let the dead bury the dead release date & other issues surrounding the text

This is still up in the air. I'll be prepping a standalone site for the book. It should have an excerpt, no you cannot quote from it or republish without permission, period. Written requests will be fine, and granting use will be completely at the author's discretion. There is no middleman here.

On the media, interviews, reviews copies, etc.: There will be no advance copies, period, and serious inquiries only. Not to be a dick (or to be one to the right people), but I'm not made of money. No free rides, I would if I could. Also, the idea of someone reviewing a book on something so personal seems pretty laughable to me outside of the technical side--style, format, depth, things that are logical and sincere rather than someone playing games. You'll be kicked to the curb immediately the moment I detect you're fucking me around, it's not going to play. That written, I expect the mainstream media to go out of their way to ignore this book because so much of it is about them and how disgusting they truly are, you have no idea.

Even in death, they keep killing her, mark this. CNN is one one of the major offenders: they will occasionally throw a blurb out there on the case either in a crappy documentary on prostitution (often upscale, with the rich & powerful), and the results speak for themselves: a willfully superficial misrepresentation of the case to protect what it was really about, their usual mercenary MO.  For this reason, even were they to somehow contact me, they'd have an uphill battle on their hands, and that's putting it mildly. I don't expect to hear from any of them no matter how well the books sells.

You didn't just walk into McDonald's, and no, you cannot have fries with that. I don't value most of your opinions, because you weren't involved. I don't even value those of many others who were, as the book will make plain as day. Yes, they're my opinions, and they're more educated than yours about the case. The only people who probably know more are the former prosecutors and judges, and they're compromised. Don't expect anything honest out of most of them, and many of them cannot tell you anyway thanks to confidentiality agreements. My role was far looser, so I can tell more, much more. But, you don't care about the truth anyway, my whole point here and in the book...

On the cult of personality & writers: When I was a kid, over a generation ago in the 1970s, there was no access to the Internet by the general public. You frequently didn't know what an author looked like, what their life was like or where they'd been, and so on, unless you did a lot of looking and research, and that was costly. Now, it isn't, it's all a few keystrokes away. What's the same between then and now is the cult of personality, which I hate and view as part of the disease of this dying culture and nation. People to others for answers are at the top of my shit-list, so, don't come looking to me for any, that's not my job, it's everyone's. The individual has to look within. Fools don't, cowards won't, and I don't have time either, not one moment, so save the effort. I know almost every trolling approach too, so again, don't bother, I will detect it and you will be removed or ignored. If you don't take a hint, if you harass me, for whatever reason is in your head, as compromised as some of them are, law enforcement and the courts will be brought into play. I'm not fucking around ask people who know me, they'll tell you. They'll also tell you that if you cross the line far enough that I'll be coming for you until I'm satisfied.

On Mark Capansky: I believe this little shithead has been harassing me. Any phony or actual cease and desists without a court order will be duly ignored. And, if I have to publish the book out of some Siberian shithole, I will, maybe even out of Iceland if necessary. I will not bow, because, unlike most of you out there, I have nothing to lose, and everything to gain.

However, if Mr. Capansky wants to explain why his number (or parents') was in the DC Madam's phone records, I'm all ears, and we can keep it off the record. On the other hand, if the dialog devolves into threats--if you even piss me off--it all goes online unredacted. I'm not fucking around here at all. If you want to fuck around, do it with the stupid women that are attracted to such a retard. By the way, I'm not jealous, as the book will make starkly clear. I don't share your hollow values and view America as a criminal, white supremacist nation, and hence, a large part of why it's crumbling, it's dysfunctional. This country sucks, you definitely suck, and go fuck yourself...

On writing a book that's non-fiction, true crime, & a historical document: I don't recommend it. There are no ground rules. Reconsider if it looks like it will take up a stage of your life. I was in my thirties when this began, now I'm rocketing towards the bad side of fifty, fuck you very much.

On literature: The book is very literary. For me, this isn't the usual approach. I do read a lot of fiction, but most of my reading is historical and non-fiction. I have been more of a student of history than anything else. A lot of reading in my life is packed into this book. The reader might find this not to their liking, or anything in-between--these are not my concerns, and unless it's constructive, I don't want hear your opinions beyond pointing-out factual errors, typos, and so on. The case, as the primary materials in the book will show, was riven through with literary references. I wasn't looking for them. They announced themselves. That brings me to...

Occult references & themes in the DC Madam case: These were also present and announced themselves. I wasn't looking for them. However, as Jesus said, for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear, and I do, and did. Most aren't attuned to this, I am, and once again, I'm not interested in the expressions of your egos, only in fact and truth, which the vast majority of you wouldn't know either were they to bite you in the ass extracting a pound of flesh. You couldn't miss this, especially considering the well-established fact that Jeane was fascinated by American Spiritualism (yes, seances, no, I am not a believer).

The case was archetypal on its own. I didn't see anything that wasn't there or implicit to it. Again, your opinions are irrelevant, and I don't care unless they augment and add something to the story, understanding, illuminate it more, whatever, but other than that, don't care.

On the former Pamela Martin escorts: I don't have a lot of respect for these women. Some wrong-headed types do for reasons that escape me, but I'm sure have to do more with gender and identity politics and wishful thinking. Once again, I don't care what you're opinions are unless you somehow had contact with them, know previously unknown aspects and facts about the case, or you have an angle on it I never considered for some of the aforementioned reasons. Beyond that, I don't care and don't want to hear your ego flexing, it won't play and I'll kick your ass to curb.

I'm sure most of my sources have withheld things from me--that's normal, human behavior. I'm not a believer in human nature or unicorns. We have tendencies. Those tendencies come out under certain circumstances and conditions. I'm intolerant of mythmakers and believers of myths. None of these women were saints. Yes, they were paid inadequately--welcome to the contemporary world, welcome to the United States and a world that's primarily ordered along patriarchal lines. I didn't make this world, you didn't, most of us didn't, and I'm not a supporter of it. In fact, I'm one of its victims, fuck you very much. You can beatify these ladies all you want, but when the truth came out, you'd look like the genuine fools with an opinion that you really are. Welcome to the human jungle, now think more often before you open your trap, or when you post something online. We all make mistakes. None of us is made of light, we all shit every morning, if we're lucky. That gut you have going is all the proof you should need that you're not a god. We're all imperfect, we all die one day, and the rest is games, lies, deceit, and horrendous, tragic, stupidity.

Insofar as I have been able to ascertain, no one, and I mean no one, has been able to find and interview these women and get some new relevant information from them, and to publish on it, nary a soul. Only one of them has come my way--allegedly, Andrea Detty who's alleged to be an alleged journalist now--and they may not even be one of them, perhaps a fake online identity, and of course, they weren't willing to convey anything of value whatsoever that I didn't already know. That's because, and this should be no surprise to anyone with their higher functions still intact, they were prostitutes and there's a reason why the term "lying whore" came into being, which I learned from direct experience in the case. Not one of them has had the courage and credibility to come forward and to follow through. One of them approached journalist Ken Silverstein during the proceedings, his moronic secretary lost the phone number they left (why not search of the phone calls that day at Harper's?), and they never reestablished contact. Thanks for fucking us, lady, but at least you tried. The rest stand as rats as far as I'm concerned, the real whores, not Palfrey, and they have earned this derision. Ever heard of confidentiality agreements with journalists, ladies? Quit kidding yourselves that you have credibility. Your silence speaks volumes.

On Jack Burkman of Focus on the Family & a lot more: There's an entire chapter devoted to dear Jack, as a template for the average Republican player in Palfrey's phone records. Expect fireworks. Expect what you suspected and knew--that he's a pathetic asshole, a scumbag, and a hypocrite.

On SAIC's presence in the phone bills and elsewhere: They're key to whatever was behind the case and the charges moving forward, not the actual solicitation by Jeane and the girls, which was what was really the incidental side of it. They're emblematic of the crisis in government today of runaway spending and war profiteering by contractors and politicians. They're connected to so many players in all this that it does have meaning to the case in ways that I never expected, not was looking for, but once again, there it was, winking at me over and over.

On the CIA's role in the case: This will get more of a factual airing than previously, although, regardless of what you might think of him, Montgomery Blair Sibley, Jeane's longest running counselor during the proceedings, has done a good job addressing in his own text, Why Just Her. I recommend it and consider both our accounts complimentary of each other. I'm not going to defend his public behavior. Federal District Judge Gladys Kessler granted wide-ranging subpoenaing power to the Palfrey defense that covered virtually the entire intelligence establishment. Ask yourself why the mainstream media never covered this, then go ask them, over and over again, until they cry uncle.

I'll have more to say later. Search the labels on this article for more. I cannot see a release date of later than late November, but no later than some time in December. That is all.

D.C. Madam's mother sues to keep autopsy and suicide photos sealed

Tarpon Springs, Florida--The mother of the deceased DC Madam, Deborah Jeane Palfrey, is suing to keep crime scene photographs sealed. Blanche Palfrey has requested that photographs of Palfrey's corpse at the scene of discovery as well as autopsy photos be permanently kept from publication.

But who would want to publish them? Not this writer, but someone Jeane Palfrey referred to frequently to this writer as a "bastard," one Bill Bastone, editor of The Smoking Gun website.

"The only media or public interest in said photographs flows from a morbid exploitation by some members of the public and the pursuit of sensationalism by some members of the media," the lawsuit states.
As of today the only entity that has requested the photographs is SmokingGun.com, said Capt. Jeff Young of the Tarpon Springs Police Department.
The department has not released any photographs or police reports on Deborah Palfrey's suicide because the investigation isn't finished, but it should be in a matter of days, authorities say.

When that day comes, the agency is expected to release whatever documentation it is obligated to under Florida public records laws, said Jim Yacavone, the attorney for Tarpon Springs. ("D.C. Madam's Mother Sues to Stop Release of Photos," TBO.com/Tampa Bay Online, 08.07.2008)

I cannot disagree with Mrs. Palfrey's and her counsel's reasoning, and she wouldn't be the only one upset by their release. The photographs won't add to any knowledge of the case for the record, and nothing will be learned from them. It's just a move by gawkers and exploiters to make money (like Alex Jones, and others...).

The DC Madam's relationship with The Smoking Gun and Bastone is a peculiar one. They were the very first media outlet to pick-up on the story. Palfrey informed this writer on several occasions that she felt Bastone had been illegally "tipped-off" by federal investigators and prosecutors on her case in order to taint her and her ability to receive a fair trial through articles containing selective leaks.

Bastone's first article appeared on October 9th (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1009061hook1.html)
. Palfrey claimed that The Smoking Gun editor contacted her on her cell phone while she was in Germany on October 6th, just two days after her home was being searched by federal agents. How did Bastone have her private cell phone number at that time?

More importantly: how was he made aware of the investigation and pertinent details of it? Palfrey thought it was leaks by the prosecution until her untimely end. The articles contain the theme of an assumption of guilt on the part of Bastone.

From December 1st, 2006:

As we first reported, federal investigators are probing the operator of a Washington, D.C. escort service that sent college-educated prostitutes to the homes and hotel rooms of well-heeled clients. In a new court filing, federal prosecutors offer an amusing glimpse into how madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey ran her escort business, which she started in 1993 and ran until about three months ago. When Internal Revenue Service agents raided Palfrey's California home, they recovered newsletters that Palfrey distributed to her stable of whores at Pamela Martin & Associates. (' "Pro-fessional Tips, Feds: Alleged D.C. madam sent newsletters to her stable of whores," The Smoking Gun, 12.01.2006)

Indeed, Palfrey was guilty, but this was over a year before her belated trial. It was before she ever charged officially with racketeering, which came in March of 2007. There are no federal laws against prostitution.

The Smoking Gun's editor wrote in his first piece from October, 2006:

But Palfrey did speculate that she may have come to the attention of federal agents because her operation had somehow intersected with a more high profile case, like that of convicted ex-congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham. Investigators are reportedly examining charges that a defense contractor provided hookers to Cunningham as part of an influence-peddling scheme. Palfrey did not claim a nexis between her escort service and Cunningham, but invoked the disgraced pol's name while saying that she would wager that the basis for the federal probe of her business "had solely to do with some Duke Cunningham-type bigwig client that got caught up in something and started to say, 'Do you know this?' and 'Do you know that?' And that he might have been able to lead them to somebody." ("New D.C. Sex Scandal Looming?" The Smoking Gun, 10.09.2006)

Yet Palfrey claimed that it was Bastone who first dropped the name of now convicted former GOP congressman Randall "Duke" Cunningham, not the opposite. J-7 invites Mr. Bastone to produce the interview tape to clear up this issue, and others, though it's doubtful that he ever will.

Ironically, my own research for the defense focused on the "Cunningham angle," one that Palfrey summarily dropped towards the end of the run-up to trial in March of this year. Bastone's--and Tru TV's--site is the only outlet to have requested the death photos of Palfrey, a curious move by those with a potentially unscrupulous relationship with her prosecutors.

If it's true that Bastone had a "relationship" with the IRS, Postal Inspectors, the FBI, or the Justice Department (take your pick), then his credibility is seriously in question (nothing new). Palfrey sent this to myself and her then-attorney, the inimitable Montgomery Blair Sibley on December 23rd, 2007:

Blair… if you ever doubt that my case is politically motivated OR simply “can’t go there” with the mounting circumstantial evidence of selective prosecution, I would ask that you read the highlighted portion below in particular, from Bil earlier today. Never forgot that son-of-a bitch, Bill Bastone’s first question to me in Germany, just days after the warrant was executed on my property had to do with Cunningham and Bastone’s insistence that I professionally knew the “Dukester”; this, despite my continued statements to the contrary. -Jeane

Mr. Bastone was questioned for this piece on how he had obtained Palfrey's cell phone number and whether she'd dropped Cunningham's name first in the impromptu interview from Germany (there might have been multiple-contacts, one possibly during an in-transit flight) in early-October of 2006. Bastone refused to comment in any detail stating in an email, "Thanks for your note. However, we don't discuss our interviews or reporting process."

Considering that the information might have been leaked illegally by a federal agent or official, that's understandable. At least his response was prompt.

"D.C. Madam's Mother Sues to Stop Release of Photos," TBO.com/Tampa Bay Online, 08.07.2008: http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/aug/07/dc-madams-mother-sues-stop-release-photos/

"New D.C. Sex Scandal Looming?" The Smoking Gun, 10.09.2006: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1009061hook1.html

' "Pro-fessional Tips, Feds: Alleged D.C. madam sent newsletters to her stable of whores," The Smoking Gun, 12.01.2006: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1201061palfrey1.html

Added-value Postscript, 08.09.2008: Here's an exchange with Bill Bastone, ostensible editor of The Smoking Gun. Isn't he charming? Yeah, I'm not either, but that's how it goes. Eat and enjoy!


On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Matt Janovic <myboigie@earthlink.net> wrote:

Dear Mr. Bastone:

On October 9th, you penned a piece on Ms. Palfrey where you alleged that she dropped the name of Randy Cunningham during your talk with her.

I would like to know the following: 1.) How did you obtain her private cell phone number, and 2.) do you still contend that she dropped the name of Mr. Cunningham first--she contended otherwise, that you said it first.

kind regards, Matt Janovic, private researcher

Then... (isn't our cause-and-effect universe thrilling?):

----- Original Message -----

From: The Smoking Gun

To: myboigie@earthlink.net

Sent: 8/8/2008 4:36:55 PM

Subject: Re: Jeane Palfrey

Matt:

Thanks for your note. However, we don't discuss our interviews or reporting process.
Bill BastoneEditor

TSG

But...

On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Matt Janovic <myboigie@earthlink.net> wrote:

Dear Mr. Bastone:

So the prosecution never briefed you on Ms. Palfrey's case in October of 2006? Are you a "friendly asset" of federal investigators?

kind regards, Matt Janovic

Yet...

Matt:

Seriously, what part of "we don't discuss our interviews or reporting process" did not register?No need for another response. [Ed.--Awwwwww, sure there is...]Bill BastoneTSG


Ed.--I won't bore you with the rest, and I certainly won't be writing Bastone again anytime soon, but suffice it to say that he was told for the several thousandth time that he was a jerk and an exploiter (in sharper words). Gotham City is not safer with this man on the beat. He sure doesn't like it when the mic is pointed in the other direction.