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

"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

Call me paranoid, but it's just a thought... (Lori Price Au-Go-Go)

WWW--Don't you think one of the best ways to disrupt a genuine grassroots movement is to have a bunch of dummy groups (like, say, Moveon.org) disrupting the focus from the real players (like Public Citizen or FAIR), eating-up donations, and basically causing division amongst the rest of us? Not that they even need to really be working for the government, mind you. I'd say they accomplish the same things anyway.

Take CLG, or 'Citizens for Legitimate Government.' Sounds similar to CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington), doesn't it? Never heard of em' before 'hookergate,' not-a-peep. Neither had some prominent activists and writers I've corresponded with over the last year. One of them referred to them as 'Citizens for Illegitimate Government,' and this was from a former board member of Common Cause.

They had never heard of them before. I won't quote from my correspondence with the nefarious Lori Price, but her side was pretty juvenile, and bizarre, and it surrounded my research into the so-called 'DC Madam's' phone records--the person-in-question was Ret. Colonel Ronald Roughead of SAIC, and brother of CNO Read Admiral Gary Roughead.

The issue was over plagiarism, as I'm the first to publish any meaningful research on his significance in the phone records, and it all began thanks to an omission of credit in a Palfrey defense newsletter sent-out by her counsel. What Price glory? All these anagrams start sounding like that song from 'Hair'...

I grant that my original e-mail was extremely-blunt (I didn't let-up that she was probably engaged in plagiarism), but then the childishness began with Ms. Price gloating over her site's hits-and-readership, then it devolved (on her end, not mine) into personal attacks and a flat-denial that: a) I was the original source, yet b) she had done her homework, and the article was solid...something in that (dis)order, wafting from her general direction.

Rather than listen to a story that I feel is urgent--that the information on Roughead must be disseminated far-and-wide, and that numerous others need to bear witness to it and do more research where mine has left-off, the exchange ended with Price calling me a Republican, which is truly price-less. She also called me a 'sociopath,' which was hurtful. ;0) Maybe she's the same Moveon woman that assaulted me at the stage-managed 'protest' that I was at last June.

Never mind that I explained ad infinitum to Price that the story appears to be very important, and that many mainstream media outlets won't even acknowledge receipt of any of it, this was all about fame and exposure for Lori, yet she accused me of the same. Hopefully, the rest of the internet and 'progressive' world will 'price-less' too, and she can take Eli Pariser and a number of other human problems in the 'progressive' community with her for good measure.

Nah-h-h-h-h-h-h, I think I will publish those e-mails at some inopportune (for Price) moment. And to Rob Capriccioso: there is no story regarding Sam Donaldson in the phone records of Deborah Jeane Palfrey. Now, that you've gotten into even deeper trouble with this silly-ass story about Trent Lott and a male escort, maybe you can fess-up about the Donaldson one being hot air. Doubtful.

Just because we want to believe something is true, don't make it so. I keep wondering if Price has done any additional research on Roughead and others in the phone records, but when I've looked at CLG's site, all it appears to be is the same as Huffington Post: some cutting-and-pasting of articles off the wire services with a splash of short-sighted opinion. That's OK to-a-point, but I detect no 'analysis,' Captain. Hardly anywhere. OK, almost nowhere.

Opinions are great, but do some research, do some analysis and interact with the information and data sometime. Find something new. Do something, ferchrissakes. This was your constructive moment. Enjoy it. Why didn't Palfrey's counsel credit me in the newsletter? I'm only worried about some of the scuffles it caused. You'd have to ask them. It probably has something to do with mounting a defense, but Roughead's in public court documents now. [Ed., 08.23.2008--Or fame and fortune.] You're welcome.

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].