Thursday, August 24, 2006

Rudy's Former Press Aide Found Strangled

First Bernie Kerik, now this:

A former press aide to Mayor Rudy Giuliani was found naked and strangled in a bed inside a cousin's million-dollar Greenwich Village apartment, law enforcement sources said yesterday.

Martín Barreto - a respected public relations guru who lived a luxurious lifestyle with high-powered clients in New York and Miami - was discovered Monday lying near a condom wrapper and safe-sex aids, a law enforcement source said.

Police investigators believe Barreto, 48, a childhood friend of Bianca Jagger, was killed by someone he knew - possibly an enraged ex-lover or a man he met while cruising the Internet for gay sex, sources said.

"We're all crushed because he couldn't hurt a fly," said Cristyne Nicholas, a former City Hall communications director. "He was just the sweetest, kindest, gentlest guy."

...

Detectives were investigating several theories and trying to find "an ex-boyfriend he had issues with," a police source said. "It's someone who tapped into his computer and had refused to understand that it was over."

Late Friday, Barreto told a doorman he was expecting a visitor and asked the doorman to let the man upstairs, said neighbors, who suspected the man was a callboy.

Several of Barreto's friends also said he had complained about being stalked by a former flame and obtained restraining orders several years ago against the man in New York and Miami. Barreto last spoke of the alleged stalker three years ago, his friends said.

"He was very afraid," his friend Joseph Gelosi said. "Martín was very sure that he was very dangerous."

Investigators seized a computer from the E. 10th St. apartment where Barreto was choked to death, and removed sheets in the hopes of finding DNA evidence. Cops said a condom appeared to be missing.

Cops found no sign that anything had been stolen or anyone had broken into the home.

"His larynx was crushed like an eggshell," a source said, adding the killer likely wrapped his arm around Barreto's neck, killing him with a wrestling hold.

Callboys, cruising the Internet for gay sex, strangled by an ex-lover or a prostitute - just another story about Republican family values.

Giuliani surrounded himself with some questionable people (starting with our old friend and nearly made man in the Mafia, Bernie Kerik) and some people who did questionable things (starting with Barreto having callboys over to the house.) And of course Giuliani himself engaged in lots of questionable behavior, from asking the pope for a special dispensation to marry his second cousin to asking the pope for a special dispensation to annul the marriage to his second cousin BECAUSE she was his second cousin and he wanted to marry his mistress, Donna Hanover. And then there was that ugly matter where he went to court to protect his right to take home and schtup ANOTHER mistress, Judi Nathan, while second wife Donna and his kids were down the hall in Gracie Mansion. And let's not forget how second wife Donna said she had wanted to save the marriage to Rudy but felt she couldn't because of his involvement with ANOTHER woman - his communications director, Cristyne Lategano-Nicholas (the one quoted in the above Daily News article.)

I dunno if any of this stuff actually hurts Saint Rudy (as my friend NYC Educator likes to call him) in the Republican primaries or the general election, but I have to tell you, Rudy's own life and the lives of those who worked for him sound an awful lot like a promo for a soap opera on ABC. Seriously, can you think of any other presidential contender who has had one major associate (a man he pushed to be "made" Director of Homeland Security) convicted of corruption charges and another major aide strangled in a bizarre sex crime? Or another presidential contender with as many ex-mistresses and infidelity allegations as Saint Rudy has?

I'm sure because he's Saint Rudy we won't hear anything about his alleged infidelities, his schtupping the mistress while his wife and kids were down the hall in Gracie Mansion, or his questionable personnel decisions (especially over Bernie Kerik.) On the other hand, the NY Times has no problem publishing 3,000 word front page articles about the Clintons that allege Bill is still seeking a little "recreation" outside of Chappaqua and spends some nights away from Hillary or wingnut fantasies about Hillary having Vince Foster killed and his body carried out in the middle of the night to a park across from the White House.

Ahh, our liberal media at work. Thank God the NY Daily News has no such compunctions over Saint Rudy - but that's because they love a tabloid story more than Rudy's mythology.

Comments:
Reminds me of the British Conservative junior minister a few years back. Found in a leather get up, orange in his mouth and plastic bag over his head.
I guess family values are for those others who really need discipline, not for conservative types.
 
reality, it strikes me that if this particular murder victim had been employed by your favorite liberal politico you would be foaming about the abuse of gays and the homophobic climate gays must endure in this time of conservative political power.

According to you Rudy surrounded himself with oddballs. That must mean Barreto, yet the only aspect of his character that isn't conventional is his sexuality. If he'd worked for Christine Quinn or Tom Duane I think you would express a far different attitude. But because he worked for Rudy, he's a bad gay.
 
To be fair, Rudy doesn't really push family values the way some other republicans do. I just wonder what will happen to Rudy's poll numbers within the GOP when some of the evangelicals find out about the three wives, numerous mistresses, and corrpution surrounding Rudy. perhaps it won't matter, although let's face it, Rudy's perosnal life is as big a mess as Bill Clinton's and the evengelicals mostly hated BC (as my wingnut father calls him) for his roving penis.
 
Nope, n_s, I don't think he's a "bad gay." I just want to point out that Rudy is the first presidential candiate to have one major associate convicted of corruption charges 9with another corrpution charge to come according to the NY Daily News) and another strangled in a sex crime.

Oh, and as for the conventionality of Mr. Barreto's sex life, I bet more than a few people would argue that having prostitutes come over to the house for sex (whether they are men or women) isn't so conventional. But I guess if you're open-minded enough to allow for criminal behavior in the house, more power to you.
 
reality, you wrote:

"I just want to point out that Rudy is the first presidential candiate to have one major associate convicted of corruption charges 9with another corrpution charge to come..."

Your raw bias surges through every time. There are many presidential candidates who've had associations with people convicted of various crimes.

We can start with Hillary Clinton and her colleagues at the Rose Law Firm.

Off the top of my head I can't recall a close associate of a presidential candidate murdered in a sex-related setting, but I'm sure I'll think of one in a while. Gary Condit, who is widely believed to have murdered Chandra Levy is one possibility.

Meanwhile, Rudy is a very weak presidential candidate. Perhaps his history is news to you but his personal life was closely followed by the NY media and is a secret to no one else. Thus if he seeks the Republican nomination, it will receive plenty of attention.

Your command of facts regarding every topic you have addressed so far is lacking.

Regarding Barreto's sex life -- as a gay man his sex life is unconventional. Hiring hookers is not unconventional. Perhaps not every male has enjoyed hired help, but that is hardly reason to call experience with a prostitute unconventional.

Based on your comment, I'd say you'd be surprised at the high percentage of men who've paid for sex.

That aside, you dodged my question about how you'd respond to the murder of a gay employee of Christine Quinn or Tom Duane. I'm sure you would characterize the situation in an entirely different manner from your assessment of Barreto.
 
I didn't dodge your question about Quinn or Duane. When one of their associates gets killed in a sex-related crime, I'll let you know.

Being a homosexual is unconventional but hiring a prostitute is conventional? I work in public schools. I would say 40% of the men who work in my school are gay. All of the men who work in my department other than myself and one other are also gay. When I attended grad school a good portion of the men in my education program were gay. I can't say what the stats are about hiring hookers, but I can say that being gay in New York City sure as hell ain't unconventional anymore judging by the number of gay men that I see every day.
 
reality, you wrote:

"...I can say that being gay in New York City sure as hell ain't unconventional anymore judging by the number of gay men that I see every day."

Your sample is statistically invalid.

At most 10% -- and I believe I'm shooting high -- of the male population in the US is gay.

If we are confining our discussion to the sexual orientation of New Yorkers, your estimate would be relevant. But we're not. We were discussing our whole society -- 300 million people -- and its conventions.
 
reality, you wrote:

"I'm sure because he's Saint Rudy we won't hear anything about his alleged infidelities, his schtupping the mistress while his wife and kids were down the hall in Gracie Mansion, or his questionable personnel decisions (especially over Bernie Kerik.)"

If there's no news coverage of these topics how do you know about them? Does Rudy call you to unburden himself?

Every one of these issues was covered in the press. The Post might have gone easy on him, but the Village Voice didn't, and that forced other print venues to add their own coverage. The NY Times might have held back a little on some of his off-hours romantic activities, but only until news of divorce was in the air.

The NY Times does not have a gossip page.

You wrote:
"On the other hand, the NY Times has no problem publishing 3,000 word front page articles about the Clintons that allege Bill is still seeking a little "recreation" outside of Chappaqua and spends some nights away from Hillary or wingnut fantasies about Hillary having Vince Foster killed and his body carried out in the middle of the night to a park across from the White House."

I think you are simply wrong about this. The Times reported on Clinton's infidelities when the women came forward and publicly accused him of various indiscretions -- Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Kathryn Wille and of course Monica Lewinsky, and others. But the Times did not sensationalize these situations.

Meanwhile, the NY Times Sunday magazine delved into the Vince Foster claims, but I remember one article that included photos of a number of obsessed anti-Clinton activists who were spreading various tales about Bill and Hill. The paper and the photos made it very clear these accusers were screwballs. In other words, the paper acted in defense of Clinton. He was not vilified by the Times.

That aside, Rudy has never enjoyed sainthood in the eyes of the press. His faltering image was reborn after 9/11 and he has benefited ever since. But up till then he was lashed daily in the news.

New York turned around during his administration. That wasn't the result of simple good luck. He was doing some things right.

But he is an Italian Catholic, thrice-married contentious firebrand leader. His ethnicity, religion and multiple marriages are barriers to the White House and the Republican Party knows it.

He's a very long shot for the nomination. John McCain has a far better chance.
 
You say I am wrong when I write that the NY Times ran a 3,000 word front page story about the Clintons "that alleges Bill is still seeking a little 'recreation' outside of Chappaqua and spends some nights away from Hillary"

On May 23, 2006, the NY Times ran a gossipy 3,000 word front page story by Patrick Healy about the Clintons. The sole purpose of the article was to titillate readers with details of the Clintons' private lives and point out that a) Clinton doesn't spend every night home with his wife (Healy actually counts the number of nights they spend together, on average, per month!!!) b) Clinton has a woman "friend" he spends some time with.

That's a fact.
 
reality, you wrote:

You say I am wrong when I write that the NY Times ran a 3,000 word front page story about the Clintons "that alleges Bill is still seeking a little 'recreation' outside of Chappaqua and spends some nights away from Hillary"

You should read the article again. It's interesting that you get so many easily verifiable facts wrong. According to the NT Times archives, the article is 1,992 words, not 3,000. Small point, but, as usual, you got it wrong.

You wrote:

"On May 23, 2006, the NY Times ran a gossipy 3,000 word front page story by Patrick Healy about the Clintons."

The article was quite sensitive and if you thought it was gossipy, you don't know gossip.

You wrote:
"The sole purpose of the article was to titillate readers with details of the Clintons' private lives..."

The article was completely devoid of details of the Clinton's private lives.

You wrote:

"...and point out that a) Clinton doesn't spend every night home with his wife (Healy actually counts the number of nights they spend together, on average, per month!!!)..."

So what? The reporter had to substantiate the basis for the article.

You wrote:
"... b) Clinton has a woman "friend" he spends some time with."

You made that up. Monica Lewinsky was mentioned as was Barbara Stronach who was part of a dinner party. Since you don't know anything about the Stronachs, I'll fill you in.

Frank Stronach, probably Barbara's father, was the head of Magna International, a Canadian car-parts manufacturer. In addition, the Stronachs have extensive holdings in the horse-racing industry.

Perhaps they have a relationship, but Healy treated the possibility with such delicacy as to leave readers thinking anything between them is chaste.

The link to the article follows:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/23/nyregion/23clintons.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5088&en=9147b84160d6cfb4&ex=1306036800&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
 
The link to the Clinton article in the NY Times follows:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/23/nyregion/23clintons.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5088&en=9147b84160d6cfb4&ex=1306036800&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
 
You know what, n_s? I agree with you. The front page article about the Clinton's marriage and sleeping habits was NOT run in order to titillate readers. I now look forward to front page Healy articles about the marriages and sleeping habits of the following potential presidential candidates: George Allen, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Saint Rudy, George Pataki, Newt Gingrich, Chuck Hagel, John Edwards, General Clark, Mark Warner, Joe Biden, Evan Bayh, and good old Al Gore. Should be a helluva series.
 
reality, you wrote:

"I now look forward to front page Healy articles about the marriages and sleeping habits of the following potential presidential candidates: George Allen, John McCain, Mitt Romney...Should be a helluva series."

Great series? Why? Readers will die of boredom. I guess you don't understand the Healy article about Clinton was a puff piece supporting his life and Hillary's pending candidacy.
 
I didn't see it that way, n_s, but let's agree to disagree.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?