Spitzer's Indiscretion--and Spies

From CounterTerrorism Blog:

So - we have 1) an organization (ECV) that is undeniably international in character, with little about it that at least has been revealed publicly beyond a few names, a number of which are acknowledged to be false names; 2) a Client (Number 9) who by his own admission carried out illegal activities - making him vulnerable to blackmail by ECV; and 3) a client who likely has been privy to a great deal of sensitive and possibly classified information on Terrorism and US and allied CounterTerrorism.

Overall, this is strongly suggestive of the architecture of an espionage organization and a recipe for disaster. It is also an organizational profile that is a classic one in espionage circles, with historical examples being rife. CTB readers can be certain that, even though reporting on the investigation has declined somewhat in the public arena, the scramble behind the scenes to produce voluminous “Damage Assessments” is ongoing and consuming hundreds, if not thousands, of personnel hours at taxpayer expense.

Before concluding, there is an important reason to raise the questions herein. More than a few commentators on this subject have amply demonstrated their abject ignorance by raising the issue of “consensual” sex and “victimless” crime before the investigation has been completed. Even aside from the lasting effects of Governor Spitzer’s debacle on his wife and two daughters, the issue of the possibility of ECV being a front for an espionage organization headquartered who-knows-where points to the absurdity of the commentators’ claims.

Finally, we know of Client 9 and the near-term results of his exposure, but what of other clients - governors, state-level staffers, federal officials and staffers, law enforcement officials, and on and on?

Interesting possibilities. The blog mentions the NYPD's Counter-Terrorism unit, which is so extensive that it has members posted in London, and is headed by an ex-CIA deputy director.

Could have been disastrous pillow chat, no?