Predictably, the usual suspects are recycling a familiar story about Senator David Vitter’s past mistakes. This time involves an interview with Wendy Ellis- who is also known as Wendy Cortez. The latter name is apparently an alias, a name that she worked under during her years as a prostitute, and her birth name was Wendy Yow (a person with multiple aliases can always be trusted to tell the truth).
The latest scandal appears to be based on nothing more than her words in an interview found here.
Her latest claim is that she and Vitter had a child together.
Certain aspects of the piece are questionable, most notably the alleged “love child” itself:
It is very important to her, and very important to me, that the identity of the child remain anonymous and I realize that it would be the one foolproof way to corroborate her story but I believe it can be corroborated by other means than putting the child’s well being at risk. I do know more about the adoption and I personally believe the information she provided in this interview to be true.
By the author’s own admission, the most important piece of the puzzle is missing. The child’s identity is being kept under wraps in the name of looking out for the child’s well- being. So Wendy Ellis and David Vitter had a child together- you just can’t see the child. And don’t ask about the usual evidence required to prove such claims. Ya know, like paternity tests.
If there is a child, how does Ellis know that Vitter is the father? Well, according to her (in one of the interview videos), Vitter was the only man she was sexually involved with at the time. Really? So she was a prostitute who was also monogamous… with a married man?
Apparently, Ellis has told contradictory stories about the nature of her alleged relationship with Vitter. In this segment of the interview, she is asked about a Times Picayune article where she is quoted describing Vitter as a “customer,” and in the referenced article she apparently denied any romantic relationship.
The Times Pic wrote it, but now she denies having said it.
Also, the article indicates that Hustler magazine, who originally broke the story of the D.C. madam scandal, was pursuing a follow up and was seeking Ellis’s input, but suddenly backed away from the story.
Of course the obvious question is why she is coming forward with this story now. Aside from her failing health, speaking with her off camera, she explained to me that she was under an exclusivity contract with Hustler up until a few months ago. Originally Hustler was considering doing a follow up story with her during this campaign cycle but she told me they suddenly changed their mind and terminated their relationship with her. She said she was told by an employee at Hustler that Larry Flynt had no interest in generating negative press about Vitter any longer.
Larry Flynt has never been one to pass on a good scandal. He unearthed the D.C. Madam Scandal in 2007, and basically ended Bob Livingston’s career by unearthing an affair that he had. Apparently, Flynt changed his mind suddenly about pursuing this latest alleged Vitter scandal.
Why would he back away from promoting Ellis’s latest claims? Could it be that he found inconsistencies in her story or that certain aspects of it don’t seem to hold water?
At the time of this writing, the lack of some very important details make Ellis’s claims difficult to take at face value. Also problematic is the fact that they come a week before our next gubernatorial campaign.
Ellis could have come forward with this information at any time. The story surfacing right now makes it look less like a real story and more like the work of opposition research hacks.
I’m being careful here not to proclaim Vitter’s total innocence or dismiss it merely as a “liberal media attack.” I’ve done that before with another politician and ended up with egg on my face.
But at the time of this writing, a woman is making some very serious claims while lacking the most important pieces of evidence to prove her allegations.
What makes all of this truly tiresome is that Louisiana faces a litany of problems such as large, looming budget deficits and the Unfunded Accrued Liabilities in the state retirement system. These are serious issues, and the candidates need to be challenged on them. Instead, we’re hearing about hookers.