IMF managing director arrested, accused of sexual attack

[Stephen Morgan]

Only the brother pictures look like they aren't her. Or only the other ones if that's really her, I suppose.

[Byrne]

A post from the excellent Golem XIV Thoughts blog, providing some info on John Lipsky, the IMF's acting managing director since the time of DSK's deposition.

http://golemxiv-credo.blogspot.com/2011 ... d-imf.html

I think it is worth noting that Mr Lipsky was the IMF's man dispatched to Chile in 1978 once Allende had been violently overthrown and Pinochet took control. In the aftermath of that coup 2700 political opponents of Pinochet were murdered and 27 000 or so were incarcerated many of whom were tortured.

Mr Lipsky did not return home in protest at what the Pinochet regime was doing. He worked, 'helping the authorities' with their 'adjustment program'. A job he did for two years before returning to New York. Mr Lipsky, when not at the IMF, is a JP Morgan man. He was their Chief economist and then the head of their Investment Bank.

Was it the case that DSK would not have gone along with the, now imposed on Greece, 'austerity measures', which only serve the banks/currently fucked (if you could see the figures) financial oligarchy, including privatisation of Greek public assets
(an "immediate" sale of the telecoms group OTE, the postal bank, the ports of Athens and Thessaloniki and the public water company in Thessaloniki)?

[Byrne]

From the UK House of Commons 'Backbench Business' debate:
Banking Reform
House of Commons debates, 29 November 2010

.....the words of the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, Dominic Strauss-Kahn, who a few weeks ago told Stern magazine that he thinks a second financial crisis is almost inevitable given the paucity of reform and the vulnerability of the financial system, and that next time round it may well be impossible to persuade taxpayers to fund bail-outs.

[lupercal]

French Socialist Party reacts to DSK's release from house arrest today:
...............................
Revirement dans l'affaire DSK: le PS chamboulé [Socialist Party turned upside down]
Le Nouvel Observateur - Publié le 01-07-11 à 16:10

PARIS (AP) — Les socialistes se réjouissaient vendredi du revirement dans l'affaire Dominique Strauss-Kahn, qui pourrait redonner à leur ancien favori un rôle à jouer dans la course à l'Elysée en 2012. Des voix s'élevaient même pour demander une "pause" dans les primaires.

-snip -
...................
Google trans: Reversal in the case of DSK: PS messed

PARIS (AP) - The Socialist rejoiced Friday's reversal in the case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who could give back to their old favorite a role in the race for the Elysee Palace in 2012. Voices were raised even to ask for a "pause" in the primaries.

DSK pranced in the polls when he was removed from the selection process for his arrest in mid-May in New York for attempted rape and sexual assault. Indicted and under house arrest, he saw his presidential chances soar even before they had time to formalize an application he prepared more or less discreetly.

Now that New York prosecutors questioned the credibility of the accuser of Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the PS is turned upside down.

"It's a thunderbolt," said on RTL former Prime Minister Lionel Jospin, the candidate twice unsuccessful presidential.

Martine Aubry, the Socialist candidate, has expressed his "immense joy". Harlem Désir, Socialist Party First Secretary Acting says feel "a great relief to the latest information which cause intense hope of good news for Dominique Strauss-Kahn."

"He will be in the presidential campaign since the American justice (...) releases and restores," said Jean-Marie Le Guen on France-Inter, adding: "as Dominique Strauss-Kahn is a fighter it will be fighting in our country. "

Vice-President (PS) of the Regional Council of Ile-de-France Sabban called Friday "a break in the primary" so that "if the opportunity is given him, Dominique may have a time speech ".

The people who run the Socialist for president may submit their formal application from Tuesday until July 13. The first and second round of primaries will be held on 9 and 16 October.

Martine Aubry, who was linked to DSK by a pact providing for the best placed of them are present in the primaries, announced his candidacy Tuesday in his stronghold of Lille. Friday, former first secretary of the PS is expressed only wanted as a "friend of Dominique Strauss-Kahn." "I sincerely hope that the U.S. court will set tonight the whole truth and allow Dominique out of this nightmare," she said. To reporters, she refused to talk about the primary PS or timing of the left for the race at the Elysee Palace in 2012.

Even refusal by Pierre Moscovici, a relative of DSK, which has made this week its support for the nomination for Francois Hollande. "When the time comes, it will be time to consider the possible political consequences of all this," he remarked on France-Info, after the rebound.

François Hollande has meanwhile been open to delaying the close of nominations in the primary. "I am perfectly willing that the date be postponed until the end of August so there is no reservation, no restriction" on a DSK bid upon return of the latter in the game policy, he said.

Asked on Europe-1 on the possible suspension of the primaries, the candidate for nomination Segolene Royal said he had "respect (the) will" Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

As for changing the primary calendar, "it is not on the agenda today," said the spokesman PS Benoît Hamon. Once the U.S. court makes its decision, "we speak, we discuss, we look, we expect the opinion of those concerned," he said on the Senate Public - AN LCP.

http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/actualit ... boule.html
.....................

anyway the point is there's hope that he'll get back in the race, though if Sarkozy would pull this to eliminate a rival (among other useful goals) what wouldn't he pull, so I'm keeping my champagne corked for now.. p.s. thanks for the updates Byrne

[Stephen Morgan]

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/ ... judgement/

I think I am entitled to claim some wisdom in what I wrote about the DSK rape allegation, which was this:

The allegations against Dominique Strauss Kahn are of a different order as they do seem to involve violent assault and non-consensual sex acts. Plainly there is a very serious case to answer, especially given his known highly charged sexual history.

But I have been given pause today by learning that the police have amended their accusation to say that they were one and a half hours mistaken in the time that the rape took place. Given that it was reported pretty well immediately, how can there have been this confusion about when it happened? A ten minute mistake would be natural, but one and a half hours wrong in a period of three hours?

The difference is very significant, because the police were alleging that he raped her, then rushed from the hotel to the airport to flee. They now acknowledge as true the defence statement that he actually went to a lunch engagement quite close to the hotel before going to the airport. Given that his alleged hurried running away was a major factor in not granting him bail, this seems to me inportant. I repeat – how on earth could an investigation make such a very fundamental mistake?

My feelings of unease were then increased by US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner coming out to lead international demands for DSK’s replacement – as the prosecuting authority, surely it would behove the US government to shut up until he has been found innocent or guilty? Since then I have been listening to Ghanaian radio (I am in Accra) where callers are more or less unanimous that as the woman is from Guinea, in Francophone Africa, the Sarkozy connection is to blame. That fact is certainly a boon for conspiracy theorists.

DSK deserves the benefit of the presumption of innocence for now. We just don’t know what happened yet. The failure to grant him bail appears to me completely unjustifiable – where on earth do they think he will vanish, and how? There seems something peculiarly vindictive in the handling of this – of which his bail appearance without being allowed clean clothes or a shave was a stark symbol.

I have added the emphasis because I had got hold of absolutely the key point. It turns out the woman lied to the police, and in fact had gone back to cleaning rooms after the alleged assault, before reporting it – but then not told the truth about that. it also turns out that the woman – who you may recall we were told at the time was a very quiet religious Muslim – has a long term relationship with an imprisoned drug dealer and had received US $100,000 in recent months, largely from him. It is also the case that she had admitted to a flase claim of gang rape in her political asylum claim, and she has been taped discussing how much money she might make from the case.

Here is part of the prosecutor’s letter to the court:
“Additionally, in two separate interviews with assistant district attorneys assigned to the case, the complainant stated that she had been the victim of a gang rape in the past in her native country and provided details of the attack. During both of these interviews, the victim cried and appeared to be markedly distraught when recounting the incident. In subsequent interviews, she admitted that the gang rape had never occurred.”

Actually, for me the scariest and most evil thing about this entire episode are the warped feminists at the Guardian who conflate the terms “men” and “rapists” as though they were the same thing. As in this:

How do we get men to stop raping lesbians or independent or highly sexual women as a “corrective act” rather than addressing the forces and powers they are truly angry at? How do we get men to understand the impact of rape: how the external bruises are internalised and remain for ever?

The hate speak involved in conflating “Men” and “rapists” in this way is a vital insight into the viciousness of the militant feminist movement.

None of that, of course, makes it impossible that DSK raped her. But I considered it unlikely before, and I consider it still more unlikely now. Fascinating that the Guardian chooses to lead the first of their articles I link to with the ludicrous bluster of her lawyer, rather than the damning facts about her which come right down later.

It is an unfortunate boon to the Daily Express tendency that it turns out this case plays right into so many of the stereotyped categories Black Americans still have to struggle against – lying asylum seekers, convicted drug dealers, out to make crooked money. But in a criminal trial, Strauss Kahn, wealthy white banker though he is, still has as much right to have his story heard as her. That is what the equality of human beings means. And bluntly, from what we know at this moment, his side of the story seems a great deal more believable than hers. That may change as more evidence emerges; but the public bluster of her attorneys to date outlines an extremely weak case.

Talking of which, yet further evidence of stunning illiberalism by the coalition was revealed in Teresa May’s unjustified – in the literal sense of the term – action against Sheikh Saleh. What precisely is Sheikh Saleh alleged to have done that made his visit to the UK so harmful? Is there any evidence of any Lib Dem influence in any direction that can be described as liberal, in any area of government policy? Answers on a postcard please.

It is worth noting that in the two occasions I have stood for parliament, just as independent me with no party behind me, no organisation except this little blog and definitely no Deputy Prime Minister to back me, I have always obtained more votes and a higher percentage vote than the Liberal Democrats did at Inverclyde in the early hours of this morning. Unless the Scottish Lib Dems abandon the hard line unionism they have adopted – which would not have been supported by either Jo Grimond or Russel Johnson, and certainly not Rosebery – they are going to be annihilated.

[barracuda]

MAID'S ATTORNEY FIGHTS BACK: Strauss-Kahn Grabbed Her With So Much Force, He Bruised Her Vagina

The lawyer for the maid in the DSK case is blasting this idea that he's innocent.

He says she's never changed her description of the facts of the day, and that all of the new information came from her originally, including the fact that the asylum application is not completely accurate. But he says she was raped in Africa.

He's laying out his version of the facts, which includes this startling line:

"Number one, when the victim walked into that suite that was for one reason, that was to clean that room. She went into that room believing that no-one was in that room.... He started to attack her. He then grabbed her vagina with so much force that he hurt her. When the nurses who examined her saw the bruises..

He says she had a ripped stocking, as well as other injuries that could only be consistent with a violent attack.

And he's also attacking DA Cy Vance:

"All of these statements that were leaked by the district attorney about her being involed with drugs... that's a lie."

He's accusing DA Cy Vance of being afraid to take the case after having lost several profile cases recently.

Clearly, Cy Vance is getting ready to dismiss the case he says despite "Knowing full well to this very well that they have a picture of her bruised vagina, and knowing full well that they have evidence of injury."

As for the phone call with the drug dealer "She didn't know he was a drug dealer."

Her Supervisor saw her spit semen, he says.

He insists: "What's false is that there was $100,000 put in her account."

More evidence, he says, that DSK was in a hurry to leave: "He had toothpaste all over his mouth."

She feels like her life is ruined, and will come out in front of the cameras to tell the world her story.

[eyeno]

Her Supervisor saw her spit semen, he says

Everything else in the article seems possible but I am not buying the above quote for a second. I am not sure I am willing to believe that she held semen in her mouth long enough to go spit it out for her supervisor.

[lupercal]

^ good point eyeno. To be honest none of it ever sounded remotely credible to me, starting with the claim she didn't know he was in the room (he hadn't checked out, so why wouldn't he be? this wasn't a Motel 6), also the claim that she didn't know who he was (he has a high profile in France and apparently stayed there regularly), then the claim he assaulted her etc. But there's no misunderestimating the gullibility of the American public who reliably swallow every spooked-up storyline their TVs feed them.

Anyway here's more about that phone call:

When the conversation was translated — a job completed only this Wednesday — investigators were alarmed: “She says words to the effect of, ‘Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I’m doing,’ ” the official said.

It was another ground-shifting revelation in a continuing series of troubling statements, fabrications and associations that unraveled the case and upended prosecutors’ view of the woman. Once, in the hours after she said she was attacked on May 14, she’d been a “very pious, devout Muslim woman, shattered by this experience,” the official said — a seemingly ideal witness.

Little by little, her credibility as a witness crumbled — she had lied about her immigration, about being gang raped in Guinea, about her experiences in her homeland and about her finances, according to two law enforcement officials. She had been linked to people suspected of crimes. She changed her account of what she did immediately after the encounter with Mr. Strauss-Kahn. Sit-downs with prosecutors became tense, even angry. Initially composed, she later collapsed in tears and got down on the floor during questioning. She became unavailable to investigators from the district attorney’s office for days at a time.

Now the phone call raised yet another problem: it seemed as if she hoped to profit from whatever occurred in Suite 2806.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/02/nyreg ... 2&src=recg

And if 100 g's got dropped in her bank account it sounds like she already profited from it.

[barracuda]

Her Supervisor saw her spit semen, he says

Everything else in the article seems possible but I am not buying the above quote for a second. I am not sure I am willing to believe that she held semen in her mouth long enough to go spit it out for her supervisor.

Wow. No one is saying she sort of held the guy's load in her mouth to show to her super as if this were a scene from a porno, dude. I'd like to see what you'd do if DSK forced his cock in your mouth and squirted all over your face and clothes. You'd still be spittin' out frog DNA to this day.

Okay, that was kinda gross.

The forensics can demonstrate a fairly plausible non-consensual scenario if the woman had a bruised vagina and torn ligaments. Blown-up photos of bruised vaginas have been known to carry some weight with the properly composed jury. Not to mention that DSK's semen was recovered all over the hotel room, the maid, and the hallway outside the room. I guess we'll see what happens at the trial, if things get that far.

I doubt they will though, because it seems the fix is obviously pretty well in on this one. I never in a thousand years thought for a moment that DSK would be found guilty. Too much money floating around loose. I guess you can hope. But add "untrustworthy people" to the list of individuals it is impossible to rape. It simply can't be done, thank god! To be raped, you have to be a nice white lady wearing very demure clothing, preferably married for twenty years or more, with lots of money, and sell doilies at the local church bazaar, and have several reliable witnesses, and maybe a confession. Maybe. Otherwise, thankfully, you're safe!

Okay, I might be exaggerating a little.

the official said

I'm kind of surprised your buying this one. (Not really.) But to watch you accept on faith information, quote, "according to a well-placed law enforcement official", regarding details of an ongoing police investigation... well, that's mildly amusing, I must say.

[lupercal]

^ If Vance took it seriously enough to spring the guy, with his reputation as DA hanging on this idiotic prosecution, I'll take it seriously. Heck if he'd been reading me here at RI it would have saved him a lot of trouble.

[barracuda]

Yeah, but then nobody would have made all that nice buy-off money. You gotta start thinking about the economy, man, or we're never gonna get outta this recession.

[eyeno]

Wow. No one is saying she sort of held the guy's load in her mouth to show to her super as if this were a scene from a porno, dude. I'd like to see what you'd do if DSK forced his cock in your mouth and squirted all over your face and clothes. You'd still be spittin' out frog DNA to this day.

I would immediately spit the shit out on the floor and so would you. I would not carry it around in my mouth like a trophy until I found someone to spit it out in front of. Sorry, but you will never make that fly for me.

[eyeno]

Her Supervisor saw her spit semen, he says

Everything else in the article seems possible but I am not buying the above quote for a second. I am not sure I am willing to believe that she held semen in her mouth long enough to go spit it out for her supervisor.

Wow. No one is saying she sort of held the guy's load in her mouth to show to her super as if this were a scene from a porno, dude. I'd like to see what you'd do if DSK forced his cock in your mouth and squirted all over your face and clothes. You'd still be spittin' out frog DNA to this day.

Okay, that was kinda gross.

The forensics can demonstrate a fairly plausible non-consensual scenario if the woman had a bruised vagina and torn ligaments. Blown-up photos of bruised vaginas have been known to carry some weight with the properly composed jury. Not to mention that DSK's semen was recovered all over the hotel room, the maid, and the hallway outside the room. I guess we'll see what happens at the trial, if things get that far.

I doubt they will though, because it seems the fix is obviously pretty well in on this one. I never in a thousand years thought for a moment that DSK would be found guilty. Too much money floating around loose. I guess you can hope. But add "untrustworthy people" to the list of individuals it is impossible to rape. It simply can't be done, thank god! To be raped, you have to be a nice white lady wearing very demure clothing, preferably married for twenty years or more, with lots of money, and sell doilies at the local church bazaar, and have several reliable witnesses, and maybe a confession. Maybe. Otherwise, thankfully, you're safe!

Okay, I might be exaggerating a little.

the official said

I'm kind of surprised your buying this one. (Not really.) But to watch you accept on faith information, quote, "according to a well-placed law enforcement official", regarding details of an ongoing police investigation... well, that's mildly amusing, I must say.

actually barracuda, i can't believe you put that much thought into what I said. If somebody shot a bad load in my mouth, I would spit it out. So would you. Tell me you wouldn't? Hold it for a trophy? Doubt it.

I also don't doubt that his ass raped her. Assholes like him think they are entitled to use people like paper towels. We are all just waste under his heels.

But, sorry, nobody holds CUM in their mouth until they can run and show it to another person. Don't happen.

Not even for you fish....just don't happen...

[Stephen Morgan]

Yes, this rebuttal by her side is somewhat unlikely. And, in the next return in the volley of accusations, turns out she might have been both a hotel hooker who was paid for sex by the guests and running a pyramid scheme targeting her fellow immigrants from Guinea or Ghana or wherever it was.

[barracuda]

you will never make that fly for me.

You're probably right about that, eyeno. Anyway, after entering "semen + supervisor" as a search string into google, I realise I 've reached the limit of my interest in defending my own remarks on this issue. Apologies.