cent right under it.

Louisiana may be going red, but the overall trend right now in the country is blue. The Rethugs know it, and they know that Vitter is excess baggage. They can't do anything about him now, though, because Blanco would appoint a Dem. Once they have Piyush in office, then they can be as brutal to Vitter as they've been to Craig.

By Anonymous YatPundit, at 11:25 AM  

"The day after he's sworn in, the Senate leadership will drive the same bus that rolled over Larry Craig back around the corner and Mitch McConnell and Trent Lott will push Vitty-cent right under it."

I seriously doubt that's going to happen, but, I'd love to see it.

By Blogger oyster, at 12:29 PM  

But keep in mind....he didn't say which New Orleans' stories were untrue....he just said "The New Orleans stories are untrue."

It was an unqualified statement.

By Blogger Dambala, at 2:39 PM  

Vitter needs to go.

By Blogger Roux, at 2:59 PM  

This woman has pictures, he cannot say that is not me.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:04 PM  

I'm not sure I'd call it an "unqualified statement", Dambala. Here's the exact quote:

"Unfortunately my admission has encouraged some longtime political enemies, and those hoping to profit from the situation, to spread falsehoods too-- like those New Orleans stories in recent reporting. Those stories are not true."

More explanation is needed, to be sure.

By Blogger oyster, at 10:37 AM