Monsters & Critics makes a "new" documentary on the DC Madam case

Ed.--I'm not sure anything surprises me anymore, and this "new" documentary Monsters & Critics (yet another entertainment media site) is no exception. I was never consulted because I don't (won't) support the ridiculous conspiracy theories peddled by right wing assholes and hungry media assholes who want to massage the facts or ignore them outright to fit their moron-narratives. 

Why do people want to lie about the DC Madam case? Because it sells. I myself could have sold many more copies of my account of the case had I adhered to these fabrications--and that's what they are, pure fiction, from the very tiny minds of morally-impaired idiots. I also have to say that a large-swath of the American public doesn't care about truth or facts and are also scumbags of basically the same ilk.

This is addressed to Harper Hill and her morally-impaired staff:

"Conspiracists and those who claim to know more about 'the list' say it was murder and not suicide." Let me guess--Wayne Madsen, for one? I'm sure Mr. Sibley had a few new dark comments without corroboration as well?  Oh, then there's the ever-credulous Infowars who were never players in the case as I was, only on-the-margins. 
The fact that Hill never contacted me for this "documentary" (safe to assume a bad collection of hastily-assembled clips supporting an erroneous thesis based on a desire for more site hits--money--with a dumb voice-over) speaks volumes for its general lack: lack of an overall array of the primary evidence; a steering very wide-of-the-mark away from contrary evidence (me, the primary records I still possess); and an obvious lacking of a desire for the truth, what really happened.
A Safe Prediction: There will be no new information in this documentary, and it will offer no new insights into the case. 
Therefore, there is no reason for this documentary to exist at all beyond the most obvious economic motivations. In short, one more gaggle of entitled assholes has come and shit upon the late Ms. Palfrey's grave, disrespecting her, her family, and what's left of her memory. Goddamn all of you. You are well-poisoners, the lowest form of human life.

I was going to post this in comments but their site insists that you register an account with Facebook, something I flatly refuse to do.

"Dude, I just realized..." [insert conspiracy theory here]

If indeed you are sane, you need to reply immediately that, "I don't give a shit about your stupid fucking opinions, or your goddamned speculations based on a staggering ignorance of our history and human nature, fuck you very much." This won't stop them. 

Stupidity needs an airing and wants to parade itself: "No, really," says the asshole that flunked out of history and barely passed civics. "This is REALLY important, it's the truth!"

"No, really, I'm not fucking around--I don't value your opinion about anything."

Feed a cold, starve a fever dream. When you respond to a conspiracy nut, you're giving them oxygen. The same goes for political opponents. Let them suffocate alone, in silence.

From 2010: "Why Alex Jones Will Live Forever"

http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com/2010/10/why-alex-jones-will-live-forever.html

to my twitter pals...

I'm here, I'm not queer, but I accept everybody who's thoughtful. Let's talk, if you want. 

Postscript: And I might add: yes, there is comments moderation, but fire away, I tend to post 99% of everything that comes my way. Besides those asserting the DC Madam was murdered--I will not respond to them beyond occasionally refuting their ridiculous assertions--I'll be happy to answer any questions about the case and my book account on it.

And of course, if you want to put the word out there about this site, the case, and my book, you're welcome to. It will be greatly appreciated. The information on this blog and in the text serve the public interest.

Wayne Madsen & Me

Where to begin with this guy? OK, I'm not going to, but at some point this well known crank got involved with the DC Madam case doing--I have no idea what the hell he did for Jeane, frankly, but it couldn't have been much since he wasn't hired by her to do general research for her defense. For several months I did this work for Jeane at her request (I had a co-researcher who had also been tapped for this work). 

Initially, we looked into what was then known as the "Poway Mafia," that is, former-and-convicted California congressman Randy Cunningham, convicted-and-former defense contractor Brent Wilkes, the convicted-and-former "number three" guy at the CIA, Kyle Foggo, and a few other players who Jeane felt were related to he case. There was a lot smoke there, but we were only able to go so far with limited resources and time. At the end of the project, we, that is me and my co-researcher, made reports as to the aforementioned--how these players related to her and the escort service and why she was being prosecuted in such a manner. Also, we looked deeply into subpoenaed Verizon phone records that went far deeper than the scanned copies that were and still are online, basically who had a specific phone number, and when, numbers that were in her records as potential client-callers. I was paid by the federal defender's office, normal for indigent defendants, then did the rest pro bono.

Jump to two weeks ago: the UK's paper the Guardian/Globe, without vetting his wacky, rumpled self mistakenly quoted Wayner in an article about an EU deal with the NSA allowing them to conduct massive surveillance. I don't even care about the details, because, yes, he was an NSA analyst at once time, ages ago, claims to still have "sources" inside, or in the intelligence community, writes crappy, baseless articles about it, and is generally ignored as a nut in DC and the rest of the sane, civilized world, and for good reason. If you're a normal, well-balanced human being, go read his writing and tell me he's not nutty as hell. I don't see it happening.

The Globe had to pull a front page article quoting Wayner. Of course, it being the UK, the rest of the press there swarmed around the publication and wrote about it, gleefully. I was a little shocked, but unsurprised, when Damian Thomspon wrote a pretty scathing blog piece at the Telegraph about Madsen and the Globe. I won't recount it and leave it to the reader to check it out and decide for themselves, but in my humble opinion, it's spot-on. 

I left this comment two weeks ago after reading it: 

Madsen tried to attach himself to the DC Madam case for a time as well. Where do I think he got the "Obama is gay" theory? From Larry Sinclair. Ironic that you have Moynihan's Twitter quote on here since he quoted me out of context in one of his inane editorials back in 2008 when Ms. Palfrey was still a name in the news.

I did general research for her on the case & was told by a few sources about a "big party" that Larry Flynt was holding for Jeane, to assist her in some way, and who was there but Wayne Madsen. One of my sources (author Bill Keisling) remarked at how slovenly & disheveled he was, wearing a rumpled suit and sounding like the nut described in this story. He also said it kept him awake at night thinking that someone like Madsen had been working for the NSA, ostensibly competent people hired to "protect" the security of the United States, scary.

Indeed, Mr. Madsen once wrote an article claiming that a "shadowy source (it's almost always that way, hence why no one credible listens to him) that the DC Madam had a CIA controller, something of that nature, but so inane and absurd it doesn't warrant further mention.

Then there's Montgomery Blair Sibley, who, as is generally known in DC, is an unhinged scion of old Beltway aristocracy, the Blairs & the Sibleys--they once owned and inhabited the Blair House before Truman's renovation of the White House, it was expropriated. That, I think, created some long-term crusade by Sibley and his late father to be a thorn in the side of the US Courts, one reason why he's currently disbarred.

But just over five years ago, he was representing the DC Madam, who abruptly fired him in January 2008. Not long after that, he was representing Larry Sinclair, the Obama accuser who claims that he & the now-president had sex and imbibed in cocaine in the back of a limo in Chicago in 1999, all a patent lie by a career-liar of another stripe.

I assume that Sibley and Madsen struck up a relationship during the DC Madam proceedings and that the connection between Sinclair probably emanates from that relationship, however, Sinclair got a lot of ink back in 2008 and is still trotted out by uninformed GOP occasionally to smear the current president, to no avail. 

And there it is, my opinion.Whatever this guy gets involved with loses its credibility. He has a negative-Midas touch--everything he touches turns to shit.
 Luckily, none of this wiped-off onto Glenn Greenwald and Edward Snowden.

And so, here we are, two weeks later, and the Wayner responds with a predictably feeble "I know you are, but what am I?":

It would seem that it was Mr Janovic, who lives in Indiana far from the DC environs, who interjected himself on the Palfrey story and my investigation. The late Palfrey contacted me and this guy Janovic, who apparently blogs from a basement, decided to involve himself from afar and tried to obtain my sources and records as the following email will attest:

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Janovic [mailto:myboigie@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 6:56 PM
To: jeanepalfrey@sprynet.com
Subject: RE: Today's piece

Jeane:

They would have to tell us this, definitely, but that's about all they would tell us. Perhaps I can just ask them ourselves? Perhaps Mr. Madsen could direct me to the resources, links, directories. There are those who would know, it could accelerate this particular research.

warm regards, Matt Janovic

The email is real, by the way. His take on it is not. His take on my life is also inaccurate and childish, but that's Wayner for you.

I responded, and this piece will be my final one on this:

Mr. Madsen's reputation speaks for itself, however, besides his poor grammar, he's wrong: the late Ms. Palfrey approached me and the email there--which is one I sent to her--is being re-contextualized. This is how he works normally, to take information and to recast it as something else. He's a laughingstock in DC and rarely, if ever, reveals his sources because they're as bogus as he is.

As for me "trying to obtain" his sources, read the last sentence, I wouldn't want them. Also, I assume that Montgomery Blair Sibley supplied him with the email, fine, but Google his name for what he's been up to recently and you'll understand the sheer nuttiness I experienced having just nominal contact with these people. Right now, the disbarred Mr. Sibley is still trying to wrong-headedly obtain another fifteen minutes of fame doing more pointless court filings to "prove" that President Obama's birth certificate is fake. I wish I could make this up. Mr. Madsen is a conspiracy nut's conspiracy nut, I doubt he was especially good at his NSA analysis job, and what he writes is paranoiac drivel.

The fact is, Jeane approached me first, not the opposite, a week earlier. The above email wasn't an especially relevant one and I believe it was about her prosecutors--doesn't matter, it was a minor issue and isn't even remotely what he's saying it is. I would never want his research materials because he's not good at it, not good at analysis, and as this article makes plain, he has a roundly bad reputation as a crank.

Again, his contention that I "interjected" myself into the case is a bald misrepresentation of fact. His inaccurate personal attack is also a misrepresentation of what really happened, something he's well known for as this article makes plain. Most of his audience is mentally unwell. Frankly, this guy is making me laugh at such an incompetent response, but that's Wayner for you. 

I could go on about what a pain in the ass he's been over the years. In one case, he poisoned the well with Siegelman case in Alabama and maybe even sent other cranks my way to cause me problems, like Andrew Krieg, but it's not worth my or your time, rest assured.

Where it all ends:  http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100224022/guardianobserver-pulls-front-page-nsa-story-after-source-turns-out-to-be-a-fruitloop-who-thinks-obama-is-gay/#comment-966678938

In Russia, accent speak for you: a panoply of picklesmells

Ya'lls:

How to shut up a conspiracy nut momentarily: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof#Science_and_other_uses

Dennis Hopper's shithoard is still up for sale:  http://gawker.com/5986447/there-are-two-days-and-20-hours-left-in-the-dennis-hopper-estate-sale?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_twitter&utm_source=gawker_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow

The best evidence that Bobby Flay isn't seen in the Patterson-Gimlin film of nineteen-and-eleventy-twelvty: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/files/mk_davis_pgf.gif

Proofing

The proof arrived today. It looks excellent. What surprised me the most was how great the cover came out. There's a teaser of it on the book's new blog @ http://letthedeadburythedead.wordpress.com. I also have a Twitter account under my name @ https://twitter.com/MJanovic. The book itself will be available at Amazon.com. I will be announcing a price and release date within a few days, no more than a week. The price of the book is not unreasonable and was determined looking at time and labor invested, printing costs, length of the text itself, and other related issues, a big book, a large trade paperback. I'll be putting it on sale, reduced, for a time, then periodically after that, either by Amazon, or me. I'm edging towards holding-off on an e-book right now, but I won't keep anyone waiting long on it. 

 I'm very interested in getting Let the Dead Bury the Dead into university collections and onto library shelves.

The book will also be available in the European Union. Regardless of what I do, the mainstream media's sure to go out of their way to avoid covering its existence. If serious journalist want to speak with me, I'm open to it. Now, if we can find any in the continental United States...

Without being too prolix: I will not speak to the conspiracy nut crowd, and yeah, you know who you are. Talk to the hand, read the book, interrogate it, and be sure not to waste my time on your way out. I shit on your opinions, show me facts, not what you want to believe, and the latter goes for everyone. I'm not concerned about them unless they're educated ones.

Will I be censored? For the most part, prior restraint isn't allowable in the United States, while libel and defamation cases are notoriously difficult to establish effectively. The outcome is rarely in favor of the plaintiff, and I'm not even taking into account how full the dockets are these days. There have already been attempts with the phony cease and desists. Someone has no respect for the First Amendment whatsoever and wants me to pull things out of the book and to take down most of what's related to the DC Madam from this blog. I will not be stopped. This book will go wide, as-is. There are no lies coming from me in this historical account. Are there inaccuracies, am I wrong about some things? It would be impossible for that not to be so, I am a man, not a god, and neither are any of us, contrary to moronic conceits making the rounds this aeon. As much as a human being can be, I was sincere, honest, and forthright in writing this book, and, it's my right to publish on it because these were my experiences. That's including my interaction with all of the information contained within it. Because I was a player in the case, neither the information and my interaction can be separated, they are one, finis. The book is as much me as it is the case. If there's something wrong with that, I must be, technically speaking, illegal. The public has a right to know, and will. No one's going to stop that, and I mean no one, none born of woman on this earth.

Most of my day was spent looking over how the proof turned out. As I wrote, it's looking very close to what I hoped for. Title page, table of contents, chapter headings, paragraphing--they all look up to a level of quality that I can live with. I believe this book is something to be proud of. With virtually no resources, I was able to accumulate some extraordinary information on Jeane's prosecution, and not merely my part of it, there were too many players to even begin mentioning. That would take another book by itself, as well as one on Montgomery Blair Sibley, who, I think, the culture should pay a little more attention to, since he's unquestionably an interesting man. Most Americans don't really know who he; is; the answer always comes from who your ancestors were. I believe his questioning of the validity of President Obama's birth certificate is wrong-headed, but his family history is our nation's. Maybe one day I'll write a book on one of the Sibleys, or Blairs. I have no intentions of writing another book on the DC Madam. I do hope that others involved in the case, the escorts most of all, would come forward with more information. So far, none of them have in any meaningful sense.

 A number of people have come forward to help me--I thank you all, and to my sources as well. All told, including additional research, editing, and revisions, the book required four years to write. In reality, there was just me, that is, Matt, and no three droogs. I had to do everything. Working in the case while it was happening was unpleasant enough, but to add on more years is prison. Real writers write because they have no choice. I had no choice. To not have written this, to not have gotten what happened off my chest in this manner, would have killed me, I found the whole thing so terrible, so tragic. Jeane didn't need to die, but now I can bury her, me, the living. 

Expect a release date within a few days. We might be pulling the trigger before the end of the month on this.

Ladies & gentlemen, if there are any left out there, be forewarned: I spare nobody in my account. Not even myself. If you are easily frightened; and if you have a tendency towards anxiousness, nervousness, and paranoia; this ride is not for you. Keep your hands and feet below the marked safety bar. Watching a national mythology come crashing down before one's eyes is never easy, I know. Enjoy the ride, when there's no more road left on dead end street, yo, top that.

DC Madam account: "Why don't you...?"

Ed.--I was recently contacted by one of Jeane's former escorts, a first I might add, since most of them have kept a low-profile for years now. I know all of their names, every single one, because several lists are in my possession from defense materials. That doesn't matter to me. Many of those names came out in the research of the phone records from numerous writers and sites, no one really gives a shit from what I can gather.  A French documentary team might be speaking with some of them, but I seriously doubt that they're being that thorough.

Also, this being America, there seems to be some confusion/conflation over what a historical account or a chronicle is, and what a book about an event by a non-participant constitutes. Because of the nature of the case, you would have to be God and been everywhere at once to have truly experienced, maybe possible at the NSA, not possible for the rest of us mortals. Hey, not everybody had a course in historiography, so let me make it clearer for those who haven't: the book is an account by someone who was a participant in other areas of the story. At one point there was only Jeane, me, and my co-researcher. After the firing of Montgomery Blair Sibley there was no one for a time, then she proceeded pro se with Preston Burton, her court appointed counsel who came back for seconds (he won out and got to travel to the estate salad bar for limitless trips in the end).

Around five days ago I got this comment from the someone claiming to be one of Palfrey's former escorts (see my responses):

Andrea Detty said...

I very much hope that your book is not filled with conspiracy theories. I worked for her and was in the trial. I'm so sick of people that know nothing, come to these "of[f] the wall" ideas. I was not the biggest fan of her. The only thing I agree with everyone, is that the trial was a complete waste of time, money, and resources. But if you were writing a book about her and the trial, shouldn't you have contacted people that were actually involved with it?

Friday, May 4, 2012 3:11:00 AM EDT

Yeah, you don't have to hope, there won't be any of that bullshit in it and do your homework some time. And really, that's all great Andrea...so why not drop me a line and fill me in on what you know? All of it, for truth, for the historical record, for the future. 

Or is setting the record straight unimportant here? Detty testified at Palfrey's trial in her favor, that Jeane was unaware of her soliciting, but to be blunt, the defendant was "guilty as shit" as one inarticulate Los Angeles attorney put it, the fact. The truth is, I have no idea if this is Detty at all. If they want to contact me, go through TOR, some third party service, encrypt it, do it, or forever hold your peace. Were they serious I'd have gotten an email from them and that's yet to happen, will almost certainly never happen. This is possibly someone trying to cause confusion about a book they've never read, that's not even out. Angela, I never heard of you either until I read the trial transcript. There was no need for me to spend good money to have someone lie to me, they can do that via cell phones, Blackberrys, iPads, email, etc., the upside of the technology and common sense. Yes, the trial was a "complete waste of time, money, and resources," and so was going to speak with her in person for reasons I'm sure you're familiar with if you are who you claim to be.

Put up, or shut up, spread 'em, now, not later. No? I thought so.

As I told this person in my responses in comments, I've put appeals out to the former escorts of PMA years ago with no response whatsoever. Am I alone? Are you fucking kidding me? No one has gotten to speak with any of them outside of a handful like Abby Cather ("Jennifer"), Detty, but nothing tangible. One escort attempted to contact journalist Ken Silverstein back in the spring of 2007 about Shirlington Limo that she'd been taken to appointments by them, information that could have linked Jeane and Pamela Martin & Associates to Chris Baker, maybe Mitchell Wade and Brent Wilkes, then to Hookergate itself. 

If any of the former escorts had anything to say to me or to others they would have by now (serious inquiries only). They haven't because most of them are scared shitless from legal harassment. You could write twenty books on this case and never get close to describing it fully. That's how writing about an event goes. Additionally, the public isn't going to sit through thousands of pages. The account contains literally hundreds of pages of primary information from the case. Beyond that, I suppose I need to write about who the attending janitorial staff was during the trial. 

I repeat: this book isn't like Tom Wolfe where he wasn't a part of the story, where everything was second-hand. There is that--a lot of that--because so much of this case took place in cyberspace, where an information war was fought against the defendant, for starters. Have you noticed that almost everything is mediated these days, indirect, because of the technology? No, of course not, that would be to understand the nature of the historical moment we live in. You know, I'm sorry, it's true, I was unable during the proceedings to go post-human and have my mind encoded on a microchip, then uploaded onto the web, sorry, my mistake there. Put up, or shut up, don't fuck me around. I'm absolutely sure it's going to be the latter. "I would have talked with you, but you got up in my shit"--bullshit, you have no serious intention of setting the record straight, none of you former PMA escorts have but a small handful. I'm very serious, as a heart attack, as the club of a riot cop crashing down on a dissident's skull. No one needs to remind me that I learned the true meaning of "lying whore" from all of this.

 "Why don't you blah-blah-blah?" Kiss my ass? Why yes, yes you should.

Hey, Ron Paul Fan boys...

Your boy got his ass handed to him by "bigger" losers than him. How does it feel? You're the lunatic fringe. You're mooks (look it up). America will never elect someone like him because they already have a long way back, the Republicans of the 1920s. That worked out well by 1929, this "we don't need regulations" nuttiness you fruitcakes hold like (like?) someone with brain damage. Without a doubt, you're going to look about as stupid as the Know-nothing Party one day. Ron Paul: a racist crank, like his moronic followers he doesn't give two-shits about. Thanks assholes, he's got your money once again, like he did with the racist newsletters years back. You're used to being used...up.

Oh, by the way: I'm going to be giving Libertarianism a good kick up the ass in my DC Madam book. Your conspiracy nut friends stuck their asses out too far trying to use her death for their anti-government agenda that has your name written all over it.

Alex Jones Featured Prominently in Upcoming DC Madam Account

There are no words to describe this scummy dirtbag and his audience, you'd have to grab some from other languages. I wasn't aware of it until last year, but Jones did a radio interview with Deborah Jeane Palfrey (aka "the DC Madam") in the spring of 2008, not long before her trial. It was her final interview with him for his moronic syndicated radio show. It's up on Youtube, check it out some time. If you want a good example of someone asking leading questions, look no further, Jones lets his ass hang out in the wind in it.

Worst of all: If you know most of the context of the case and how it played out, you can hear the ambulance chaser concocting his own conspiracy theory before her death. Suffice it to say this gets more elaboration in the text, but Jones is busted here, it's one more example of what a disgusting exploiter and a demagogue he truly is. His audience are way beyond sick and would make good redneck extras in Twain's Huckleberry Finn. I used to think this bastard and his ilk were lowly, but this one tops my worst assumptions about this asshole, this liar, this degenerate, who routinely abuses the First Amendment. He should in fact be taken off of the air for his alarmist comments as well as his pandering to what are very violent, extremist elements in American life.

Filmmaker Richard Linklater should be ashamed for putting this turd in not one, but two of his feature films, both animated. President Lincoln was in fact wrong to fight southern secession after all...