CREW's Melanie Sloan was on Rachel Maddow's show last night to talk about Senator David Vitter:

Yesterday, CREW filed a bar complaint against Senator David Vitter (R-LA) because of his criminal activity involving prostitutes.  Last night, the Times-Picayune in New Orleans reported on our complaint, noting Vitter's 2007 speech admitting to "a very serious sin." Actually, that "sin" is probably criminal activity related to Vitter's own role in a prostitution ring and should warrant an investigation by the Louisiana authorities who oversee attorney disciplinary activity:

An ethics watchdog group in Washington, D.C. is asking Louisiana’s Office of Disciplinary counsel to investigate whether Sen. David Vitter, R-La., should be disciplined for his 2007 admission of a “very serious sin in my past” related to his phone number appearing on a list compiled by a Washington prostitution ring.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington said its request is related to Vitter’s recent request for a Justice Department investigation into ACORN, the community activist group with headquarters in New Orleans. Staffers in at least four ACORN offices around the country have been caught in a video sting giving advice to a couple pretending to be a prostitute and pimp looking for tax breaks and other assistance.

“Sen. Vitter’s zeal to see ACORN criminally investigated for offering advice in setting up a prostitution ring reminded me he has yet to be held accountable for his own role in a prostitution ring,” said Melanie Sloan, CREW’s executive director. “While ACORN’s conduct is indefensible, so is Sen. Vitter’s and what is good for the goose is good for the gander.”

Sloan asked the state Office of Disciplinary Counsel to investigate whether Vitter violated the state’s rule of professional conduct that says it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to “commit a criminal act especially one that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honestly, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects.”

Charles Plattsmier, chief deputy counsel for the Office of Discplinary Counsel, said by Supreme Court rules he can't say anything about a complaint filed with the office, even to confirm or deny that one has been submitted.

Via a post titled "Hooker Hypocrisy?" at the "Mouth of the Potomac," we get the response from Senator Vitter to CREW's bar complaint against him:

Vitter spokesman Joel DiGardo says CREW is just trying to take the spotlight off ACORN and Democrats.

“It’s no surprise that CREW, an organization run by a former Democratic Senate staffer, is trying to do anything possible to shift the light off the fact that ACORN has stood hand in hand with the Democratic Party for a long time as it misused taxpayer dollars,” DiGardo said.

That response comes as no surprise to us. But, we actually agree on something here. We DO want to change the focus and direct it at Senator Vitter's criminal behavior with prostitutes. Here's the response from Melanie Sloan:

Sen. Vitter is right on one count: CREW does want to shift focus. This so-called “family values” politician wants the public to ignore his record of criminal sexual encounters with prostitutes while he feigns outrage over ACORN’s admitted misdeeds (and my resume). Even in Washington, this level of hypocrisy is unparalleled – and that’s saying something.

That is saying something.

Today, CREW filed a bar complaint with the Louisiana Office of Disciplinary Counsel against Senator David Vitter (R-LA) for violating Louisiana’s rules of professional conduct for lawyers.

In 2007, it was revealed that Sen. Vitter’s telephone number was included in the so-called “D.C. Madam,” Deborah Jeane Palfrey’s, list of client telephone numbers. The senator confirmed he had sought Ms. Palfrey’s services, saying in a statement, “this was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible.” Two other women also alleged Sen. Vitter had engaged the services of prostitutes. Jeanette Maier, the “Canal Street Madam,” claimed Sen. Vitter visited the New Orleans brothel several times in the mid-1990s. In addition, a woman who worked as a prostitute under the name of Wendy Cortez said Sen. Vitter was a regular client of hers between July and November 1999.

Under D.C. and Louisiana law, it is a crime to solicit for prostitution. CREW filed a complaint against Sen. Vitter with the Senate Ethics Committee, which, to no one's surprise, dismissed the matter without action in September 2008.

Louisiana Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(b) provides it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to “commit a criminal act especially one that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects.” By repeatedly committing the crime of soliciting for prostitution, Sen. Vitter violated the rules of professional conduct for lawyers and should be investigated and disciplined for his misconduct.

When we sent the complaint, CREW's executive director Melanie Sloan said:

Sen. Vitter’s zeal to see ACORN criminally investigated for offering advice in setting up a prostitution ring reminded me he has yet to be held accountable for his own role in a prostitution ring. While ACORN’s conduct is indefensible, so is Sen. Vitter’s and what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

13 former prostitutes were forced to testify at the trial of the DC Madam, who committed suicide shortly after her conviction. Sloan noted that one, a former Navy supply officer and Naval Academy instructor, lost her job because the Navy requires those who serve “to adhere to a standard of conduct that reflects the Navy’s values of honor, courage and commitment.”

Melanie Sloan added this statement:

It is a shame the Senate has no such standard of conduct. It will be interesting to see what sort of standard the Louisiana Disciplinary Board chooses to apply.

The bar complaint and exhibits can be found here.

Senator David Vitter is in the news again.  He's facing another investigation involving his behavior.  This time, it's the Transportation Security Administration doing the investigating -- and Vitter's actions at Dulles Airport are the subject of that investigation.  It sounds like this is more that the "gossip" Vitter claims it to be:

The Transportation Security Administration is reviewing a report that Sen. David Vitter, R-La., set off a security alarm when he opened a gate door in his rush to catch a flight last week at Washington Dulles International Airport.

In a statement, Vitter said he accidentally went through a wrong door at the gate leading to the United Airlines plane he was trying to board.

A Roll Call newspaper report based on an anonymous tipster says Vitter had a heated exchange with an airline worker and then left the scene when the worker left to call security. Vitter said the report mischaracterized his conversation with the employee.

"I did have a conversation with an airline employee, but it was certainly not like this silly gossip column made it out to be," Vitter said. He said he was trying to get home.

TSA spokeswoman Lauren Gaches wouldn't comment Thursday on the nature of the alleged incident under review.

"It has to be looked into first," she said.

United spokeswoman Robin Urbanski did not specifically identify Vitter, but said that "somebody attempted to open a door that was closed," which set off an alarm. The airline contacted airport authorities, she said.

CREW released this statement after we got the news that the FEC Commissioners deadlocked 

Today’s decision indicates the FEC has finally recognized that at least in some cases, members of Congress should not be allowed to use campaign funds to bail them out of legal problems of their own making. This breaks with the FEC’s pattern of granting members permission to pay lawyers with campaign funds nearly every time the issue has been raised. It remains to be seen whether this is a one-time decision or whether the FEC really is breaking with its past precedents.

Here's how the Times-Picayune described the FEC proceedings:

Dividing along partisan lines, the Federal Election Commission couldn't agree Thursday on whether Sen. David Vitter, R-La., can use campaign money to pay all the legal costs related to his involvement in a Washington escort service scandal.

In a 3-3 vote, with all three Republicans voting yes and all three Democrats no, the commission deadlocked on whether Vitter could use campaign money to pay more than $160,000 in legal fees accrued in monitoring the federal criminal case against Deborah Jeane Palfrey, the so-called "D.C. Madam," and quashing her defense team's subpoenas of the senator. A majority vote is required for passage of a resolution.

This staff decision makes sense to us.  Vitter's involvement with the D.C. Madam had nothing to do with his status as a federal candidate.  His campaign account shouldn't be a legal slush fund.  We hope the FEC upholds the staff recommendation:

In asking for permission to use campaign money for legal expenses, Vitter's attorneys said that he would not have been subpoenaed by the Palfrey defense were it not for his status as a U.S. senator.

The commission's lawyers said that "even assuming that to be true, " it would not be enough to justify use of campaign money to pay the $85,322 in legal fees to quash the Palfrey subpoenas and another $75,213 for lawyers to monitor the Palfrey legal proceedings. Vitter's attorneys said that the senator already has spent $70,000 of his own money to cover the legal bills, which amounted to more than $200,000.

"Here Sen. Vitter's need for legal representation to quash Ms. Palfrey's subpoenas stemmed from his role as a potential witness in Ms. Palfrey's trial and was not related to information known to or acquired by Sen. Vitter during the course of his candidacy or in the performance of his duties as a U.S. senator, " the FEC attorneys wrote. "Moreover, Sen. Vitter's obligation as a witness to comply with a valid subpoena would exist irrespective of Sen. Vitter's campaign or duties as a U.S. senator."

In the end, Palfrey didn't call Vitter as a witness, although the federal judge overseeing the case said there was no legal impediment to her doing so.

There haven't been many surprises when it comes to the scandal involving Senator David Vitter and his interaction with prostitutes.   There have been no legal or ethical ramifications for the Louisiana Senator.  The "toothless" Senate Ethics Committee exonerated him.  Now, he's gaming the system even more.  Vitter intends to use campaign funds to pay his legal fees:

U.S. Sen. David Vitter will ask the Federal Election Commission today whether he can use campaign funds to pay for the $137,177 in legal fees he incurred from his involvement in the case of a woman convicted of running a high-priced Washington prostitution ring.

The Louisiana Republican acknowledged in July 2007 that his phone number appeared on the client list of the woman dubbed “the D.C. Madam.” Deborah Jeane Palfrey was convicted in federal court in April of money laundering, mail fraud and conspiracy.

In a letter to the FEC, an attorney for Vitter says his client incurred the legal expenses in monitoring the Palfrey trial and quashing the subpoenas issued to him.

Vitter also had to hire attorneys to defend himself to the Senate Ethics Committee because of a complaint filed by the government watchdog group Citizens For Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. The complaint was dismissed by the committee, which noted that Vitter was not charged with a crime and the incidents occurred when he was a House member.

In a post titled, "Senate Ethics: Another DC Oxymoron," the Mouth of the Potomac blasted the complete exoneration of David Vitter:

The toothless Senate Ethics Committee lived up to its reputation today, declining to investigate the antics of admitted john Sen. David Vitter (R-La.).

Vitter was an admitted client of the escort service run by Deborah Jeane Palfrey, who committed suicide earlier this month rather than going to prison.

Now the less-than-heroic souls on the Senate Ethics Committee probably thought they could slide its suspect decision without anyone noticing. Tough luck though: the legal watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington caught them and sent out an angry statement:

“The Senate Ethics Committee has once again done what it does best: nothing,” said CREW Deputy Director Naomi Seligman.

The letter CREW received from the Senate Ethics Committee is in the post below. Here's our statement:

The Senate Ethics Committee has once again done what it does best: nothing.

Following its standard operating procedure, the Committee announced today that it has dismissed CREW’s complaint against Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) without prejudice. As a result, we will never know whether Sen. Vitter violated Senate Rules by soliciting for prostitution.

While Deborah Jeane Palfrey, who committed suicide last week, was found guilty of operating a prostitution ring, Sen. Vitter has not been held accountable for his activities. He walks away without even a slap on the wrist.