9Mar/13

Why no Grand Jury? Chicago Tribune reporter John Chase involved in a crime. AGAIN!

Share

Thomas Barton, Investigative Reporter

Chicago Tribune reporters John Chase and Jeff Coen are on-record claiming to have had access to all the Blagojevich wiretap tape recordings that were never made public.

The U.S Attorneys Office has gone on-record claiming that they did not give Chase or Coen access to the Blagojevich wiretap tapes and transcripts.

So, here's what we know for sure:

(1.) The Blagojevich wiretap tapes and transcripts are sealed by a federal protective order signed by Judge James Zagel. The only way to legally obtain them is from the feds.

(2.) Chase and Coen claim to have had accessed the recordings and have offered up a sample of taped conversations that were never made public as proof of possession.

(3.) The U.S. Attorney's Office insists that no one there provided the tapes or transcripts to anyone, including Chase and Coen.

Doesn't that mean Chase and Coen have confessed to being involved in the act of breaking a federal protective order signed by Judge Zagel?

Keep in mind that this isn't the first time Chase has received information as a result of someone acting above federal law. The existence of the federal wiretap made its way to Chase after someone in the Department of Justice broke the law and leaked it to him.

Why did U.S Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald enforce federal law when it involved New York Times reporter Judith Miller, but chose not to enforce federal law when it involved Chicago Tribune reporter John Chase?

Do the Chicago Tribune editors and reporters act with impunity outside of federal law?

And, hey, why are the Chicago and national media ignoring this story?

20130311-100650.jpg

Does Judith Miller have any thoughts on the subject? We'll ask her.

Developing.......

 

Share
3Mar/13

Stunning development in Chicagogate: Publisher of Blagojevich book “Golden” confesses

Share

 

<< Breaking News >>

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

Jeff Coen and John Chase celebrate the publication of "Golden" with their editor from Chicago Review Press

 

In a stunning development, Chicago Review Press, publisher of "Golden: How Rod Blagojevich Talked Himself out of the Governor's Office and into Prison," confessed to failing to fact-check the book.

Cynthia Sherry of Chicago Review Press recently went on the record stating that the publisher "trusts their authors," and that she "trusted the Chicago Tribune and their reporters so there was no need for her to fact-check the book."

Does that mean Chicago Review Press does not fact-check any of the books they publish?

Ms. Sherry also acknowledged that she didn't confirm that John Chase and Jeff Coen actually had access to the wiretap recordings they claim in the book.

Chicago Review Press' trust of the Tribune, Chase, and Coen is even more remarkable when you consider that Ms. Sherry, and others at Chicago Review Press, were provided verifiable information that should have insured that they take all precautions and thoroughly vet the claims Chase and Coen made.

That is, unless fact-checking the book didn't fit the publisher's agenda.

Did Chicago Review Press betray our trust?

What really should have Chicagoans scratching their heads is this:  The Blagojevich legal team has remained silent as Chase and Coen tell the world there's nothing on the tapes that vindicate Blagojevich, and that the tapes prove his guilt.

Keep in mind, these are tapes that Blago and his lawyers claim they can't talk about. And, these are tapes that Chase and Coen could not have obtained legally, unless they recieved acsess from the feds.  And the feds have denied giving them that access.

So, how is Blagojevich helped by silence?

Why are lawyers remaining silent?

Remember, the appeal they filed is (suppose to be) for the right to a new trial.  Not for freedom.

No comment from Blagojevich attorney Sheldon Sorosky has been yet offered. Only the sound of crickets.

Sheldon where are you? Why aren't you representing your client, Rod Blagojevich?

Much more to come........ 

 

Share
22Feb/13

Now that Jesse Jackson, Jr. is a convicted liar and thief

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

It's time for the U.S. Attorney in Chicago to reopen the criminal investigation of Jesse Jackson, Jr.'s attempt to purchase the U.S. Senate seat that Rod Blagojevich was found guilty of trying to sell to him.

After all, why are we to believe Jr. when he say's he did not try to buy the senate seat?  He's a confessed liar.

Plus, Jackson is bipolar, right? So ask him again. Maybe this time he'll confess.

Don't forget: the prosecution has Jackson friends and allies, Raghuveer Nayak and Rajinder Bedi, ready to testify under oath that Jr. tried to buy the seat.  And then there's Rod Blagojevich sitting in a federal prison for attempting to sell the Senate seat to Jr.  What more does a prosecutor need?

Sounds like a slam dunk conviction. (Maybe that's the problem.)

If prosecutors want overkill, they can call John Chase and Jeff Coen to testify about the contents of the wiretap recordings - recordings that only John and Jeff were allowed to hear.

Keep in mind, the statute of limitations on this crime expires next December.  It's time to act.

This would come as great news to Robert Blagojevich.  He's expressed disappointment to Carol Marin of the Chicago Sun Times that the House Committee on Ethics would no longer be investigating Jackson's attempt to purchase the Senate seat, due to the fact that Jackson resigned from congress.  (Which is like telling a teacher who sexually abused students that arrest is avoided by resigning.)

Robert Blagojevich, we at IP2P stand with you in your quest to have this fully investigated, and call on the DoJ to reopen the criminal investigation into Jackson's attempt to purchase the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Barack Obama.

And furthermore, we urge Carol Marin and the Sun Times to get behind Robert in this worthy cause.

Let's all help Robert Blagojevich get the investigation into Jackson reopened.  Let justice be served.

Share
20Feb/13

Did Jesse Jackson, Jr.’s bipolar condition cause him to commit perjury?

Share

Thomas Barton, Investigative Reporter

2008 Democratic National Convention

Jesse Jackson, Jr. supporters claim that he was not himself when he repeatedly broke campaign finance laws, beginning in 2005 and continuing thru 2012.  And, that his bipolar condition contributed to his illegal behavior?

Really?

Read: Statement Of The Offense

If we're to believe J.J., Jr. when he testified that he didn't attempt to purchase the U.S. Senate seat from then governor Rod Blagojevich, wouldn't the USAO charge Raghuveer Nayak and Rajinder Bedi with lying to federal agents for claiming that he did try to purchase the Senate seat?  And furthermore, they were instructed by Jackson family members to facilitate the purchase?

Someone is lying here.

Either Raghuveer Nayak and Rajinder Bedi need to be charged with lying to the feds, or bipolar-Jackson committed perjury when he claimed he didn't try to buy a lifetime ticket on the Senate gravy train.

So, which is it Attorney General Eric Holder?

Share
16Feb/13

Rod Blagojevich: How could I be guilty of selling, if Jesse Jackson Jr. was not guilty of buying?

Share

Hugo Floriani, Investigative Reporter

It's only a matter of time before we hear Rod Blagojevich's advocates ask the question: How could Blago be guilty of trying to sell the U.S. Senate Seat that Barack Obama vacated, if there was no buyer?That's coming, as part of the puppet show staring Blago.

There was a buyer. But the feds just put him on ice with an indictment that could have, should have, been issued years ago.

The timing of the U.S. Attorney's office (USAO) in Washington, DC decision to stop looking the other way as Jesse Jackson Jr and his wife Sandi broke campaign finance laws, could not have been better. That is, if your goal is to protect Barack Obama and his administration from Chicagogate.

Jesse Jackson, Jr. has presented a dilemma for the Obama administration since the USAO in Chicago gave the go-ahead to the Chicago Tribune to warn Rod Blagojevich that the feds were recording him.

It was a warning given in order to save Jesse Jackson, Jr. from being arrested in a trap set for Blago.  After all, not only did Jackson Co-chair Obama's 2008 Campaign Committee, Obama and Michelle are near Jackson family members.  And J.J., Jr. knows too much - way too much.

However, as the Jackson's are learning, even family members are expendable if it means protecting the Obamas.

When J.J., Jr. resigned from congress not only did his political career end (perhaps), the investigation into his attempt to buy a U.S. Senate Seat ended, too.

And, the reason Jackson resigned?  The USAO in D.C. decided to indict Jackson for crimes the Attorney General had known about for years: Jackson's violation of campaign finance laws.

Simultaneously, the DoJ is protecting Jackson from being indicted for a different crime that the Attorney General has known about for years: Jackson's attempt to purchase a U.S. Senate Seat from then Governor, now federal prisoner, Rod Blagojevich.

It is all part of the puppet show.

And the media is doing their part, by being complicit in covering up the entire story.

Here's a radical idea.  Suppose some media personality asks John Chase, and the Chicago Tribune editors, this question: Why did you warn Rod Blagojevich he was being recorded by the feds?

Any takers?

Share
14Feb/13

Dept. of Justice turns a blind eye for U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, and against the First Amendment

Share

The Entire Staff of Writers, IllinoisPayToPlay

When U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald attacked Peter Lance, and his book Triple Cross, from the Office of the U.S. Attorney in Chicago, he crossed a dangerous line.

A line that, as Americans, we must not allow our government to cross.

That line protects our First Amendment Right of Speech, and prevents government censorship.

View Peter Lance talk about his book Triple Cross herehttp://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Triple

"Peter Lance filed a complaint with the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) asking for an investigation of Patrick Fitzgerald on June 13th, 2009.

He Fed Ex'd copies of the letter to both A.G. Holder and Mary Patrice Brown, then Acting Counsel of the OPR. Lance never received a response from either of them."

You can read the formal complaint filed with the OPR here:
http://www.peterlance.com/PL_OPR_%20Complaint_VS_PF_AP

When the Dept. of Justice's (DoJ) Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) ignored that Fitzgerald abused his power as U.S Attorney in his attempt to censor a book containing material he disliked.  An act that violated the Constitution

The clear message was sent that, Holder's Dept. of Justice doesn't respect the First Amendment.  That should chill us all, and make us wonder: What other parts of the Constitution are they ignoring?

At IP2P, we believe the issue of government censorship is of such great importance that we urge all Americans who treasure their God-given right to freedom of speech to let the DoJ know how you feel.

And when you get no satisfaction from the OPR, consider contacting your member of Congress.

Mary Patrice Brown, and the OPR, have been asked to comment on this question:  "Why was no investigation into U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's disturbing conduct ever initiated?"

So far, there's been no response.

As this story develops, ask yourself: Do I want the government deciding what I can and cannot read?

Share
9Feb/13

U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald “Most Dangerous Man”

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

Former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald was right when he said this about Ali Mohamed: “This is the most dangerous man I have ever met. We cannot let this man out on the street.”

However, we believe that, in hindsight, Fitzgerald proved more dangerous than Ali Mohamed.

In-fact, Patrick Fitzgerald may be remembered by history as being a danger to the American way-of-life - depending, of course, on who writes the history of this alarming era.

We hear you thinking, "Why that's nuts!"  Really?

It's not nuts when you take into account the events involving Fitzgerald leading up to 9-11, as those events have been documented by Peter Lance, and others.
                                                               Amazon/Triple Cross

It's not nuts when you examine the chain-of-events set off by Fitzgerald's willing incompetence, and wonder what this era would have been like had he'd done the right thing.

So let's play...What if?

What if Patrick Fitzgerald had had Ali Mohammed arrested - the person he described as "...the most dangerous man I have ever met. We cannot let this man out on the street.”.

Would 9-11 have happened?

Would we have gone to war in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Would we have given up so many of our liberties under the guise of being more secure?

Would our financial institutions and the USD be eroding?

What if Patrick Fitzgerald had not been appointed U.S. Attorney of the Northern Dist. of Illinois?

Would John Chase have been instructed to call Rod Blagojevich and warn him that the feds were recording him?

Would Jesse Jackson, Jr. have been arrested for trying to buy the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Barrack Obama?

Would Barrack Obama have been elected President without the help and protection of U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald?

We agree with Patrick Fitzgerald's assertion that Ali Mohammed was dangerous, and should not have remained a free man.  (Did we ever find out why Mohamed remained free?)

If he had been arrested, would we have children being groped at airports by TSA agents?  Would we have warrantless wiretaps underway, or drones flying overhead?  Would there be American citizens on the President's kill list?

We think there's a good chance all that might not have happened.  And, consequently, we nominate Patrick Fitzgerald as America's "Most Dangerous Man."

To be continued.........

Share
6Feb/13

U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald’s war against the truth

Share

Editorial Staff

At IP2P, we've addressed several articles about Patrick Fitzgerald's idea of truth.

However, the piece that may prove to be our most important chronicle is ahead. It involves a book titled Triple Cross.

U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's attack on investigative reporter and novelist Peter Lance, and his book Triple Cross, was Fitzgerald's war against the truth.

The Department of Justice declared war against the First Amendment when it allowed Fitzgerald to conduct his war on Lance, and on the publisher of his book, from within the U.S. Attorneys Office in Chicago.

Read about Fitzgerald's Attempts to silence Lance here:

U.S. Attorney Tries to Kill Triple Cross. Fitzgerald threatens to sue

Triple Cross is a must read for anyone who wants a truthful look at our government's actions, and lack of actions, that led to 9-11.

And, perhaps equally important, Triple Cross revealed that U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, the man touted as the most likely candidate to replace FBI director Robert Mueller, has no problem employing Gestapo tactics on citizens who tell the truth about his, or his accomplices', actions in a significant cover-up.

In Triple Cross you can learn, thanks to old-fashion investigative work done by Peter Lance, the truth about Patrick Fitzgerald.  He is no Elliot Ness. And the thought of Patrick Fitzgerald ever becoming FBI Director should alarm all freedom-loving Americans.

Lance's work is a road map to understanding how we've come to a point in American history where the Justice Department routinely tramples on our constitutional rights, and now insists that it is within the President's power to kill American citizen's without due process.

Learn more from Peter Lance here: http://peterlance.com/wordpress/ 

More ahead on this.

Share
2Feb/13

Chicago Review Press: Do they ignore the facts?

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

 

Since the release of the book "Golden," by authors and Chicago Tribune reporters John Chase and Jeff Coen, serious questions have been raised about the honesty of the book's claims.

IP2P has received information from several sources that lead us to conclude this: Someone is not telling the truth about the claims made in the Chicago Review Press publication.

These public assertions lead us to that conclusion:

(1) The man who warned Rod Blagojevich that the feds were recording him, Tribune reporter John Chase, was a co-author of the book.

(2) Chase and Coen claim, in their book, to have listened to, and read, the transcripts of all the Blagojevich wiretaps...that have never been made public.

(3) The U.S. Attorney's Office insists the wiretap tapes and transcripts were provided to no one - including Chase and Coen.  Even though Chase and Coen insist that the USAO did provide the material.

(4) Prior to Chicago Review Press publishing "Golden," a credible source made attempts to provide important information to the publisher that would have helped insure that their book was factual.

U.S. Attorney's Office claims author's of Blagojevich book "Golden" lying

(5) To date, Cynthia Sherry and the Chicago Review Press have refused to answer basic questions that a publisher should expect from the media: (A) Did Chicago Review Press fact-check the book they published as non-fiction? (B) Did the authors actually have access to the tapes and transcripts of the Blagojevich wiretaps that were not made public?

From: (Redacted)

To: csherry

Sent: 2013-02-01 21:00:02 +0000

Subject: Fwd: Publishing False Information

Ms. Cynthia Sherry

Did The Chicago Review Press verify that John Chase and Jeff Coen actually possessed and listened to all the Blagojevich wiretap tape recordings and read transcripts that were never made public, per their claim in the book you published titled "Golden" ?

If you did verify, please explain how.

(Name redacted)

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

From: (Redacted)

To: csherry

Sent: 2012-12-08 23:15:43 +0000

Subject: Publishing False Information

Ms. Cynthia Sherry

The U.S. Attorney's Office Northern Dist. of Illinois has just gone on the record saying that John Chase and Jeff Coen are not telling the truth about having access to tapes a transcripts of the Blagojevich wiretaps that were never made public.

Ms. Sherry,  as publisher of Chase and Coen's book "Golden" you can clearly understand the ramifications if this is true.

Did Chase and Coen publish false information?  The USAO says yes.
Ms. Sherry, what do you say?

(Name redacted)

All of this begs the question: Was Chicago Review Press so concerned with telling the authors' version of the Blagojevich story that they ignored the facts?

Listen to Cynthia Sherry explain Chicago Review Press promotion of progressive  writings and social justice.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/299785-1

At IP2P we ask this: Did the truth about the Blagojevich case not work for their progressive agenda?

More on this soon............  

 

Share
29Jan/13

Robert Blagojevich dodged going to prison

Share

Hugo Floriani,  Investigative Reporter

Jesse Jackson Jr. was not the only one saved when John Chase called the Blagojevich camp and warned them that the feds were listening.

Remember, it was Robert Blagojevich that would have been caught on surveillance tapes, meeting with Jackson's money man, Raguveer Nayak.  Chase not only saved Jesse Jackson, Jr. from prison, he also saved Robert Blagojevich.

Hold that thought. We'll come back to it later.

November 21, 2012: Within hours of Jesse Jr's resignation from Congress, Robert Blagojevich expressed his disappointment.  He felt he likely would never be able to clear his own name.

Why is that? you ask.

Well, R. Blagojevich assumed there'd be no ethics committee investigation of Jesse Jackson Jr's attempt to buy the U.S. Senate seat his brother, then Governor Rod  Blagojevich, was selling.

Robert was right.  The DC pols didn't want to investigate that attempted transaction.

However, there's nothing to stop Robert Blagojevich from making his case to the public.

That is, if Robert truly believes his name could be cleared.

Robert Blagojevich has all the FBI wiretap tapes that brother Rod and his attorneys have.

Robert has listened to all the government's wiretaps, and, as of today, he hasn't expressed any disagreement with Chase and Coen's assertion that the contents of the tapes show his brother is guilty.

Furthermore, Robert, Rod, and their respective attorneys have remained silent, while Chicago Tribune reporters Chase and Coen assert that the Blagojevich defense was built on a house of lies.

Remember, the entire Blagojevich entourage was screaming that "the tapes would set them free," if only everyone could hear them.

In their book "Golden," Chase and Coen claim they listened to all the wiretap tapes, and that there is nothing there that suggest Rod or Robert are innocent of attempting to sell a U.S. Senate seat.

So, in a nutshell:

In the past.

The Blagojevich brothers and their attorney's repeatedly professed that proof of their innocence is captured on the government's tapes.  And that, if the public were allowed to hear the tapes, the brothers would be found innocent.

Present day.

(1) John Chase and Jeff Coen claim that the Blago's and their attorney's were lying.

(2) The Blago brothers and their attorneys are not disputing Chase and Coen's claims.

Conclusion:

The Blago's and their attorney's lied about what's on the tapes.


So, what will the Brothers and their attorney's want you to believe next? (coming soon)

Questions:

(1) What was captured on roughly 400 hours of recorded Blago wiretap conversations?

(2) Why can't we hear them?

(3) Why are the Blagojevich's and the U.S. Attorney's Office hiding behind a phony protective order?

Developing  story...... 

Share