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." ...

Official: Deborah Jeane Palfrey committed suicide

Tarpon Springs, Florida--I haven't been reading my email for several days, but this was no surprise and nothing missed. Jeane Palfrey killed herself by her own hand. Not to be outdone by reality, entrepreneurial demagogues like Alex Jones are going to keep digging deeper holes insisting that there's a cover-up. Keep digging, Alex, everyone cranes their necks at a car wreck. At least ethically-impaired author Bill Keisling understood what we were looking at on May 1st of this year--suicide. I'm not so sure in the case of Palfrey's erstwhile civil attorney Montgomery Blair Sibley. Recently, he seemed to be leaning towards a strong possibility that Palfrey was the victim of foul play. Why exactly that would be necessary for his version of the narrative escapes me. Doesn't it seem obvious that the woman was unwell?

The unasked question remains: why was there no competency hearing during the legal proceedings of Deborah Jeane Palfrey? Are the answers in sealed court documents? I'm saying yes. How sick and depraved is it to use the legal system to run a mentally-unbalanced woman to her death? What kind of message does that send? At best, a pretty weird one. This was a witch trial-of-sorts, make no mistake of it. But it wasn't the kind that Ms. Magazine and other outlets are saying it was. Palfrey was a businesswoman, a capitalist, an employer, but most of all, she was a pimp. She wasn't an ordinary one, however, and there's no indication that she was any more abusive and exploitative than any other American employer. She was not.

But her clients were extremely well-heeled, even incredibly powerful. Does that mean they "murdered" her? No. There was no reason to after her conviction, and she was holding a bad hand--there were no more "big" names that Palfrey was aware of. By the end, it was a bluff on her part, though it's possible there are other names yet to be revealed in her remaining phone records. She was playing a very dangerous game considering her clientele. Her crime was telling us some their names, their identities. The common mistake of the press--namely the mainstream media--was that this was all about "big names," a trap that Palfrey fell into herself. The reasons for this error on their part is complicated, and this new report isn't going to fuel anything but the most base and paranoid of imaginations. Proof: you have none. She killed herself because she was disturbed. Get over it, and yourself.

Along with the Jack Abramoff and Randy Cunningham scandals, Palfrey proved that there's an institutionalized culture of bribes that include sex in Washington D.C., and that blackmail is likely a part of a very noxious-mix. In a surveillance culture like our own, someone is always watching, taking notes, and that the implications for frail politicians (and the rest of us) are grim. The government and the mainstream press did their best to keep the rest of us from knowing that what she did was commonplace in the nation's Capital.

The downing of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer during her legal proceedings only underscored the fact that the government is constantly watching and cherry-picking who gets "outed" based on who's running the executive branch at the time. The case of Republican Senator David Vitter's treatment after his own indiscretions were made public just makes the hypocrisy all-the-more obvious. Justice? Good luck finding much in America these days, guilty-or-not. My former co-researcher Monique Rawlings (aka "SP Biloxi,") is likely to contend that Jeane was "innocent," another assertion that I find not only intellectually dishonest, but utterly bizarre.

That's not important now, the truth is. I told you so.

Songs from the Site Meter: The Sibley Clan?

Site Meter--My "relationship" with close-to-erstwhile attorney Montgomery Blair Sibley (former DC Madam counsel) has been storied-at-best. Like erstwhile author Bill Keisling, Sibley's come around looking for my pieces of information regarding the case, and I have to be fair: he's been pretty equitable in sharing, which is saying a lot more in his favor than Keisling who wanted and never gave-in-return.

Sibley's also been much more well-mannered than Keisling, whose overall sincerity I doubt on a number of topics. That might be because he filed for chapter 13 reorganization before his role in the DC Madam's saga, and needed a big story to pay some outstanding bills. It appears that I'm not alone in my suspicions that he's ingenuine. But Keisling told me a number of extraordinarily wild "facts" surrounding the case, and claimed they were by-way of Sibley.

Some of these statements appear to be spot-on, but then he clammed-up entirely after getting a few emails between Palfrey and I. I'd love a clarification from Mr. Keisling, it might allay my own fears, and the fears of others regarding his investigative behaviors that smack more of a used car salesman than someone wishing to fix a broken system. My own hunch is that one thing he told me was true: that he's ghostwriting Sibley's book for a cut. If that's the case, it explains why he won't discuss anything with me--he's under contract to the Marianne Strong Agency and cannot.

That said, the Sibley clan originates from Rochester, NY, where Montgomery Blair Sibley was raised. Interestingly, Keisling once conveyed to me that he was researching a story in upperstate New York before he cut all contact. But "Blair's" also been awfully quiet these days--he's finishing his take on the Palfrey scandal. Who knows who this hit might be? Without being prolix...

Domain Name		rr.com ? (Commercial)
IP Address		74.74.155.# (Road Runner)
ISP		Road Runner
Location		Continent : North America Country : United States (Facts) State : New York City : Rochester Lat/Long : 43.1693, -77.6189 (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; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; MSN 6.1; MSNbMSFT; MSNmen-us; MSNc00; v5m)
Javascript		version 1.3
Monitor		Resolution : 1024 x 768 Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit		Oct 18 2008 5:03:48 am
Last Page View		Oct 18 2008 5:07:57 am
Visit Length		4 minutes 9 seconds
Page Views		3
Referring URL		http://www.google.co...ond ohio&btnG=Search
Search Engine		google.com
Search Words		montgomery blair sibley diamond ohio
Visit Entry Page		http://74.125.45.104...n&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us
Visit Exit Page		http://74.125.45.104...n&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us
Out Click
Time Zone		UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time		Oct 17 2008 5:03:48 pm
Visit Number		42,814

Late DC Madam's mother Blanche Palfrey breaks down in court

"Up the close and down the stair,
In the house with Burke and Hare.
Burke’s the butcher, Hare’s the thief
Knox, the man who buys the beef."

--An Edinburgh children's song about Burke and Hare,
both 19th century grave robbers, murderers,
and all around exploiters of the dead.

Pinellas County, Florida--It's all about money, not about the truth, but the press are expending more effort on obtaining access to 288 death photos of Jeane Palfrey than they ever were at getting to the bottom of her story when she was alive. That's what they do.

Additionally, you have various "players" like former counsel Montgomery Blair Sibley, Preston Burton and Orrick, Herrington, & Sutcliffe [Ed., 08.29.2008--In the spirit of fairness, it should be conveyed that counsel Sibley has written to myself via e-mail that the photos will not be published and that he's only looking to confirm the cause of death.], and bottom feeders like Alex Jones and Jeff Rense who are jockeying for a view of the goods. They don't care how they affect the 76-year-old mother of the deceased. What you have are a lot of agendas, and as Jean Renoir and Alexander Sesonske wrote in the screenplay for "Rules of the Game," "people have their reasons. They sure do.

There are no words for the craven attitudes of these people who had no genuine respect or concern for this late, troubled woman. They forgot their and her humanity a long time ago. Today, they caused the woman who gave birth to Palfrey to break down emotionally:

"This is the last thing I can do for my daughter," Palfrey said. "Please don't let these pictures get out in public."
News organizations have asked under Florida's public records law to inspect the photographs, a request opposed by Palfrey as a violation of her privacy. She filed a lawsuit against Tarpon Springs to prevent release of the photos.
Circuit Judge Linda R. Allen declared a break just before 11:30 a.m. so she could review the 288 photos in private.
The photos would not be released until after the investigation of the death. (" 'DC Madam's' Mom Breaks Down During Suicide Photo Hearing," The Suncoast News, 08.15.2008)

We might have a decision later today. My feelings are that they will be released to very hungry media and lawyers, and a gaggle of other opportunists who never cared to help Palfrey in any substantial sense. I lay no claim to a right to see these photographs, and would prefer not to ever see them.

It doesn't strike me that they'll offer anything new to the record or any understanding. What they will offer is the opportunity for those with book deals to have some nifty images for their tomes, and Blanche will just have to "accept" it "in the service of the truth." But the truth isn't what they're interested in, just the aforementioned money. Then, there are other issues at-play.

It was known by a number of individuals that Palfrey was threatening suicide during her proceedings, and nothing appears to have been done about it. This, then, could be one of the reasons Judge Gladys Kessler was removed from the case. If the judiciary knew of Palfrey's suicidal tendencies, they didn't act on it and never ordered a competency evaluation to see if she really was fit to stand trial. Various counsel at all points in the proceedings might have considered calling for one as well. Also, sources are saying that Blanche Palfrey is becoming "forgetful," which raises a number of legal issues regarding the Estate of Jeane Palfrey if it's true.

At-minimum, if the judges and the Justice Department knew about it, you have an incredible example of gross negligence. There was no call for a competency evaluation. A number of sealed records generated during pretrial legal proceedings could clarify this. The issue of competency over-complicates an already complex case, and it wasn't merely Palfrey who dragged-out her legal ordeal. She had a lot of help along the way from counsel and the prosecution.

Now, some of them outside of the prosecution (primarily in the media) want to continue exploiting Palfrey, even in death. What do you call exploiting the troubled life of a dead woman who might have been mentally unbalanced?

It can't be good, so let's call it "paying the mortgage" or the "bills." Granted that it's usually to pay for future investigations, but then, there's that lifestyle to pay for, or the fact that the bathroom needs retiling.

This writer wishes author William Keisling all the best of luck in his association with Montgomery Blair Sibley [Ed., 08.29.2008--They might both need that luck.]. He's going to need it. Burke's the butcher, and Hare's thief, and the publishers (and the public) are the ones who will buy the beef.

Revised, with comments, 08.29.2008

" 'DC Madam's' Mom Breaks Down During Suicide Photo Hearing," The Suncoast News, 08.15.2008: http://suncoastpinellas.tbo.com/content/2008/aug/15/mother-dc-madam-wants-suicide-photos-kept-private/?news

"Run amok" attorney Montgomery Blair Sibley is at it again: Insists in filing that death photos of deceased DC Madam be released

"Jeane was very clear with me that if she was ever found dead of an apparent suicide, I was to make sure that all the evidence was publicly disseminated so that it could be independently evaluated." --Montgomery Blair Sibley, a former counsel for the late DC Madam.

Tarpon Springs, Florida--C.L.G.'s (who are they? Citizens for Legitimate Government) Lori Price is scribbling today that on July 22nd, the third and former attorney for the late Deborah Jeane Palfrey filed for release of all investigative documents pertinent to her suicide--that includes the death photos that Palfrey's mother Blanche has filed to keep suppressed.

...This request includes copies of every document related to the matter, regardless of the format in which the information is stored. I note that information stored on a computer is as much a public record as a written page in a book or stored in a filing cabinet."...Citing his obligation to discharge explicit instructions from his former client, Jeane Palfrey, the so-called DC Madam, to "fully investigate and reveal the circumstances of her death if deemed a suicide by authorities," her attorney, Montgomery Blair Sibley, has moved to intervene in a lawsuit filed by Jeane's mother, Blanche Palfrey. That lawsuit seeks to prevent the Tarpon Springs, Florida Police Department from releasing information requested by Sibley pertaining the investigation of Jeane's death on May 1 of this year. (Attorney: 'DC Madam' left instructions if 'ever found dead of apparent suicide', Citizens for Legitimate Government, 08.10.2008)

You think she had to do it in-response? It's even money, and that's all this is about, sadly. Write a book, why dontcha.' Ask the Marianne Strong Agency, they have one in-the-works, possibly Sibley's.

A source informed me over a month ago that Sibley would be meeting with Blanche Palfrey around the end of July--apparently this meeting didn't pan-out, and it's likely to have been predicated on book deals and materials in the possession of the Palfrey Estate. Once again, for the record: Jeane discharged advocate Sibley with extreme prejudice (not legalese) in late-January of this year. That was her mental "cast" at that particular moment.

The break between them actually came much earlier in December, and Palfrey had to remove Sibley from the case in court. He had to be removed as her counsel.

Jeane informed me on a few occasions afterwards that counsel Sibley had done a poor job representing her, and that she considered him "nuts" and "crazy." Palfrey herself told this writer that, "things were said [between us] that you cannot take back."Take from these quotes what you will, and it must be admitted that the deceased was acting erratically at the time.

It was over, but is anything ever over with Montgomery Blair Sibley?

Well, yes, once he's been disbarred throughout the continental United States, Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, Guam, the Marshall Islands, and the rest of America's possessions, though he could have a fighting-chance in Florida. J-7 invites counsel Sibley to provide the actual date of authorship of the instructions left by the late Palfrey in the event of her suicide. What's interesting is that sources have informed this writer that Palfrey had threatened to commit suicide early-on in the legal proceedings (from as early as March-April, 2007) if she was convicted.

Everything this writer experienced before and after Sibley's departure as a short-duration researcher on her defense team supports this contention, as does her February 28th email to us. I was tapped by Palfrey herself in December of 2007 for research purposes. But from my involvement in all of this from June of 2007-on, I had a fear that this was going to end badly.

I have questions regarding the role of her final counsel, Preston Burton, whose defense strategy was an utter failure. Considering the fact that the firm he works for--Orrick, Herrington, & Sutcliffe--does extensive legal work for the federal government internationally, one could make an argument that there was (and still is) a very substantial conflict-of-interest. Mr. Burton refuses to discuss anything pertaining to his representation of Palfrey to this writer.

The lady wasn't kidding when she told bestselling journalist Jason Leopold and the rest of us on February 28th of this year:

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

As an interesting side-note, Leopold missed the import of the message entirely, telling me that he'd been "busy." I'm sure he was, but you couldn't miss the implications of the missive...if you were paying attention. I have no idea if others in the defense team caught this, as they and Palfrey kept things extremely compartmentalized. Leopold's role is a mystery, though I was informed by others that he was being prevented from working on the case by his then-employers Talkout--their editor went as far to monitor his computer account.

Oh well, most of the "McProgressive" sites like these and CLG are going to be gone soon, with little or no contributions. OpEd News is one-month-away from folding for said reasons. Now, if Moveon.org folds, we can actually get on with a genuine Populist movement. What a life. Yes, what a life indeed. Montgomery Blair Sibley's former client is dead, but he has assured this writer that none of Jeane's death photos will be published. As it stands, her estate wants nothing to do with him.

And yet, all I can think of is poor Blanche Palfrey and all that she's been through over her daughter's death. First came the government's agents. Then came the lawyers [Ed., 09.05.2008--I am told by a source that attorney Preston Burton began an argument at the funeral over who would control the estate of the deceased. If true, it's in exceptionally bad taste, if not profoundly questionable and unethical.] Then came media, and finally, came the Tarpon Springs Police to carry Jeane's lifeless body away. All this feasting on the lives of others just underscores how sick we are as a culture. Let the dead rest in peace, and note the photograph above. Reflect on the violated dignity of the deceased. Her mother deserves to be left alone, and this site is doing just that. Greed is a horrible thing, destroying everything in its wake.

Revised, 08.29.2008

Attorney: 'DC Madam' left instructions if 'ever found dead of apparent suicide', Citizens for Legitimate Government, 08.10.2008: http://www.legitgov.org/dc_madam_update_100808.html

Montgomery Blair Sibley: Well hung?

"I asked him to wear a suit and tie."

--Obama-accuser, Larry Sinclair.

Washington D.C./Florida--For those of you who don't know the story of Obama accuser Larry Sinclair, count yourself lucky. Sinclair has been claiming for some time that he had coke-fueled sex with the presidential candidate in a limousine in Gurnee, Illinois way back in 1999. Right, he's an annoying liar and an idiot.

Can he prove it? No. Does he have a criminal record? Yes, dating-back 27 years. Is he so incredibly ugly that nobody in their right mind would fuck him, and certainly wouldn't be paying him for the sex? Correct. Is he insane? Probably, but some (other) bloggers wrote things that hurt his feelings, calling him a liar (which we can assume is accurate), and he tried to sue them. Now it's clear that he's just a disturbed sociopath. [Ed., 07.31.2009: and probably still is.]

By all appearances, Sinclair's going to keep trying, we can assume it's going to go nowhere and that he's going to lose miserably in any courtroom that would be stupid enough to accept his presence. Who would represent someone like this? Enter Montgomery Blair Sibley, an attorney I've actually communicated with: Sibley is currently suspended from practicing law in the District of Columbia and the State of Florida, apparently for frivolous litigation and filings.

In case you don't already know, Mr. Sibley was the third sequential attorney [Ed., 07.31.2009: partly-true--as criminal her counsel, but he was civil counsel very early on until January 2008.] for the troubled DC Madam, Jeane Palfrey. Palfrey fired Sibley sometime in January of this year, re-replacing him with her former criminal attorney, Preston Burton. Burton is currently representing the estate of Palfrey, but that's not stopping Sibley from trying to re-enter the picture. [Ed.,08.28.2008-This isn't to say that Burton is pure or unsullied in his motives, which remain unclear.] More on that later.

On Wednesday, Sinclair and counsel Sibley held a press conference at the National Press Club so that Sinclair could convey "evidence" of his alleged one night stand with Barack Obama. I wasn't there, and I'm glad. Anyone can rent a room there for such purposes, and reports state that Sinclair paid-out $4,100 USD for...I don't know what for. The stories are already becoming legend, but it's obvious that Sinclair has no evidence whatsoever, and that he was clutching his last 15 minutes of fame as hard as he could. In the spirit of things, counsel Sibley did likewise, and appeared at the press conference in a kilt. Yes, you read it correctly: a kilt.

Sibley was asked why he was wearing the kilt by an exasperated journalist, possibly from Reason magazine. Sibley's reply, from Huffington Post: "I don't know why men wear pants. It's a function of male genitalia. If you're size normal or smaller, you're probably comfortable with [pants]. ... Those at the other end of the spectrum find them quite confining." In other words, he's saying that he's well-hung. Where is this coming from? Why all the filings of motions and complaints in the courts?

Sibley grew up in Rochester, N.Y., one of six siblings. "We're a big family, but nobody is crazier than Blair," says Harper Sibley Jr., Sibley's father and now a prominent South Florida developer. Sibley played rugby and several other sports with so much aggression that his father often picked him up from the hospital. Sibley's ambitions soon turned to the law. He graduated from the University of Miami and later from Albany Law School at Union University, returning to his hometown district attorney's office as a prosecutor for the next five years. After losing his bid for district attorney in 1987, Sibley headed to Miami. ("The Man Behind the Madam," Law.com, 03.30.2007)

Comparing the M.O. of the Sinclair case with Palfrey's, it's not hard to understand why hers just kept going-and-going-and-going, seemingly without end. Certainly, the client, the government, and her counsel contributed to this fact. Palfrey was clearly a troubled and disturbed individual, but is Sibley?

For that, we'll all have to wait-and-see, but there appear to be columns of thick, black smoke rising from the embattled attorney and his quest for the white whale. The prognosis is not good, not at all, especially considering that Sibley technically cannot represent Sinclair in D.C., though it's possible he could in New York and New Jersey. If any of this is about anything at all it's money, the American Dream (really a nightmare). Jeane, you should have taken the plea deal...

"The Man Behind the Madam," Law.com, 03.30.2007: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1175159039205

Montgomery Blair Sibley's May 8th Suspension from Practicing Law in the District of Columbia: http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/5/16/1914169/sibley-dc-suspension.pdf

The Florida Bar on Montgomery Blair Sibley: http://www.floridabar.org/names.nsf/0/686B8824E4A5B00185256A8400151BDD?OpenDocument

"The Colorful Case of a Well-Named Lawyer," the Washington Post, 05.04.2007: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/03/AR2007050302233.html

Revised 06.23.2008

Postscript, 07.31.2009: At this point, considering the incredibly crappy coverage surrounding the Palfrey scandal and numerous others during the Bush II administration, I have to question the veracity of the Washington Post article. I'd also add that while Mr. Sibley might be considered eccentric, I've never seen any indication he had any nefarious intent as an attorney or a private citizen. Why he would wear a kilt to events like this is probably a matter of "doing battle." I can see and hear wise-ass journalists mocking him and Sibley making his retorts that were then conflated into a lot more than they really constituted. Such is public life...

The Jackals Who Drove Jeane Palfrey to Suicide Return to J-7 for a Long Read...

Site Meter--For the AUSAs and USAs (particularly Jeffrey A. Taylor): may this haunt you forever. I know that you have no moral compass, or why would you be in the positions you're in right now as Bush/Gonzales appointees? You and this criminal administration will be remembered forever as the scoundrels you are.

There are no names that would do justice to the animals that you are. Read-up, you're going to be doing a lot of it soon, it's going to be part of the permanent historical record. Readers: copy-away from this site and disseminate (primary materials only, the rest requires permission).

Domain Name		usdoj.gov ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address		149.101.1.# (US Dept of Justice)
ISP		US Dept of Justice
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; DI60SP1001; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; InfoPath.2)
Javascript		version 1.3
Monitor		Resolution : 1280 x 1024 Color Depth : 16 bits
Time of Visit		May 14 2008 9:41:21 pm
Last Page View		May 14 2008 9:58:15 pm
Visit Length		16 minutes 54 seconds
Page Views		10
Referring URL		http://www.google.co...=j to the power of 7
Search Engine		google.com
Search Words		j to the power of 7
Visit Entry Page		http://chickasawpick...esmell.blogspot.com/
Visit Exit Page		http://chickasawpick....com/search?q=butler
Out Click		http://www.yardbird.com/reform_usa_Farewell_Deborah_Jeane_Palfrey.htm http://www.yardbird....ah_Jeane_Palfrey.htm
Time Zone		UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time		May 14 2008 9:41:21 am
Visit Number		35,414
Postscript, 08.23.2008: Keisling and I were corresponding at this time. Were we under surveillance? Was the Justice Department or other govt. entities reading our e-mails?

Author Bill Keisling's Farewell to Jeane

Yarbird Books Home--Bill Keisling has written a very moving and poignant goodbye to Deborah Jeane Palfrey. You can find it at the link below. Read it and weep.

"Farewell, Deborah Jeane," by Bill Keisling:
http://www.yardbird.com/reform_usa_Farewell_Deborah_Jeane_Palfrey.htm

[Ed., 09.13.2008-I have to question the sincerity of Mr. Keisling on this now based on past conversations with him regarding Palfrey.]

Does the Government Have the Right to Keep Deborah Jeane Palfrey's Assets?

Washington D.C.--A solid source is telling me that because Jeane Palfrey died before sentencing, her record is now clean. As a result of this, all of her forfeited assets no longer belong to the Federal Government. Any readers who have additional information on sentencing guidelines in this area, please feel free to drop me a line via e-mail.

If this is true, we have part of the motive behind Jeane killing herself: she wanted to leave her family something, and suicide was the only way to achieve this. Hopefully, we'll find-out the contents of the two notes that she left.

I found the image to the left searching one night and forwarded it to Jeane--she was thrilled by it and found it funny. She asked me to forward it to AUSA William Cowden, and I did: seven times in one night (it got stuck in my "out" box, I swear to God)...
05.05.2008 Postscript: When someone convicted of a federal crime dies before sentencing in the federal circuit courts, the prosecution files an abatement that strikes the entire criminal proceedings. This includes forfeited assets, and the precedents are in-favor of Jeane's family receiving her assets. This is good to hear, and might shore-up the possibility that Jeane can be viewed as a kind of "anti-hero." This might have been part of her motive for committing suicide on May 1st.

Additons to David Vitter's Wikipedia Article Reinserted 09/22/2007

Wikipedia--Here's the text of what will be removed either tonight or tomorrow by some very angry GOP operatives (in-spirit or fact):


TOP BIO:

Specifically, since the evening of July 9th of 2007, the public has been aware of his five calls to Pamela Martin & Associates spanning 1999-2001, which could have been repeated 'Master 9 severity' violations under District of Columbia prostitution statutes. It's unclear whether this could impair his ability to continue serving as a ranking minority member on the Subcommittee on International Operations and Organizations, Democracy and Human Rights. This is a subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Another factor could cause Senator Vitter some very serious problems within the Senate: he had Senate Foreign Relations Committee oversight responsibilities over the State Department when the Palfrey scandal had broken in the Spring of 2007. These oversight failures were specifically breached by inadequate oversight (known as "oversight failures") of Randall L. Tobias, now former director of U.S. Foreign Assistance and head of USAID at the State Department. Tobias was also found in Palfrey's phone records by ABC's 20/20 in late-April of 2007. He resigned on April 27th, 2007, just one day after confirming his identity within the phone records of Deborah Jeane Palfrey. Tobias is thought to have carried a 'Top Secret security clearance' while serving at USAID.[1]

Very Bottom of the Article:

As of September 18th, 2007, there has been no serious oversight or ethics investigation of Senator Vitter. though Senate Ethics Committee probes are usually confidential at their inception. It's unclear whether any of these facts about Vitter have caught the attention of other members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the Ethics Committee, and other members of the Senate.

To whomever is removing the entries: they are factual, provable, and I can cut-and-paste them back at my leisure. Prove them wrong, let the ruling board of Wikipedia decide. Vigilantes aren't good deciders.

[Ed., 09.13.2008-The additions were done at-the-behest of author Bill Keisling who is the origin of the contentions. They probably true, but who cares at this points anyway? Vitter is done, put a fork in him. Wikipedia is unnecessary-at-best, a poor concept that has more to do with the opposite of the democratization of information. Do web searches, use academic sites, they're reliable. Why do you think I post links to them? Decide for yourselves. I make no apologies.]

David Vitter's Page at Wikipedia: Acrimony or Objectivity?

Wikipedia.com--An interesting note: I perused the page and saw not one mention that Senator Vitter serves on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. There have been a number of disputes over "NPOV," or "Neutrality Point of View." I've joined and filed a request that the page for Senator Vitter be unlocked from "semi-protection." Also expedited was a post of a comment noting the fact on Vitter's committee post:

"Agreed Captain Annoying and Journalist1983. I believe it's time to end the semi-protection, incidentally. Why? Because nobody but long-term registered users can add information. This can effectively block new information that established users may be biased towards, yet is a solid, verifiable fact. For example: not one section contains the fact that Senator Vitter is a member of a subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committe, and holds a security clearance [Ed.-Basically all elected representatives do, with few-exceptions.] It's verifiable with a quick search. As a result of Randall L. Tobias calling Ms. Palfrey's service, it's possible Vitter has committed an oversight failure. This can be proven eventually, but the basic facts are pertinent and deserve an airing. Individuals can challenge them after they've been posted for their veracity. ." [Final version, September 22nd, 2007]

It's @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:David_Vitter#Palfrey

Here's the request post to unlock David Vitter's page so that additional information is allowable to others besides "established users" and editors:

David Vitter (edittalkhistorylinkswatchlogs)
"Locked since July [10]. Lock is preventing the addition of crucial information on Senator Vitter's seat as a member of Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the fact that he was serving on it when calls were made by Randall L. Tobias to Deborah Jeane Palfrey's Pamela Martin and Associates. This is an oversight failure on Senator Vitter's part. Addition should be allowed to at least be challenged for veracity. User:MattJanovic/MattJanovic 3:09 EST, September 20, 2007." (both the 'talk' section post and unblock request were modestly edited again after midnight by the author. Final corrections, 22nd September, 2007.)
It was @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection (above the one for Che Guevara, how apropos)

I'm not drawing any conclusions yet, but look at the identities of some of the disputants, it's fairly telling in some areas. It's a hard call as to why Senate Ethics Committee Chair Barbara Boxer (R-Ca.) and Vice Chair Sen John Cornyn aren't moving on an ethics investigation of Sen. Vitter. Or are they? Usually ethics investigations are done "confidentially," so there could be one that's ongoing. We should be asking her and others in Congress why Sen. Vitter hasn't undergone an ethics investigation.

This is especially glaring when one considers that Sen. Larry E. Craig has been met by calls for an investigation from within his own party-ranks, even being induced to step-down from his committee and subcommittee positions. There hasn't been a peep on David Vitter being investigated.

Senator David Bruce Vitter, still being allowed to hear key testimony on September 11th, 2007 from General John Petraeus: http://vitter.senate.gov/?module=PressRoom/PressItem&ID=823a51f1-5a27-44af-82ef-87973fd52302

[Ed.-After checking Wikipedia around midnight tonight, the author discovered that a ruling has come from the board that has unblocked the article. Additions have been made, and only the facts known to the author at the time of the additions.]

[Ed., 09.13.2008--Again, I make no apologies for the additions. Bill Keisling should have made them himself, but I'm always ready to lend-a-hand in downing corrupt politicians. Politics makes for strange bedfellows. I leave it at that.]

Fun at Wikipedia: Palfrey and Vitter Information from Yardbird.com and J-7 Posted, Then Removed, Then...

Wikipedia.com-I posted this basic information yesterday at the entry for 'Deborah Jeane Palfrey,' and today--POOF!--it was gone! These things just magically happen, like the hacking of Ms. Palfrey's phone lines and e-mail accounts. Then, there's the possibility that Senator Vitter and/or his interns or congressional staff removed it...why, that could be an abuse of his office. My guess is it's some n'er-do-well Republican pud, just some wrong-headed vigilante checking it, becoming enraged (which is always a good thing), and deleting it. Anyway, here's the sum, (re)posted today with some slight-differences, but basically the same:

On July 9th, 2007 Palfrey released the supposed entirety of her phone records for public viewing and download on the Internet in TIFF format. Senator David Vitter (R-LA) acknowledged that he had been a customer of Palfrey's escort service. On September 2nd of 2007, writer Bill Keisling noted that USAID's Randall L. Tobias presence in the phone records of Pamela Martin & Associates amounted to a violation of his duties as a ranking minority member of the Foreign Relations Committee. [Ed.-final version, 09.22.2007]

Questions remain as to whether Tobias's background check was shoddy, or whether investigators deliberately looked the other way, or even helped facilitate his behavior. As a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Vitter also holds a high security clearance. Even while Vitter attempts to weather what he describes as a personal sex scandal, and deflects attention away from his committee oversight failures, more questions are being raised about the alleged procurement of prostitutes by U.S. government agencies and the United States military for foreign diplomats, and others. (http://www.yardbird.com/)
As of September 18th, 2007, there has been no serious oversight or ethics investigation of Senator Vitter. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deborah_Jeane_Palfrey)

The majority of my additions today are of Bill Keisling's observations, and there are others on Col. Roughead in other areas that aren't quoted here. Just a couple other facts like that he was a defense attache, possibly present at the U.S. embassy bombing in Kenyan, etc. There are some indications that Col. Roughead was also involved in the investigations of the Kenyan bombing. Why, one might think he's been part of crafting the war on terrorism from its earliest inception. Fancy that.

So, I went back today and reinserted what had been deleted. [Ed.-I think they should hold at this point, 09.22.2007] I defy others to prove the additions wrong, and any further deletions by third-parties other than Wikipedia will be countered with a reinsertion of what is factual. Be logical, reasonable, and fair--prove them wrong if you can and then they can be removed by an arbitrator (Wikipedia). Just a FYI to CYA.

Interestingly, whomever did the redactions forgot or didn't care about removing the information on Ret. Colonel Ronald Roughead who works for SAIC, and can be found in the December 2005 Cingular records of Pamela Martin & Associates. He called three times in short-duration calls. What's interesting is that the calls were itemized, therefore in the front, just four-pages-in. Did he call collect? Why would he think he could do that if he did?

[Ed., 09.13.2008-No apologies forthcoming here. Nothing to be ashamed of.]

The Sergeant at Arms of the Senate Returns, This Time Over The Rougheads

Site Meter--To the Senator or Senators who tapped the office of the Sergeant at Arms to peruse the articles here: read well, you all have a lot of investigating and subpoenas to draw-up and issue. The public is tired of waiting--we want results, we want some people brought to justice. We're tired of the excuses, and we're not buying any more of them. This is not a threat, it's a warning.

The rule of law has been thrown into disregard, which is a very dangerous thing for any democracy. We know who many of these people are, so start investigating, and begin impeachment investigations and hearings now. And to the Sergeant at Arms of the Senate himself: Mr. Gainer, you need to begin investigating the fact that Sen. David Vitter violated terms of his seat on the Foreign Relations Committee by committing what could be repeated felonies while serving on said committee (and the Senate in-general). This fact has been uncovered by journalist and author, Bill Keisling (http://www.yardbird.com/).

Most of all: you need to subpoena Ronald Roughead, a retired U.S. Army Colonel. You need to ask him why he called the escort service of Pamela Martin & Associates, and if he's ever had contact with Shaha Ali Riza, Paul Wolfowitz, and if he had a security clearance at the time he called Ms. Palfrey, and why he was doing so. You should also ask Mr. Roughead--and perhaps his brother Gary, current CNO of the U.S. Navy--if he has ever had contact with Jack Abramoff, Edward T. Norris, Brent Wilkes, or individuals connected to them.

And while you're at it, you need to hold serious congressional hearings on the murder of Assistant U.S. attorney Jonathan P. Luna--you need to subpoena FBI Special Agent Steven Skinner and Thomas DiBiagio, as well as Ed Norris, and several other individuals. Get to work, there's a lot to be done.

Domain Name
senate.gov ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address
156.33.122.# (U.S. Senate Sergeant at Arms)
ISP
U.S. Senate Sergeant at Arms
Location
Continent:North Americ
Country:United States (Facts)
State:District of Columbia
City:Washington
Lat/Long:38.8933, -77.0146 (Map)
Language
English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System
Microsoft WinXP
Browser
Internet Explorer 7.0Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; InfoPath.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)
Javascript
version 1.3
Monitor Resolution:1920 x 1200
Color Depth:32 bits
Time of Visit
Sep 18 2007 5:54:20 am
Last Page View
Sep 18 2007 6:00:47 am
Visit Length
6 minutes 27 seconds
Page Views
2
Referring URL
http://www.google.co...&hl=en&start=20&sa=N
Search Engine
google.com
Search Words
admiral gary roughead home of record
Visit Entry Page
http://chickasawpick...ald-roughead_16.html
Visit Exit Page
http://chickasawpick...ctor-visits-j-7.html
Out Click
Time Zone
UTC-5:00
Visitor's Time
Sep 17 2007 5:54:20 pm
Visit Number
20,979

[Ed., 09.13.2008-I'm unconvinced of Keisling's assertions about Vitter's committe responsibilities at this writing. Yes, I believe that I was wrong in thinking it was a valid point.]

Ed Norris: He won't talk (and neither will Rawstory)

WWW--It would behoove Ms. Alexandrovna and associates to publish her findings from Rawstory's twelve hours of interviews with the former Baltimore Police Commissioner (search this blog under his name for previous articles). You don't conduct that many "sittings" if the interviewee says nothing of value.

But let's be fair: If it's nothing, just a lot of self-serving garbage, fine, don't run it. If it is significant, then let it be part of the public record. Palfrey has communicated to this author that Norris has been trying to get his side of his predicament out to the press for awhile. He does have his own radio and television shows, after all.

Norris clearing the air might clarify areas of Deborah Jeane Palfrey's own predicament (she's parted-ways this week with her court appointed criminal representation, Preston Burton, over "irreconcilable differences" [Ed., 08.28.2008--Like the fact that she was probably suicidal.]). I'm unaware of anyone else who has gotten Edward T. Norris to talk as much as Rawstory. I'm assuming that they there were ostensibly about his own plea deal and the events surrounding his own legal predicament.

At some point, they hit-a-bump in some a priori assumptions, and had to scuttle the story. [Ed., 08.28.2008--Alexandrovna explained to me in an angry e-mail that Palfrey and her civil attorney had failed to meet her as planned by a prior-agreement. She also mentioned things that could be construed as a violation of a confidentiality agreement.] There is also another possibility that could run parallel with the aforementioned issues--that Rawstory cannot release the materials under a confidentiality agreement. There might also be fears on-his-part of government retaliation regarding his original plea deal. Was Palfrey part of this deal? She has made comments that it might, but has also mentioned that Norris would deny any involvement with her.
Where does Ed Norris fit-in in the saga of "Hookergate"? Does he fit-in at all, or is he just a red-herring? This writer would like to know, and he's sure that the public would too. Where does Norris fit-in with the murder of assistant U.S. attorney Jonathan Luna? Does he at all? Ms. Palfrey has contended there might be a connection between all-three. Do the interviews with Norris support any of this? Again, it's like a dialogue with the Sphinx.

What did Ed Norris say in those interviews? Surely, a journalist and their associates would not spend that much time if he hadn't said something important initially in the first hours of their conversations. The interviews should be turned-over to author Bill Keisling, and other interested researchers, it could be a motherlode of information. Of course, Mr. Norris could just start talking to other journalists, so it's on him as well.

If there's nothing in them, allay our fears, and be forthcoming about it. There was a time when this writer really felt Rawstory was doing their best--and they may be doing so regardless of my suspicions--but they've raised some flags. It could just be journalistic method on-their-part, or it could be something insignificant. My hope is that it's something insignificant, and perhaps Mr. Norris needs to contact Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee to clarify things. There could be a lot her concerning the Bush Justice Department and so many other transgressions that they've commited in the name of upholding the law.

Former U.S. attorney Thomas DiBiagio might have to be subpoenaed as well, since he was involved in the prosecution of Mr. Norris. He was also acting U.S. attorney when one of his assistant U.S. attorneys--Jonathan Luna--was murdered. DiBiagio was also the first U.S. attorney fired by the Bush administration, since the number is really nine, not eight, as misreported by much of the mainstream media.

It's not hard to fathom why a defendant wouldn't be forthcoming about all the details of their case, regardless of their guilt or innocence. What's disappointing is that many in the press began with a presumption of guilt as soon as this story broke in October of 2006--just weeks-away from the U.S. attorney firings. We should be looking to see if there is any connection here with all of this.

Ask Ed: http://www.ednorris.com/

Ask Larisa: http://www.rawstory.com/ , then ask yourself.