Friday, August 28, 2009

House Committee on Oversight and Reform Chair Henry A. Waxman was looking into selective prosecution in Palfrey case in 2007

Washington D.C.
--They say the wheels of justice are slow...especially when you're on the short-list.
In 2007, California Rep. Henry A. Waxman was chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and was apparently showing some interest in the DC Madam's legal plight and whether it might be politically motivated, even possibly having a connection to the U.S. Attorney firings. Why show interest, then drop it? Sure, perhaps there were other fish to fry, or he didn't think that there was much there--fine-and-well--but that doesn't appear to be the case and sounds more like another Democratic cop-out.

Waxman was presented with materials sometime in December, possibly January, by counsel regarding Palfrey's case. Apparently, he and his staff did look into it, but short-listed her, and even confirmed it did appear that her case was politically motivated, but then it went nowhere as it often does in the nation's capital. So much for oversight and due process, get in line, lady. Did I mention that Democratic Rep. Louise Slaughter was also pushing for a probe into the procurement of prostitutes by a DHS contractor, Christopher D. Baker (who has a 60+ page rap sheet), "proprietor" of Shirlington Limo?

DHS rebuffed Slaughter entirely, imagine that. They weren't alone: the CIA and DIA were stonewalling in such matters. And surprise-surprise, Baker kept getting multi-million dollar contracts from Congress to unnecessarily ferry appointed turds around DC on our dollar. One has to ponder if I and many others were correct in assuming that Palfrey's problems were directly related to "hookergate," a scandal involving cigar-and-hooker parties with CIA staffers, GOP congressmen, and government contractors such as Brent Wilkes at the Westin and Watergate Hotels. It sure looks like there was more than smoke...

On 2/4/08, Jeane Palfrey <jeanepalfrey@> wrote:

Bil… isn’t it realistic to think the Feds were looking at me in the same way, they viewed Michael? Perhaps, they thought I too was “in cohoots” with the Poway Mafia. Gotta admit – lots of connections (San Diego, Wells Fargo Bank, Shirlington Limo, Wilkes’s ongoing patronage of my business, Smoking Gun’s bizarre phone call to me in Germany). After several years of investigation though, they honestly had gotten ‘no where’ from what I have been able to ascertain. It is only my abnormal actions, in the summer of 2006, i.e. abrupt business closure, move to Europe, etc which I believe caused alarm and the rationale for the subsequent and sudden California trip. All this discussion about being a diversion is a little out there. Don’t you think? A bit too conspiratorial. I have found most things in life are rather simple, when you get right down to it. Yet, both Jason’s investigation and contacts and Waxman’s investigation and contacts are leading in the direction, that my case was part and parcel of the DOJ’s efforts, to prosecute selective targets verses any sort of garden variety screw up here. -Jeane

This relates back thematically (politically motivated prosecution) to a 12/23/2007 email, posted below for the public record, a primary historical document. My personal opinion is that Smoking Gun editor Bill Bastone was told by federal prosecutors--illegally, mind you--that Palfrey was somehow connected to a very specific corruption scandal emanating out of San Diego and Poway, California from just a few years ago. She had a property in Poway, Vallejo, and a condo in Florida. It sounds like she made more than the $2 million she and the government were claiming in court filings. Why would they all lie? In her case, exoneration, but what of the prosecutors? Perhaps it was the same for them.

They also leaked an unsigned warrant to him, also illegal, but nothing's illegal for some of us it seems. From the December 23, 2007 email:

Blair… if you ever doubt that my case is politically motivated OR simply “can’t go there” with the mounting circumstantial evidence of selective prosecution, I would ask that you read the highlighted portion below in particular, from Bil earlier today. Never forgot that son-of-a bitch, Bill Bastone’s first question to me in Germany, just days after the warrant was executed on my property had to do with Cunningham and Bastone’s insistence that I professionally knew the “Dukester”; this, despite my continued statements to the contrary. -Jeane

I have no reason to think that Palfrey was lying about the Smoking Gun's editor Bill Bastone and his statements directed at her that she was part of the scandal surrounding convicted GOP Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, now residing in a federal penitentiary for taking bribes, gifts, and sexual favors. Someone told him this, and that someone was probably part of the investigation and the prosecution, probably the someone who was directing the whole puppet show.

These bribes were given to former representative Cunningham for his votes on specific legislation and appropriations that went directly to convicted government contractor, Brent R. Wilkes and others like former number three man at the CIA, Kyle "Dusty" Foggo. With nicknames like these, you'd think you were dealing with the mafia, but what's the difference? Do you think Cunningham's alone in this, taking bribes, bedding prostitutes for his vote? Nah, me either.

By the way: ever see that crappy 80s movie, "Top Gun"? That was "based" on Cunningham's experiences as a combat fighter pilot during the Vietnam War. You can get it in blow-out at Walmart now for around $5. Cunningham wasn't exactly a hero in Vietnam either, but that's another story altogether. What he is now is a convicted felon who even has other more pressing problems. From some of the public statements made during his criminal proceedings, it sounds like he couldn't always get-it-up, but that's politics for you. Cunningham's a good metaphor for American-style politics and capitalism, meaning corrupt, embarrassing, delusional, and impotent. Except that it's not a metaphor.

No comments:

Post a Comment