I'll make this short: Not so long ago, I was contacted once more by an unreliable narrator who was a marginal player in the DC Madam case, someone who Jeane consulted briefly before her trial in the spring of 2008, a long time ago. I am not and will never be willing to compromise with the factual-and-objective information I experienced and uncovered before, during, and after, the DC Madam's legal proceedings.
This is never going to change. Not for money, or any other reason. I know what happened and what happened to me during the legal proceedings. The sad reality in the United States today is the complete ditching of context by some along with a fundamental disrespect for the truth. Unless it serves someone's personal or political agenda, they don't want to know, and we're talking about an all-ages club here, a pervasive American attitude. This is nothing new in American history; we've been running from the truth since well before Lexington and Concorde, which is running from your problems. I think we decided a long time ago as a nation that these very real social problems aren't problems at all, but just one more way to turn a buck, the original point of Anglo-America. Fine at least if one admits it from the onset and remains consistent on the point. Everyone knows that we were founded by a corporation.
I knew when I began assisting the late Ms. Palfrey that it wasn't about money, and it wasn't. There's no way that I will have ever profited from my involvement in the case. Insisting on the truth of the matter precludes that in a culture which has and is hostile to truth, whatever it may be, in whatever context...that dirty word again, that abomination to would be tyrants everywhere. The case was and will continue to be a barometer for this climb backwards into the darkly peculiar history of the United States.
We've been here before, in the 1830s and 1840s, when the kind of demagoguery was being pioneered by Andrew Jackson whose shadow looms over the current mess that is the U.S.; it's no secret that it's particularly evident in the southern states and those whose formation came about as a result of the Mexican-American War. Money is all in this, the final white supremacist holdout. I wrote over a decade ago that America is an oligarchy; we have a contemporary aristocracy, and the DC Madam case was just an expression of that fact. These congressmen generally live above the law.
Hardly being alone, the U.S. is a lawless nation and has yet to become fully civilized. In this context, I always have and will consider Palfrey more akin to a 19th century madam than anything, curious anachronism in a former colonial jerk-water, one that became a world power for a time. That time is over. One day, perhaps, young people will want to learn the truth about this and many other events and stories of the first decade of the twenty-first century. If others were serious about portraying the DC Madam case either dramatically or in a documentary, I would know about it. There have none up to the time of this writing. What will young people think about the case in the future?
If there's one message that I would send them, it is this: understand that the people who often govern your lives are lesser than you are, that they can sometimes be beaten, they are human, and, therefore, fallible. More often you'll begin to see as you grow older that the bastards undo themselves with their moronic and self-destructive behavior. The best cure for all of this is heading them off at the pass by filtering them out of politics. Get involved in taking down the local Goliaths, forget national politics, start at the bottom...but don't think you're not corruptible, you are.
