Washington D.C.--It appears that things are beginning to finally get moving with the dismissal of Preston Burton as "DC Madam" Deborah Jeane Palfrey's criminal representation. What's unclear is how it's all going to play-out. Will civil attorney Montgomery Blair Sibley take the proceedings into areas Burton was unwilling to? It appears so from this newsletter from Ms. Palfrey and counsel, and a status conference is probably occurring in DC while this is being written:
Subsequently, Judge Kessler entered an order indicating that she would take up Jeane's selective prosecution argument. In essence, Jeane is arguing that as the only one of some eighty-three (83) escort agencies operating in the metro-DC area, the government's decision to prosecute her was based upon political considerations arising before the November 2006 elections.To support this contention, Jeane will be offering a composite exhibit of statements, news articles and a memo from Monica Goodling which collectively detail the politicization of the Department of Justice in a manner which lends credence to Jeane's argument of selective prosecution. At the conclusion of the argument, Jeane will be asking the Court to issue subpoenas and conduct an evidentiary hearing into these allegations. (10.21.2007 newsletter, 'Palfrey Update #29-Hearing Tomorrow on Selective Prosecution')It's unclear how District Judge Gladys Kessler--a Clinton appointee to the bench--is going to rule on these coming motions. If you've been reading this site, little of this is going to come as a surprise. There are ample signs of politicization of Palfrey's case, partly due to the timing, and partly due to who her prosecutors are or who they might actually be. The playing filed is extremely foggy in many areas.
Take the example of Ms. Goodling, a graduate of Regents Law School (formerly part of Oral Roberts University. Roberts is currently being accused of embezzlement), a phony institution used to train political-operatives to be inserted into the federal bureaucracy by sundry conservative elements--approximately one-sixth (at one count, 150 at Justice) of all graduates of Regents are serving as Bush appointees to the Justice Department, providing reasonable suspicions to support Palfrey's claims. Similar examples in her case are there, waiting to be reported by the media. As far as anyone can tell, these appointments are all still in-place at the Department of Justice.
But remember Monica Goodling? She was disgraced former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's top aide who resigned this Spring and pleaded the Fifth amendment at congressional hearings over her and the boss's role in the U.S. Attorney firings scandal. Monica is going to be back in the spotlight again, and likely to be subpoenaed for Palfrey's trial(s), if only in document form.
She won't be alone: so will employees of defense/intel contractor, SAIC (search this site for more). Again, remember that Regents is considered the lowest of the low for law schools, and that Goodling's 1999 class had a bar exam failure rate of 60%. Karma being what it is, we can rest assured that the GOP's Monica will deliver the goods Bionic Woman-style. Small wonder that they're all being caught at wrongdoing. But how did they all get in there? Thanks to leap-frogging appointments, naturally, a nineteenth century atavism
.Not long ago, it was rare for Regent graduates to join the federal government. But in 2001, the Bush administration picked the dean of Regent's government school, Kay Coles James , to be the director of the Office of Personnel Management -- essentially the head of human resources for the executive branch. The doors of opportunity for government jobs were thrown open to Regent alumni. (The Boston Globe, 04.08.2007,How else do you keep investigations of obvious criminal behavior at bay? There's nothing clever about it, the game is based more on audacity and the unwillingness of atrophied congressional incumbents to believe that an administration like that of George W. Bush is even possible. This is what they were banking on all-along: that the opposition in the political sector would become frozen and make half-hearted attempts at stopping them to preserve the power of the executive branch for themselves. Where does Palfrey figure-into all of this? Nobody is quite certain of this, but this author has some ideas.
First: the aforementioned "legal firewall" was created and maintained by political appointees like Goodling to keep the genuine, uncompromised forces of law and order in the bureaucracy (and the outlying society) at bay. This has played-out in numerous arenas, including the war in Iraq, Guantanamo Bay conditions, illegal rendition, torture--virtually every case of Bush and GOP wrongdoing and incompetence.
Second: Karl Rove's (and likely the vice president's, and many others in the RNC...) knowledge of numerous GOP incumbents' scandalous behaviors have allowed neoconservatives to continue a process of political blackmail of said incumbents throughout the Bush years--it's unlikely they invented the process, as the historical record is studded with examples thanks to J. Edgar Hoover. Someone, somewhere is keeping-tabs at all times of compromising behavior.
Third: while blackmailing these incumbents has meant that these congresspersons are de facto captives of the neoconservatives, some are being discovered through the incompetence of Bush appointees in the Justice Department, a failure in cloaking their behaviors. They're also being caught because they cannot control themselves. On top of this, there has also been whistle-blowing by long-term employees at Justice, many of whom have resigned since 2001. The bureaucracy has been fighting-back. Deborah Jeane Palfrey could be the person who could free these compromised incumbents from the clutches of the neoconservative plague. If you wonder why some in Congress continue to vote the way they do, you should wonder no more.
After all, American culture is still decidedly Puritan, and especially so when it comes to the GOP's voting base. With the promise that "we'll keep things quiet about your immoral behavior," the Bush administration has secured the voting behavior of an unknown segment of incumbents in Congress. Besides quashing investigations into the possible criminal behaviors of GOP incumbents, we know from Judiciary Committee hearings and solid investigative journalism that a push for partisan-based investigations of Democratic incumbents occurred as part of the U.S. attorney firing scandal.
This is evident in the firing of former U.S. Attorney David C. Iglesias who was pressured by standing Senator Pete Domenici and Rep. Heather Wilson of New Mexico. Both incumbents attempted to pressure Iglesias into investigations of state Democrats before the 2006 elections, surely experiencing their own pressures from the White House and Karl Rove.
In back-to-back hearings in the Senate and House, former U.S. 8attorney David C. Iglesias of New Mexico and five other former prosecutors recounted specific instances in which some said they felt pressured by Republicans on corruption cases and one said a Justice Department official warned him to keep quiet or face retaliation. Iglesias's allegations of congressional interference have prompted a Senate ethics committee inquiry. Yesterday he offered new details about telephone calls he received in October from Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.) and Rep. Heather A. Wilson (R-N.M.), saying he felt "leaned on" and "sickened" by the contacts seeking information about an investigation of a local Democrat. (The Washington Post, 03.07.2007, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/06/AR2007030600606.html )It should also be remembered in this context that it was one Monica Goodling who helped pave the way for Rove protege Tim Griffin as a U.S. Attorney. Griffin is now aiding Fred Thompson in his campaign...nearly the only campaign whose offices will never be burglarized during the entire run-up to the 2008 elections, a prediction of this writer. San Diego is burning. Perhaps with some luck, it will take SAIC's headquarters with it.