Patterico's Pontifications


Prostitute Says Allegations Against Menendez Made Up, Says Washington Post. Just One Little Problem . . .

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 9:59 pm

. . . the Post got the wrong prostitute.

The Washington Post mistook one prostitute for another Monday in a report that initially seemed to debunk a November 2012 Daily Caller exposé of New Jersey Democratic Senator Bob Menendez.

While the Post said it had an affidavit from a woman in the Dominican Republic admitting she fabricated claims Menendez paid her for sex, that woman was not one of the two prostitutes TheDC interviewed for a Nov. 1 report.

Did they not ask the Caller which prostitute the Caller had relied on?

Mmm, that’s good journalism!

UPDATE: Tucker Carlson says the WaPo lied about asking him for comment.

Even better journalism!

Thanks to narciso.

UPDATE x2: This appears to be the affidavit relied on by the Washington Post. It’s in Spanish, but I don’t see anything there about the Daily Caller.

57 Responses to “Prostitute Says Allegations Against Menendez Made Up, Says Washington Post. Just One Little Problem . . .”

  1. D’oh!

    Patterico (9c670f)

  2. Ah, but the article will likely live on, uncorrected for a while. Now, THAT is modern ‘journalism.’ Writing that in posterity will seem accurate, unless you know to look further into the future to find the correction.

    Creating the story, and perhaps history, seems to be the modern goal. Not finding the story. Not reporting the story. Creating it.

    JohnInMA (0d6af8)

  3. whoopsies!

    must be lookin bad for the good senator

    EPWJ (1ea63e)

  4. Yeah, Menendez wasn’t doing hookers when he was hanging out at his rich donor’s villa at the Casa de Campo resort.

    “Good girls go to heaven, bad girls go to Casa de Campo in a Mercedes”

    Prostitution, at least in the DR, can be divided into four general categories…

    Of course, you just have to look at Menendez to realize he doesn’t need to pay for it. I’m sure he’d hang out the resort bar in his body-hugging sleeveless Underarmour t-shirt so he could impress the ladies with his sixpack abs, chiseled pecks, and massive guns. And then nature would just run its course.

    Steve57 (60a887)

  5. Pecs, not pecks.

    Steve57 (60a887)

  6. Buffahs and layahs. Beyond hilarious.

    Ed from SFV (bc726e)

  7. It’s tough to tell the hookers without a program, especially for the Capital “J” Journalists.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  8. You’d think that one set of whores would recognize another.

    The callous Dana (3e4784)

  9. annnd Dana wins the thread

    EPWJ (1ea63e)

  10. And we all know how trustworthy and honest hookers are? Don’t we?

    They would never lie to the police about a crime taking place. Would they?

    phttt. Give me a thousand dollars and I’ll get another story for you. toot suite.

    Jcw46 (f33482)

  11. Jew46

    yeah hookers were lying when the secret service was partying it up

    hookers were lying when Vitter’s name was on a list……

    yeah lets believe them when its convienent

    EPWJ (1ea63e)

  12. the propaganda sluts on the cnn aren’t keeping them honest

    they’re just mindlessly repeating the wapo propaganda

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  13. Nt surprising, this was one of the Post’s lead Plame proppers, back in the day.

    narciso (3fec35)

  14. it’s just they only have a few minutes for news before they have to obsess about the sleazy mormon murder thing nobody cares about

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  15. oh. some random fill-in propaganda slut just reported a “bizarre turn” in the story and cited the dailer caller report

    carol the cackling news crone is off doing some fluffy baseball thing today

    now propaganda bimbo wants to know “does any of this even matter?”

    i dunno sweetie don’t know what to tell you

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  16. And CNN were the first to investigate John Edwards right, no, shocker.

    narciso (3fec35)

  17. It seems that Senator Menendez (D-NJ) and Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, did not have sexual relations with that women, Miss de los Santos Santana.

    ropelight (3ee6cf)

  18. Check the updates. This story is just heating up, folks.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  19. UPDATE: Tucker Carlson says the WaPo lied about asking him for comment.

    Even better journalism!

    Thanks to narciso.

    UPDATE x2: This appears to be the affidavit relied on by the Washington Post. It’s in Spanish, but I don’t see anything there about the Daily Caller.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  20. The Dems are really working this one behind the scenes even more vigorously than I would have thought. Always remember that in addition to Menendez’ hookers, the importance of this story is really about the senator’s continuing poor judgement and poor ethics, seriously falsified travel records, influence for sale, and a “friendship” which may have seriously enabled medicare/medicaid fraud on the American taxpayers.

    elissa (660edb)

  21. C’mon Elissa. It is common knowledge that Optometrists are skilled in port security.

    JD (4f721c)

  22. The Update is stunning. I wonder how the professors at the Columbia School of Journalism will excuse that (although I know they will)?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  23. Why is everyone wasting their time with this story ?
    The Washington Post needs to invest its energy and resources into investigating the real scandal by a sitting Senator—when that Marco Rubio person took a swig of water. From a bottle. On television.

    Elephant Stone (f2d669)

  24. it’s possible that the wapo has discovered a dominican hooker what didn’t bonk our corpulent jersey trash senator friend for money

    this is news of a sort i guess

    btw cnn propaganda slut ashles banfield has decided to drop the Daily Caller part of the story and just regurgitate the wapo propaganda like the storyline was earlier

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  25. Remember for them, ‘1984’ is a user’s guide, not a warning,

    narciso (3fec35)

  26. So, to clarify ….
    WaPo “debunked” a story about hooker A and hooker B’s claims, by interviewing hooker C, who claims she never said what hookers A and B said.
    Hooker C references info that did not come to light until months later than the interviews in her affidavit.
    WaPo affidavit never mentions Daily Caller.
    WaPo then lies about reaching out to Daily Caller, by claiming they would not comment, when story was published 30 min before they sent email.
    And WaPo tells willing hack Dylan Byers that they stand behind their reporting.

    JD (4f721c)

  27. DRJ #24: I see this kind of Ethical Twister in academia all the time, ma’am. My best guess? On a basic, primal level, progressives believe that they are noble and correct and good. Thus, whoever disagrees with them must be ignoble, incorrect, and not-good. So…when they make mistakes, it is from a noble perspective. It’s okay. When opponents make mistakes, it is inexcusable.

    I mean, if you look at how people carried on about Gitmo, for example, prior to BHO coronation…and their responses now. Wow! I had a colleague—a nice man—tell me it was no big deal that several people died at Benghazi. “Embassies get overrun; people die. It’s sad but not a big deal.” I wanted to ask him how he felt about burglaries in hotels during the 1970s—they happen, too (except no one died). But that’s different.

    So they genuinely don’t see it as hypocrisy. They remind me of the Soviet era blathering about “The New Man.”

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  28. Can’t they at least arrest Bob Menendez for screwing the country on the taxpayers’ dime ?

    The only reason he didn’t resort to advertising his illicit services on craigslist is because he already has franking priviliges as a sitting member of the Senate.

    Elephant Stone (f2d669)

  29. The part you’re all overlooking is that part where the escorts unearthed by WaPo are saying they were paid to frame Menendez.

    And the part where the FBI investigated and found no evidence to support Daily Caller’s claims.

    Hey, maybe the Daily Caller found a prostitute who really did have relations with Menendez. But it doesn’t look plausible right now.

    Kman (5576bf)

  30. The real story here is that Menendez is associated with so many hookers they can’t keep them straight.

    Kman — what does Menendez’ taint taste like? Roses?

    Rob Crawford (6c262f)

  31. I am SHOCKED that Kmart showed up to defend the WaPo’s dishonest reporting. SHOCKED.

    JD (4f721c)

  32. They would never lie to the police about a crime taking place. Would they?

    What crime? It’s legal in the Dominican Republic.

    THEY’RE talking about legal acts they committed; the Senator is lying about his accepting bribes in the form of their services and other considerations.

    Rob Crawford (6c262f)

  33. The WaPo just ended their ombudsman position.

    JD (b63a52)

  34. “The part you’re all overlooking is that part where the escorts unearthed by WaPo are saying they were paid to frame Menendez.”

    Kman – Were they paid after the story broke?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  35. “And the part where the FBI investigated and found no evidence to support Daily Caller’s claims.”

    Kman – What you are overlooking is that claim was made by the WaPo based on anonymous sources at the FBI, not put out in a press release by the FBI.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  36. If Kman claims to have knowledge about the protocol for dealing with underage hookers, we should probably at least give him the benefit of the doubt on that.

    Elephant Stone (f2d669)

  37. Menendez = Liberal
    Daily Caller = Conservative.

    Washington Post, needs to discredit the messenger as it buys time. So many excuses need to be made before Menendez is force to resign and go to work for John Corzine.

    Gus (694db4)

  38. Kman, I’m sure Menendez was just going to the DR for the golf.

    I totally believe that.

    Just like if he jetted off to Bangkok a dozen or so times because he said he really likes the museums and the floating market, I’d totally believe that, too.

    You only really find good golf or culture in third world countries full of destitute women.

    In Dominican Republic seaside village, a virtual supermarket of sex Read more here:

    BOCA CHICA, Dominican Republic — By day, Italian tourists pack the beach of this Caribbean seafront village. By night, prostitutes fill its streets.

    “Prostitution is everywhere here; on the beach, in the bars, in the clubs,” said Antonio Guzman, 36, a hustler who has worked the beach for 15 years and regularly connects tourists with prostitutes. “This place runs on it.”

    Across this nation of 10 million, similar scenes play out — from small bars and hotels where tourists pay $40 for a half hour with a woman to packaged sex tourism vacations costing upward of $4,000 for a three-night, all-inclusive stay.

    Long before explosive allegations emerged claiming Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., and a political contributor flew to the country for wild parties with several prostitutes, the Dominican Republic had cemented its reputation as a hub for sex tourism. Menendez has denied the allegations, calling them a political smear campaign.

    By no means is sex tourism solely the domain of the Dominican Republic. Countries from Costa Rica and Brazil to Thailand and Cambodia have massive industries. But the Dominican Republic’s proximity to the United States — less than two hours from Miami by plane — and Europe, coupled with its cheap travel packages, have made it a preferred spot.

    Read more here:

    It’s totally absurd to believe Menendez would have engaged the services of hookers in the sex tourism hub of the Caribbean. Absurd, I tell you, that middle-aged men would travel there for that purpose.

    I also have zero suspicions about what Chuck Wrangel was doing all those decades at his undeclared villa in Punta Cana, DR.

    Steve57 (60a887)

  39. I forgot the ellipses in that quote from the Miami Herald; some paragraphs were eliminated from that quote. Go to the link.

    Steve57 (60a887)

  40. LOL!!!!!!!

    Rodney King's Spirit (951136)

  41. I saw this story in the New York Post this morning:

    It says posted: 1:08 AM, March 5, 2013 and Last Updated: 8:47 AM, March 5, 2013.

    The story does basically rely on the Washington Post.

    It is not correct that to say that the Washington Post confuses one prostitute for another. There were two prostitutes on camera, and neither one of them was called Nexis de Los Santos Santana, according to the Daily Caller.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)


    The woman, who was not present when her affidavit was revealed at a press conference by an attorney in the Dominican Republic Monday, said her performance last year was arranged by a Dominican lawyer who had her rehearse statements and promised to pay her well.

    Early Tuesday the Daily Caller said the woman who said she was lying was not one of the women featured in their original report. However, the attorney who presented the affidavit Monday identified the woman to reporters in attendance as the female wearing a yellow shirt in a video on the Daily Caller website.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  43. However?

    Any actual attorney authorized to practice in the Dominican Republic is more trustworthy than the Daily Caller?

    For starters, Martosko suggests that the Post is confused, because the woman who gave the affidavit identified herself as 23-year-old Nexis de los Santos Santana, but the women they interviewed were 24 and both had different names.

    Because a woman who is being paid to lie about having sex with a United States Senator would definitely not lie about her name and age while doing so? (The Daily Caller story does not claim the women proved their identities to them.)

    The Daily Caller also says that the woman claims she was paid to implicate a Dominican lawyer named Vinicio Castillo Semán, but that Seman was not mentioned in the DC interview. However, Seman was implicated in another written testimonial from an unidentified prostitute, so that doesn’t necessarily mean the Post story is wrong or that de los Santos is lying. She could have implicated him to others; just not The Daily Caller.

    But then the article points out something that indicates the woman is lying in the affidavit:

    In the biggest strike against the Post story, Martosko says that de los Santos claimed in her sworn affidavit to being “surreptitiously taped,” after refusing to give consent, but in the video of the Daily Caller interview she is “wearing an earpiece and answering questions.” They also say that both women in the DC videos knew the camera was present (since it was a webcam interview) and consented to taping. The Miami Herald, doing additional reporting, adds that de los Santos claims she did not give consent to being videotaped.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  44. So now let’S look at the Miami Herald story:

    Galván [the lawyer this week who produced the affidavit] said he was asked to find women to record videos. He turned to de los Santos, who was supposed to ask a friend to also record a video. They met at Jumbo, an upscale grocery and department store in La Romana, according to the testimony.

    De los Santos was supposed to pose as a female “companion” of Melgen at his house in Casa de Campo, an exclusive tourism development outside of La Romana, according to her testimony.

    “He claimed he would pay her $500, but only paid $100,” Galván said in his testimony.

    De los Santos said she never consented to record the video and that it was recorded with a hidden camera. However, in The Daily Caller video, in which she is allegedly the woman wearing yellow whose face is blurred out, she appears wearing an earpiece and answering questions.

    Contacted briefly by phone Monday evening, Figueroa described allegations that he orchestrated the plan as “totally false.”

    “It was a case that I handled for these women and faithfully represented them for what they said,” he said.

    Figueroa said that it has been months since he has had contact with any of the women who appeared in the videos and that he no longer represented them. “These are lies by Galván,” Figueroa said. “What he is saying is a lie.”

    Read more here:

    It’s not clear if Figueroa is saying it is a different woman. But he can’t. Nobody has seen the woman who filed the affidavit, and maybe no one knows anybody’s real name.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  45. It’s totally absurd to believe Menendez would have engaged the services of hookers in the sex tourism hub of the Caribbean. Absurd, I tell you, that middle-aged men would travel there for that purpose.

    I also have zero suspicions about what Chuck Wrangel was doing all those decades at his undeclared villa in Punta Cana, DR.

    Comment by Steve57 (60a887) — 3/5/2013 @ 10:33 am

    Hi Steve,

    Prostitution is legal pretty much everywhere outside the USA. I wouldn’t draw any judgement based on his destination. People on the East Coast go to the Caribbean more than the West or Midwest do, but that’s a function of geography and flight times.

    I know that I’m an outlier here, but I’m more concerned with his Medicare corruption problem than I am about lying hookers.

    carlitos (49ef9f)

  46. sex tourism probably sounds like a whole lot more fun than it actually is

    like ziplining

    which is terrifying and plus also it chafes

    happyfeet (4bf7c2)

  47. carlitos, I spent 20 years in the Navy. Trust me when I say your comments about how prostitution is pretty much legal outside the US (When did Nevada secede?) doesn’t come as news to me.

    It’s just that I tend to find it somewhat suspicious when someone “forgets” to declare travel expenses to or the fact they own a villa in a place famous for it.

    Why, it’s almost like they don’t want people to know where they’ve been spending their time.

    And no you’re not an outlier. But the fact is it’s going to a lot harder to prove corruption than that he was doing hookers.

    As Robert Stacy McCain observed in his post Billion With a ‘B’: Did Menendez Provide Special Favors to HookerGate Donor?:

    Did Melgen’s carefully nutured relationship with Menendez therefore give him a special opportunity? The questions multiply and it’s often difficult in such situations to prove that this quid over here is connected to that quo over there by a pro, if you see what I’m saying.

    Back during the Lewinsky scandal, remember, the president’s lawyer buddy Vernon Jordan made an extraordinary effort to help Monica get a job with New York-based Revlon (a firm headed by a Clinton donor) and then arranged for Monica to sign an affidavit stating that she couldn’t testify in the Paula Jones lawsuit because, well, she was moving from D.C. to New York for her new job at Revlon.

    The blindingly obvious truth is that this was obstruction of justice and suborning of perjury as part of a corrupt effort to deprive Paula Jones of relevant testimony in her civil-rights lawsuit against Clinton, but actually proving the ”pro” part of the quid pro quo — helping Monica get this job from a campaign contributor in exchange for having her sign this false affidavit denying a sexual relationship with her presidential boyfriend — was impossible, so long as everybody involved was willing to lie about it, as they most certainly were.

    Or think about Watergate: If it hadn’t been for the White House tapes, Nixon might have gotten away with that cover-up, letting some minor figures take the fall for the “Plumbers” operation and using plausible deniability to conceal any direct presidential knowledge.

    Unless either Melgen or Menendez was stupid enough to put in writing that the the Senator was willing to do favors for the doctor in exchange for massive donations and off-the-record trips to the DR, they’ll never prove there was a connection between Menendez’s interventions/legistlation and Melgen’s cash.

    Two of Menendez’s donors are already doing time. Benedetto and Joseph Bigica of Hoboken NJ conspired to act as or get straw contributors to contribute more than the maximum amount of campaign contributions to the Senator.

    I have no idea what favors Menendez did the Bigicas for the money (let’s not play stupid and pretend these two donors expected nothing in return, they just decided to break the law for the hell of it). But Menendez simply postured as the “victim” of fraud.

    Unless there’s something illegal about Melgen’s contributions then nobody’s going to jail over the “coincidence” that Menendez intervened on Melgen’s behalf and Melgen just happened to be giving Menendez all kinds of bennies as well as support both financial and in-kind.

    Steve57 (60a887)

  48. Steve, don’t forget that it is illegal for a U.S. citizen to travel to a foreign country for the express or incidental purpose of engaging the services of a sex-worker who is less than 18-years of age, and many are prosecuted for it by U.S. Atty’s.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

  49. narciso, that’s about what I expected. It’s exactly what someone like Menendez would arrange to counter the story.

    askeptic, I didn’t forget that. That’s why I was telling carlitos that while the corruption aspect is more important, it’s much harder to prove. Basically you’d have to get Menendez to admit he did favors for Melgen in exchange for money (I don’t think it’d be enough to get Melgen to say he paid Menendez for favors as Menendez would just claim he was an unwitting victim as with the Bigica brothers). If everyone is willing to lie and nobody wrote anything down or said then they walk away.

    The hooker angle is less important, but no doubt easier to prove if you can find he witnesses before the powers that be in the DR disappear them. Menendez would no doubt do what Clinton did and smear them to know end (trailer park trash). But there’d be receipts, flight logs, all sorts of other evidence I’m sure.

    It’s sort of like getting Capone only for tax evasion, but what the hey. I’d take it.

    Steve57 (60a887)

  50. I hear Big-Al’s old cell on Alcatraz is available.

    askeptic (b8ab92)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 2.3146 secs.