home

MassageGate? Al Gore's Alleged Sexcapades

Update: WaPO reports the Enquirer says the woman asked for $1 million for her story, through her lawyer, but it decided not to pay her anything. Instead, it talked to her for a few minutes and relied on police reports for the rest.

****

The Enquirer strikes again. This time Al Gore is the target. The 73 page police report (available here) includes the alleged victim's 2009 statement about a massage she gave to Al Gore at a hotel in Portland Oregon in 2006. The Oregonian account is here.

The woman claims he had been drinking. There's a funny part where he asked her to go into the bedroom part of the suite and listen to Pink on his iPod singing "Dear Mr. President," a song about Bush.

She claims he "bellowed" at her when rebuffed. Alternately, he went New Age:[More...]

After first being rebuffed, Gore tried another tactic, according to the woman, "pleading for the release of his second chakra" -- a euphemism for sexual activity, she claimed. Instead, the woman said she tried a pressure point hoping it would make him sleepy.

Maybe the newly single Al Gore should give Rielle Hunter a call.

At other times, she describes him as "giggling" almost uncontrollably.

Here's an ironic twist to the tale: the woman claims she saved her pants because they might have Gore stains on them. Can they go to the Smithsonian along with Monica's dress?

The accuser's wording is very picturesque, reading like a screenplay. She told him he was being "too frisky", she yelled at him, "You big big lummox, get off me" and asked him how long he was "whacked out" he was after the 2004 election. She also says:

"I told him I was sorry to disappoint him and he would just have to take matters into his own hands that night.

The police have declined to prosecute citing insufficient corroborating evidence. Yet the police release the accuser's statement anyway. Why not just release their finding? Anyone can just make stuff up.

The report says she waited six weeks to report the incident in 2006 and then refused to give a statement because she wanted to bring a civil suit.

So what happened? Did Al Gore refuse to pay or offer her an acceptable settlement, causing her to tell him she was going to revive her criminal complaint and go public with her accusations? Maybe not, since she says she was never interested in money.

The timing is interesting, coming less than a month after the Gores announced their split. Did he have to warn Tipper this was going to break and she responded by kicking him to the curb?

I doubt many people will read through the 73 page statement. I did, and would caution people to remember you are reading one side of the story.

According to the D.A.:

"If the complainant and the Portland Police Bureau wish to pursue the possibility of a criminal prosecution, additional investigation by the Bureau will be necessary and will be discussed with the Portland Police Bureau," said the District Attorney's office.

As to why this is coming out now:

Detective Mary Wheat, a Portland police spokeswoman, said the woman contacted detectives this month and asked for a copy of her statement. According to Wheat, the woman said she planned to take her case to the media.

Update: Anyone want to bet tomorrow's news will be Gloria Allred is representing her?

< Thursday Morning Open Thread | Supreme Court Rules for Enron's Jeff Skilling and Conrad Black on "Honest Services" Fraud >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    The timing of the Goring? Day 64 of the BP Spill. (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:11:48 AM EST
    Some observers have been wondering whether Gore will take a more visible role in responding to what is shaping up to be one of the worst environmental disasters -- like, in the history of the world. I've been wondering how the press would endeavor to preempt the likelihood of Gore taking on that role. We need wonder no more.

    Well, if that's the case, I'm sure (none / 0) (#3)
    by scribe on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:17:23 AM EST
    some enterprising journo can start working Dave Vitter and asking whether he'll contribute from his stockpile of Pampers(TM) to help save the beaches of the state he represents.

    Gotta be an equal-opportunity offender....

    Parent

    His role is an enabler (none / 0) (#86)
    by Rojas on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 07:56:42 PM EST
    BP is no child where was Gore?

    When the whistle-blowers in Alaska were complaining about no maintenance, where was Gore?

    I remember it quite well, they were releasing the Strategic Petroleum reserves at a time when major oil companies were reporting the price per barrel was less the maintenance cost to keep domestic production viable.

    Not that anyone could see the train wreck coming... Not that they were warned... Not that accountability should enter in to the equation...


    Parent

    How long before we see.... (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by magster on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:30:22 AM EST
    Top ten Al Gore pick up lines on Letterman?

    "Hey, I've got global warming in my pants!"

    Sounds to me like the woman just may be (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by ZtoA on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:02:13 PM EST
    after media attention. Statements from Portland police and DA office via BlueOregon:

       A national tabloid magazine has published a story discussing allegations made by a Portland woman against former Vice President Al Gore. The Portland Police Bureau does not generally disclose information regarding sex crimes, as they are deemed confidential. However, because of the high-profile nature of this case and the fact that the woman involved provided reports to a media outlet, we will provide the following information:

        In December 2006, a local attorney contacted the Portland Police Bureau and said he had a client that wanted to report an unwanted sexual contact by Mr. Gore. This allegation stemmed from an incident on October 24, 2006, when the woman involved, a Licensed Massage Therapist, was called to a local hotel to provide a massage to Mr. Gore.

        After repeated attempts by Portland Police Detectives to interview the woman involved, the Police Bureau was told by her attorney in January 2007, that they were pursuing civil litigation and declined the assistance of the Portland Police Bureau's Detective Division. A special report was written and the case was exceptionally cleared--a standard procedure when the person involved declines to talk to police. The District Attorney's Office was consulted during this time.

        On January 6, 2009, the woman involved came to the Detective Division and explained that she would like to give a statement. On January 8, 2009, a Detective and a victim advocate assigned to the Sexual Assault Detail met with the woman. The woman read from a prepared statement and detailed the events of October 24, 2006. She reported that she was repeatedly subjected to unwanted sexual touching while in his presence.

        The woman reported that she still had clothes that she had worn during the encounter. But due to the description she gave of the incident, detectives did not collect the clothes as evidence because they did not feel there was any evidentiary value to the clothing.

        After interviewing the woman, the Police Bureau provided additional services per the victim advocate program. The case was not investigated any further because detectives concluded there was insufficient evidence to support the allegations.

        In June 2010, the woman involved contacted Detectives and asked for a copy of her statement, which she was given. She then asked if she could edit her statement and was told she could provide detectives with additional clarifications that would be added to her original report. She also advised that she was going to take the case to the media.

        The District Attorney's Office has a copy of the reports. At this point, the Police Bureau does not consider this an ongoing investigation unless new evidence is received in this case.

        The Police Bureau is releasing the redacted reports concurrent with this news release. In 2007, the Police Bureau released the initial special report regarding the incident after it received a public records request by the Portland Tribune.

    And the statement from the Multnomah County DA:

        In late 2006 and January 2007 this office was briefed by the Portland Police Bureau on allegations that were brought to it by an attorney representing a woman who alleged unwanted sexual contact by Al Gore. We were told the woman was not willing to be interviewed by the Portland Police Bureau and did not want a criminal investigation to proceed.

        About a year after this event, our office was aware that a public records request from the media regarding this matter had been granted by the Portland Police Bureau. Today our office was notified by the Portland Police Bureau that further investigation of this matter had been conducted by it in 2009 and we were provided with the reports from that further investigation.

        If the complainant and the Portland Police Bureau wish to pursue the possibility of a criminal prosecution, additional investigation by the Bureau will be necessary and will be discussed with the Portland Police Bureau.




    Sounds to me like the woman just may be (none / 0) (#27)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:13:50 PM EST
    Sounds to me like the woman just may be after media attention.
    Something Gore is known for, what, shunning?

    Parent
    Well, when you're a Nobel Prize winner it's (none / 0) (#36)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:52:16 PM EST
    considerably harder to "shun" media attention, doncha know. That's all.

    Parent
    Yep, garnering media attention (none / 0) (#41)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 02:18:01 PM EST
    can certainly be advantageous.

    Parent
    Money money money (none / 0) (#52)
    by ZtoA on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 03:33:19 PM EST
    one million dollars.....so far. Ah well, media can equal money.

    Of course she only sold her "story". I wonder if her "story" is not 100% and she actually set him up if she needs to return the money. Maybe she'll sell that story too and make more.

    Parent

    I would suggest you be very wary about (none / 0) (#53)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 03:55:06 PM EST
    accepting the "reported" one million number as fact.

    I very much doubt they paid anywhere near that amount, in fact I doubt it was anywhere near Gore's $825,000K he got for his half of the Nobel.

    Parent

    Guilty as charged, hey (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Brookhaven on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 04:21:37 PM EST
    Same goes for you.  Perhaps you should also be VERY weary of believing this alleged story about Gore.  

    Parent
    Dude calls a woman to his hotel room (none / 0) (#61)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 04:40:23 PM EST
    for a 3 hour massage at 11pm.

    I'm certainly open to hearing his side of the story, but it better be something that's way more believable and probable than that he had a few drinks and simply wanted a late night rub 'n tug, as they say...

    Parent

    "Dude" was not charged because there (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 07:21:48 PM EST
    wasn't any corroborating evidence to sufficiently support the allegations. In the eyes of the law, "dude" did NOTHING wrong. So let's say we put away the pitchforks, reel our tongues back in, pull our pants up, and move along.

    Parent
    What do the eyes of the law (none / 0) (#120)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 12:13:39 PM EST
    have to do with a dude named Al Gore calling a woman to his hotel room at 11 at night for a 3 hour massage?

    I am making no judgment of right or wrong, why would you make that bizarre claim?

    Like I said, if his intent was something other than a rub 'n release from a pretty young woman at the end of a long day before he goes to sleep, I'd be very open to hearing it.

    Parent

    Ah come on.... (none / 0) (#55)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 04:21:08 PM EST
    Why do you think they're getting a divorce?

    It's simple, he told Tipper and she said he could have his tools and the riding mower...The china, silver and silk sheets she'll keep.

    Sad story but not unusal.

    Parent

    Of please (none / 0) (#110)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 07:34:47 AM EST
    Can you get off the "you can't have an opinion" bit?

    I can and I do and I think this speaks for itself.

    Tough when the demi-gods fall, eh?

    Parent

    Exhausted, lonely older man... (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by Dadler on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 06:27:52 PM EST
    ...seeks comfort and human touch. Come on, does anyone here REALLY think Gore fits any profile for a sexual offender?

    Sometimes the frailties of the human condition get the best of all of us.

    That is what this seems to me. Just my gut take.

    When you've thrown your (none / 0) (#121)
    by jondee on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 12:44:00 PM EST
    career lot into a Machiavellian realm, which entails that anyone who's remotely influential or controversial will have a target on their back at all times, you have to be extra careful that your inner Clinton-Spitzer-Hart doesn't get the best of you.

    Parent
    I think this woman's behavior is very odd (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by esmense on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 06:46:31 PM EST
    She hires a lawyer but won't make a statement to the police? Then, nearly three years after the alleged event, suddenly changes her mind and does make an extremely long and detailed statement? She claims she has kept clothes, presumably unlaundered over that three year period, from the encounter -- even though they offer no physical evidence of the events she is alleging? She waits 4 years to sell her story to the tabloids (at a time when the Gore's marriage and speculation about the reasons has likely increased the value and newsworthiness of her allegations)?

    None of this sounds, to me, like reasonable behavior for a victim of a sexual assault. Mostly it sounds like someone trying to decide how they might best profit from an encounter with a famous figure.

    Well there it is... (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 07:12:33 PM EST
    If there were semen on any of the allegedly unlaundered alleged clothing it would be substantive corroborating evidence that some type of sexual activity took place. That piece of evidence is usually sufficient to proceed with charges. As to whether it was consensual or nonconsensual, that would have to be determined in a court of law. It is quite the challenge to prove non-consent, in the absence of other evidence that indicates force or overt coercion.

    My guess is that there is no incriminating bodily fluid on any clothing. If there were the police would not have declined to file charges due to lack of corroborating evidence.

    Parent

    I just added an update (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 07:26:06 PM EST
    as this thought came to me: Anyone want to bet tomorrow's news will be Gloria Allred is representing her?

    already saw the enquirer (5.00 / 2) (#89)
    by cpinva on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 08:45:09 PM EST
    front page on this, at the grocery store. the best part, for the accuser, is that nowhere is her name mentioned, only former vp gore's. standard in sexual assault cases, but certainly not fair to mr. gore.

    my guess (and this is purely speculative), the accuser files a civil suit, in the hopes mr. gore will pay her off, in lieu of going through the public agony of a trial, regardless of his actual guilt or innocence.

    so far, she's well ahead of the game, financially speaking. i'm also guessing (again, purely speculatively) that those pants haven't actually been tested for anything. could be a bbq sauce stain (assuming a stain actually exists), and no one would know the difference.

    with respect to the 3 hour massage, so far, we only have the word of the lady in question for that.

    myself, i doubt this has anything whatsoever to do with the unfortunate recent events in the gore's marriage. i suspect they just grew apart, as many couples do.

    Dream on... (none / 0) (#96)
    by Upstart Crow on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 10:24:09 PM EST
    Women in their 60s don't like to start over, lookin'-for-love in competition with women half their age.  Not to mention dividing assets and giving up a life they have, to some extent, loved (otherwise they would have bailed years before).

    Divorce is nasty. People don't do it because they've "drifted apart." They do it when "drifting apart" results in adultery or abuse.

    It's very unlikely she hasn't known about this.

    It would certainly be a deal-breaker for most women.

    Pretend it was Palin, or Huckabee, or Bush, and think how most of you would be all over it.

    Parent

    I've known a few women who chose to divorce (5.00 / 2) (#104)
    by esmense on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:34:25 PM EST
    late in life, ending what to others appeared to be successful decades-long marriages, with absolutely no desire to "start over" or any intention of "looking for love." What they were looking for was independence -- after a lifetime of putting the needs of others first and conforming their behavior to what best served the interests of their mate's career, ambitions, etc.

    Perhaps Tipper is simply ready to retire from the job of being the wife of a very public person -- a job that demands much more (than in most marriages) suppression of one's own needs and desires, and much too much intrusive public scrutiny of one's private actions.  

    Parent

    Makes Sense (5.00 / 2) (#105)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:46:24 PM EST
    Particularly from a Jungian perspective. The idea that a 60 year old woman is no longer desirable may not be remotely the thinking of a 60 year old woman. Something tells me Tipper Gore does not feel the need to depend on a man.

    I did not think it strange that they split up, nor did I think there was some dark private reason behind it all.

    Parent

    And sometimes... (none / 0) (#106)
    by Upstart Crow on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 01:29:56 AM EST
    And sometimes they break up because they know behind-the-scenes nasties that are about to break.

    I don't know of any women who have suddenly decided to seek independence in their sixties. Someone like Tipper Gore already had tons of "independence" as it was. Believe me, independence is easier with multiple residences, when you haven't split assets.

    However, I know many, many women in their 50s and 60s who were forced to walk the plank.

    And I've been there. I'm glad I'm out, and I learned to enjoy my independence -- but there was a gun to my head. You learn to recognize these from a distance.

    If it turns out that this story is entirely made up, and the woman he is or was alleged to be having an affair with is also entirely made up, and Tipper Gore suddenly decided she wanted legal freedom -- I'll be pleased.  After all, I voted for this guy and applauded his Nobel.

    But it's likelier that he isn't what we imagined him to be.  

    Parent

    My own grandmother divorced my grandfather (5.00 / 3) (#111)
    by esmense on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 08:44:33 AM EST
    when she was well into her 50s -- in the 1930s. She fled small town Missouri to re-invent herself as a nutritionist to the stars (and other wealthy people) in California, spending the years until her retirement at 65 traveling the globe at other people's expense, on other people's yachts, etc., and then the next three decades after that as a footloose world traveler living off the canny investments she had managed to make during her brief independent career (as well, of course, as that newfangled Social Security that she had so objected to as a good Republican). After raising 5 children, helping her husband establish several successful businesses, and spending 30 years as a wife and prominent pillar of her small, rural community, she opted for independence, adventure and the larger world -- and found it. She was the most cheerful human I've ever known -- although of course she could have been secretly taking all those cruises and hanging out in Europe and Asia for weeks and months at a time simply to hide her broken heart and her grief at not being offered opportunities to hook up with some old man in time to nurse him through his final illness, but I doubt it. More likely, she had plenty of such opportunities and ran from them like the plague.

    On the other hand, one of my aunts re-married, after a few years of widowhood, at the age of 83. The resulting close to 15 year marriage gave every indication of being even more romantic and contented than the successful more than 50 year long marriage that preceded it.

    Personally, I see absolutely no reason to assume older women's lives, with or without romance, must be dismissed as outside their own control and informed only or mostly by the actions of men. I also don't think romance is an impossibility for all older women. Nor do I think it is a necessity.

    Some people do decide, for their own reasons, to divorce quite blameless spouses. And some people, men and women, recognizing that time is dwindling, decide they want to take different paths for what remains of their lives.

    Of course Al probably isn't whoever we "imagine" him to be -- but that of course applies equally to Tipper. All we know is that we don't know who they are at all.

    Parent

    Point taken (none / 0) (#113)
    by Upstart Crow on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 09:48:27 AM EST
    And I am the very last person "to assume older women's lives, with or without romance, must be dismissed as outside their own control and informed only or mostly by the actions of men."

    All I'm saying is that when I first heard the split, it looked and smelled a certain way, and not that it's playing forward in time, that perception is being confirmed.  

    And I found it weird that the MSM treated this in an entirely different way than they would have treated any other case. For example, the way they would have treated it if Todd or Sarah Palin had been caught in the same situation.

    And on TL, the masseuse is being bashed and calumnied rather than come to the obvious conclusion that her story is likely to have some embroidery -- but most women don't call the police and entirely make up police reports.  And most men don't organize 3-hour $540 massages at 11 p.m.  

    I'm kind of expecting someone to start saying that the masseuse "asked for it," and wondering whether her blouse was low-cut.

    "All we know is that we don't know who they are at all." Truer word were never spoken.

    Parent

    Actually, Salon is reporting that the Portland (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by esmense on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 10:06:39 AM EST
    paper, after receiving a tip from someone other than the woman making the allegations, spent months exhaustively researching the story -- even going so far as to use Craigslist ads to seek massage therapists who had had encounters with prominent men (they didn't name him by name) in other cities Gore had visited (it appears that getting a massage in his hotel room is a something Gore does routinely). No one else came forward and the more they researched the allegations made by the woman (who was insisting on all kinds of unusual control over what they could publish) they more they realized there really was no story there. By their own account,  they would have been overjoyed to find a such a story.

    Frankly, if Gore really had a history of such boorish and clueless behavior, I can't see ANY WAY it could or would have escaped media notice in the heated, personally destructive atmosphere of our politics over the last two decades.

    If there was a believeable story to tell, someone would have told it a long time ago.

    Parent

    Again... (none / 0) (#115)
    by Upstart Crow on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 09:56:55 AM EST
    My point is not what Gore did or didn't do -- it's the way several months ago the MSM made assumptions based on their opinions about the people involved, and the way those assumptions are playing out now.  The way a police report that would have been reported on for most other public figures was ignored in the case of this one.  The way people are willing to extend the benefit for the sake of some but not others.  And the way we are willing to bend over backwards to keep this particular god in place.  

    Parent
    Dream on... (none / 0) (#97)
    by Upstart Crow on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 10:25:19 PM EST
    Women in their 60s don't like to start over, lookin'-for-love in competition with women half their age.  Not to mention dividing assets and giving up a life they have, to some extent, loved (otherwise they would have bailed years before).

    Divorce is nasty. People don't do it because they've "drifted apart." They do it when "drifting apart" results in adultery or abuse.

    It's very unlikely she hasn't known about this.

    It would certainly be a deal-breaker for most women.

    Pretend it was Palin, or Huckabee, or Bush, and think how most of you would be all over it.

    Parent

    You can choose to end a long-term marriage (none / 0) (#112)
    by ruffian on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 09:38:33 AM EST
    and have no intention of going back to the marriage market. I know 3 women personally who have done so just this year alone. No adultery or abuse on either side is involved. There are plenty of other reasons to be unhappy and not want to live that way anymore.

    Parent
    Setting aside the woman's motivation (none / 0) (#2)
    by scribe on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:14:41 AM EST
    (whatever that might be) and the truism that the more a complainant says, the more there is to use in cross-examination and to trip up the complainant, and assuming the truth/accuracy of her recitation of his alleged statements, it only goes to prove that when a man is looking for some, he'll say anything if he thinks it will work.  No matter how stupid it might be or make him look.

    And, no, I'm not going to spend my time reading her statement.

    How does this "prove" (none / 0) (#78)
    by Cream City on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 07:07:54 PM EST
    that Gore was "looking for some"?  If you want to castigate an entire gender, I guess you can go ahead.  But this is a story about a specific guy.  A story based on someone else's allegations about him.  A story in the Enquirer,yet.  So how does it "go" to "prove" what you state that he did, much less what other men do?

    You might spend time reading your own statement!

    Parent

    In related news... (none / 0) (#4)
    by kdog on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:23:29 AM EST
    Gore announces plans for a sequel to "Inconvenient Truth" titled "Inconvenient Ending".

    Sorry, couldn't resist:)

    Bush widely blamed (none / 0) (#13)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:21:33 PM EST
    She obviously is an agent for Rove...

    ;-)


    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#6)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:35:46 AM EST
    Another argument for legalizing prostitution. More than likely this was not a first for Gore, except maybe the "no" part.

    What about guilty until proven innocent? (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:18:30 PM EST
    Replying to squeaky who said:
    Another argument for legalizing prostitution. More than likely this was not a first for Gore, except maybe the "no" part.

    Why on earth do you assume these thoroughly unproven allegations are true -- let alone indicative of a pattern of such behavior? Your conclusions are astonishing, especially in view of the fact that the police declined to prosecute citing insufficient corroborating evidence.  

    Parent

    Word (5.00 / 4) (#60)
    by Brookhaven on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 04:28:36 PM EST
    This is a serious allegation.  I honestly don't understand the jokes and I'm astonished by some comments automatically assuming Gore is guilty.

    We need a ton of more evidence before anyone can come to a conclusion as serious as condemning someone as guilty as charged for sexual assault.  

    Parent

    WTF? (none / 0) (#16)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:26:37 PM EST
    Not sure what you are babbling about, but if prostitution were legal this would not be an issue. I am not a judge nor in a jury, nor am I assuming that Gore is guilty of anything.

    My point was about the absurdity of the laws regarding paid for sex. I would not be shocked or surprised if Gore had gotten "massages" before that wound up moving to sex. Evidentially it is not unusual, from what I have heard.

    Had prostitution been legal, Gore or anyone would not have to hope that he or she would have to hope that the massager gave the extended version of their job description.

     

    Parent

    I'm guessing ... (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by Yman on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:41:57 PM EST
    More than likely this was not a first for Gore, except maybe the "no" part.

    ... this is what FHA was referring to.

    Parent

    Yeah (none / 0) (#23)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:46:39 PM EST
    I do not see consensual sex as a crime when it is paid for. As I said, it is obvious to most who have been in the world for five minutes, that many of the hotel service massage crew, delivers extras. I would not be the least bit surprised that Gore or anyone else paid for pleasure, which included sex.

    As far as sexual abuse charges, evidentially they were dropped. I am not commenting on whether or not Gore attempted to rape a woman. There is no pending charge as far as I know, regarding that allegation.

    Parent

    I don't think prostitution ... (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Yman on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 05:06:46 PM EST
    ... should be a crime, either, but that's not the point.  My point is the hypocrisy of those who excoriate others for failing to adhere to the principle of presumed innocence, then turn around and suggest others are probably guilty of crimes based on nothing more than unsubstantiated allegations in a police report.

    Actually, it's worse than that.  You presume the woman is likely a prostitute, when no one has even made such an allegation.  Hey - she's a massage therapist at an expensive hotel, right?  You presume that Gore was soliciting a prostitute, when there is no evidence to support such a claim.  Yet if someone says they believe a person is guilty of a crime - even when there is a great deal of evidence to suggest their guilt - you accuse them of having a "prosecutorial mindset", failing to adhere to progressive principles, suggest they're being unfair by not waiting until a trial before reaching a conclusion, etc.

    I have no idea whether Gore did what this woman is alleging or not, but it's the height of irresponsibility and hypocrisy to suggest she's a prostitute and that Gore was paying her for sex (and had likely hired prostitutes previously), when there is zero evidence to support either claim.

    Parent

    Please (none / 0) (#66)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 05:26:10 PM EST
    Get over it, I never said anything about the particulars. My point is that were prostitution legal this would be nothing.

    Evidentially the allegations have been investigated, and no crime is being prosecuted. The allegations are now a media blitz. Who knows what happened. I certainly have never remotely suggested that the masseuses claim is true, so please get off your high horse and stop making false statements about what I have said.

    I have said that in the massage business many extras are part of the job. Certainly there are plenty of masseuses who will rub every part of the body except the genitals, that is a given. And I have said that I wouldn't be surprised if Gore has had massages that include massaging the genitals. Were prostitution legal, the distinction between non sexual massage and sexual massage would be clear as choosing chocolate or vanilla ice cream.

    That is not the case today.

    Parent

    No thanks (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by Yman on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 05:56:40 PM EST
    Get over it, I never said anything about the particulars.... Evidentially the allegations have been investigated, and no crime is being prosecuted.

    Yes, you did.  You suggested, with zero evidence, that the woman was probably a prostitute and that Gore had probably hired prostitutes previously - both are which a completely specious.

    Must be that "prosecutorial mindset" of yours.

    Parent

    Please Quote (none / 0) (#68)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 06:05:08 PM EST
    I have never called anyone a prostitute. I have said that the massage business often involves genital rubs, aka sex. My point is that were prostitution legalized, a lot of the crime, disease, and damage rife in the underworld prostitution business would disappear.

    I said that I would not be surprised if Gore had massages before.

    I am not a jury or judge, and there are no criminal charges pending. What is your problem?

    Parent

    I guess this is your point.... (none / 0) (#74)
    by ZtoA on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 06:48:28 PM EST
    My point is that were prostitution legalized, a lot of the crime, disease, and damage rife in the underworld prostitution business would disappear.

    This seems to be a cause you care about. However I don't think this instance of a media attention to unsubstantiated allegations will do anything to help your cause.

    From today's Oregonian (newspaper, of sorts):


    The therapist later told detectives she did not call the police because she was afraid she wouldn't be believed. "I deeply feared being made into a public spectacle and my work reputation being destroyed," she said.

    As it was, she said, even friends of hers who had voted for Gore didn't necessarily support her. She did call the Portland Women's Crisis Line, which encouraged her to call police.

    She told detectives last year that she was not out for money but only wants "justice.

    "

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#76)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 06:56:09 PM EST
    I am not opining about whether or not Gore sexually abused, raped, or attempted murder. When and if he gets charged with a crime, I will let you know my opinion, that is if I feel so compelled.

    Parent
    No need to quote you (none / 0) (#84)
    by Yman on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 07:51:03 PM EST
    Since I never said you called her a prostitute - you just suggested (repeatedly) that massage therapists often perform sexual acts, that Gore likely engaged prostitutes, and that this issue would not have arisen if prostitution was legal.  But of course you weren't suggesting she was a prostitute.

    Not sure what you are babbling about, but if prostitution were legal this would not be an issue.

    The only way legalizing prostitution renders this issue moot is if Gore was soliciting a prostitute and/or the masseuse was engaging in prostitution, for which, of course, there is zero evidence.

    My point was about the absurdity of the laws regarding paid for sex. I would not be shocked or surprised if Gore had gotten "massages" before that wound up moving to sex. Evidentially it is not unusual, from what I have heard.

    So when you put "massages" in quotes and suggest Gore likely received "massages" that "wound up moving to sex", you weren't suggesting Gore had actually solicited prostitution, because, regardless of your beliefs as to what the law should be, that would be a crime - and your (evidence-free) suggestion that he has likely done so previously would be contrary to the presumption of innocence that you previously argued must be applied.

    Had prostitution been legal, Gore or anyone would not have to hope that he or she would have to hope that the massager gave the extended version of their job description... it is obvious to most who have been in the world for five minutes, that many of the hotel service massage crew, delivers extras. I would not be the least bit surprised that Gore or anyone else paid for pleasure, which included sex.

    Oh, .... but you're just making an argument in general, not suggesting this "hotel service massage crew" was "delivering extras".  Which, of course, would make your argument ......

    ... completely irrelevant.

    BTW - So the presumption of innocence only applies to a judge or members of a jury, or when criminal charges are actually pending?

    Interesting.

    Parent

    Presumption Of Innocence (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 09:59:56 PM EST
    Yes, in a court of law presumption of innocence is the standard. This is not a court of law, and Gore has not been charged with any criminal act.

    But at least you have one thing right sort of, that presumption of Innocence applies to court proceedings. Everyone else is entitled to their opinion.

    Parent

    That's not what you said ... (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by Yman on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 10:56:55 PM EST
    ... just a few weeks ago.

    Sounds like you are part of a lynch mob or something. Not sure what country you live in but here, most reasonable people presume innocence. Well, it is true that some here at TL are not reasonable in these matters. They claim to have the same mind reading, fortune telling ability that you are claiming to have.

    That was in response to someone (not a judge or juror) who opined that JVDS was guilty.

    So it's okay to voice an opinion of guilt when there's not even enough evidence to file charges (i.e. Gore), but not when there is evidence to support charges (JVDS).

    Huh.

    Parent

    Guilt? (none / 0) (#100)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:05:59 PM EST
    There are no charges against Gore. There is no criminal investigation against Gore.

    And your dishonest quote of mine, was in response to a comment so vile that it was deleted. You have no idea about what it said, so stop making sh*t up.

    And yes it is fine to opine about whether or not you think someone is guilty or not even when there are criminal charges pending, as long as you are not a juror or judge seated on a trial.

    Please stop your nonsense, It seems clear that you are trying to prove something here, give it up.  

    Parent

    I made up nothing, ... (3.00 / 2) (#108)
    by Yman on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 06:34:35 AM EST
    ... unlike you, who suggested Gore has been soliciting prostitutes and/or this woman was engaged in prostitution, both of which are complete speculation.

    BTW - Doesn't matter comment you were responding to - it was complete and accurate.  Your quote (and hypocrisy) stand on their own.

    Parent

    The only way legalized (5.00 / 3) (#72)
    by Anne on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 06:32:39 PM EST
    prostitution makes "this" a non-issue is if Al Gore thought he was getting the services of a sex worker - and regardless of your "feelings" about what Al Gore may have done in the past, you don't know what Al thought; shoot, you don't even know what we think - even when we tell you flat-out and straight-up.

    I don't know what happened, and neither do you.  I have no idea what Al's history is - and neither do you.  But somehow, you've managed to divine that what Al Gore was "really" after was something a whole lot more than "just" a massage, based on absolutely nothing other than your overly fertile imagination - which then forms the basis of your if-it-were-legal-there'd-no-story-here meme.

    If it happened as she said it did, it's probably another example of ego-gone-wild; if it didn't, it's probably a case of I-think-I-hear-opportunity-knocking.

    Either way, it's a tremendous distraction from issues of actual importance and consequence.

    Parent

    I Could Care Less (none / 0) (#75)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 06:52:49 PM EST
    If Al Gore was paying for sex or not paying for sex, having an affair or f'ing male whores. I see no stigma in paying for sex whether it is with a prostitute or a masseuse, straight gay or whatever.

    My point was that prostitution should be legalized, things like this would not matter so much, at least from a legal standpoint.

    it's a tremendous distraction from issues of actual importance and consequence.

    Yes, you are quite the tabloid queen, this matter is sooooooo important. if you believed Gore was an adulterer or paid for sex, you, and others like you, would probably stop believing in global warming or something equivalently stupid.


    Parent

    Making stuff up again... (5.00 / 4) (#114)
    by Anne on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 09:53:34 AM EST
    which is what got you in trouble in the first place; you're making assumptions about me, just as you have been making them about Gore.

    Yes, you are quite the tabloid queen, this matter is sooooooo important. if you believed Gore was an adulterer or paid for sex, you, and others like you, would probably stop believing in global warming or something equivalently stupid.

    My point was, I thought, pretty clear: that the Al Gore "story" isn't important by comparison to what else is going on.  Let me repeat: The Al Gore story ISN'T important when stacked up against things like the oil spill, the war in Afghanistan, the Cat Food Commission, and so on.

    I have repeatedly said that I do not know what happened.  I said that I believed Al Gore to be a human being, not a god, and not even god-like.  I regard his sex life to be his business, and I regard his marriage and issues concerning it, to be his - and Tipper's - business, as well.  Not mine.

    I am not a hero-worshipper, not someone who drinks anyone's Kool-Aid, so I can actually separate someone's work on behalf of a particular cause - like climate change - from what he or she is doing in what he or she believes to be the privacy of his or her own space.

    I am not the one who mused that Gore had probably sought "massage services" in the past - that was you - and it was based on absolutely nothing.  It appears that sometimes you throw these little musings out so that you can showcase your open-mindedness on some particular thing that you support.  

    Unlike you, I don't need to fantasize about Al Gore's sex life to show anyone that I have an open mind - I can just state that I don't know what happened, it isn't up to me to pass judgement, and it's really none of my business.

    Parent

    Again, what evidence do you have to support your (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:53:52 PM EST
    supposition that Al Gore was seeking the services of a prostitute? Without debating the merits of the law -- solicitation is illegal. You are clearly saying that you would not be "shocked or surprised" if Al Gore engaged in this illegal conduct.
    I would not be shocked or surprised if Gore had gotten "massages" before that wound up moving to sex. Evidentially [sic] it is not unusual, from what I have heard.

    Had prostitution been legal, Gore or anyone would not have to hope that he or she would have to hope that the massager gave the extended version of their job description.

    At this point, we have no evidence whatsoever that Al Gore solicited sex from a masseuse. With that firmly in mind, one must err on the side of presuming that he is innocent until proven guilty -- not the other way round as you have done.

    Parent

    There Is No Crime (none / 0) (#26)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:02:54 PM EST
    There are allegations in the media, I could care less about whether Gore paid for sex, or not. The police did not pursue the allegations.

    I have zero problems with anyone engaging in prostitution, drug use as well. In fact I would not be surprised if Gore has used illegal drugs in his life time.

    If you have a problem with that, sue me.

    Parent

    Gosh, who's to say that I haven't (5.00 / 4) (#34)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:46:43 PM EST
    turned some gnarly tricks and done boatloads of heavy drugs myself? Suffice to say, I don't have a "problem" with consenting adults "engaging in prostitution or drug use".

    I do, however, have a problem with your conclusion that Al Gore has "more than likely" engaged in solicitation -- illegal conduct. That appears to be a defamatory statement, given the complete absence of any supporting evidence.  

    Chase your tail some more if you want (and you probably will), but I've completely lost interest.


    Parent

    Amazing, even appalling assumptions (5.00 / 4) (#42)
    by Cream City on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 02:39:50 PM EST
    here, huh?  And on blog allegedly about the law of this land, where everyone is to be presumed to be innocent until proven, etc.  Yet there is the statement that Gore is guilty.  The statement that a masseuse is a prostitute.  (The ignorance about the realities of prostitution also are amazing.)

    And it is illegal, of course, for "even" a  prostitute to be subjected to sexual harassment, i.e., "unwanted advances."  But the assumption here, it seems, is ye olde "she must have wanted it," so therefore she must be a prostitute . . . and other such circular reasoning here that is common among guys in grade school, but most grow out of it.

    Parent

    Well, it appears there are no prescribed (4.75 / 4) (#49)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 03:13:11 PM EST
    protections, no benefit of the doubt, no common decency in the offing for someone when the 'evidence' is not even sufficient to bring charges. Not when it's Al Gore.

    A few months ago, I got smacked up the side of the head for "smearing" a convicted sex offender when I asked: would you let him babysit your kids? -- nothing more, nothing less. What a sliding scale of standards, eh.

    Parent

    Defamatory Statement? (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 05:04:16 PM EST
    What have you lost your mind. At least now I know what you are up to, riding in on a white horse to save Gore, lol.

    Hilarious, imo.

    Parent

    Uh, yeah (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by jbindc on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 02:07:12 PM EST
    This would still be an issue.  This man was Vice President of the United States and at the time of this alleged incident, was still married and this woman is clearly not his wife.  Aside from that, the complaining witness accuses him of an unwanted sexual advance, and possibly assault (if he touched her) - which is still illegal.  I hope you are not arguing that unwanted sexual advances are akin to prostitution.

    Parent
    But here's the thing, jb: (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by Anne on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 02:42:08 PM EST
    the woman in question claims to have been a legitimate, licensed, massage therapist, which isn't the same as being a prostitute.  Although, she admits in her statement that she knows some LMT's who make some money on the side for the "extras" they offer.

    So far, all we have are accusations that the authorities didn't feel were backed up by enough evidence to do anything about (which sounds a lot like what was said in the Roethlisberger incident, although those accusations were made immediately after the event).

    The woman admits that from time to time, she does encounter clients who want more than just a massage, and she explains how she deals with that.  As I read the transcript, there were about 10 instances where I wondered, why didn't she listen to her gut, excuse herself, go down to the hotel desk and claim unexpected illness if she didn't want to embarrass Gore and risk this hotel not sending her any more business, and ask for some assistance getting her equipment gathered up and returned to her?  She claims Gore has already grabbed her hand and shoved it under the sheet, so why on earth would she stay there as the whole thing, according to her, was escalating?

    No woman should have to accept unwanted advances, or assaults - no matter who they are coming from, but so far, all we know is what she said in 73 pages of transcript.  I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I am saying that we don't know enough to know if it did or didn't.

    The issue of Al Gore cheating on his wife - if that is, in fact, what he did - is none of my business; that's between them, regardless of whether he broke any laws.

    [And I still have no idea what bearing his having been VP has on any of this.]


    Parent

    I agree (5.00 / 4) (#118)
    by jbindc on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 10:13:27 AM EST
    I guess that was my point - squeaks went on about prostitution, which has not been claimed in any story or by any source and is a completely separate issue, than a woman claiming sexual assault - which IS illegal.  Somehow our conversation got hijacked into the morality of prostitution, which has nothing to do with the topic being discussed.

    Parent
    Al Gore was not VP in 2006 (5.00 / 3) (#65)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 05:19:28 PM EST
    and hadn't been since 2000.

    Parent
    Al Gore was not charged in 2006 (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 08:15:13 PM EST
    and the case is not being reopened, is it? Is there any credible indication of newfound evidence that might lead to charges being filed now? If I understand correctly, the answer is no and no. If there is any bodily fluid (semen?) on any piece of unwashed clothing, why was that not proffered in 2006? After all that is a routine part of evidence gathering at the time of an initial complaint. And that is still not proof of any sexual misconduct.

    Jeralyn, if I may presume, what possessed you to write such a prejudicial editorial? "MassageGate? Al Gore's Alleged Sexcapades". Is that any way to impartially frame a discussion about a public servant who was expressly not charged with any wrongdoing due to a lack of evidence.

    Your cavalier mockery and speculation is exceedingly problematic, IMO:

    [T]he woman claims she saved her pants because they might have Gore stains on them. Can they go to the Smithsonian along with Monica's dress?...Maybe the newly single Al Gore should give Rielle Hunter a call. So what happened? Did Al Gore refuse to pay or offer her an acceptable settlement, causing her to tell him she was going to revive her criminal complaint and go public with her accusations?...Did he have to warn Tipper this was going to break and she responded by kicking him to the curb?...Anyone want to bet tomorrow's news will be Gloria Allred is representing her?

    No, I don't want to bet on that. But I would bet you will castigate any commenter who takes a similar attitude, and tone, in discussing somebody who is actually charged with, or convicted of, a sex crime. You will be justified in doing that. I just wish you would afford Al Gore the same level of respect. Allegations of sexual assault, or sexual harassment, are no laughing matter.

    Parent

    So what? (none / 0) (#117)
    by jbindc on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 10:11:44 AM EST
    Squeaky said this would never be an issue.  I disagree -  he is a public figure and if any of this is true, or even if it was an affair, or she was a prostitute, or whatever, it would still be reported on.  I didn't say he was VP in 2006.

    Parent
    Legalize prostitution (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by ZtoA on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:14:23 PM EST
    and require all massage therapists be prostitutes and their sale available at every call from anyone. Heck, mandate that everyone be a prostitute and name their sale price.

    Parent
    You missed squeak's point... (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by kdog on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:21:53 PM EST
    If prostitution were legal, there would be no customer confusion between ordering up a massage and ordering up a "massage"...it would protect legit massage artists from unwanted sexual advance.

    Parent
    So, somehow, the magic of making (5.00 / 3) (#38)
    by Anne on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 02:02:05 PM EST
    prostitution legal eliminates the possibility that a licensed massage therapist won't be confused with someone who is offering sex?

    How would that work?  Would we just add a new category to the yellow pages: "Sex Workers?"

    Heck, unwanted sexual advances are made upon women all the time by men who aren't "confused" about who is and isn't selling sex; there are men out there who think they are "paying" for sex when they pick up the tab for dinner or drinks, you know.  Some are under the impression that they are so irresistable that no woman in her right might would not "want" to be advanced upon.

    I'm not entirely opposed to legalizing prostitution (I do have trouble with the exploitation of underage young men and women, and I don't think legalization will stop that), but let's not go crazy and assume that it will end the problem of unwanted advances upon anyone.


    Parent

    If this were a less salacious discussion (5.00 / 5) (#43)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 02:40:16 PM EST
    it would be about the WHO and the WHY of Al Gore being publicly smeared at this time -- irrespective of whether the allegations have merit -- and thus far they don't!

    Instead, the thread has devolved into puerile fantasies about the man's sexuality and his presumed need and pursuit of paid sexual services. Un-fu@king-believable, as usual. Perhaps he would get a break if he were a convicted sex offender -- just sayin'.

    Parent

    Protecting St. Al Gore... (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by kdog on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 03:12:25 PM EST
    is hardly raging against the machine F.A...he is part of the machine.

    And the Enquirer will smear anybody famous to sell papers...though they were vindicated when they were accused of "smearing" John Edwards, weren't they?

    Now I don't know if Al propositions massage artists or enjoys happy endings on the regular or if this is a classic shakedown or orchestrated smear job by some global warming skeptic, all are plausible...I do know I find a debate on prostitution prohibition more interesting than either of those scenario...enough deification of another arsehole who had the opportunity to hit the brakes on the machine and chose not to.

    Parent

    I didn't say Gore wasn't 'part of the machine' (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 04:23:25 PM EST
    kdog. And what makes you assume that I attribute any "saintly" qualities to Al Gore -- or to anybody else for that matter.

    What I am objecting to is a craven enabling process that allows Al Gore to be wantonly tried and convicted by the corporate media and a clique of bloggers and commenters -- on the basis of of what has been legally dismissed as insufficient evidence. This is a law blog, I would think this issue has a place front and center here, no?

    I am sick to death of the same tired-ass, right-wing, fear and smear machinations that took Al Gore down in the 2000 elections. Allegations about hypocrisy; exaggeration; egoism -- Love Story; Love Canal; inventing the internet; propositioning a masseuse -- whatever.

    Same $hit, different decade. That's worth raging about imo.

    And what about the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico; two doomed wars in the Middle-East; Bagram; Gitmo; 'preventive' detention; presidential assassination decrees; jihad on whistle-blowers; self-serving allegiance and boundless financial support to Israel; joblessness; home foreclosures; across the board bailouts for Wall Street but not Main Street; etc? (This too is same $hit, different decade -- only worse.)

    What happened to all of that while every form of media, and every pundit of every political stripe, whiled away the hours and days obsessing over Al Gore's di@k? And the TL piece de resistance: the presumption that Al Gore was illegally soliciting sex and, ergo, he ought to be sticking it in a place where prostitution is legal. Nice work.

    Parent

    Not end unwanted advance... (none / 0) (#40)
    by kdog on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 02:11:16 PM EST
    but reduce it in the case of massage artists.

    You do realize a good portion of the massage parlors are rub and tug joints, dontcha Anne?  It's the unspoken obvious truth.  If the rub and tug joints could call themselves rub and tugs without police breaking down the door, I think it is reasonable to assume people wouldn't walk into a massage parlor thinking they're gonna get a happy ending...they'd go to the rub and tug joint.

    Now it's no excuse for manhandling anybody...if you paid for what you thought was a happy ending and just got a massage you chalk it us up as a bad beat and go home...you don't get rough.  But if the goal is too reduce manhandling, removing the confusion through prohibition repeal is a good step, imo.


    Parent

    This did not take place at (none / 0) (#45)
    by ZtoA on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 02:43:13 PM EST
    a massage parlor. He was staying at a very trendy exclusive expensive boutique hotel. Elite hotels often will arrange for massage, dry cleaning, tours and other services. It might be a mistake to assume the massage artists are prostitutes in this context.

    Not sure why anyone would get a three hour massage tho. Maybe he made a mistake and thought she would deliver more. Maybe not. Lack of evidence. Great smear tho. And, evidently she got a lot of money to sell her story to The Enquirer. Quite a perk.

    Parent

    For 450 bucks... (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by kdog on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 02:48:05 PM EST
    I'd sure as hell assume a happy ending was included in that price, if not more!

    But Al lives in a different world than I do, in my world legit massage is 20 or so for 15 minutes:)

    Parent

    He seems to have assumed something (none / 0) (#47)
    by ZtoA on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 03:05:20 PM EST
    and she seems to have let him assume away. She could play it however she wanted. And apparently she has now been paid 1 million $ for the evening. Buyer beware.

    Parent
    Different world than me, too. (none / 0) (#50)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 03:15:24 PM EST
    Who has 3 friggin' hours to just while away getting a massage?

    Parent
    He, along with Albright and Pelosi (none / 0) (#51)
    by ZtoA on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 03:28:29 PM EST
    had presented at a huge event on global warming. I'm sure speaking to crowds like this in real time is very stimulating and tiring too.

    The massage therapist arrived at his room at 11pm after the event. She shows up and gives her massage and -according to her "story"- he gets ideas while she is giving him an abdominal massage. She bats him away some, and saves her "stained" black pants. Still has them if anyone wants to see them. - for a price that is.

    Parent

    in the wee hours of the night. They must be so proud.

    Parent
    I don't know (none / 0) (#69)
    by Yman on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 06:05:30 PM EST
    Got my wife a gift card for a massage at a local spa - it was $100/hour, and that's if you drive to the spa, as opposed to the masseuse traveling to a hotel.  The price itself doesn't seem out-of-the-ordinary.

    Parent
    Nor the three hours (none / 0) (#71)
    by Cream City on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 06:32:06 PM EST
    as I'm told, via a family member who is a good friend of a fine masseuse (and a fine woman who also does not deserve the denigrating assumptions here), that would include standard allocations for travel time.  (Just like many of the experts I hire to make house calls, aka plumbers, electricians, etc.)

    Parent
    I still think (none / 0) (#32)
    by ZtoA on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:26:30 PM EST
    everyone should be mandated to be a prostitute and have a price range. I would not have a problem with that at all !

    Parent
    Well... (none / 0) (#33)
    by kdog on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:32:08 PM EST
    to quote Gram-Gram, "we are all whores in our own way, Mr. Finkelstein." :)

    Seriously though, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the alleged incident described happens quite a bit to legitimate massage artists.  Prohibition is too blame, forcing prostitutes to pose as massage artists to ply their trade. It would be easier if the law would help us out here and restore the line between the professions.

    Parent

    I don't think this story is about (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by ZtoA on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:47:58 PM EST
    prostitution - the sexual kind at least. It seems quite possible that something's getting sold here and the media are buying.

    Perhaps Gore does not know how to order that "special" massage, but did order a three hour massage. Maybe he groped her or maybe not. Three hours is a long massage. Police records show insufficient evidence to support her allegations. Media does not have those standards.

    Parent

    A shakedown.. (none / 0) (#37)
    by kdog on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:57:13 PM EST
    it could well be, who the hell knows except Al and the massage artist.

    Parent
    Sometimes wants becomes confused (none / 0) (#58)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 04:25:24 PM EST
    with needs and the delivery person takes on undesired duties.

    Parent
    Ah The Puritans (none / 0) (#29)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:17:13 PM EST
    Reactionary sarcasm much?  at least the puritan position has been voiced.  

    Parent
    Assuming a massage therapist (5.00 / 4) (#31)
    by ZtoA on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 01:23:24 PM EST
    does not necessarily want to be a prostitute is a "puritan position"? Great for a laugh! Of course it says a lot about your attitude of just what massage therapists are in all cases.

    Parent
    Riiiight. (none / 0) (#17)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:26:54 PM EST
    Because a prostitute's "picturesque" and lurid story of Gore's sexual lummoxity would be of no interest to anyone if prostitution was legal.

    Riiight.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#18)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:33:15 PM EST
    Spitzer had a looooong run, if it were not for the disgusting GOP operative Roger Stone, he would still be governor.

    Once our absurdly puritanical views about sex change, and prostitution is legal, there will be no story. Not to mention the lust this crap is eaten up by the fainting couch crowd.. worse than the act, imo.

    And most in the business, do not reveal the dirt. Vitter, as an example, did you happen to read any lurid details? He is still a congressman as far as I know.

    But then again, maybe only Democrats get their sordid details revealed.

    Parent

    OMG, stop it, you're killing me! (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:38:45 PM EST
    But then again, maybe only Democrats get their sordid details revealed.


    Parent
    Good grief (none / 0) (#59)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 04:28:09 PM EST
    Can you spell Larry Craig?

    Parent
    Huh? (none / 0) (#62)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 04:54:53 PM EST
    Well for you touching a shoe and putting out a hand, is sordid. But for most of it is basically a sting operation, which is pretty sordid, but not the type that gets the puritans all interested.

    Parent
    Uh, nice try at changing the subject (none / 0) (#95)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 10:16:02 PM EST
    But the subject was your false claim that no Repub's sexual activities get attention...

    And did I mention that Repub Congress Critter from FL and his stupid emails to male pages????

    Parent

    Huh? (none / 0) (#98)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 10:41:15 PM EST
    But the subject was your false claim that no Repub's sexual activities get attention

    That was certainly not my claim, but, then again, you have never been good at reading, so I am not surprised.

    Parent

    Huh? (none / 0) (#109)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 07:24:23 AM EST
     
    Well (none / 0) (#18)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:33:15 AM CST

    snip

    But then again, maybe only Democrats get their sordid details revealed.

    Your moniker is "squeaky." isn't it?


    Parent

    Oh I See (none / 0) (#119)
    by squeaky on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 10:14:24 AM EST
    It is not a reading problem, but a vocabulary problem. Look up sordid, and you are welcome for the vocabulary lesson.

    Parent
    If this had been Cheney (none / 0) (#7)
    by BTAL on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:42:27 AM EST
    This thread would already be well past 100 comments.

    No massage artist... (5.00 / 5) (#8)
    by kdog on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:45:42 AM EST
    is that desperate for business.

    Parent
    Which Cheney? (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Zorba on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:01:11 PM EST
    Dick, or Liz?

    Parent
    The Enquirer strikes again (none / 0) (#10)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:08:27 PM EST

    The local paper had the police report years ago and decided not to publish.  It seems strange that it takes the Enquirer to publish a story with such obvious news interest.  

    Uh, the paper's location is (none / 0) (#11)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:15:11 PM EST
    Portland, OR.

    Parent
    the statement wasn't given until (none / 0) (#15)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:25:34 PM EST
    2009. The paper had the initial police report, uncorroborated, in 2007, but because the accuser wouldn't give a statement, didn't publish it as Gore denied it.

    Parent
    Public record (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:41:52 PM EST
    The paper had the initial police report, uncorroborated, in 2007...

    The bottom line is that the paper had a public record in its hands and chose not to publish that fact.  The existence of the public record is news all by itself and was certainly corroborated by the paper.

    After seeing the "nuts and sluts" treatment other women got that were mistreated or worse by the anointed its no wonder she wants her name kept out of it.

    Parent

    Oh nonsense. During the Clinton scandals (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by esmense on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 06:57:01 PM EST
    the women who claimed to be his victims were publicly feted and made out like bandits financially -- lucrative books deals, speaking fees, cosmetic surgery paid for by Republican supporters, etc., etc. The only women who endured ill affects from those scandals -- arrest and other legal threats, bankruptcy, etc. -- were women who either denied having affairs or sexual encounters with Clinton or refused to support the claims of others who said they were his victims.

    In today's tabloid fame and sex obsessed environment, "nuts and sluts" can be a quite lucrative, and shame free, career path.

    Parent

    story (none / 0) (#79)
    by ZtoA on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 07:10:24 PM EST

    Mark Garber, the Tribune's editor-in-chief, said the woman was not willing to talk on the record or press charges and the paper considered the time lapse between the incident and when the paper received the police report. "In the end, we decided not to proceed with a story that we could not document," Garber said.

    link

    Parent

    Nope, the story is (none / 0) (#85)
    by Cream City on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 07:54:15 PM EST
    not laundering her clothes for three years. . . .

    Sure, it's not a crime.

    But it's icky.  Hold the presses!

    Parent

    Ah ! The presses are not held now (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by ZtoA on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 08:22:57 PM EST
    this is another snippet from the city paper front page today:


    She called him a "crazed sex poodle" and tried to distract him, pointing out a box of Moonstruck chocolates on a nearby table. He went for the chocolates and then offered her some, cornering her, fondling her and shoving his tongue in her mouth to french kiss as he pressed against her.

    She said he tried to pull her camisole strap down.

    She said she told him to stop it. "I was distressed, shocked and terrified."

    She said she was intimidated by his physical size, calling him "rotund," described his "violent temper, dictatorial, commanding attitude" -- what she termed a contrast from his "Mr. Smiley global-warming concern persona."

    I have to say that I had a quick coffee with a friend today and we laughed so hard over the Oregonian article that we snorted and teared up. Nice comic relief from some actually serious news.

    And, (product placement) I like Moonstruck Chocolates too!  and we were shocked, simply shocked that she was "shocked and distressed" and that she found his global warming information was best described as "Mr. Smiley".

    Parent

    Al Gore: private citizen, human being, (none / 0) (#14)
    by Anne on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:22:08 PM EST
    not God, not even god-like.  Public figure, yes, so no room for stupidity - if, in fact, the events occurred as the complainant alleges - so if true, just proves once again that ego must, eventually and over time, neutralize the part of the brain that checks the impulsive decisions of the, um, little head.  

    If true, ugh.  If not true, more (still) ugh.  Doesn't help that he is alleged to have had - or be still having - an affair with Laurie David (Larry David's ex-wife).  All of a sudden, Al's a sexual being, apparently, which seems weird in the timing.

    Read enough of the transcript to have some healthy skepticism, but understand why someone with legitimate credentials and training in massage would feel the need to defend against assumptions that equate massage therapy with prostitution.  Somehow, though, being on call lists at hotels raised an eyebrow.

    Must admit, with some embarrassment, that I had a sense of a very bad SNL skit on the way.


    Wasn't everybody really expecting this? (none / 0) (#19)
    by Upstart Crow on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 12:36:06 PM EST
    Marriages of 40 years standing don't just break up because people "drift apart." Not in my experience. There's a shared lifetime that cannot be reproduced with anyone else.  Divorce hurts.  Not worth going through unless there's a very powerful positive or negative motivator.

    I wondered when I saw all these media articles about why longstanding marriages fall apart for no apparent reason. I think there was even a TL thread to this effect. It seemed like people were being deliberately naive.

    I hoped I was wrong, and kept my mouth shut.  But I had a feeling that there were a few bodies that were going to surface.  

    This particular one may or may not be true, but I have a feeling there's more coming. Sad.

    New Post up on this (none / 0) (#101)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:18:49 PM EST
    here. Via WaPo, the woman asked the Enquirer for $1 million and they gave her nothing. She told the police she wasn't interested in money.

    Let's keep this discussion free of personal attacks on commenters please.

    What constitutes a personal attack? n/t. (none / 0) (#102)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:24:39 PM EST
    I deleted several (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jun 24, 2010 at 11:28:43 PM EST
    in this thread, and a few with profanity. Extreme rudeness is also objectionable, as are spats between two commenters about what one of them meant or didn't mean based on past comments on other topics.

    The comments are for rational discussion. If people can't do that, they are free to comment elsewhere.

    Parent

    for grocking what somebody may be saying in the present. Granted, it should be possible to go there in a manner that isn't obnoxious.

    Parent
    it's not allowed here (none / 0) (#122)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Jun 25, 2010 at 12:48:03 PM EST
    and never has been. It takes the thread off-topic. Back to the topic of the post now please.

    Parent
    I dont think so (none / 0) (#123)
    by soniaescort on Tue May 29, 2012 at 12:40:30 AM EST
    Dont reply that acurate kolkata escorts