Views » May 15, 2006

Hooray for Hookergate!

By Dave Mulcahey

On April 27, Republicans awoke to a PR disaster. Tucked away on page A6, a brief Wall Street Journal article updated the saga of former Rep. Randall “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif.), who was convicted in March of taking bribes. Investigators were expanding their inquiry to determine whether, in addition to the $600,000 he pocketed from defense contractor Brent Wilkes, Cunningham had also accepted the complimentary services of prostitutes.

The article further revealed that investigators were looking into the possibility that other members of Congress or their staff were being similarly serviced. Wilkes, it seems, was using a sketchy limousine company to connect his friends with escorts and making hospitality suites available in that most suggestive of Washington crash pads, the Watergate Hotel.

Hookergate was upon us.

While the mainstream media trod carefully, the blogosphere jumped in with both feet. Building on the reliable reporting of the San Diego Union Tribune, bloggers began cataloguing arcane details and trying to finger the targets of the widening investigation. The more the bloggers raked, the more muck they found. Shirlington Limousine, for example, Wilkes’ connection to a ready supply of prostitutes, turned out to have sweetheart contracts with Homeland Security and other federal agencies, even though its ex-con owner had a 62-page rap sheet.

Scrutiny soon settled upon the highest echelons of the CIA. Kyle “Dusty” Foggo, a bosom pal of Wilkes, and a mysterious person known as “Nine Fingers” were identified as frequent guests at Wilkes’ bacchanals. They turned out to be, respectively, the No. 3 man at the CIA and a former staffer for CIA Director Porter Goss when he was chair of the House committee on intelligence. Goss lasted a few days before tendering a hasty resignation. Foggo followed the next week.

Such is the power of Hookergate, and the best is still to come. It’s too early to say how damaging it will be, but it bids fair to become a campaign-season train wreck. As scandals go, it’s certainly a twofer, casting a harsh light on both the Bush administration and congressional Republicans.

It’s unknown exactly who, or how many, but more congressmen are reportedly under investigation for their ties to Wilkes and co-conspirator Mitchell Wade. GOP strategist Ed Rollins opined—perhaps tactically—that as many as 15 members could eventually face grand juries.

To make matters worse, Republicans couldn’t get in front of this story. Goss’s departure was painfully clumsy, especially for a White House that stage-manages its every move. The extemporized “resignation”—with no replacement in sight, no explanation forthcoming—had “the unconvincing choreography of the Andropov-era Soviet Union,” as a UPI reporter put it.

The administration lamely tried to spin Goss’s exit as the consequence of a turf war he’d been fighting with intelligence czar John Negroponte. But soon it became clear that Goss, the hatchet man Bush and Cheney put in to purge the CIA of liberal bias, was hoist by his own petard. Competent management, much less leadership, at the agency clearly took a back seat to the more important job of ideological cleansing.

Ideological overreach plus mendacity plus two-fisted boodling. Sound familiar? Hookergate is the story of the Bush presidency, all wrapped up in one easy-to-understand scandal. Needless to say, this is a golden opportunity to take control of the campaign debate. Why not present the imbroglio as a rich object lesson in how the Republican Party governs?

Democratic strategists should take a leaf from the 2004 GOP playbook and work with the “netroots” to hammer this home. The bloggers are way ahead of other media in terms of analysis and even reporting, and they’re moving the debate.

Hookergate’s turning out to be a barrel of monkeys. And we haven’t even met the hookers yet.

• Help In These Times publish more articles like this. Donate today!
• Subscribe today and save 46% off the newsstand price!

• subscribe to print magazine

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments

  To take advantage of this developing story politically, Democrats would have to grow a set of balls quick.

  As it stands now, they are most likely going to avoid this story as “too unseemly” to use against Repugnicans. Heaven forbid Democratic leadership stoop down to the level of Repugs and sling some of the slop (in terms of lies, accusations, character assassinations that are the standard style of Repugs) that Repugnicans don’t hesitate to use against Dems.

  If any sense of actually taking advantage of this oppty. to further clarify the culture of corruption the Repugs brought to Washington develop, you can be sure the Repugs will dig up some lone, unconnected Dem. from the past who can be accused of behaving just as badly.

  Of course, two wrongs don’t make a right, but Repugnicans aren’t interested in right. They are only interested in getting away with the same slimy acts that got them into power.

  I look forward to the posts from the brain-dead, butt-suckers for Bush, Repugnican posters as they do exactly that. LOL

  Of course, because they will be so full of themselves, they will miss the simple fact that - Two wrongs do not make a right. Democratic mistakes, misdeeds do NOT justify or make acceptable bad behavior and illegal activities on the part of today’s Repugs. 

  Those that break the law, ignore the law or pay politics like Goss did and disregard our national security structure cannot have their misdeeds minimized or excused merely because a couple of members of the party NOT in power did similar things.

  We all are judged by our own actions, and the fact that someone else did what we did can never be used as an excuse.

  No misdeed, bad policy, stupid mistake or scandal that can be blamed on Dem. decisions of the PAST can justify the stupid, bad policies or purposeful corruption that exists today in Repugs.

  Especially since they claimed to be the party of virtue and morals. They’re supposed to set the standards. Instead of trying to trying to be no better or worse than their competition.

  Of course it’s not always Repug butt slugs employing this tactic. Sometimes our conservative press gets in on the action. Just recently I saw Pig Russert the talking potato head on Face the Nation. In all seriousness he tried to paint the Abramov scandal as much Dem. as Rep. because both parties accept millions in support from lobbyists.
  Hmmm, there are lobbyists and Abramov. They are not one in the same. Also one Dem or two receiving money from Abramov does not equate to out and out illegal donations by Abramov to Repugnicans.
  Especially since there are no quid pro quos in terms of policies pushed by the Dems. as there were on the Repugnican sides.

  I do wish Dems. could take this opportunity and use it to further shine the light on Repugnican cynical lack of morals and values, but I’m not holding my breath.

  Posted by johnnyincentx on May 16, 2006 at 4:41 AM

  Reminds me of the Monkey Business - that cost a presidential election. . .

  Of course, both Dems and Repubs are whorehoppers, nothing new there!

  Posted by wolf on May 16, 2006 at 9:51 PM

  dems don’t have to do anything, just sit back and watch the repubs self destruct .

  Posted by brian28 on May 18, 2006 at 4:01 AM

  I’m still trying to get my mind around this latest scandal. The author (Mulcahey) seems to give the blogosphere credit for digging out the trash about the Watergate Hotel from the Cunningham scandal. But I wonder a little further.

  It sure seems odd that this connection to the CIA comes around the same time that the phone record collecting is reported in USA Today and that the Bushies nominee was in charge of the NSA and that phone record keeping. And the supposed buzz about a power game between John Negroponte and Porter Goss.

  One wonders if Negroponte had the Watergate dirt long before the bloggers and was just waiting to leak it when best for him. This just seems to be normal conservative poiltics. I’d be shocked if the cons surrounding Negroponte were unaware of the cigar smoking pimps of the CIA hanging at the Watergate Hotel. This probably was cons vs cons, the more powerful cons winning.

  One also must wonder if this is spy vs spy, NSA vs CIA. And one wonders whether one agency (NSA) is using information for political reasons rather than the line of crap we get (terrorism) against the other agency (CIA).

  I highly doubt that the complete story will ever be uncovered. So the winners would be Negroponte and his flunky Hayden (if confirmed to CIA post), so it’s easy to assume that Negroponte was behind the leak.

  Posted by Jon B on May 19, 2006 at 11:58 AM

• register a new account »Posting Security

  To participate in our forums, please register for a free account.

  Username Password

    Remember me
  

  Retreive lost password »

Also featured Literature Consumed
Anarchist Cheerleader Elected
Saving Secular Society

Full contents
Previous issues
Subscribe and save!

Also by Dave Mulcahey

• Tranche Warfare
  Who will be left holding the bag as subprime mortgages go bad? Posted on July 17, 2007
• Passion of the Right
  The uses of persecutionPosted on October 5, 2004
• Another World, Possibly
  Shortly before he died in 1918, the American critic Randolph Bourne penned an… morePosted on August 17, 2004
• The Wise Many
  Connoisseurs of the Strangelovian may recall last summer’s dustup over a plan hatched… morePosted on July 6, 2004
• Design Flaw
  On the edge of the Chicago suburb of Barrington is a massive edifice… morePosted on January 2, 2004