IMF Chief - setup or not?

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Mon May 16, 2011 7:44 am

I've seen a lot of stories since yesterday on the arrest over the weekend of Strauss-Kahn.

There seems to be more than a bit of speculation that he was set up. Seems he has a lot of enemies that are looking to ruin his political aspirations.

Various stories report that his phone and personal items were left in his hotel room and that he was pulled from a last minute Air France flight at the airport. yet another story today claims he was having lunch with his daughter at the time of the alleged incident.

What is the European take on this?

mikeinie · Post by **mikeinie** » Mon May 16, 2011 9:43 am

we will go with whatever gets us a better interest rate from the IMF...

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Mon May 16, 2011 10:32 am

That it stinks.

I think the fact he's so willing to undergo forensic body examination says a lot and the timing just before he's due to put his name forward for the French Presidential elections is reason enough to question what i understand to be an unsupported allegation.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Mon May 16, 2011 11:37 am

Bryn Mawr;1359662 wrote: That it stinks.

I think the fact he's so willing to undergo forensic body examination says a lot and the timing just before he's due to put his name forward for the French Presidential elections is reason enough to question what i understand to be an unsupported allegation.

Doesn't say anything to me other than the police were requesting or had already gottten the warrant for the body examiniation. How would the guy look if he fought it at that point?

I am interested in what you've seen that I haven't that leads you to understand the allegation to be unsupported.

I've seen reports now that the flight was previously booked and not a last minute arrangement he made. That would indicate to me that the appearance that he was fleeing could just be coincidence.

On the other hand, you have a hard working maid who has been in the job for three years - lots of rich folks to cry rape on - hasn't happened.

I have wondered that if the guy came out of the shower and she's bent over working, if the whole thing didn't turn into a horrible farce as they realize the other is there. She freaks, as anyone would with a naked guy behind you and he tries to grab her and calm her and it all heads south after that...

Post by **spot** » Mon May 16, 2011 9:43 pm

I'm astounded the chap isn't fully protected by diplomatic immunity. Your country needs a large fence building round it, floppy. Nobody in their right mind should set foot on US soil if they have citizenship options in civilized countries.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:10 am

He's not a diplomat why would he be protected by diplomatic immunity? Besuides given the nature of the allegation I can't see ny european government protecting one of their diplomats from investigation.

It needs to be investigated just because of who he is and what his job is doesn't make him above the law. I'm surprised he wasn't given bail, if he did leave the country the odds of him getting away with not being handed back are slim to non existent.

On the other hand he's french and a banker on trial in an american court, he's had it.

How do you think americamns wopuld reacty if Bush gets arrested if he ever leaves the country and travels to europe?

George Bush calls off trip to Switzerland | Law | The Guardian

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Tue May 17, 2011 4:58 am

Personally I think that someone should start looking into these $3000 a night hotel rooms.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Tue May 17, 2011 7:11 am

Here's a US take on the French take of this event

French reaction to IMF scandal: Media 'lynching' to 'wait-and-see' -

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Tue May 17, 2011 7:18 am

spot;1359685 wrote: I'm astounded the chap isn't fully protected by diplomatic immunity. Your country needs a large fence building round it, floppy. Nobody in their right mind should set foot on US soil if they have citizenship options in civilized countries.

You're not seriously saying that the USA should allow rich Europeans to come over here and attempt rape without consequence?

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Tue May 17, 2011 9:04 am

Apparently he wasn't here for work.

IMF not to foot bill for Dominique Strauss-Kahn's infamous hotel stay - The Times of India

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Tue May 17, 2011 10:28 am

YZGI;1359694 wrote: You're not seriously saying that the USA should allow rich Europeans to come over here and attempt rape without consequence?

Sounds like it, doesn't it?

BTW, it appears that he is a rich european based on the tax dollars of the alleged victim. that should make her feel better, eh?

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Tue May 17, 2011 10:58 am

flopstock;1359663 wrote: Doesn't say anything to me other than the police were requesting or had already gottten the warrant for the body examiniation. How would the guy look if he fought it at that point?

I am interested in what you've seen that I haven't that leads you to understand the allegation to be unsupported.

I've seen reports now that the flight was previously booked and not a last minute arrangement he made. That would indicate to me that the appearance that he was fleeing could just be coincidence.

On the other hand, you have a hard working maid who has been in the job for three years - lots of rich folks to cry rape on - hasn't happened.

I have wondered that if the guy came out of the shower and she's bent over working, if the whole thing didn't turn into a horrible farce as they realize the other is there. She freaks, as anyone would with a naked guy behind you and he tries to grab her and calm her and it all heads south after that...

The woman has accused him of trying to rape her, he has denied it, there were no other witnesses and no other evidence has been produced - his word against hers in an unsupported alegation which is why agreeing to a forensic body examination was interesting, to see what additional evidence could be found.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Tue May 17, 2011 12:04 pm

Bryn Mawr;1359710 wrote: The woman has accused him of trying to rape her, he has denied it, there were no other witnesses and no other evidence has been produced - his word against hers in an unsupported alegation which is why agreeing to a forensic body examination was interesting, to see what additional evidence could be found.

I'm not sure what good DNA does either side here. She's a maid in a suite that he was known to have occupied. If she hasn't touched things that he has touched, I'd be surprised.

I still say his best case is to state that he was just as surprised to see her there when he walked out of the bathroom, as she was him. I have no trouble imagining him trying to keep her from running screaming from the room. If a naked stranger tried to stop me, I'd be fighting to the death and not listen to attempts to reason with me. Especially if there are multiple languages involved.

Problem with this defense is the alibi. If he wasn't there and nothing happened, he can't come up with a reasonable explantion for it happening later.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Tue May 17, 2011 12:25 pm

flopstock;1359717 wrote: I'm not sure what good DNA does either side here. She's a maid in a suite that he was known to have occupied. If she hasn't touched things that he has touched, I'd be surprised.

I still say his best case is to state that he was just as surprised to see her there when he walked out of the bathroom, as she was him. I have no trouble imagining him trying to keep her from running screaming from the room. If a naked stranger tried to stop me, I'd be fighting to the death and not listen to attempts to reason with me. Especially if there are multiple languages involved.

Problem with this defense is the alibi. If he wasn't there and nothing happened, he can't come up with a reasonable explantion for it happening later.

More looking for scratch marks to the body - she claims he was naked and that she fought him, there would almost certainly be scratches in places he couldn't explain if this were the case.

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Tue May 17, 2011 1:02 pm

we will go with whatever gets us a better interest rate from the IMF...

:yh_rotfl

Anyway this does seem to have a bad smell to it from any direction you're standing. Considering he's the number 1 candidate for the pres of France and who he's up against I think this is what happened.

Sarkozy and his people know he's a lech, they paid off the maid to sleep with the guy and then claim rape. The horndog being who he is couldn't resist or even think straight in the situation finally realized what was going on and tried to beat feet out of the country.

I could of course be completely wrong.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Tue May 17, 2011 1:13 pm

Scrat;1359720 wrote: :yh_rotfl

Anyway this does seem to have a bad smell to it from any direction you're standing. Considering he's the number 1 candidate for the pres of France and who he's up against I think this is what happened.

Sarkozy and his people know he's a lech, they paid off the maid to sleep with the guy and then claim rape. The horndog being who he is couldn't resist or even think straight in the situation finally realized what was going on and tried to beat feet out of the country.

I could of course be completely wrong.

Sounds more than plausible and it wouldn't be the first time :wah:

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Tue May 17, 2011 1:13 pm

Bryn Mawr;1359718 wrote: More looking for scratch marks to the body - she claims he was naked and that she fought him, there would almost certainly be scratches in places he couldn't explain if this were the case.

I agree and if he is going to have scratch marks he'd better have a better explanatin at the onset than that he was having lunch with his daughter. Because that takes away any other possible explanation than that he is guilty as not yet charged...

Are they still pending? He hasn't been charged yet has he?

Post by **spot** » Tue May 17, 2011 3:01 pm

YZGI;1359694 wrote: You're not seriously saying that the USA should allow rich Europeans to come over here and attempt rape without consequence?

Play the mirror game, Wisey. Are you saying the rest of the world should allow Americans to commit crimes in their countries without consequence? Your State Department screamed diplomatic immunity when that chap shot two people dead in a Pakistan street, for example. I note he's back in the USA, none the worse for his murder spree.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Wed May 18, 2011 7:15 am

spot;1359736 wrote: Play the mirror game, Wisey. Are you saying the rest of the world should allow Americans to commit crimes in their countries without consequence? Your State Department screamed diplomatic immunity when that chap shot two people dead in a Pakistan street, for example. I note he's back in the USA, none the worse for his murder spree.

Come on Spot, deflection is beneath you. I never inferred any such thing so i will not defend something which i never suggested.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Wed May 18, 2011 7:24 am

Seriously though, the guy is a Socialist multimillionaire, with homes in several countries and 'bump' rights with Air France? $3000 a night for a hotel room?

Socialism sure has changed since the last time I looked at it.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Wed May 18, 2011 7:28 am

flopstock;1359765 wrote: Seriously though, the guy is a Socialist multimillionaire, with homes in several countries and 'bump' rights with Air France? $3000 a night for a hotel room?

Socialism sure has changed since the last time I looked at it.

I reckon it depends on which side of the socialist railroad you were born on.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed May 18, 2011 10:04 am

flopstock;1359765 wrote: Seriously though, the guy is a Socialist multimillionaire, with homes in several countries and 'bump' rights with Air France? $3000 a night for a hotel room?

Socialism sure has changed since the last time I looked at it.

Probably it has, In europe it has a far broader meaning than it does in america where they seem to see revolutionary communism as synonymous with socialism. The labour party in the UK has more millionaires in it than the tories.

Politicians, however, are the same the world over, lying hypocritical self servinf -- you get my drift.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Thu May 19, 2011 4:38 am

He's resigned.

It would have to really suck to be dealing with something like this and having the folks around you more concerned with something else.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Thu May 19, 2011 5:19 am

Here's an interesting timeline.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn: Timeline Of Events Leading To Alleged Attack, Arrest And IMF Resignation | World News | Sky News

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu May 19, 2011 5:45 am

Well, if he's a multi-whatever financially, he doesn't live like a socialist, does he. Though it's fair to note that whatever one adopts philosophically doesn't change the reality of the system one finds himself or herself in.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Thu May 19, 2011 7:30 am

Ahso!;1359816 wrote: Well, if he's a multi-whatever financially, he doesn't live like a socialist, does he. Though it's fair to note that whatever one adopts philosophically doesn't change the reality of the system one finds himself or herself in.

have you seen what this position pays - tax free?

IMF __ Just Another Black Hole Sucking In US Dollars « Conservatives on Fire

Why Is the U.S. Bankrolling IMF’s Bailouts in Europe? - HUMAN EVENTS

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu May 19, 2011 9:52 am

The following is info about the IMF minus the spin. Sorry, but the articles you've linked are meant to incite anger, which is obviously easy to do during these days of economic difficulty.

About the IMF

If anyone in the US wants to get serious about money spent abroad, let's start with what we send to Israel. Until that conversation occurs, all this bellyaching falls on deaf ears.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Thu May 19, 2011 12:23 pm

Ahso!;1359816 wrote: Well, if he's a multi-whatever financially, he doesn't live like a socialist, does he. Though it's fair to note that whatever one adopts philosophically doesn't change the reality of the system one finds himself or herself in.

What do you think a socialist is? Why on earth do you have to be poor to believe in equality?

I don't think it is the left you need to worry about in america

Rachel Maddow Show

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Thu May 19, 2011 1:50 pm

Ahso!;1359826 wrote: The following is info about the IMF minus the spin. Sorry, but the articles you've linked are meant to incite anger, which is obviously easy to do during these days of economic difficulty.

About the IMF

If anyone in the US wants to get serious about money spent abroad, let's start with what we send to Israel. Until that conversation occurs, all this bellyaching falls on deaf ears.

Well then get the hell out of the thread if you don't want to discuss it.

Talk about whining!

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu May 19, 2011 5:49 pm

I'm wondering what exactly it is you're discussing. You've taken this thread from introducing a conspiracy, to socialism, then to the IMF, and finally culminating into Obama recklessly handing over all our hard earned tax dollars to Socialist European countries.......again.

Individuals allow their intelligence to be insulted when political hacks convince them that a child's allowance is analogous to the intricate and complicated working of an organization such as the IMF, which attempts to maintain a world economy. That's no small matter. Whether one prefers Socialism, Capitalism, Communism, or what have you, international economics and a child's allowance are worlds apart.

I'm not saying I agree with everything the IMF adopts as policy because I don't know enough about it. It's obvious though that the two gentlemen who typed both of those highly politically biased blog posts have, at best, little understanding of the IMF as well.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Fri May 20, 2011 2:27 am

flopstock;1359829 wrote: Well then get the hell out of the thread if you don't want to discuss it.

Talk about whining!

Why do you think he is being set up?

What is shocking to europeans is the parading of him in chains, the open discussion of the case before trial and being refused bail - Where do you think he is going to run to?

To most europeans socialism is good, fascism is bad. The last time fascists got any real power the result was world war two.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Fri May 20, 2011 5:24 am

gmc;1359847 wrote: Why do you think he is being set up?

What is shocking to europeans is the parading of him in chains, the open discussion of the case before trial and being refused bail - Where do you think he is going to run to?

To most europeans socialism is good, fascism is bad. The last time fascists got any real power the result was world war two.

Where couldn't he run? He is a man with a lot of money.

Former IMF Chief Could Soon Be Released From Jail : NPR

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Fri May 20, 2011 7:25 am

flopstock;1359856 wrote: Where couldn't he run? He is a man with a lot of money.

Former IMF Chief Could Soon Be Released From Jail : NPR

Where could he run to without being extradited? I preseme they would keepm his passport, doesn't say for for US airport security if he mananged to get on a plane.

Hoe would you feel about the next head of the IMF being chinese? Are you seggesting it's a chinese plot to destabilise the euro? t.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Fri May 20, 2011 9:00 am

gmc;1359861 wrote: Where could he run to without being extradited? I preseme they would keepm his passport, doesn't say for for US airport security if he mananged to get on a plane.

Hoe would you feel about the next head of the IMF being chinese? Are you seggesting it's a chinese plot to destabilise the euro? t.

I don't believe or disbelieve it is any sort of plot. I saw several stories on it almost immediately after this story broke, so I wondered what foreigners thoughts were on the subject around here.

The plot is what captured my interest in IMF(of which I knew virtually nothing prior). The hotel room price caught my attention next. He wasn't on business for the fund so it wasn't covered, but I did not know that at the onset.

I think the IMF should be done away with, if this pay structure flows from the top down. Let successful bankers and business people donate their time to managing it, if they want the tax write offs.

As for the Chinese leading it - could they do any worse? And no one at the head is what benefits the US.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sat May 21, 2011 8:29 am

flopstock;1359864 wrote: I don't believe or disbelieve it is any sort of plot. I saw several stories on it almost immediately after this story broke, so I wondered what foreigners thoughts were on the subject around here.

The plot is what captured my interest in IMF(of which I knew virtually nothing prior). The hotel room price caught my attention next. He wasn't on business for the fund so it wasn't covered, but I did not know that at the onset.

I think the IMF should be done away with, if this pay structure flows from the top down. Let successful bankers and business people donate their time to managing it, if they want the tax write offs.

As for the Chinese leading it - could they do any worse? And no one at the head is what benefits the US.

You should maybe read up on what the ImF actually does before you conclude it should be done away with. Same with the world bank, guess which nation is in charge of that and why. Or don't guessdo some research. Your nation is going bankrupt and your economy in the shitter because of american bankers and industrialists - no one else is responsible. You should maybe turn your attention to them and stop blaming everybody else for your problems. The notion that countries in the far east can force american companies to shut down US based operations and move them overseas is a ludicrous one. All that would happen if the US became isolationist is that the world economy would adjust and probably grow more effectively as a result.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Sat May 21, 2011 9:01 am

gmc;1359931 wrote: You should maybe read up on what the ImF actually does before you conclude it should be done away with. Same with the world bank, guess which nation is in charge of that and why. Or don't guessdo some research. Your nation is going bankrupt and your economy in the shitter because of american bankers and industrialists - no one else is responsible. You should maybe turn your attention to them and stop blaming everybody else for your problems. The notion that countries in the far east can force american companies to shut down US based operations and move them overseas is a ludicrous one. All that would happen if the US became isolationist is that the world economy would adjust and probably grow more effectively as a result.

And maybe you should read what I write. I don't blame anyone but ourselves for the troubles we are in. We spend too much time trying fix the rest of the world when we should be focusing on ourselves and our own internal problems.

But while we are throwing working americans tax dollars around the globe, I become more than a little curious what the IMF annual payroll is and what the breakdown is. Are all of their employees riding tax free? And what does all those perks and living expenses add up to? How much aid do any of these international organizations throw back into US based growth and developement? There has to be some - somewhere, correct?

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sat May 21, 2011 11:05 am

flopstock;1359934 wrote: And maybe you should read what I write. I don't blame anyone but ourselves for the troubles we are in. We spend too much time trying fix the rest of the world when we should be focusing on ourselves and our own internal problems.

But while we are throwing working americans tax dollars around the globe, I become more than a little curious what the IMF annual payroll is and what the breakdown is. Are all of their employees riding tax free? And what does all those perks and living expenses add up to? How much aid do any of these international organizations throw back into US based growth and developement? There has to be some - somewhere, correct?

What make you think it is a charitable aid organisation? I suggest you go and look the issues up and which countries are actually behind it all. A major issue is what strings the IMF attaches to the loans it gives to third wold countries. Euriopeans give a lot of aid to thirrd world countries meanwhile the bankers still insist that those countries service the loans at the expense of the kind of social programmes that would help render the aid unnecssary. That is the fault of the world bank and the IMF and an insistence on money being aid back even if it had been lent to dictators that have been overthrown. It's like of you moved in to a house and found you were liable for the loans given to the previous owner.

Third World Debt | World Centric

Third World Debt Undermines Development — Global Issues

The whole thing is a mess.

Why don't you get your own government to finance growth and development programmes? You elect them after all.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun May 22, 2011 7:37 am

flopstock;1359934 wrote: And maybe you should read what I write. I don't blame anyone but ourselves for the troubles we are in. We spend too much time trying fix the rest of the world when we should be focusing on ourselves and our own internal problems.

But while we are throwing working americans tax dollars around the globe, I become more than a little curious what the IMF annual payroll is and what the breakdown is. Are all of their employees riding tax free? And what does all those perks and living expenses add up to? How much aid do any of these international organizations throw back into US based growth and developement? There has to be some - somewhere, correct?Think of the IMF as an investment similar to you investing in the utilities in your house. You pay your utility bills because those utilities provide you with the basic essentials necessary to continue to create income for yourself.

Investment into the IMF provides support for an ongoing world economy which American GDP as well as that of all advanced economies is highly dependent on. Without investing (which is achieved via loans, incidentally) American GDP would decrease, and that spells big-time trouble for an economy such as ours. It's all part of a long term strategy in order to maintain an economy based on investment.

For reference: http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/199.asp

Post by **spot** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 1:56 pm

So, the prosecution's withdrawn the charges.

I note that the woman outed herself some while ago and consequently I can put a reasonable question. She's built like a Marine and half the chap's age. What possible definition of "rape" exists in the US that covers those details? Is she claiming she said no but he went ahead anyway and she took no physical steps to prevent it? That's rape these days? I don't think she can possibly maintain that she was physically forced by superior strength. I don't recall the prosecution saying he was armed.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:11 pm

My guess is it was all consensual, but it is possible that an employee may hesitate to resist an aggressive guest in a hotel of that reputation. If the employee resists and the guest panics and reports the incident on false grounds and the employee doesn't, chances are she'd be fired. I imagine that hotel pays relatively well as hotels go.

Post by **spot** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:15 pm

I have no reason at all to think it was consensual. Why would I think that? The guy's French, he probably expects service like that in every hotel he visits.

I'm not trying to write fiction here, I'm trying to discuss facts. I'm challenging this odd new definition of rape we seem to be using. If it falls into a category of rape solely on the word of the complainant then it has to be an unenforceable law because a successful prosecution can only happen if the prosecution is believed beyond reasonable doubt. How can there possibly not be reasonable doubt where two people disagree on what was said?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:19 pm

spot;1366881 wrote: I have no reason at all to think it was consensual. Why would I think that? The guy's French, he probably expects service like that in every hotel he visits. I'm not trying to write fiction here, I'm trying to discuss facts.

I'm merely challenging this odd new definition of rape we seem to be using. If it falls into a category of rape solely on the word of the complainant then it has to be an unenforceable law because a successful prosecution can only happen if the prosecution is believed beyond reasonable doubt. How can there possibly not be reasonable doubt where two people disagree on what was said?I agree with your second paragraph. I'm of the opinion that it probably was consensual and she was probably paid for the service.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:20 pm

Apparently the maid got caught out In her lies.

Video: The Maid Lied, Ex-IMF Chief Strauss-Kahn Released, Innocent of Sex Crimes part of Maid is a Liar, Ex-IMF Chief Strauss-Kahn is Innocent of Sexual Assault Charges (Video)

If she did Indeed lie, what appropriate course should be sought against her? As a maid, she won't be worth financial claims but surely some charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice?

Post by **spot** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:28 pm

I see no reason to disbelieve her when she says she refused. He may well have expected to tip her generously but I've no reason to think she took any money at all - I'm quite sure it would have formed a cast-iron defense if she had done, so it seems impossible.

I maintain that if he was incapable of forcing himself on her by reason of either physical strength or the threat of a weapon then rape is the wrong word for what happened and the wrong charge to bring in court. Given her size and youth I claim she could have stopped what happened at any stage. To say afterwards that she said no shouldn't be sufficient to bring the prosecution. The failure of the prosecution shouldn't be down to some smeghead attorney backing off for fear of tarnishing his run rate, it should be down to the lack of adequate evidence regarding the "no" in the context of "beyond reasonable doubt".

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:31 pm

spot;1366887 wrote: it should be down to the lack of evidence regarding the "no" in the context of "beyond reasonable doubt". Always difficult In a he said, she said situation with no Independent witness's.

Post by **spot** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:36 pm

oscar;1366885 wrote: Apparently the maid got caught out In her lies.
That may perhaps be why the smeghead attorney backed out of the courtroom. It has nothing to do with my question. She can have been entirely credible with no record of lying, that doesn't mean a jury can believe her "beyond reasonable doubt" on the basis of her testimony and nothing else. Nothing she physically did attempted to prevent the event, despite her obvious physical capability. Claiming to have uttered the word shouldn't be sufficient on its own to have a man jailed for rape.

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:39 pm

He didn't have a big enough tip.:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl