Washington D.C. them out of office--Reading today's Washington Post piece on the release of Deborah Jeane Palfrey's Pamela Martin & Associates phone records is like a perusing a funeral lament. Note this tear-soaked passage:
In a world where phone numbers change constantly, where it is as easy to dial a wrong number as a right one, the public posting of the alleged D.C. madam's phone records has created a new commotion in a case that always aspired to be the next Washington sex scandal. It has raised the specter of wives searching frantically through records for their husbands' numbers, of grudge-bearers buckling down to unearth dirt on their enemies, of political groups aiming arrows at their opponents. (Washington Post, 07.11.2007)It reads like the voiceover for a bad Michael Bay movie trailer. "Specter"? Arlen? If someone has done wrong and betrayed the public trust, subsequently gets exposed...I'm not seeing the bad here, sorry.
Being one of the 50 individuals that was sent the records, receiving them on Monday, I can tell you the sense of relief that this information has been democratized--it's staggering, just peruse them yourselves, and make several calls. Better yet, start Googling them. Again, the logistics are absolutely staggering here, we're talking thousands of calls (with major repetitions, primarily from Palfrey and her associates). Are there "grudge bearers" out here in America? You bet. We've all tolerated far-too-much from this political and economic system and the political generation that has marginalized the American worker.
For at least three decades things have gone awry in this nation, and this is one little part that's going to fix things in our ailing democracy. It's time for genuine accountability, and it's time for our government to start serving the people again--not merely the wealthy and their holdings. Their servants are being run out. It's really time for a new day in America. This is a very belated shot across their bow, a kind of an asymmetrical warfare that privileged hypocrites of the Big Lie never wagered on. Everyone is biased, there is no objectivity, that's an excuse and an apology for power, or of careerism.
As Ms. Palfrey told me herself in a conversation, "Nobody has a monopoly on the truth." I agreed heartily then, and do now. With the release of these primary documents, we're going to have a much clearer picture of this political era than we ever imagined. Couple this with the probes in Congress, an unprecedented era of whistle-blowing, and you have a critical-mass for the criminals who occupy public office. It's about trust. This echoes the 1960s-70s when there was whistle-blowing and sundry revelations of a similar nature, though elements of Palfrey's predicament could reach into areas previously unknown in American political scandals. For that, one has to look at the Profumo affair in Cold War England during the 1960s, not Watergate.
Speaking again of people who apologize for power for a living: The Washington Post--headed by one Bob Woodward--is making it clear that they don't like this development. One could rest assured that they've quashed other stories like this one, either by buying the incriminating evidence, or simply ignoring the true import of the stories (as ABC's Executive Producers futilely attempted in early-May). We know for certain now that federal prosecutors simply messed with the wrong woman.
If anyone doubts that the "DC Madam" is going to fight for her survival to-the-hilt, those illusions have finally been shattered by the felling of Randall L. Tobias and GOP Sen. David Vitter, with more-to-come. It appears that Larry Flynt gets to keep his reward (for now)! There is a corroboration-of-sorts:Hustler magazine publisher Larry Flynt is claiming credit for Louisiana Sen. David Vitter's admission to being linked to the Deborah Jeane Palfrey, also known as the "D.C. Madam." Vitter, who was once considered a rising star for his public opposition of immigration reform, is now facing some tough questions into his clandestine travels and activities. According to Flynt following Hustler staff calling Vitter's office Monday, saying they had knowledge his telephone number appearing on a list from Deborah Jeane Palfrey's escort service, he went public."Vitter ran to The Associated Press in an attempt to get ahead of the story," Flynt's office said. Jeanette Maier, who is often called the Canal Street Madam, revealed on Tuesday that Sen. David Vitter started visiting her establishment in the mid-1990s. (AHN media, 07.11.2007)Nobody in the media seems to understand the underlying significance in this connection--or they aren't telling. Jeanette (eerie parallel, no?) Maier was also part of an investigation by the federal government that went wrong. Solution? Lie and say it was just to bust her, justifying the warrants and the funds expended:
With great care, the agents documented the secret life of a high-end brothel. Through more than 5,000 phone calls, they kept listening to the madams, the hookers and the johns, even though the conversations never turned up mentions of mob bosses or hard-core drug dealing -- both cited in the FBI's initial wiretap application 13 months ago. (Washington Post, 06.03.2002)There is an extremely strong possibility that this is what started it all regarding "Hookergate." Another important factor in the Canal Street case--the surveillance was going on while the 9/11 hijackers were plotting the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Feel safer now?
Washington Post today:
"Hustler Publisher Claiming Credit For Vitter Going Public About Paying For Sex," 07.11.2007: http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7007877986
The Canal Street Madam connection: http://taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=383
"New Orleans Brothel Made a Federal Case-FBI Wiretap Finds Elite Clientele, No Mob Ties," 06.03.2002: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A49210-2002Jun2?language=printer
Ed.-Many thanks go to Jody "the High-tech Madam" Williams for her assistance in connecting-the-dots for this article.
[12.31.12 addendum: I retract the thanks to Ms. What's-her-name.]
No comments:
Post a Comment