Spitzer and Limbaugh

Mark Kleiman notes that the "structuring" charges that appear to be Elliot Spitzer's main legal vulnerability were also a problem for Rush Limbaugh back when he was trying to conceal his illegal prescription drug purchases:

But this is a case where consistency is a virtue. Either both Limbaugh and Spitzer should have been prosecuted, or neither. I'd hate to think that politics might intrude into law enforcement decisions made but Bush appointees at DoJ. Wouldn't you?

Good thing the Bush administration would never do anything like that. Hm. I genuinely don't know what standard practice is in these cases, but I do think one would want to avoid drawing the conclusion that if Rush was left off unduly easy, therefore liberals should be let off easy too. Insofar as one motive here was to tarnish Spitzer's reputation and wreck his political career, that seems to have been accomplished already, so at this point I'm not sure how much these decisions matter.

Comments

I suspect spending 3 years in the federal pen might matter to Spitzer.

Posted by mert7878 | March 11, 2008 11:53 AM

I suppose it's possible to imagine that Spitzer could mount a partisan prosecution defense. It's certainly conceivable that DOJ did this out of political motives or at least took some joy in publicizing it for that reason.

To get the public or the press to care about that line of inquiry, though, it helps to be innocent.

Posted by southpaw | March 11, 2008 11:57 AM

ack, unintentional italics . . .sorry

Posted by southpaw | March 11, 2008 11:58 AM

Hate to defend the big fat idiot, but he did not hold elected office or prosecute others for what he himself was guilty of.

Posted by john i | March 11, 2008 11:59 AM

Spitzer - Human Trafficker - Lacks respect for human-beings...

Posted by Richard Pointer | March 11, 2008 12:04 PM

Hate to defend the big fat idiot, but he did not hold elected office or prosecute others for what he himself was guilty of.

Which, of course, is irrelevant.

Posted by SavageView | March 11, 2008 12:10 PM

Listen, I hate Rush as much as the next liberal, but the (more compassionate) drug legalizers were right when he got busted, that he shouldn't be punished for his pain pill addiction anymore than a poor "Bubbles-type" addict should be punished for his heroin addiction.

Spitzer broke the law, the Mann Act, which has about as grotesque a history as any law, short of the fugitive slave act, can have. In 2008, we're really going to charge Spitzer with the crime of "White Slavery?" Really?

Posted by DSG | March 11, 2008 12:10 PM

Look, I'm as much for sleeping with a 1k an hour hooker as the next loser (yea, right, like I have that kind of ching...)Hell, we're all aware that a stiff prick has no conscience. But Spitzer didnt just get caught with his proverbial pants down. He got caught screwing the public amidst a torrid affair of self-inflicted, pornographic hypocrisy.

He'll soon go from client number 9 to cellmate number 1. And his little party, of sorts, will continue.

Posted by resh | March 11, 2008 12:15 PM

Spitzer, like Limbaugh, will get off legally with a slap on the wrist: both can afford top legal talent and the charges for both are minor.

The real trick will be public opinion. Limbaugh still enjoys a large audience. The question is whether Spitzer will survive the next election.

Posted by Human Trafficker | March 11, 2008 12:20 PM

"Insofar as one motive here was to tarnish Spitzer's reputation and wreck his political career..."

The leak maybe, but I haven't see any evidence that one purpose of the investigation as a whole was to harm Spitzer. He seems to be perfectly capable of doing that himself.

Posted by Dave | March 11, 2008 12:25 PM

Spitzer - Human Trafficker - Lacks respect for human-beings...

Limbaugh - International narcotics trafficker - Lacks respect for national sovereignty...

Posted by SavageView | March 11, 2008 12:27 PM

Hate to defend the big fat idiot, but he did not hold elected office or prosecute others for what he himself was guilty of.

prosecute, no. but he did persecute them.

Posted by cleek | March 11, 2008 12:27 PM

Look, I'm as much for sleeping with a 1k an hour hooker as the next loser (yea, right, like I have that kind of ching...)Hell, we're all aware that a stiff prick has no conscience. But Spitzer didnt just get caught with his proverbial pants down. He got caught screwing the public amidst a torrid affair of self-inflicted, pornographic hypocrisy.

He'll soon go from client number 9 to cellmate number 1. And his little party, of sorts, will continue.

Perhaps he and Senator Vitter can be bunkmates, with Larry Craig across the hall serenading the other inmates.

Posted by SavageView | March 11, 2008 12:32 PM

Hell, we're all aware that a stiff prick has no conscience.

Come on, have some decency and leave John Kerry out of this.

As far as why Spitzer might legitimately take a harder legal fall than Limbaugh for the same offense, the best reason that comes to mind is just good government. These transactions initially looked like the kind of thing a politician would do if he were setting money aside for bribes, etc. As much as I would've liked to see Limbaugh go to federal prison what he does with his piles of cash is of little or no importance to the public (except that many of us derive satisfaction from seeing him knocked off his high horse).

But what the governor of a state does with mysteriously-withdrawn thousands of dollars is an issue of legitimate public concern, and so punishing Spitzer more simply because he's governor, as opposed to because what he did was objectively "worse", might make sense.

All that said, I don't think he deserves to go to prison, and presumably the ongoing horror-show will make an impression on other politicians tempted to get cute with their money. I just don't think the comparison to Limbaugh is apt.

Posted by JB | March 11, 2008 12:36 PM

I am a Democrat, and Rush Limbaugh registers pretty high on my annoy-o-meter. But there are only two differences between the two cases, as far as I'm concerned. First, Limbaugh was only harming himself; Spitzer betrayed his whole family's trust. But that's a moral issue, not a legal one. Second, there's a possibility that Spitzer was involved in transferring public funds to pay; Rush never did something like that (as far as I'm aware). That makes this, potentially, a much more serious legal issue. If it turns out that he did break some other financial laws while breaking the anti-prostitution laws, then yes he should resign and be prosecuted.

Posted by Tel | March 11, 2008 12:37 PM

The leak maybe, but I haven't see any evidence that one purpose of the investigation as a whole was to harm Spitzer.

Evidence? Not yet. But both the DOJ and the bank that first flagged his transactions both had considerable motive. Spitzer had the bad luck of being guilty, but it looks as if he was going to be indicted in the next nine months regardless.

Posted by jlw | March 11, 2008 12:39 PM

I believe we shouldn't entrench bad precedent. If a person argues that Spitzer shouldn't be prosecuted for "structuring" just because Limbaugh wasn't, that makes it that much more difficult to prosecute structuring under any future circumstance.

Posted by Mike H | March 11, 2008 12:47 PM

I'm sorry... but when was Rush elected Governor?? Spitzer's actions put the entire State of NY at risk given the opportunity for blackmail. The only thing Rush put at rsk was his credibility and career... the first was already in question

Posted by A Moderate Voice | March 11, 2008 1:36 PM

Rush Limbaugh is merely a hypocritical talk radio host.

Eliot Spitzer built his life as someone with ultimate life-ruining power over the powerful Inspector Javert of the rich and powerful, a Javert who has been found breaking the law. And this is no J. Edgar Hoover, willing to apply enforcement with an uneven hand according to politicial or ideological goal, no such nuances allowed.

He will have done to him what he would do to others, and, if he manages to bargain it down, what he is trading is the public image he worked his whole life to attain.

Rminence grise pundit of New York politics, Clyde Haberman:

Long a Public Scold, Now Facing Life as a Punch Line:

...“The world’s smartest man,” Representative Charles B. Rangel once said of him with a healthy dash of derision. Is he ambitious? No question. Has he shown that he is prepared to knock down walls to get his way, even if it means knocking down people as well? Absolutely.

But character is destiny, as the saying goes, and Mr. Spitzer’s flaws as an individual keep getting in his way, particularly his broad moralizing streak.

He was headed for trouble right from his vaunted Day 1 in office....

Right off the bat, he treated lawmakers as unworthy hacks....

....One state senator said the governor threatened during an argument to cut the senator’s head off.

Sanctimony is not listed among the seven deadly sins, but maybe it should be, right next to pride....

....Being cast eternally as a punch line could be a fate worse than resignation. Mr. Spitzer might want to start asking Monica Lewinsky or Senator Larry Craig what it’s like.

Those who find the above any of the above on the hyperbolic side, check the downward trajectory of his approval ratings since first day in office first.

Posted by artappraiser | March 11, 2008 1:42 PM

I'm sorry... but when was Rush elected Governor?? Spitzer's actions put the entire State of NY at risk given the opportunity for blackmail.

If you believe that, then I have the girl for you... only $1,000,000/hour.

The only thing Rush put at rsk was his credibility and career... the first was already in question

And the entire federal system of narcotics regulation.

As I've said, I'd be more than happy to see Spitzer and Vitter as bunkmates with Craig serenading the cell block. I'll through in Rush as the snitch doing the laundry.

Funny thing is, though, that by the end of the week, only one of these guys will be out of job.

Posted by SavageView | March 11, 2008 2:41 PM

Can't we agree that they all should be in prison for violating laws, and we shouldn't feel bad for them because they are huge hypocrites, and just because some of them aren't in prison, for whatever reason, doesn't mean the others should get off scott free?

Posted by Wilson | March 11, 2008 3:06 PM

Limbaugh didn't make his name prosecuting the kinds of crimes he had been accused of. As hard as that concept is for Matt to wrap his head around, it matters.

Posted by James Robertson | March 11, 2008 3:57 PM