by RB1 » Sat May 06, 2006 1:22 am
Got to Daily Kos tonight and find and absolutely "rigorously intuitive" thread sitting dead center of their Recommended Diaries list. From courtjester's diary...<br><br>"It's about GAY hookers, STUPID!"<br><br>"I'm sorry, but why is everyone so shy about asking the gender of the hookers involved in the Duke Cunningham scandal? And for those of you who might say it does not matter, I have just one thing to say... You are fools! Edwin Edwards used to say that the only thing that will cost me the Governorship is if I am caught with in bed with a dead girl or a live boy. And there is nothing that gay repugs fear more than being outed. It is a political death sentence in the Christo-Repug Star Chamber.<br><br>And with that in mind, I return (below the fold) to the question of the gender of these hookers who were provided to the Dukester by Shirlington Limo and Mitchell Wade...<br><br>Per Josh Marshall, Shirlington head honcho Chris Baker, allegedly, made the hookers available to Cunningham as follows... <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/...">www.talkingpointsmemo.com/...</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br> In case you've forgotten your scorecard at home, Brent Wilkes is the arch-briber in the Randy "Duke" Cunningham scandal. As the Wall Street Journal first reported back on April 27th, federal investigators are looking into evidence that, in addition to cash prizes, Wilkes may have also set Duke up with hookers at the parties he threw in DC. The Feds also looking into what other members of Congress and intelligence officials spent quality time at Wilkes' hoedowns. (Wilkes' was apparently throwing these parties for something like 15 years.)<br><br> This Justin Rood post from TPMmuckraker has quotes from Reps. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) and Jerry Lewis (R-CA) denying that they partied with Wilkes. And here's the follow-up piece from the Journal in which the CIA concedes that Agency #3 man Dusty Foggo did party with Wilkes but didn't stick around for the hookers to show up.<br><br> Anyway, Chris Baker was clearly Wilkes' go-to guy for the 'hospitality suites' notwithstanding the fact that Baker's lawyer told the San Diego Union-Tribune that Baker was "never in attendance in any party where any women were being used for prostitution purposes." And, as we discussed late Tuesday, there's something pretty fishy about the mega-contracts Baker's company managed to land from the Department of Homeland Security. <br><br>Did anyone think to ask whether Baker had been in attendance in any party where any men were being used for prostitution puroses. They used to call this kind of parsing Clintonian.<br><br>Also, a googling of the words "Duke", "gay" and "prostitutes" brings up this interesting cache from Wonkette...<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://72.14.207.104/...">72.14.207.104/...</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Check out the references to Duke's trip to Saudi Arabia, his "lady doth protest too much" lashing of Barney Frank and his delicate taste.<br><br>Finally, and most significantly, there is this piece from the Washington Blade where Chris Crain makes the compelling case that Duke is gay...<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.washblade.com/...">www.washblade.com/...</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Crain begins with this powerful intro...<br><br> THE THING ABOUT LYING, your mother probably told you, is that the more lying you do, the deeper the hole you dig. That familiar lesson was apparently lost on good ol' Duke Cunningham.<br><br> The grizzled Vietnam War veteran turned right-wing Republican resigned his seat in Congress this week after he pled guilty to accepting $2.4 million in bribes from defense contractors. Over the years, Cunningham accepted a staggering list of gifts and sweetheart deals in exchange for his vote and influence.<br><br> What you won't read about in these mainstream press accounts is the other double life led by the closet case, Duke, the anti-gay conservative...<br><br>Like a skilled prosecutor, Crain then lays out the evidence, and then concludes with this powerful closing...<br><br> This is, after all, a man without principles, who could "love men" in private, all the while condemning gays in speeches and in congressional votes. Little surprise that he could live a second double life, in which he sold those unprincipled votes to the highest bidder.<br><br>So help me out here... Why the media silence on the gender of the prostitutes at the Duke Love Shack? Can we do anything to turn that around, because it is very friggin' relevant if a gay-bashing administration turns out to be a haven for and a bastion of gay whore-mongers."<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/5/5/194558/7271">www.dailykos.com/story/20...94558/7271</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Some great info in the comments, too <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :hat --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/pimp.gif ALT=":hat"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p></p><i></i>
