2016 election stimulates new interest in DC Madam case

Former DC Madam civil and criminal counselor Montgomery Blair Sibley has been doing some filings recently, all covered in the press, and he wants to release the subpoenaed Verizon phone records for reasons I won't go into based on confidentiality, a promise I have made to a source. The development comes at an interesting time and I cannot fault the man for doing what he's doing and even wish him well, I hope he's successful.

His claim that there are 815 names in the subpoenaed phone records is correct, however, I never noticed any major political names and have not gone back to them or Dan Moldea's searches of her phone records that Jeane herself entrusted to myself and others for the purposes of research for her case.

I would add that since 2008, I haven't had anyone request or tell me either telephonically, via email, or served through the postal service, to return any of those materials, not that I could if I tried since they've been so thoroughly disseminated as to render that impossible. That being stated, and I say this as a layman, I seriously doubt that anyone could even claim jurisdiction over me and them. In fact, I've published some of them on here, the raw information, but only specific names.

Here's the thing: Nearly all of the names we were able to dig deeper on are published online anyway. The Chief U.S. Courts judge, a fellow named Roberts, God help us, really just seems to hate Sibley along with the rest of the legal establishment in DC and won't let him release and publish (the most important aspect, I believe, that right) them, hoping, Sibley said, to affect the outcome of the political elections. Can he? Will he? Should he?

It's possible that the names are of people who rose since I last looked at them, I don't know, frankly, there were so many.

Where does that leave me? Yes, stuck in the middle, again, somewhere in Dante's limbo, on the outskirts of mortality.

Jeane never told me or Mr. Sibley to return that information, the files, the phone numbers, the scans of her phone bills, or anything at all. Neither has the Palfrey Estate in all of eight years. I believe their time is well up seeing that the phone records were probably released online at Jeane's bequest by Citizens for Legitimate Government, hence by Lori Price. It was never a great idea to put those phone bills online for the defense, but, I must add that the above parts of this paragraph are simply my conclusions and opinions, albeit very informed ones.

Are there more names of importance in the phone records? Why wouldn't they have been found already? I'm skeptical but might be induced to take another look, maybe, just maybe, if I cared enough to. It's mostly a closed door for me.

I have communicated with Mr. Sibley recently. That being said, no, I'm staying mum out of respect.

An open call for information regarding GOP pundit, lobbyist, and attorney Jack Burkman

WWW--I am looking for a very specific piece of information: what was the phone number of J.M. Burkman & Associates in 2006? I already know what the address is but have been unable to locate the number from that time. It could very well be correct, but I get the impression that Mr. Burkman has been going around making threats all over the blogosphere.

Just in case you don't recall, Burkman was very closely involved in the witch-hunt to take down former President Bill Clinton for lying about getting some since painting him with the corruption brush just wasn't going to work when everyone's having the same fun in that arena, what with many of the same fingers in the same pots. Ironically, Palfrey and I argued over Clinton's innocence in the realm of corruption--I never agreed with her or conceded to her on it. Oddly, she would finally end up with Monica Lewinski's lawyer who I don't believe did a very good job defending her.

Around June 16, 2006, the website Wonkette reported on Burkman's alleged attempts at offering to pay two lesbians to have sex with him at a gay pride parade in DC. The two ladies "outed" Mr. Burkman on one of their Myspace pages, even putting a scan of the business card he allegedly gave to them and a partial account of the whole night:

...afterward, we got a snazzy hotel room at the mayflower downtown. on the way over there, this really hot business man in a pinstriped suit walked past me, said hello, and doubled back. he asked me my name and introduced himself (jack burkman, government relations strategies), asked where i went to school, etc, gave me his card, and asked me to call him. i later texted him and never could get rid of him again. he thought he talked to me on the phone several times, but he never did. i always made kat or kristin be me. he told kristin about how he really enjoyed my outfit (TITS GALORE) and that i was beautiful, etc. by the end of the night (5 am or so), he was offering to pay for our room and give us a thousand dollars if two of us would fuck him. oh, jack burkman. his card is my DC souvenir.

Burkman has been a strong advocate for the Family Research Council, one of those wacky family values organizations and was founded by the televangelist James Dobson.

Less than a month later, Citizens for Legitimate Government (who are they?) was claiming that Burkman was in the phone records of the DC Madam. Now, both articles at Wonkette (and many other progressive sites) on these two incidents of what might have been solicitation are gone, taken down, possibly since 2008. Other sites have pulled their articles on Burkman and one or the other of these two alleged scenarios. Wonkette and several of these sites have refused to reply to my questions on this issue. But Palfrey all-but-confirmed it was real at the time, as she recounted to blogger Margie Burns just a couple days after CLG released the name:

“Ms. Burns… FYI, this and any calls to the Washington area were business, i.e. escort service related.

–Sincerely, Jeane Palfrey” ("Ms. Palfrey confirms that Mr. Burkman's business with her was escort service related, 07.13.2007)

I was pretty close to the story and had never heard of his number being in the phone records and neither have several others close to the Palfrey case. What gives? What is this? There isn't one article that resoundingly impeaches the contention that Burkman was in Palfrey's phone records and not one mainstream press outlet picked it up at the time. What do you think?

Burkman responded clumsily in the third person--as megalomaniacs do--and included a double-negative in his statement that's not exactly reassuring regarding his innocence. A more toned down 2008 version of the statement is still on his personal website:

“BURKMAN RESPONDS:

Web allegations are simply and completely false, driven by a group of left-wing people seeking to intimidate conservatives and independants [sic].

As my viewers and readers know, I usually do not respond to silliness on the internet. But in this case--given the national and international coverage--I feel I must. The recent allegations concerning sollicitation [sic] are false lies. They have been printed and reprinted by websites with a long and intense history of harrassing [sic] me and trying to stop my commentary.

None of the sites even so much as contacted me for comment. But I can assure you that they will not succeed. My family and I have been through this before. During impeachment in the 90's, every form of illegitimate pressure that could be brought to bear was brought to bear in an attempt to silence me. But they failed and seven years later, my commentary continues unabated and unphased [sic]. And it always will.

Thank you for watching and reading.
- Jack Burkman”

Yeah, he's a real martyr for freedom alright, a regular Patrick Henry. He sure never was a speech writer, and he can barely write at all. I could be wrong, but wasn't Henry famous for saying, "Show me your tits, I'll pay"? Maybe this whole Burkman story was overshadowed by the Vitter revelation, but if it's true, what gives? Surely, Larry Flynt would have released his name had his PI Dan Moldea found it, but then, that doesn't fit their criteria at the time: they were looking for hypocritical office holders and Burkman is a lobbyist and talking neck with close ties to the GOP and sundry corporations due to his line of business.

So: if you have any letterhead or copies of J.M. & Associates, LLC business cards, I'd love to see them. Any information related to the aforementioned issue is being sought, and I can only offer you my thanks, that's it. What an arrogant little man.

"Ms. Palfrey confirms that Mr. Burkman's business with her was escort service related, Margie Burns.com, 07.13.2007: http://www.margieburns.com/blog/_archives/2007/7/13/3090733.html

Ronald Roughead Plagiarists, Take-Note: The Internet Never Forgets

"The mere fact that Roughead’s name along with that of the SAIC is getting ‘out there’ is entirely due to you and your hard work." --Deborah Jeane Palfrey, in a September 12th correspondence with the author.

J-7--I've been noticing a disturbing trend with a number of sites and blogs that have been copying and republishing information found by this site: no intellectual attribution. This is plagiarism. Almost all posts on the internet are copied--'cached'--by internet providers like Google, and by other telecommunications entities.

At this point, I have to reiterate that I am not the first individual to locate Mr. Roughead's phone number in the records of Pamela Martin & Associates, it was an anonymous commenter at a progressive blog whose name escapes me--you do the search. It was posted around July 8th-9th. That's not how I found Mr. Roughead's number in the records, however, as I was one of the 50 original recipients of the phone records of Pamela Martin & Associates in CD-ROM form back in early-July.

I have even gone as far as to call Mr. Roughead personally, getting him on the line for a few moments. The man behind the number is the same man who ran IMN and who I assume is still employed by SAIC to represent them in Washington D.C., amongst other duties.

Note that I didn't begin my searches until July 15th, and found Mr. Roughead's number on that day after just 8 hours of Google searches using the phone numbers. I found the anonymous comment mentioning retired Col. Roughead during the latter-part of my searches, and posted my first article ('Pax Americanas...') on July 16th, where it was subsequently cached. Comments posted by myself at other sites will corroborate as well, along with correspondence in my possession.

In short: don't think that these postings/articles are going away, and that any Johnny-come-lately types can claim the discovery as theirs--that belongs to myself and the anonymous poster. This fact can be instantly established through the postings which are routinely dated with a time-marking, as well as the caching. You can't prove original authorship.

It's a very disheartening trend that I've found in this story of people fighting over credit (like Rawstory), but credit is due here. This writer has literally sweat blood researching the significance of Mr. Roughead, his connections to SAIC, and other aspects that make him pertinent to a "Honey Pot" defense. I can claim considerable responsibility for advising (not legal advice, however, that's illegal) in the new defense strategy.

It was J-7 that first put-forward the theory of a "Honey Trap" in the case of the "DC Madam," and it should be noted here that Ms. Palfrey was non-plussed at the time it was originally posted (see article "Does DC Have Her Own Salon Kittys?"), so it appears that the possibility hadn't escaped her at that time. What can I say to you plagiarists, except that you lack the insight and analytical abilities that I have?

Perhaps it's because many of you are unprincipled careerists, rather than someone who wants to save their country from what could be an encroaching tyranny? Do you really care about saving this nation? What are you...really? Ponder it. What's more important: your country and the people you love in it, or just yourself? On this note, I should remind readers that Roughead's name is only four-pages-in within the 'Cingular, 2005' file (December 17th, three-times) of Ms. Palfrey's phone records. The media is sitting on this story, protecting him, de facto.

To the plagiarists: you are late to this story, and you will be identified as such by simple searches by anyone with a few minutes on their hands. You're all very disappointing opportunists without merit as researchers. Your motives are fairly transparent--you want the glory, whereas I simply want the credit for my own hard work and inherent abilities. So do the work. Cut-and-paste this. It appears not all of the whores are in established media...yet.

Consider the implications of technology and how they can catch people lying for personal-gain (not just the politicians anymore). Today, we can do it more readily, and it's amusing to watch those who haven't figured this out yet. This is a time of scoundrels of every kind. I can prove my contentions here, can you? Do the work, lazy journalists, you bums.

(revised 09.15-16.2007)

[Ed., 09.13.2008-Palfrey might have been the worst-offender here, precipitating the writing of this article!]

FROM THE RECORDS OF PAMELA MARTIN & ASSOCIATES: 703-228-4470

Arlington, Virginia--Speculation is useless on this one. However, it has a possible significance. It's the phone number of the Arlington County Jail. The call was made by Pamela Martin & Associates on December 28th, 2000. It's on page 5 of the file "ATT January 22 2001-December 27 2001." The call is 1.3 minutes, at 2:14 PM, with no repeats in the next few days. In fact, there aren't any significant calls to Arlington until around March of 2001--to the National Science Foundation.

Another file for another period has a hotel in closest proximity to the Pentagon. Many, many others are hotels that surround Annapolis one named the "Sheraton Barcelo Hotel"), while there are sundry academics, doctors, and even law firms represented. This is just from random searches. A number of private foundations are also in the 2001 phone records. So are a lot of average private citizens who, unfortunately, will be caught-up in some of this. J-7 has no intention of dragging them or any employee of Pamela Martin & Associates into the spotlight. Unfortunately, others already are [Ed., 10.04.2009: Like CLG and Lori Price].