8Apr/140

The Blagojevich legal team just can’t get their story straight

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

The Blagojevich legal team just can't get their story straight. Most notably, they're having a difficult time coming up with a reasonable explanation for why they did not make Chicago Tribune reporter John Chase tell a jury how he knew that the FBI had a wiretap on Blago.

Such a difficult time, in fact, veteran attorney Sheldon Sorosky actually said that if he had called Chase to testify, "They would have just blamed an FBI agent" for leaking the information about the wiretap.

Let's take a minute to fully appreciate what a truly remarkable statement that is for a defense attorney to make.

Clearly Sorosky is at a loss to explain why he did not call the one witness whose testimony could discredit the very people that Blago needed to discredit, namely the FBI.

Good thing you chose not to discredit the FBI, Shelly. Otherwise the prosecutors would have regretted calling FBI agent Dan Cain as their first witness to testify against your client in BOTH of Blagojevich's trials.

Remarkable, Shelly, truly remarkable! Can anyone spell malpractice?

Blago's other legal eagles, Sam Adam and Sam Adam, Jr., have been contacted by IP2P but have not responded. If they have anything to add to Sorosky's explanation just let us know?

As for Robert Blagojevich's attorney, Michael Ettinger, his previous position was that they would have put Chase on the witness stand had they thought of it. But that has now become "I don't recall who John Chase is."

Really Michael, now you don't remember who "Golden" author John Chase is? That's peculiar considering you've publicly declared John Chase a liar.

Apparently Ettinger has now decided to rejoin the rest of the Blagojevich legal team in their silence on the subject of John Chase knowing about the FBI wiretap and receiving copies of the sealed tapes from the feds.

When you add all of the above to the fact that the media in Chicago is completely ignoring everything while posting "poor Patti Blagojevich" stories, you can only come to one conclusion:

The feds and Blago have finalized their deal, and you can expect the announcement of his early release from prison very soon.

Oh, and don't be surprised if you hear that WLS Radio has a job waiting for Blago when he gets out.

More to come......

Share
30Mar/140

Blagojevich agreed to let Chicago Tribune reporters lie about the tapes

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

This may come as no surprise, but Rod Blagojevich's get-out-of-jail deal not only involves the federal prosecutors and his defense team, it also included the direct involvement of the Chicago Tribune.

That's because, as part of his deal to get out of prison, Rod Blagojevich agreed to let Chicago Tribune reporters John Chase and Jeff Coen lie to the public about the wiretap tapes that put him there.

Due to some excellent investigative reporting by Barbara Hollingsworth, who now writes for CNS News, we know that the feds gave Chase and Coen copies of court-sealed tapes and transcripts from the Blagojevich case.

Gee, why would the FEDS do that?

Simple. Chase and Coen were instructed to tell the public that they listened to all the sealed tapes and found nothing interesting on them.

We know differently because Blago was caught on tape talking to some of the top power brokers in the country, including Obama and his chief-of-staff Rahm Emanuel.

So the real question you must ask is:

Why would Rod Blagojevich and his lawyers, who knew very well the explosive contents of the conversations caught on those tapes, allow Chase and Coen to lie about them?

Facing 14 years in federal prison, Blagojevich should have dragged Chase and Coen in front of Judge Zagel and made them tell the court who gave them tapes and transcripts that he had placed under seal. But Blago didn't.

The $64k question is why?

Blago's attorney, Sheldon Sorosky, has confirmed that there is and never was anything stopping Blago from telling the public what is on the tapes, which he insist to this day prove his innocence.

So why did Blago and his attorneys let Chase and Coen's public proclamation that the contents of the sealed tapes confirm his guilt go unchallenged?

And why is Blago pretending he wants the tapes to be unsealed when he is completely ignoring the fact that the Chicago Tribune claims to have copies?

More importantly, why are the feds insisting the tapes stay sealed nearly 2 years after they gave copies to the two Chicago Tribune reporters-who have refused to make them public?

What possible reason could Chase and Coen have not to release the transcripts?

The answer is that Chicago Tribune reporters John Chase and Jeff Coen are lying to the public, the feds put them up to it, and Blago agreed to go along with the deception as part of his get-out-of-jail deal.

Share
9Feb/140

Rod Blagojevich continues to insult the people of Illinois

Share

Hugo Floriani, Investigative Reporter

Rod Blagojevich continues to insult the people of Illinois. He obviously thinks we are stupid.

That is the only way to explain Blago's ridiculous behavior when it comes to the subject of federal wiretap recordings in his case.

Here's the latest:

Rod Blagojevich's attorney's recently filed a motion objecting to prosecutors' request to have the tapes continue to remain under seal.

No kidding, Blago apparently thinks that the people of Illinois will believe the fairytale that he actually wants the tapes and transcript to be made public.

Rod, let me try to put this delicately for you.

In a pigs eye! We already know that there is not a snowball's chance in hell that you want those tapes in the public domain.

Because if you did, your lawyers would be filing motions to drag Chicago Tribune reporters John Chase and Jeff Coen into court to explain who gave them copies of tapes and transcripts that were under court seal.

And Rod, you and your attorneys sure as hell would not have just sat there silently as Chase and Coen told your potential jury pool that the contents of the "sealed tapes and transcripts" prove your guilt rather than your innocence.

Which is exactly what they did while touring Illinois promoting their book, Golden.

In addition, Blagojevich's attorney, Sheldon Sorosky, has admitted that there is nothing legally stopping the former governor from revealing to the public the full details of conversations that were captured on tape. But so far Blago has chosen not to do so.

However, we know for a fact that he has been using the tapes to blackmail his way out of prison.

We also know that Blago, the prosecutors, and an untold number of other miscreants want the tapes to remain sealed forever.

So Rod, contrary to what you think, we are not that stupid. Either drag Chase and Coen into court and start telling us what is on those tapes, or shut the hell up about them!

 

Share
12Jan/140

Plamegate update: Clarice Feldman says Sibel Edmonds misunderstood

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

American Thinker contributor Clarice Feldman came up with a stunning justification for her hit piece on Sibel Edmonds' credibility.

After she was criticized for failing to provide any facts or references to support her public declaration that FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds is not credible, Feldman finally offered this journalistic gem:

"p to p has no secret info to my knowledge. As I recall the investigation of Sibel's charges was mixed--She was found credible respecting claims of the operation of the FBI's Arabic translation group. Not so with her assertions that a variety of high govt officials were engaged in treasonous stuff with Turkey. As to those things I thing she misunderstood what she had overheard"

So, according to Clarice Feldman, the woman who testified before the 911 Commission and had state secrets privilege invoked on her twice, simply "misunderstood what she overheard" on the FBI wiretap tapes.

Wow, thanks for clearing that up for us, Clarice.

Now if you don't mind, just tell us the correct translation of what is on the FBI wiretap tapes that Edmonds "misunderstood".

And please show us where DoJ Inspector General Glenn Fine says Edmonds is not credible as it pertains to "her assertions that a variety of high govt officials were engaged in treasonous stuff with Turkey" in his unclassified report.

Because we can't find that in the report. Or anywhere else for that matter.

Unless of course Clarice received a copy of the classified report. Well, did you Clarice?

But Feldman is right about one thing: "Plamegate" was a hoax. However, she is not telling the truth about the who, what, why, when, and where of the hoax. Or the more accurate description - disinformation campaign.

And now Feldman is continuing the disinformation campaign by quoting from a new book by John Rizzo, a CIA attorney and self described friend of Patrick Fitzgerald.

Really?

Will get back to you on that one......more to come...

Share
6Jan/140

CNS News: It’s about Patrick Fitzgerald

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

CNS News understands that the real story in the Blagojevich saga is not Rod Blagojevich, it's former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald.

Rod Blagojevich is just another crooked politician who under normal circumstances in Illinois would never have seen the inside of a courtroom, much less a jail cell.

However, a distraction was needed to cover up crimes the Bush administration was committing, and to clear the path for Barack Hussein Obama to lead the next puppet administration.

You heard right, Fitzgerald was covering up crimes for both Bush and Obama.

Since Fitzgerald and his partners in crime (including the media) were successful, it is now time to let Blagojevich out of jail before he snitches on his fellow criminal government pals.

CNS News recognizes that although Blagojevich is guilty and belongs in jail, in the big picture Blago is just a flea on an elephant's ass.

If you really want to know who the big time criminals are, focus on Patrick Fitzgerald and what he has done. He will lead you right to them. Don't be distracted again!

High honors to Barbara Hollingsworth at CNS News, very astute.

Read CNS article here: 2014 Prediction: A 'Get Out of Jail' Card for Rod Blagojevich

Share
18Dec/130

“Plamegate” was a CIA/State Dept. disinformation campaign

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

"Plamegate" was a CIA/State Dept. disinformation campaign designed to distract Americans from Acts of Treason that had been, and were being committed.

And who better to carry out such a plan than Mr. Disinformation himself, Dick Armitage?

You see, the CIA, State Department, Department of Defense, Department of Justice, FBI, DoJ Office of Inspector General and the White House all knew by Feburary, 2002 that in the summer of 2001 Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman was caught on a FBI wiretap exposing Valerie Plame and Brewster Jennings as CIA to Turkish nationals.

So, with that being a documented fact, how could Valerie Plame possibly think she was a covert agent attached to the CIA front operation known as Brewster Jennings & Associates in 2003?

Answer: she couldn't. It's a lie. Or, as Plame would say, her tradecraft allows her to call it disinformation.

And did anyone seriously believe the bullshit story Mr. Disinformation Dick Armitage told?

Answer: of course not. Armitage planted the story with the unwitting Robert Novak to kick off the Plamegate disinformation campaign.

Oh, we forgot to mention that not only was Grossman captured on tape exposing Brewster Jennings & Associates as a CIA front, he (Grossman) was also caught on tape selling America's nuclear secrets on the black-market.

Wasn't it Valerie Plame's job at the CIA to catch people that do things like that? You know, the bad guys dealing in nuclear proliferation?

The problem for Dick Armitage, Valerie Plame, Patrick Fitzgerald, James Comey, Judith Miller and a plethora of others connected to the "Plamegate cover-up" is that the plan relied on silencing FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds.

And as they learned the hard way, that was something that could only be accomplished temporarily.

As this unfolds you will find that nothing is as it seems, and that we really are dealing with a one party system in Washington, DC.

Remember, "the truth will set you free". And, there is no expiration date on the truth.

Share
16Dec/130

Valerie Plame lied to Congress and Chairman Henry Waxman knew it

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

On March 16, 2007 while testifying to the Congressional Oversight Committee, Valerie Plame lied under oath. And Chairman Henry Waxman was fully aware of the act of perjury being committed by Plame.

Long before Congressman Waxman heard sworn testimony from Valerie Plame at a House Oversight Committee hearing, Congressman Waxman was briefed by former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds.

In addition to being briefed by Edmonds.

Congressman Waxman was provided Inspector General Glenn Fine's classified report that contained the fact that Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA operative was exposed in 2001 when Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman was secretly recorded warning Turkish nationals to stay away from Brewster Jennings & Associates because it was a CIA front.

And as Chairman Waxman was well aware, Brewster Jennings & Associates was the CIA front that Plame claims gave her covert status.

Like many in our government, Congressman Waxman thought Edmonds (the most gagged woman in the U.S.A.) would never be heard.

You thought wrong Henry. Oops!

Now, armed with the knowledge that Congressman Waxman was fully aware that Valerie Plame was lying to the oversight committee. And the fact that we also know "Special Counsel" Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation was a sham, and United States v I. Lewis Libby was a show trial.

With this in mind take another look at the despicable conduct of Chairman Waxman as he lies to all of America, and tries (but fails) to discredit an honest witness.

Congressman Henry Waxman, time for you to join Sen. Chuck Grassley up on stage with your pants down.

Share
22Nov/130

Sen. Chuck Grassley caught with his pants down

Share

Hugo Floriani, Investigative Reporter

Senator Chuck Grassley has joined a growing number of politicians and law enforcement officials who can't answer the simplest of questions when it comes to their involvement in the "Plamegate cover-up"

Put simply: Senator Chuck Grassley has been caught with his pants down.

And clearly Sen. Grassley is hoping that nobody will notice that he has been exposed as a major player in the "Plamegate cover-up".

From: (redacted)
To: jill kozeny
Sent: November 21, 2013 at 1:31
PM Subject: Are you sure?

Jill

For Sen. Grassley to respond by having Nick Davis tell me that there is no question to answer in the email below, is truly a remarkable position for the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee to take.

Perhaps this will help.

Does Sen. Chuck Grassley deny that he knew Marc Grossman exposed Brewster Jennings & Associates and Valerie Plame as CIA in 2001?

Jill, tell the Senator we can get to the Blagojevich related question below, next.

(name redacted)

-----Original Message-----
From: (redacted)
To: jill kozeny
Sent: November 20, 2013 at 11:14 AM
Subject: Fwd: Clarice Feldman believes Dick Armitage is a liar, except…. (Attn: Sen. Grassley)

Jill

Please discuss this communication with Sen. Chuck Grassley, and I will call your office for comment.

(name redacted)

-----Original Message-----
From: (redacted)
To: patrick fitzgerald
Sent:November 19, 2013 at 12:07 PM
Subject: Fwd: Clarice Feldman believes Dick Armitage is a liar, except….

Patrick

Do you remember Glenn Fine ?

The guy who should have investigated the leaks emanating from your office to the Chicago Tribune in the Blagojevich case.

(name redacted)

-----Original Message-----
From: (redacted)
To: glenn fine
Sent: November 19, 2013 at 8:56 AM
Subject: Fwd: Clarice Feldman believes Dick Armitage is a liar, except….

Mr. Glenn Fine

You knew Dick Armitage was lying when he claimed to be the person that exposed Valerie Plame as CIA.

Care to comment on the latest developments in the Plamegate cover-up?

(name redacted)

-----Original Message-----
From:(redacted)
To: (redacted)
Sent: November 18, 2013 at 12:30 PM
Subject: Clarice Feldman believes Dick Armitage is a liar, except….

Clarice Feldman believes Dick Armitage is a liar, except….
http://illinoispaytoplay.com/2013/11/18/clarice-feldman-believes-dick-armitage-is-a-liar-except/

Here are the facts:

Sen. Grassley was ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2002 when FBI translator Sibel Edmonds informed him that Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman was caught on a federal wiretap exposing Brewster Jennings & Associates as a CIA front to the Turks.

FBI Director Robert Mueller and Senator Chuck Grassley

In 2003 Sen. Grassley actively engaged in a cover-up by participating in the appointment of U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald as "Special Counsel" to investigate who exposed Brewster Jennings and Valerie Plame as CIA.

Sen. Grassley's involvement in this cover-up was shielded from the public by the fact that the U.S. Government gagged FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds by invoking States Secrets Privilege on her.

But on August 8,2009 Sibel Edmonds testifies under oath that Marc Grossman exposed Brewster Jennings & Associates as a CIA front in 2001.

And, Edmonds also testified that Inspector General Glenn A. Fine, Sen. Chuck Grassley and Sen. Patrick Leahy were officially informed of Grossman's crimes in 2002.

That's when Sen. Chuck Grassley and many others in government got caught with their pants down.

Secret is out!

Not only will others join Sen. Grassley on stage with their pants down, but this scandal is going to be "The Full Monty"

Developing.....

Share
7Nov/130

Judith Miller exposed “Plamegate” as a cover-up

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

When Judith Miller recently confessed that she knew it was not former Deputy Secretary of State Dick Armitage that exposed Valerie Plame as CIA, and that, "a lot of people knew."

Miller exposed "Plamegate" as a cover-up.

You see, the real scandal of "Plamegate" is that it's all a lie. And, Miller just admitted it!

Now that the lie is out in the open, individuals involved in the "Plamegate cover-up" are having difficulty answering the simplest of questions.

For example:

Former Deputy Secretary of State Dick Armitage is having a extremely difficult time expressing how he feels about the Miller confession. That is understandable considering the fact that Miller's confession disputes Armitage's confession that he was the leaker in the Plame case.

From: (redacted)
To: kara bue
Sent: November 6, 2013 at 3:50 PM
Subject: Media inquiry (Your no comment?)

Kara

After weeks of waiting for an answer, I was told that you personally were working on a response to the question I asked of Dick Armitage in the communication below.

I am now being told that you have decided to respond with "no comment"

What is most perplexing is that when I pressed your underling Chase Bakaly to confirm that the "no comment" response was coming from Dick Armitage personally, he responded with "no comment" to that question as well.

Kara, is the response of "No Comment" coming from former Deputy Secretary of State Dick Armitage personally?

(name redacted)

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

From: (redacted)
To: kara bue
Sent: November 5, 2013 at 1:38 PM
Subject: Media inquiry (Your response)

Ms. Kara Bue

I have been informed that you are working on a response to the question addressed to Richard Armitage concerning Judith Miller's confession.

Kara, when can I expect to receive your response?

(name redacted)

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

From: (redacted)
To: chase bakaly
Sent: October 17, 2013 at 10:04 AM
Subject: Media inquiry (Judith Miller's confession) Attn: Richard Armitage

Mr. Richard Armitage

Former New York Times reporter Judith Miller has gone on record stating that she knew that you were not the one who exposed Valerie Plame as an employee of the CIA. And, that "a lot of people knew" this.

Do you have a statement for the media, in light of Judith Miller's confession that she knew you were not the person who exposed Valerie Plame as CIA?

(name redacted)

While pondering the dueling confessions, keep in mind that there is sworn testimony and government documents that support Miller's confession.

Judith, tell us more.

We hope to have that for you soon.......

Share
19Oct/130

Scooter Libby’s attorneys might be forced to “Win”

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

Lewis Libby, center, listens to his lawyer Ted Wells, left, speak to reporters outside federal court after his arraignment hearing in Washington, D.C. Also pictured are Libby's wife Harriet and lawyer Joseph Tate.

 

The attorneys assembled to form the "legal team" that defended Lewis "Scooter" Libby, in the case
U.S. v Libby, apparently have a dilemma.

Scooter Libby's attorneys might be forced to win the case for their client.

The email communication below, contains a possible explanation as to why Libby's attorneys have not yet demanded justice for their client Scooter Libby.

From: (redacted)
To: ted wells
Sent: October 6, 2013 at 4:03 PM
Subject: How about you

Mr. Theodore Wells

What is your dilemma?

(name redacted)

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

From: (redacted)
To: joseph tate
Sent:October 5, 2013 at 4:15 PM
Subject: You have a decision to make.

Mr. Joseph Tate

The fact that you and your firm Dechert LLP represented Lewis 'Scooter" Libby in U.S. v Libby puts you in a very per-carious situation due to recent developments.

As you can see from the Illinois Pay-to-Play article linked below, your client should never have been indicted much less ever brought to trial. And, as Libby's defense attorney in that case, it is incumbent on you to rectify this egregious misconduct on the part of the Dept. of Justice.

The dilemma for you and Dechert LLP is, if you honor your obligation to your client and your profession, your partner at the firm, Glenn Fine, may lose his license to practice law.

However, if you ignore your obligation to your client, you will lose the trust of those who have, and would consider hiring your firm, and you diminish your entire profession.
Perhaps, even exposing the firm to legal complications and liabilities.

Advance notice of your decision would be appreciated.

(name redacted)

DoJ Inspector General Glenn A. Fine complicit in fraud known as “Plamegate”

http://illinoispaytoplay.com/2013/10/04/doj-inspector-general-glenn-a-fine-complicit-in-the-fraud-known-as-plamegate/

Officers of the court are required to report illegal and or un-ethical conduct. Not to mention the obligation they have to their client.

The conduct of the Dept of Justice in U.S. v Libby was both un-ethical and illegal.

So, no dilemma, officers. Just do what's required!

Oh, and could someone please wake up Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz. He needs to have a serious chat with the new FBI Director James B. Comey.

The Libby "legal team" aka officers of the court.

Theodore V. Wells
Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019-6064

William H. Jeffress
Baker Botts LLP
1299 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20004-2400

Joseph A. Tate
Dechert LLP
2929 Arch Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-2808

John D. Cline
235 Montgomery Street, Suite 1070
San Francisco, California 94104

Share

Switch to our mobile site