"Short answer: probably not."
Corn gives a good example at how difficult researching phone numbers can be:
July 12, 2007
DC Madam Records Lead to...Pat Moynihan?
Was Senator Pat Moynihan, the Democratic statesman from New York state who died in 2003, a client of the DC Madam?
Short answer: probably not. But some conservative bloggers are chortling over this possibility--or the possibility that a Moynihan aide was a client--because one of the two unidentified Senate phone numbers that I dug out of Deborah Jeane Palfrey's phone records (and posted yesterday) has been linked to Moynihan's office.
Several readers (and others) did a search of Google Groups for the number and came across a March 1999 New Jersey environmental newsletter that said:
The Ocean Dumping act states that dumping in the water is the last resort, all other alternatives must be exhausted. The bad precedent established by the actions of these New England agencies threatens all national waters. Senator Daniel Patrick Monyhian has joined the fight. In a scathing letter to Army Corps of Engineers' Chief of the Regulatory Branch, Joe Seebode, Monyhian wrote, "I believe that (the Corps) has violated the spirit of the law by combining the permits. The Senator has also asked for a detailed explanation from the Corps regarding the criteria used to dump material at a site not formally designated under the law. To commend Senator Moynihan call (202) 224-9557.
That's the second of the unidentified Senate numbers. ...
This shows how tough it can be to pin a number to a person. As one Capitol Hill aide told me, "I work in an office pod with several other people. We all have access to the same phone lines. One of my fellow workers could be using one of these lines for who-knows-what, and such a call could technically be traced back to the phone on my desk." And the fact that a phone call occurred between Palfrey and a person in a Senate office does not prove what happened. According to Palfrey, standard operating procedure was for her clients to call her and ask for a woman. She would then call them back and confirm the appointment. So a quick call to a Senate office could have been confirmation of an appointment. Or she might have been talking to an employee. Or perhaps she was calling to complain about taxes. Obviously, these numbers are leads, not the full story.
~snip~
Researching the DC Madam's phone numbers can turn up unambiguous results. See David Vitter. But often more legwork is required. I hope people continue to dig.
http://www.davidcorn.com/