Even more songs from the Site Meter: Democratic counsel Diana Oo again

Site Meter--The enigmatic, the mercurial, the secretive, Diana Oo. If I ever needed to feel like I was inhabiting a Dashiell Hammett novel, what better name for a femme fatale would one need? Palfrey's was a fine, French one, and I once told her she reminded me of Joan Bennett, the femme fatale of them all from Fritz Lang's "Scarlet Street." She didn't care for that, and I can imagine why. Osborne's character dies. At least Jeane had someone to mourn her. It would have been nice had she gotten due process.

Domain Name		house.gov ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address		143.231.249.# (Information Systems, U.S. House of Representatives)
ISP		Information Systems, U.S. House of Representatives
Location		Continent : North America Country : United States (Facts) State : District of Columbia City : Washington Lat/Long : 38.9097, -77.0231 (Map)
Language		English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System		Microsoft WinXP
Browser		Firefox Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.14) Gecko/2009082707 Firefox/3.0.14
Javascript		version 1.5
Monitor		Resolution : 1680 x 1050 Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit		Sep 23 2009 2:28:21 am
Last Page View		Sep 23 2009 2:28:21 am
Visit Length		0 seconds
Page Views		1
Referring URL		http://www.google.co...BkLI5I-4Pk8XAPNmNV3Q
Search Engine		google.com
Search Words		diana oo
Visit Entry Page		http://chickasawpick...-theyre-looking.html
Visit Exit Page		http://chickasawpick...-theyre-looking.html
Out Click
Time Zone		UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time		Sep 22 2009 2:28:21 pm
Visit Number		60,347

Even more songs from the Site Meter: visits over USPS inspector Mark Hines & Democratic counsel Diana Oo, and much more...

Site Meter--This first site hit is an interesting one! Mark Hines was the alleged beginning--the "genesis" if you will--of the investigation into the DC Madam.

Hines was (is?) the U.S. Postal inspector who allegedly first noticed Deborah Jeane Palfrey and her escort service, Pamela Martin & Associates, a seldom told part of the story. According to court documents, the investigation began in August of 2001 when Hines "noticed" a pattern with Palfrey's mail--there were a disproportionate number of money orders coming to her mailbox, or so the story goes. I don't take it at face value. You know, there is such a thing as hierarchy, and God knows that there are forces in this country (and in Palfrey's phone records) who love reminding us of this fact. I'm here to do the same today.

So, was it just little old Mark Hines finding Palfrey and keeping the investigation alive? That's impossible, but we're all supposed to believe it. Somehow, I don't think that's exactly how it went down. Law enforcement in San Diego and around the beltway (the D.C. area) knew her history and at least in Alexandria, Virginia, the cops knew she was operating her escort service in the nation's capital as early as 1994, that she was running a prostitution operation. When you look at her newsletters, you might get the impression that the fix was on in her favor at the time. She seems to feel pretty self-assured that it was all going to go away, and by 1997 it did. Interestingly, Senator Vitter's calls (some of them from the floor of the House) to obtain sex from prostitutes overlaps the beginning of the investigation into Palfrey and PMM, he made some calls beginning in 1999 and apparently ending in 2001.

Honestly, I cannot prove it right now, but it wouldn't surprise me if this site hit was Mr. Hines-- inspector Hines--but it most definitely has to do with the Palfrey case, they went right to a specific part of my archives. He should know that I'm going to be including him in my own account of my experiences surrounding the Palfrey scandal and that he doesn't look so upstanding or honest so far, but that's my opinion. In other words, inspector Hines might want to contact me some time for a chat, clear things up. Surely, he never will. I am very close to 100% certain that USPS inspector Hines was ordered onto the the Palfrey investigation and that others up the chain-of-command--coming directly from the Bush II White House--were pushing them at the USPS to protect their own in the GOP.

Someone alerted Hines to Palfrey's operations, and someone helped him keep the investigation alive from 2001 until the fall of 2006, that's 100% certain. Who were they? Did it come from the White House under George W. Bush, from the Justice Department? To coordinate so many governmental institutions would require going fairly high up the chain.

To Senator Vitter: figuratively speaking, I am coming for you. I will never rest until the real blame you and your counsel deserve is affixed to your backs, your foreheads, for how things ended with Jeane. "Hate" isn't a strong enough word for what I feel for you and I would hope that the Palfreys understand that any deals they make in closing the book on their end (I refuse to be silenced) is making a deal with the very people who not only could have prevented her death, but pushed her to it to protect corrupt, privileged fucktards like Davey. The morons in Louisiana might be dumb enough to vote for you Senator Vitter, but I and many others are the corrective measure, the reformist impulse that's going to help you take yourself down faster--besides the uncontrollable, politically and legally unaccountable, and likely very tiny, "Mr. Winkie."

And as I write this, I've just received this newsletter from Montgomery Blair Sibley, former civil counsel to the late Ms. Palfrey:

I make the "Watch List" Posted: 15 Sep 2009 10:30 AM PDT I was stopped at the door of the U.S. Courthouse in Washington, D.C. today by the U.S. Marshal's Service. They indicated that I was on their "Watch and Escort List" and needed an armed escort to go to the Clerk's office in order to file some legal papers. What fun! I stand in good company. My family was so proud when then-President Nixon put my grandmother, Mrs. Harper Sibley on his enemies list. She was on Nixon's enemies list we later learned because she was president of that radical group --the United Council of Church Women. Anyway, here is my letter to the Marshal's Service in response . . . United States Marshal George B. Walsh U.S. Courthouse 333 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 Re: Inclusion on United States Marshal’s “Watch & Escort List” I write to inquire upon what basis I have been placed on the United States Marshal’s “Watch & Escort List” at the U.S. Courthouse at 333 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Today, for the second time in the last two months, I was stopped at the security checkpoint at the 3rd Street, N.W. entrance immediately upon entering and before I presented any identification. The United States Marshal on duty informed me that he was required to have me escorted in the building and immediately called someone to escort me to the Clerk’s office where I had a matter to file. I was escorted to and from that office and then left the building. While at all times all members of the United States Marshal’s Service treated me with dignity and respect, I nonetheless must write and inquire – pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act – upon what basis I have been accorded this special – and chilling – treatment in pursuit of my First Amendment right to petition the government. I do not believe that my suspension from the practice of law by this Court – without hearing I might add – merits such treatment. Nor does the fact that as counsel for the D.C. Madam, Jeane Palfrey, I am in possession of heretofore not publically released telephone records which contain the telephone numbers of individuals who work in the U.S. Courthouse and identify them as customers of the escort service, merit such treatment. Accordingly, please either provide promptly the basis for the inclusion of my name on the United States Marshal’s “Watch & Escort List” at the U.S. Courthouse at 333 Constitution Avenue, N.W., so that I may challenge such defamation of my character or confirm in writing that I am not on such a list so that I may have such letter with me whenever I desire to enter the Courthouse.

Counselor Sibely could perhaps be viewed as "eccentric" by some, but there's no indication that he's ever shown a propensity for violence, I've seen no indication of this whatsoever. Who ordered this and why? Why isn't the House Judiciary Committee looking into this? Why the special treatment?

But one thing's for sure: they're still shitting themselves in D.C. over a dead woman and the root- system of corruption her case inadvertently began to uncover until potential inquiries into it were shut down. Whoever said that this story was over has no idea, none. Were it over, this situation with counselor Sibley wouldn't be happening, they're afraid of him to do something like this. When Federal Marshals are briefed (presumably with photographs) to know someone at first-glance, something's up, and it's not simply a man's reputation but the very real threat he presents to what I believe is unaccountable power quaking in its boots.

They should quake.

What do we want? I know what I want: an independent investigation into the real roots of the prosecution of the late Deborah Jeane Palfrey, and that's just for starters. As to someone at Georgetown University (where the law is taught) looking for information on Ms. Oo, I leave it to you, the readers, to decide. They can keep trying to quarantine this story, but I refuse to be silenced.

Domain Name		verizon.net ? (Network)
IP Address		71.191.4.# (Verizon Internet Services)
ISP		Verizon Internet Services
Location		Continent : North America Country : United States (Facts) State : District of Columbia City : Washington Lat/Long : 38.9097, -77.0231 (Map)
Language		English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System		Microsoft WinXP
Browser		Internet Explorer 7.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1)
Javascript		version 1.3
Monitor		Resolution : 1280 x 1024 Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit		Sep 15 2009 11:31:49 pm
Last Page View		Sep 15 2009 11:49:52 pm
Visit Length		18 minutes 3 seconds
Page Views		4
Referring URL		http://www.google.co... hines&aq=f&oq=&aqi=
Search Engine		google.com
Search Words		deborah palfrey mark hines
Visit Entry Page		http://chickasawpick...8_11_01_archive.html
Visit Exit Page		http://chickasawpick...8_11_01_archive.html
Out Click
Time Zone		UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time		Sep 15 2009 11:31:49 am
Visit Number		59,940

Domain Name		(Unknown)
IP Address		161.253.47.# (The George Washington University)
ISP		The George Washington University
Location		Continent : North America Country : United States (Facts) State : District of Columbia City : Washington Lat/Long : 38.9376, -77.0928 (Map)
Language		English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System		Microsoft WinNT
Browser		Internet Explorer 7.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; GoogleT5; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.21022; .NET CLR 3.0.30618; .NET CLR 3.5.30729)
Javascript		version 1.3
Monitor		Resolution : 1680 x 1050 Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit		Sep 15 2009 7:53:42 am
Last Page View		Sep 15 2009 7:53:42 am
Visit Length		0 seconds
Page Views		1
Referring URL		http://search.yahoo....qyEMP6A--,1253058706
Search Engine		search.yahoo.com
Search Words		"diana oo"
Visit Entry Page		http://chickasawpick...tees-democratic.html
Visit Exit Page		http://chickasawpick...tees-democratic.html
Out Click
Time Zone		UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time		Sep 14 2009 7:53:42 pm
Visit Number		59,906

Accused Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich loses Homeland Security Clearance--what other accused politicians have?

Washington D.C.--There's no indication that former Alaska Senator Ted Stevens lost his security clearance during the legal proceedings in his own case, so why the move on Blagojevich's? To hurt him, to make him appear "bad," to assassinate his character. Yes, yes, one was a senator, the other a governor--except that Stevens was under investigation for a very long time as Blagojevich has been (years), and there was every indication that he was guilty, just like the Governor of Illinois.

Great, they have a lot in common...except in how they're being treated. At least Ted Stevens is going to have a hard time practicing law in Alaska, but does it matter? He's in his eighties. Stevens got the kid-glove treatment for far longer. Yes, there have been "ongoing investigations" into Blagojevich for years, which is not simply odd but smells of someone gunning for someone.

On Stevens's last day in the Senate, he was given a standing ovation. It wasn't reassuring that anything was about to change in Congress anytime soon. This is an individual--not a man--who was convicted of seven felonies by a jury of his peers. You read that right if you didn't somehow know it already: seven felony convictions. Stevens was also on committees and subcommittees that dealt directly with the DHS.

There's no indication from the record that he was ever stripped of any of his security clearances at any point until it was clear he was convicted and leaving office.

That's not the case with Blagojevich, and yet, the Bush II administration must be behind some of it--they still have sixteen days left in office, not the Obama team. Surely, they requested it--someone did--and it's safe to assume that it was for political reasons that cross party lines into the realms of class loyalty and preserving a rotten barrel. By all appearances, Ted Stevens retained his DHS security clearance (and his general security clearance as a sitting representative) until he was indicted in July 2008. Blagojevich hasn't even been indicted yet, but the calls to move quickly in unseating him stand in stark contrast with the treatment of other politicians accused of criminal behavior.

That's a matter of procedure at that point, but it should have been stripped from Stevens much earlier than it was, but Republicans can do anything they want.

Somehow, a man with seven felony convictions deserves a standing ovation before the Senate of the United States, while a standing governor of Illinois deserves no presumption of innocence until proven guilty, including the removal of said clearance, and so on. If that's not a contemptible attitude for due process to serve political ends, then nothing is. Republican senators did their best to block stripping Stevens from holding leadership roles on committees for exactly one year after the FBI raided his home. His indictment forced their hand.

Governor Blagojevich hasn't even technically been indicted yet and U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald is asking for "more time" to shore-up one. Curious, that--all of it. Perhaps we'll all be singing "The Wreck of the Patrick Fitzgerald" before long.

Revised 01.04.2008

Let's be natural: Blago's stunning move in appointing former Illinois AG Roland Burris to the US Senate

Chicago, Illinois--Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich is innocent until proven guilty, apparently a foregone conclusion to state legislators and U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and Illinois state legislators, the mainstream press, and the public whose opinion they've done their best to affect.

But never mind that: the media's saying he's guilty over and over again, so it must be true. Is he guilty? It sure looks like it.

My own opinion? He's no worse than the other Illinois politicians who are pointing-the-finger at him, it being Illinois. Today's move was brilliant on Blagojevich's part, and I have to hand it to him. By picking a prominent figure on the Illinois political scene in Roland Burris (who is African-American), he's injected not only defiance but race into what's rapidly becoming a constitutional crisis in the "land of Lincoln."

and his accusers. The press conference today was an And God knows, "Old Abe" is getting invoked so much that he might just materialize and weigh-in on the fact that most of his own cabinet were crooks and incompetents who couldn't agree on much, and that his generals drank a lot. So much for the sentimentalized version of Lincoln, the real man was more complicated. We can--at least--assume the same of Blagojevichunequivocal "fuck you" from the governor to the State legislature and the members of the impeachment board. If only our Congress were so vigilant.

The scene itself was quite dramatic when the governor spoke, but best of all was when congressman Bobby Rush spoke, daring Harry Reid and all the other white senators (Obama was the first Black U.S. Senator in ages) to vote against Burris in confirmation hearings, and not to "hang or lynch" him. This isn't so bombastic as it sounds: the last African-American senator before Obama was Carol Moseley-Braun...the second Black senator since Reconstruction, which speaks volumes about our political system and culture.

The congressman was speaking symbolically, but call it what you will (and I know you will).

Rush is a longtime face on the Illinois and Chicago political scene, as well as a former leader of the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense who narrowly escaped death in the state-sanctioned assassination of Panther leader Fred Hampton on December 4th, 1969. Rush had planned to visit Hampton and Mark Clark's apartment that night, but was exhausted that night from his work for the party.

Bobby Rush is also the man who beat Barack Obama during the 1990s in a congressional election, so Obama and the Illinois Democratic Party allowed him and a team to engage in gerrymandering a new district into existence for the 2004 Senate elections.

But it appears that Reid and other white senators might not have to worry--Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White has stated he won't certify Burris's appointment to the Senate. This could become a major legal battle in-itself. What's troubling are the media comments smearing Blagojevich from government informants, always a matter of concern to be weighed with the highest suspicion.

If Governor Blagojevich has a "bad record," you should look at the FBI's and the Justice Department's, the institutions that put-in-motion the assassination of Fred Hampton and Mark Clark under President Richard M. Nixon almost forty years ago. This all hedges on the assumption of guilt, which is un-American and has nothing to do with due process and justice, but has a lot to do with politics and acrimony.

Perhaps he's guilty, but he deserves a fair trial, something that's virtually impossible after the media campaign being waged right now. So-called "progressive"sites (and the right's sites and blogs), the wire services, television coverage, word-of-mouth, and the newspapers, are doing the government's unwarranted work with every parroting and reprinting of the line that "he's guilty until proven innocent."

Remember that the same Congress that let George W. Bush and his administration get away with high crimes is saying they won't accept any appointment to the Senate by Blagojevich. This is the same Congress that has allowed him every pass imaginable for his unconstitutional behavior. Not-so-ironically--because they have a sense of humor--Illinois Republicans are saying that Blagojevich is "creating a constitutional crisis," which we've seen at least twice under the Bush II administration.

Whatever the truth, little of this is what it appears to be.

2008 Roundup

J-7--It's been one hell of a year, hasn't it? From my work for the Palfrey defense, to my paralegal classes, to the inevitable collapse of world capitalism, to incredible revelations of Bush II administration wrong-doing and the resultant inaction from Congress and the Judicial branch, there's every reason to feel hopeful. What kind of a year did you have? Not one like mine, I can state with complete certainty.

I even had the well known Libertarian "Reason magazine" quoting me next to Val Kilmer, and conspiracy-theorist Alex Constantine has threatened to sue me for having negative opinions about him. This isn't even counting the hacking of my email account (I have my suspicions here), the phony "cease and desist" emails regarding the Palfrey information on my site about two noteworthy former clients, or the other harassing ones that came my way.

Wha? Hopeful?

Yes, there's every reason to feel hopeful about reasonable change. That doesn't mean we just sit back and let it happen, because then, it won't. Demand, demand, and demand again what you need to survive. Band together, make friends with people you might never have, and organize and act for change.

I've written on quite-a-few subjects this year, from attempts to desecrate the memory of Edgar Allan Poe, to issues of the geopolitical and of illegal surveillance. What's been most alarming is the inaction of Congress and the courts against Bush II crimes, but I have a newer take on this: they only did it to save a dying system, it was never really about protecting Bush and Cheney, and it's not working. With every revelation...nothing, no action to hold anyone truly accountable. That's desperation, kids.

American Empire is ending and history cannot be fought or denied when the currents are as strong as they are against established power in North America. It's over, now it just has to play-out, and all the king's horses and all the king's men aren't going to fix it. As a matter of fact, the more they keep doing what they always have to preserve their power, the faster they're going to lose it. Empires fall and things are moving faster than they have in decades, and can be counted on to move faster than in the past thanks to widespread access to telecommunications technology.

This decline is affecting everyone. There's nowhere to run for the jaded and the apathetic anymore. Yes, things will become ugly at times, but if you have it in-mind to help others, we can avoid a catastrophe as we have in the past. Use your head and have a safe and happy 2009. Understand that this won't always be the case, have realistic expectations, and stay honest if you can. And remember that the children are counting on us not to blow it, we owe them a better world where people look out for each other. Helping others is the most important thing.

On Jeane Palfrey: Watching a woman die from a distance after being driven to it by federal prosecutors was horrible, but I did help her as much as I could and she told me that she appreciated it, she even told went as far as to ask me if anyone had ever told me I was smart. God knows that I wish she had survived her ordeal and that her suicide will haunt me until the day I die. One can only hope it does that and much more to her tormentors. I intend to keep digging into these matters regarding everything that happened to Deborah Jeane Palfrey, and will continue to publish primary materials on this site since it's still my right as an American to do so. The vast majority of my contact with the deceased "DC Madam" was off-the-books, it wasn't under attorney-client privilege, and the public has a right to know what happened. Eventually, everything I have will be online in one form or another.

There must be accountability in this matter, and eventually, there will be. If that means people like Federal District Judge James Robertson looks like the goon and lackey that I suspect he is in the history books after his death, then so be it. The same goes for Jeffrey A. Taylor, a most unusual U.S. Attorney for the fact that he's an interim appointment that was never approved of by the Senate, as the Bush II administration sneaked him in when they were on recess in 2006...during the U.S. Attorney firing scandal. He prosecuted Palfrey. At the very least, future generations of Americans are going to view her trial as the abomination it was, a fraud that was a matter of selective prosecution in a time when there were more than would be statistically normal. Had Palfrey lived, we might know more about what happened, although she wasn't the last word as some are painting it to my mind.

At this writing, the Palfrey Estate is working against disclosure, and it's understandable. They want things to rest and for their loved one to rest in peace. They've had enough of the circus, the press, the media, and the lawyers. So have I. They're tired of others (starting with Bill Bastone, an individual they should take to court for defaming their loved one) dragging the name of their loved one and their family through-the-mud. I concur. But that doesn't mean every revelation is going to make Jeane look bad--that's not even the point. From what I know, she's beginning to look more and more heroic, or at least edging beyond being an "antihero," which in this society isn't a bad thing to be either. She was that and a whole lot more, and she was very complicated, just like the rest of life itself.

I enjoin the Palfrey Estate to move towards transparency in the matter and to realize that the government isn't going to give them what's theirs (Palfrey's remaining assets) without a major fight. Having counsel that does contract work for the government in other capacities isn't going to help them towards this reasonable goal which their loved on died for in-part. My opinion.

Astonishingly, Palfrey's will wasn't discovered until September 2008--what took so long? Why is Orrick going around and threatening various players in the Palfrey saga with lawsuits and invoking attorney-client privilege? One could imagine it has a lot to do with brokering a deal with the government, and one still hasn't been completed in the arena of asset seizure and forfeiture The abatement issue created by Palfrey when she killed herself before sentencing created problems for the State, and a semi-secret Trust created by Palfrey is causing problems for the Estate itself. She knew what she was doing. I have to wonder if her family does, but I wish them well and empathize with their suffering. There are so many unanswered questions in the Palfrey scandal, but I don't think Jeane's death closes-the-door entirely: there were many things she simply didn't know about her predicament, things that should have been included in discovery (sharing of information, what they have on you) from the prosecution. Eventually, some of these documents are going to surface, and we'll have at least a little clearer picture. I do not believe that she was innocent, I believe that she was denied due process.

The House Judiciary committee contacted Palfrey in the spring of 2008 through a "Ms. Oo," then didn't appear for a face-to-face meeting or respond to further calls and emails. Oo wouldn't do. Why? Who or what put-the-skids to their inquiry into the effect that forfeiture had on her rights to due process? They--and others--might tell me and the public, but I'm not holding my breath on that one, it's going to take years, and it's going to take persistent demands. It was quite a year, 2008. I don't expect any miracles from President-elect Barack Obama, but it's on him and Congress to initiate lengthy and serious probes into every crime committed by the Bush II administration, to rollback the precedents, and to allow justice to be served in the matter rather than in the obstruction of it. Palfrey is a part of all of this. There's reason to be hopeful, but not without demands.


Postscript, 12.29.2008: Add to the list that Larisa Alexandrovna gave me a good review on a satire about her marrying Yakov Smirnoff, which surprised the bejeezus out of me.

What is the extraordinary nature of the Blagojevich scandal?

"I can't wait to begin to tell my side of the story and to address you guys and, most importantly, the people of Illinois. That's who I'm dying to talk to."--Standing Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Chicago, Illinois--These are truly momentous times, a real threshold moment in American history. The Illinois Supreme Court's rejection of state Attorney General Lisa Madigan's filing to remove standing Governor Rod Blagojevich is a stunning example of a political and economic order on the ropes. It raises the specter of a power-vacuum and the continuation of a vicious Machiavellianism at the heart of American politics. In other words, intrigue.

Is that what's happening in the Blagojevich scandal? It wouldn't surprise anyone except maybe a High School teacher, the last to know what's going on at City Hall.

U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's case that the Governor attempted to "sell" Barack Obama's senate seat and did so actively in what he's called a "corruption crime spree" looks good on paper, it's convincing, but his outrage over things like how many times and permutations Blagojevich said "fuck" smacks of character attack and over-zealousness. Welcome to Chicago, Pat.

Coming from the Chicago U.S. Attorney, you'd be led to believe that Blagojevich was Rasputin and that his downfall was virtually inevitable based on the evidence he claims to have on him. Fitzgerald made similarly broad claims with the Plame case, winning a minor conviction on I. "Scooter" Libby, former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney which was quickly commuted by President Bush. Go team (boo team, you lost, you promised more than you could deliver).

Genson said it would be "frankly illegal" for the committee to base an impeachment recommendation on the criminal complaint against Blagojevich. The complaint doesn't provide full conversations and context, he said, and it can't be cross-examined like a witness.

Rep. Jack Franks, D-Woodstock, challenged Genson to have Blagojevich testify.

"If we want the facts, we should have your client here. If you want to get to the facts, let's bring him here, let's ask the questions," Franks said. ("Attorney: Ill. governor won't fill senate vacancy," AP, 12.17.2008)

The federal investigation appears solid on the surface, but did Blagojevich and others close to him really take affirmative steps towards the completion of a crime? Why the rush to judgment? Did they (Blagojevich and others) technically break the law merely by talking about something but not taking any substantial actions towards completion? Is this a case of wishful thinking?

Blagojevich could have a very good case here. His counsel, Ed Genson, has raised some very good points because there's a strong possibility that no substantial steps were taken towards completion of the crime, just a lot of [expletive deleted] talk.

Context is everything in a criminal case (let alone a political one), and we have yet to see it in the release of the wiretaps. What were the comments before-and-after the ones released by the U.S. Attorney's Chicago office? What other evidence is there? Is the investigation near completion? Is the Governor still being wiretapped? What role did informants play in this, like Jess Jackson Jr.? Is Blagojevich's counsel currently being wiretapped? Since the investigation is not currently over, on what legal grounds should anyone claim the right to remove the Governor?

These are just a few of the questions that should be addressed by the prosecution, the GOP, the DNC, the Obama campaign, and Blagojevich's detractors in the Illinois State House and Senate, and within his own office.

These people need to state their case clearly, the onus being on them in our legal system. At this writing, Blagojevich's attorney has announced that the Governor will not name Barack Obama's successor in the senate, answering at least one question in this whole mess.

This chaos and loss of faith in icons of authority and power all reminds one of the last days of Tsarist Russia. I can hardly wait to hear what the Governor has to say in his defense, I'm dying too Rod. Will it include revelations about someone who arouses just as many suspicions of corruption, one Rahm Emanuel?

U.S. Attorney Fitzgerald might discover that Blagojevich and Emanuel share a similar vocabulary, both politically and linguistically. He had better hope he's right, but procedure that gives deference to government investigators and prosecutors could shield him if this is so. Whatever happened to due process?

WTOP Radio: DC US Attorney Jeffrey A. Taylor claims prosectuors "quite anguished" over Palfrey suicide

"Prosecutors in the office who handled the case were quite anguished about how that turned out. Nobody was happy with that result." --Outgoing U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeffrey A. Taylor.

Washington D.C.--This is something else: soon-to-be ex-U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeffrey A. Taylor is saying that the suicide of Deborah Jeane Palfrey upset members of the prosecution and that it was a "shock" when she committed suicide on May 1st, 2008.

Funny that they suddenly get all teary-eyed after their absurd zealousness in prosecuting her to the point of death.

This is a lie and Taylor is a black liar who's hiding something along with his associates. That something is that he and the prosecution had ample reason to think that Palfrey was unstable, might kill herself and did nothing about it.

Even as a low-level member of her defense team, I knew for certain by February 28th, 2008 that the defendant was unstable when she forwarded me and the rest of the defense team an exchange between herself and journalist Jason Leopold. Would it have mattered had I forwarded it to the prosecution or the Court? Doubtful, and I wasn't going to violate attorney-client privilege when my contact with her was only via email. There wasn't enough to go on, and others missed the import of the email entirely.

Jason… let’s put it like this, the bastards aren’t going to take me alive. Of course, anytime that you want to do an interview – I will make myself available. However, I doubt that I will be doing any interviews once I am in D.C., for the trial. –Best, Jeane

Yet Taylor is stating that he wasn't aware of how unstable Palfrey was. This is going to be found to be a lie, a fabrication to protect the members of the prosecution from gross negligence in their mishandling of the case, their over-zealousness, and the fact that a competency hearing should have been convened. Why wasn't this done? Ask Taylor and ask Federal District Judges Gladys Kessler and James Robertson.

Is this one of the reasons why Judge Kessler was removed from the case? Did she have an awareness that Palfrey was in fact suicidal? I haven't listened to the entire WTOP radio broadcast, but I assume that their own Neil Augenstein interviewed Jeffrey Taylor and D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier who was on-hand for gender backup so that the prosecution of the deceased didn't look too much like a victory for entrenched patriarchy (it was). Where were the other prosecutors like Catherine Connelley, William R. Cowden, and Daniel Butler? They must have been busy getting ready for the wave of firings with the new president coming into office in January 2009.

This comment by Taylor was illuminating:"That's not to say we're not uncomfortable with the havoc that [we] can wreak on the lives of these individuals. We are careful, but at the same time have an obligation having brought the charges to prove that case." ("Prosecutors 'quite anguished over D.C. Madam's suicide," WTOP, 12.04.2008) He omits "we" in the sentence, so I reinserted it for his (and our) edification.

The Palfrey prosecutors should be "anguished" over it alright, they destroyed her life, humiliated over a dozen former escorts on the stand for a few days, and did their best to ensure that the defendant wouldn't receive a fair trial. They have a lot to feel "bad" about and it's this writer's humble curse that it haunts them until the day each of them die. I don't imagine that hey were asked by WTOP who leaked the unsigned warrant to The Smoking Gun's Bill Bastone, it being just another elephant in the room that they must ignore to get out of office safely, unscathed by civil suits from Palfrey's estate. Did they know Palfrey was suicidal?

They knew. They knew Palfrey was unstable and suicidal when she stated she wouldn't serve even one more day in prison several times in the mainstream media. When I decided to help her, I knew "this isn't going to end well. " It was obvious over time. They knew full-well that their case was political, but they lie because they got themselves into "quite" a mess. They knew they were doing their best to hide the identities of the "Johns" because many of them were either part of or had connections to the GOP in Washington D.C. Appointments have a way of working-out like this.

The WTOP article also contains a glaring mistake of its own. "Most of the former escorts subpoenaed to bolster the prosecution's claim that Palfrey ran a prostitution service managed to keep their identities secret before her federal racketeering and money laundering trial. " (ibid) This is factually incorrect, it wasn't "most," but a few of the girls did manage to stay hidden. Discovery documents contain a list of well over one hundred former escorts of Pamela Martin & Associates which was in-the-possession of the prosecution; they knew who almost all of them were. They settled on around fifteen of them to testify against Palfrey under immunity, meaning that they were busted at some point and forced to turn on her.

If USA Taylor wants to clear his and the rest of the prosecution's names, they should make the vast majority of documents related to the investigation and the prosecution available to the press, researchers, and historians. Transparency is key. With Ms. Palfrey now dead, there's no specific reason to keep these materials classified any longer...unless it was part of a larger investigation, which there have been indications of in the past. There is one thing that USA Jeffrey A. Taylor was honest about in the interview--Palfrey was offered several very good plea deals and she turned them all down.

In the fall of 2007, she conveyed to me that she almost took one of them, but by that point the prosecution wasn't offering much. For every reason, they should have seen very clearly that as an indicator of instability, she was not acting rationally in her own best interests. As a matter of fact, they most certainly did notice having reasonable proximity with her during negotiations. In addition, when she fired a couple members of her counsel at various points in the legal proceedings the papers were sealed by the Court. This is because they also knew she was unstable, maybe even suicidal. This could implicate the Court, the prosecution, and perhaps at least one of Palfrey's former counsels in the matter. One of them tried to do something about it, but for more on that one, you'll just have to wait...

"Prosecutors 'quite anguished over D.C. Madam's suicide," WTOP, 12.04.2008: http://www.wtop.com/?sid=1537593&nid=25

From the Palfrey trial transcripts: April 7th, 2008 excerpt

Ed.--This excerpt comes from the opening day of the trial of Deborah Jeane Palfrey. The witness for the government being questioned is Mark Hines, beginning at the bottom of page 12 and ending on the bottom of page 20. Palfrey always contended to me and others on the defense team that she thought the investigation into her began around May/June of 2004 in the Baltimore IRS office, apparently brought to their attention by USPS investigators.

I'm unaware of the entire extent of discovery materials she was given by the prosecution, but basically rang true at the time, and in a way it still does. Except for one thing. The real inquiry into the "DC Madam" began in August, 2001. Until reading the trial transcript, I was completely unaware of this fact, partly because press coverage of the trial was almost non-existent, and what little there was lacked any substance or detail.

Eventually, either I, the government, or someone else will post it online in toto, and the public can finally judge for themselves how fair her trial proceedings were, and all of the roads the government didn't go down.

For example: why couldn't they have gotten her for underreporting her income? A source informs me that this would have been the easiest of charges to prosecute.

Why didn't they do it? I have my suspicions, and it includes Palfrey and the government both lying about how much money she earned, and that she hid a lot of it. My guess is that they're either still investigating to find it, or they've already located most of it. She made a lot more money than anyone's reporting. The text has been broken-up for easier reading. Page breaks are noted. It appears that the investigation into Palfrey actually did originate in Washington D.C. and not in Baltimore, but in Linthicum, Maryland as Palfrey and author Bill Keisling once contended...

... "DIRECT EXAMINATION

22 BY MS. BUTLER [Ed.--Nice typo, Butler is a "Mr."]:

23 Q Good afternoon.

24 A Good afternoon.

25 Q State your full name and spell your last name, please. [Page Break]

13

1 A My name is Mark Hines. Last name is spelled H-i-n-e-s.

2 Q Mr. Hines, where do you work?

3 A I'm employed as a Assistant Special Agent in Charge with
4 the Postal Service Office of Inspector General.

5 Q And just briefly, what does the Inspector General's
6 office do?

7 A The Postal Service AIG is the internal law enforcement
8 arm of the postal service, and we investigate fraud, waste,
9 and abuse within the postal system and also employment conduct
10 issues.

11 Q And how long have you been with that office?

12 A I started work with them in 2005.

13 Q Okay. Where were you before that?

14 A Prior to that I was employed as a U.S. Postal Inspector
15 in New Orleans, Louisiana.

16 Q Okay. And how long were you there?

17 A I was there from 2003 to 2005.

18 Q Okay. And before that, where were you?

19 A I was employed as a postal inspector in the Washington
20 Division, the Washington Metro area.

21 Q And how long were you there?

22 A I was employed as a postal inspector in Washington
23 between 1994 and 2003.

24 Q Okay. And just briefly, describe what the Postal
25 Inspection Service does. [Page Break]

14

1 A Postal Inspection Service is the external law enforcement
2 branch of the postal service. They investigate violations of
3 postal law and external attacks on the postal system.
4 Examples of that would be robbery of a post-office,
5 a burglary of a post-office, dangerous mailings or illicit
6 mailings going through the postal system and mail fraud.

7 Q Okay. In about 2000, what was your assignment within the
8 Postal Inspection Service at that time?

9 A In 2000, I was assigned to the Prohibited Mailings Team.
10 That was a team that investigated illicit items and contraband
11 being mailed through the postal system.

12 Q Okay. And was there a specific place or location where
13 you were -- primarily would do that?

14 A Yes, sir. I was assigned -- my last duty station was the
15 incoming mail facility at BWI Airport.

16 Q Baltimore/Washington International Airport?

17 A Yes, sir.

18 Q Okay. And what was your -- what was your assignment at
19 that time? What was your job description?

20 A It had two functions. One function was to profile
21 express mail system for illicit mailings containing
22 contraband; that would be narcotics and also illicit funds.

23 Q Okay. And you said two functions.

24 A Yes, sir.

25 Q What's the second function? [Page Break]

15

1 A The other function was to investigate violations
2 involving postal money orders.

3 Q Okay. Now, let's sort of make sure everyone's operating
4 from the same place in terms of knowledge. Express mail, what
5 is that, just briefly?

6 A Express mail is the service provided by the U.S. Postal
7 Service, an overnight delivery service. You can go to the
8 counter at a post-office, pay a larger fee than you would
9 normally, to mail a first-class envelope, and then that item
10 has a control number assigned to it and it's delivered in a --
11 in an expedited fashion, overnight typically.
12 The other aspect of express mail is that you can
13 track its process through the postal system by the use of that
14 assigned control number.

15 Q And you mentioned money orders. What -- just, again,
16 just briefly, what is a money order?

17 A Postal service money order is a financial instrument
18 that's available to postal customers. You can go into a
19 post-office and with currency purchase a negotiable instrument
20 similar to a check or a money order you might get at a
21 7-Eleven or another outlet.
22 In turn, that document, you can convey to somebody
23 else and it can be cashed at a post-office or it can be
24 deposited like a check at a bank.

25 Q And a money order, does it show who purchased the money [Page Break]

16

1 order on the face of the document?

2 A There is a portion on the face of the document for the
3 person remitting it to write the purchaser of the money order
4 and the sender of the money order, although it's not always
5 completed.

6 Q Okay. And in your assignment at BWI, what were you
7 looking for in terms of express mail labeling and in terms of
8 money orders?

9 A During the course of my assignment, we would look for
10 patterns of suspicious mailing activity; we would look at that
11 through the paperwork which would be the express mail labels
12 from these postal mailings. We would also look at live mail
13 that would go out to the postal service facility, the
14 processed incoming express mail for the D.C. Metro area and
15 also outbound express mail coming from the D.C. Metro area,
16 again, for suspicious mailings.

17 Q What were you looking for? What, in particular, were you
18 looking for? What were you trying to find?

19 A In particular, what we were looking for was in the
20 mornings, we were looking for inbound mailings that typically
21 contained drugs, illegal controlled substances, and then in
22 the evening, at the outbound mail, outbound express mail, we
23 were looking for illicit funds, currency, and also postal
24 money orders and other negotiable instruments.

25 Q And did there come a time when you focused on a business [Page Break]

17

1 called Pamela Martin & Associates?

2 A We did, yes, sir.

3 Q And how did that come about?

4 A In August of 2001 [Ed--My emphasis.], I had been profiling for outbound
5 express mailings and came across an express mail piece going
6 to Venetia, California, which had also come to my attention
7 during our review of Postal Service Express Mail labels.

8 Q Okay. And based on that, what did you do?

9 A With that particular piece, I tried to investigate what I
10 could about the sender, the recipient, and the goal was to
11 obtain a federal search warrant to open the mail piece and
12 determine whether contraband, in other words, illicit funds
13 were within that mail piece.

14 Q Did you have sufficient information at that time to
15 obtain a warrant for that piece of information?

16 A I had sufficient information to seek one.

17 Q Okay. Did you actually obtain one, though, at that time?

18 A I did not.

19 Q Okay. So what did you do with that package then?

20 A The package was returned to the mail stream for delivery.

21 Q And did you follow up on that at all?

22 A I did. That mail piece and the information that I found
23 out, which I attempted to get a search warrant on the basis
24 of, developed further through a longer term investigation and
25 became the first mail piece of a series of suspicious [Page Break]

18

1 mailings.

2 Q Okay. And did you look at patterns or other -- you say
3 other mailings. What did you do to look at other mailings
4 that were going to that post-office box? What did you do?

5 A There were a couple of initial investigative steps. We
6 reviewed the mailing history for express mailings going to
7 this particular address in Venetia, which was P.O. Box 1211 in
8 Venetia, 94510 is the ZIP code, Venetia, California.
9 Over an extended period of time, we developed about
10 247 mailings emanating from the Washington Metro area going to
11 this P.O. box.
12 We also did a mail cover tracking to --

13 Q Describe -- before you go too far, what is a mail cover?

14 A Mail cover is an investigative tool available to law
15 enforcement where law enforcement is authorized to review
16 incoming mail, the face of incoming mail going to a given
17 delivery address based on a criminal investigation. So, for a
18 period of 30 days or 60 days, we can review who is sending
19 mail to a given subject of an investigation.

20 Q And as part of that, what information did you develop
21 through that mail cover?

22 A What it developed was that the box holder of P.O. Box
23 1211 in Venetia was a Deborah Jeane Palfrey and that this
24 individual was associated with an out-call escort service
25 named Pamela Martin & Associates. [Page Break]

19

1 Mail directed to that P.O. box came in the name of
2 Deborah Jeane Palfrey, Pamela Martin, Pamela Martin &
3 Associates and combinations thereof. The mail cover that we
4 did illustrated a quantity of express mailings similar to the
5 ones that we had already tracked through our historical
6 documents, and those documents and the mail cover results
7 indicated that about 25 female senders were mailing express
8 mails and the grand total was 247 of them to this P.O. box in
9 Venetia.

10 Q And for what period of time are you talking about?

11 A The records that I reviewed were between the year 2000
12 and 2002.

13 Q Okay. And did you take steps in the local area to
14 determine if you could identify the women who were sending
15 those documents to Venetia, California?

16 A Yes, I did.

17 Q What steps did you take?

18 A We used address checks checking through the postal system
19 to see who receives mail at a given address; in this case, the
20 return address on the mailings. We have also used Department
21 of Motor Vehicle checks and Auto Track, which is a
22 commercially available address check system to try to identify
23 the mailers such as they appeared on the return address
24 portion of these express mails.

25 Q Okay. Were you able to identify any individuals who were [Page Break]

20

1 actually sending documents to Venetia, California?

2 A Yeah, approximately 25 of them.

3 Q Okay. And did you identify specifically by name any
4 individuals? Without giving their names, were you able to --
5 not just get the names of the persons but to identify -- to
6 figure out who they were, where they lived, that type of
7 thing?

8 A Yes, we were able to figure out many aspects of their
9 background.

10 Q Okay. And did you take steps at the post-offices
11 themselves to see if you could track those individuals'
12 actions relative to sending those express mail packages?

13 A Yeah. During the course of the investigation, I dealt
14 with many different postal employees, from window clerks who
15 sold the express mail service, to delivery employees who
16 delivered the express mailing in California and other
17 locations, and those individuals did provide me with
18 information.

19 Q And did you also take steps on the California end of
20 things to see if you could identify further who Deborah
21 Palfrey was and that type of thing?

22 A Yes, I did. The steps on the California end were to
23 determine whether or not, first of all, Ms. Palfrey held this
24 P.O. box, and in review of our postal records is each P.O. box
25 is a P.O. box application, a Form 1093." ...

Songs from the Site Meter: Visits over Ted Stevens

Site Meter--Quite a few hits on the meter over this, one from Washington D.C., then they went off to DCPhonelist to check if in fact the number is there for ASRC. Hint: it is, but I have the phone number (301-957-1234). An SS# was also included. Want it? ;0)

It's entertaining knowing you're costing scoundrels thousands-of-dollars in legal and investigative expenses.

This other number was also provided by Verizon: 301-837-5500

Domain Name		verizon.net ? (Network)
IP Address		138.88.114.# (Verizon Internet Services)
ISP		Verizon Internet Services
Location		Continent : North America Country : United States (Facts) State : District of Columbia City : Washington Lat/Long : 38.9097, -77.0231 (Map)
Language		English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System		Microsoft WinXP
Browser		Internet Explorer 6.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30; InfoPath.1)
Javascript		version 1.3
Monitor		Resolution : 1280 x 800 Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit		Jul 31 2008 4:48:00 am
Last Page View		Jul 31 2008 4:49:10 am
Visit Length		1 minute 10 seconds
Page Views		3
Referring URL
Visit Entry Page		http://chickasawpick...iful-world-gops.html
Visit Exit Page		http://chickasawpick...re-fucking-abba.html
Out Click		DC Phone List search those records & publish your findings, it's legal! http://www.dcphonelist.com/
Time Zone		UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time		Jul 30 2008 4:48:00 pm
Visit Number		39,325

And someone who appears to have been flying around with their laptop...

Domain Name		gci.net ? (Network)
IP Address		206.174.90.# (GCI Communications)
ISP		GCI Communications
Location		Continent : North America Country : United States (Facts) State : Alaska City : Juneau Lat/Long : 58.5813, -134.7698 (Map)
Language		English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System		Microsoft WinXP
Browser		Internet Explorer 6.0 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
Javascript		version 1.3
Monitor		Resolution : 1024 x 768 Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit		Jul 31 2008 12:11:04 am
Last Page View		Jul 31 2008 12:35:57 am
Visit Length		24 minutes 53 seconds
Page Views		4
Referring URL
Visit Entry Page		http://chickasawpick...iful-world-gops.html
Visit Exit Page		http://chickasawpick...iful-world-gops.html
Out Click		http://dwb.adn.com/news/alaska/story/7242777p-7154791c.html http://dwb.adn.com/n...42777p-7154791c.html
Time Zone		UTC-9:00
Visitor's Time		Jul 30 2008 8:11:04 am
And later... Domain Name dillinghamairport.com ? (Commercial) IP Address 209.165.183.# (GCI Communications) ISP GCI Communications Location Continent : North America Country : United States (Facts) State : Alaska City : Anchorage Lat/Long : 61.1692, -149.8443 (Map) Language English (U.S.) en-us Operating System Microsoft WinXP Browser Firefox Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.16) Gecko/20080702 Firefox/2.0.0.16 Javascript version 1.5 Monitor Resolution : 1920 x 1200 Color Depth : 32 bits Time of Visit Jul 31 2008 12:13:46 am Last Page View Jul 31 2008 12:13:46 am Visit Length 0 seconds Page Views 1 Referring URL Visit Entry Page http://chickasawpick...iful-world-gops.html Visit Exit Page http://chickasawpick...iful-world-gops.html Out Click Time Zone UTC-9:00 Visitor's Time Jul 30 2008 8:13:46 am Visit Number 39,314