Rezko friend Dr. Ronald Michael, is he above the law?
Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
Remember Rezko's friend and partner Dr. Ronald Michael? At IP2P we believe he's the only person ever to file a libel lawsuit under then alias - "John Doe."
Well, here's an update on the "good" doctor: He didn't file any kind of lawsuit against The MayReport.com, or against Tim Coffaro for publishing the accusations below.
#3: Subject: RE: An article I just published on CSUMRI and Dr. Ron Michael
Date: 11/11/2005 10:09:57 A.M. Central Standard Time
From: [email protected]
Thanks for the info! I cannot confirm this, however I have heard thru the grapevine Dr. Michael overcharges insurance
Company's and ask's for kick backs from certain patients. I can't confirm (from personal experience) another issue, however I understand that Dr. M receives kick back's (he calls it consulting fees) from Spine Company's in return for him purchasing their product. HIGHLY ILLEGAL STARCK LAWS. I have I friend that he asked for approx $250,000 in return for purchasing product. My friend refused. The motto with this guy is "YOU CAN'T MAKE A GOOD DEAL WITH A BAD MAN!"
The mainstream media would have a field day with this guy!
Tim Coffaro
708 751 2019
__________________________
So, Dr. Michael sued the Chicago Sun Times under the alias "John Doe" for printing the factual story "Doc Banks on Government cash."
But he didn't file a lawsuit against those who publicly accused him of committing crimes, that, if true, could cost him his medical license, and perhaps his freedom. What's up with that?
Has Cook County State Attorney Anita Alvarez, or Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, investigated these serious allegations involving Michael's practice?
Or, are they merely looking the other way?
Should the medical community and state regulators in Illinois take these allegations seriously?
We think they should.
Developing story......
U.S. Attorney’s office protected Rezko friend Dr. Ronald Michael
Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) Carolyn McNiven was the attorney-of-record in the government's case against Obama friend and fundraiser, Antoin "Tony" Rezko.
McNiven was also lead attorney in the government's case against Rezko's partner in the enterprise called Companion Security, Daniel T. Frawley. It was a venture designed to, allegedly, train, in the U.S., Iraqi security workers for the Iraqi Ministry of Electricity.
At IP2P we've also recently learned that Patrick Fitzgerald put McNiven in charge of suppressing evidence that Rezko friend and associate, Dr. Ronald Michael, committed multiple felonies.
One of those felonies was an act of fraud that involved the law firm Piper Rudnick, currently known as DLA Piper.
That's the same Piper Rudnick that:
(A) employs Obama's friend and backer, Peter Bynoe, as a senior partner;
(B) is aligned with The Cohen Group where Patrick Fitzgerald's star witness in the Valerie Plame investigation, Marc Grossman, is Vice Chairman; and
(C) was dealing with Rezko and Frawley pertaining to Companion Security's 50 million dollar Iraq security contract.
Isn't it interesting how the dots connect
Isn't it also interesting how the Chicago media serially ignores the dots?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dan Frawley<Address redacted>
To: Robert Cooley <Address redacted>
Date: Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 12:54 PM
Subject: ROBERT NICHOLS IS THE PIPER RUDNICK ATTY WHO WENT TO JORDAN WITH ME. HE ALSO REPPED BILL COHEN'S (COHEN GROUP) & NOUR USA HUD FAROUKI GOOGLE THEM
And, as luck would have it, the same DLA Piper/Piper Rudnick that made Carolyn McNiven a full partner when she left the U.S. Attorney's office. Imagine that.
PRESS RELEASE
Carolyn McNiven joins Litigation practice in San Francisco
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: (Redacted)
Sent:Tue May 11, 2010
Subject: Follow up on our meeting
Carolyn
Let me know when you are available to finish our conversation about Dr. Ronald Michael being on the Terrorist watch list, and the circumstances that led him to send Paul Dubuque to Jordan on his behalf. Dr Michael's involvement with Tony Rezko and the contracts that came out of Iraq will need to be disclosed. It is starting to appear unlikely that your office is going to proceed to trial against Rod Blagojevich this June, making the truth of John Thomas even more important than ever. I look forward to our follow up.
(name redacted)
The most disturbing aspect of Assitant U.S. Attorney Carolyn McNiven suppressing evidence of crimes committed.
It nearly cost someone their life.
Coming soon....Marc Grossman, The Cohen Group, DLA Piper
The Valerie Plame case: The man who was appointed to appoint Patrick Fitzgerald “Special Counsel”
Thomas Barton, Investigative Reporter
U.S. Attorney James B. Comey was appointed Deputy Attorney General for the purpose of appointing U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald as "Special Counsel" to lead the investigation into who "leaked" Valerie Plame's identity as a C.I.A. employee to the press. It was all choreographed.
It was known that Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage leaked Plame's identity as a CIA employee to the press - even before Patrick Fitzgerald was appointed "Special Counsel". Go figure.
And, it was known that Armitage was the "Leaker" before Comey was chosen for his job, and before he appointed Patrick Fitzgerald as "Special Counsel," and before Fitzgerald was tasked to find out what the government already knew.
Seriously, you can't make this stuff up! Here's a sequence of key dates:
Oct 1, 2003: Bob Novak published an article that causes Richard Armitage to go immediately to the FBI and confess to being the "Leaker" in the Valerie Plame case.
Oct. 3, 2003: George W. Bush nominates Patrick Fitzgerald's peer and close friend, U.S Attorney James B. Comey, to be Deputy Attorney General.
Oct. 29, 2003: During Comey's senate confirmation hearing, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) questions Comey about the possibility of Attorney General John Ashcroft recusing himself in the Plame case and Comey appointing a Special Counsel to that case.
So, what happened next?
Comey was confirmed Deputy Attorney General.
Ashcroft recused himself, putting Comey in charge of the Plame case.
Comey appointed his close friend, Patrick Fitzgerald as Special Counsel in charge of finding the "Leaker".
And, this was all done after Armitage confessed to being the "Leaker," said he wouldn't seek legal representation, and claimed to be prepared to accept the consequences of his actions.
Fitzgerald asked Armitage to keep his guilt to himself.
Armitage complied.
Judith Miller went to jail, and Scooter Libby was prosecuted and found guilty...of something other than leaking.
Shortly after appointing Fitzgerald to the Plame case, Comey left the Attorney General's office to become lead counsel at Lockheed Martin. We'll explain the significance of that move later.
And where's Comey today? He's a partner and general counsel at Bridgewater Associates.
Stay tuned.....
The Valerie Plame Case: Why was Patrick Fitzgerald appointed Special Counsel?
Hugo Floriani, Investigative Reporter & Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
It's been documented that Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage was the source of the so called "leak" of Valarie Plame's identity as a CIA employee to the press.
And, that the FBI and the Attorney General's office was well aware that Armitage was the "leaker" before appointing Patrick Fitzgerald "Special Counsel" to look for an answer they already knew.
The lingering essential question is. Why was Patrick Fitzgerald appointed Special Counsel? And, why would a prosecutor tell the known guilty party not to tell anyone of his confession?
Isn't that the opposite of how prosecutors usually operate?
In a situation like that, wouldn't the Attorney General simply determine whether Armitage broke the law or not, and either charge him with a crime or close the case?
Why would the Bush administration's Attorney General appoint a Special Counsel when Richard Armitage had already confessed?
Let's imagine that the whole Valerie Plame case was staged? Who would benefit from the appointment of Patrick Fitzgerald as Special Counsel in a case that was already solved?
Wouldn't it be the same people who benefitted from U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald being put in charge of the 10 state investigation of ACORN that could not be avoided? An investigation that was suspiciously a dismal failure.
The Democrats benefitted, with Barack Hussein Obama being the biggest benefactor. However, to be accurate, it must be said that those who benefitted the most from Patrick Fitzgerald being appointed Special Counsel and U.S. Attorney in Illinois were anyone interested in the fundamental transformation of the United States of America. And that is inclusive of Democrats, Republican's and foreigners.
A case can, and will be made, that, Patrick Fitzgerald, in his role as U.S. Attorney of the Northern District of Illinois and Special Counsel in the Valerie Plame investigation, intentionally did as much, if not more, than anyone to insure that Barack Hussien Obama was elected President of the United States of America.
Why was Patrick Fitzgerald appointed Special Counsel? For the same reason he was appointed U.S. Attorney. To assist in the fundamental transformation of the U.S.A.
Fitzgerald was put in charge of Obama sensitive cases to assure that those cases die on the vine, be derailed, be covered-up, or be in some way diverted.
As we back up these statements with the facts, the question becomes: Will anyone in Washington DC care?
More to follow...
The truth about the Valerie Plame case. (10 years later)
Hugo Floriani, Investigative Reporter
We're going into the final year of a decade since the Valerie Plame case burst into the national news, and still the truth remains untold by key persons involved. Why is that?
Is Richard Armitage telling the truth when he says he didn't tell President Bush that he was the leaker in the Valerie Plame case because of U.S Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald?
In an interview with CBS News national security correspondent David Martin, former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage said he didn't come forward as the source of the leak because "the special counsel, once he was appointed, asked me not to discuss this and I honored his request".
Patrick Fitzgerald was appointed special counsel on December 30, 2003.
Let's examine Armitage's claims.
Armitage has stated that reporter Bob Novak's column, published October 1,2003, caused him to (1) immediately meet with the FBI and confess to being the leaker, and (2) then call Secretary of State Colin Powell and tell him he was Novak's source and, therefore, responsible for leaking the identity of Valerie Plame as a CIA employee.
According to court records Richard Armitage went to Marc Grossman, the Undersecretary of State, on the evening of October 16, 2003 and told Grossman that he, Armitage, was the leaker. Armitage did this knowing that Grossman was scheduled to be questioned by the FBI the next day.
Undersecretary Marc Grossman is the author of the memo that started it all by identifying who Valerie Plame was to his superiors at the State Department - Armitage and Powell.
So, what do we know?
(1) We know that as of Oct. 16, 2003 the top three officials at the State Department and the FBI knew that Richard Armitage was the person who divulged Valerie Plame's identity to the press.
(2) We know that, between Oct. 16 - Dec. 30, it was not Patrick Fitzgerald who was keeping the three top officials in the U.S. State Department from divulging that Armitage was the leaker.
And (3) we know, that, if in the time between Oct. 16 - Dec 30, any one of the State Departments top three officials (Powell, Armitage or Grossman) or the FBI would have gone public with what they knew, Patrick Fitzgerald would have never been appointed Special Counsel.
Consequently, New York Times reporter Judith Miller would not have spent nearly three months in jail, and Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby, would not have been prosecuted.
As this unfolds, ponder this:
Did our current FBI director Robert Mueller keep the identity of the "leaker" Richard Armitage from his boss, Attorney General John Ashcroft?
And, if not, did John Ashcroft neglect to tell President George W. Bush?
To be continued....
Nadhmi Auchi further outed by John Shaw thanks to Doug Ross
Editorial Staff
(Nadhmi Auchi)
John Shaw, former senior official in the Defense, State, and Commerce departments, who also served on several White House staffs, was a specialist in international technology transfer and arms sales, as well as in the economic development of the Middle East.
Doug Ross recently posted a piece written by Shaw that helps us grasp the extent of corruption in Chicago, and the devastating effects that corruption is having on U.S. sovereignty.
The insidious nature of Chicago corruption is enabled by both Democrats and Republicans, as well as a faux Chicago media.
It's bipartisan. And it bridges multiple White House administrations.
IP2P applauds Dr. John Shaw (PhD. Cambridge) for his patriotic and bold actions. We, also, commend the intrepid blogger, Doug Ross, for his honest journalism at a time when it is so needed, and so very rare.
Go to www.directorblueblogspot.com to read Shaw's latest piece entitled "Arab Money and the Purchase of a President".
Developing...
Related stories: Nadhmi Auchi
Rezko’s friend Dr. Ronald Michael and the State Attorney’s Office
Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
ILP2P has learned that the Cook County State Attorney's Financial Crimes Unit was not only aware of Dr. Ronald Michael before $7.2 million of government funds were deposited in Arcola Homestead Savings Bank, they were protecting Michael.
-----Original Message-----
From: (Redacted)
To: Anita Alvarez
Sent: 2009-02-09 13:19:53 +0000
Subject: Fwd: Public Trust
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: (Redacted)
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 1:25:58 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Public Trust
Roger:
Re: Dr. Ronald Michael's purchase of the controlling interest in Arcola Homestead Savings Bank; Arcola, IL
As you know, the I.D.F.P.R. is in possession of proof of FRAUD regarding Dr. Ronald Michael's purchase of Arcola Homestead Savings Bank.
The only question remaining is, what is your agency doing about this?
CC: Robert Stearn, Steve Ginsburg, D.L. Padron
Respectfully,
(Name redacted)
_______________________________________________________________________________
Wait, it gets better.
Even though Dr. Michael was being protected by the State’s Attorney's office, Alvarez felt free to beat her political opponent over the head with the fact that he accepted a $10K "donation" from Dr. Michael.
State's attorney candidates trade claims of tainted donors
Rob Olmstead, Daily Herald Staff
July 29, 2008
A Cook County state's attorney candidate says she's comfortable taking a small donation from an acknowledged target of an FBI investigation, saying he has never been charged with a crime.
On the flip side, her opponent says he sees nothing wrong with taking a larger donation from a man who was a friend of convicted influence peddler Tony Rezko and who was approved by state officials for bank ownership despite once having helped run a company that went bankrupt.
Welcome to the race for Cook County state's attorney.
The first donation, $500 given in June by former Chicago Alderman William Singer, was made to Democrat Anita Alvarez.
Singer was identified by federal authorities during the Rezko trial as a target of a federal investigation into a crooked land deal involving Stuart Levine and former Chicago Alderman Edward Vrdolyak.
Levine wore two recording devices to try to capture Singer on tape, but somehow both recording devices failed during his conversation with Singer, testimony showed. Defense attorneys for Rezko intimated Levine did it on purpose to protect Singer, but Levine denied that on the stand.
Singer has not been charged with any wrongdoing. A secretary at his office Monday said he was out of town and unavailable for comment.
"I think it would be highly inappropriate to keep this money," said Alvarez' opponent, Republican Tony Peraica.
But Alvarez spokeswoman Sally Daly said Alvarez does not know Singer, and in the absence of any charges thinks that an implication by Levine, an admitted liar and heavy drug user, is not enough to impugn his reputation.
"Given those circumstances, we're not uncomfortable with it," said Daly, who said Alvarez will not be returning the contribution.
Daly, in turn, criticized Peraica's acceptance in a previous campaign of over $10,000 from Dr. Ronald Michael, a friend of Rezko who contributed heavily to Gov. Rod Blagojevich and was awarded state regulatory approval to buy a bank, even though he once helped run a company that went bankrupt.
"He's [Peraica] received sizable and ongoing donations not only from people whose name came up in the Rezko trial - but people whose business practices have been scrutinized by the federal government."
She was referring to another campaign donor whose company incurred Clean Air Act violations.
"Was Mr. Michael ever under a federal investigation?" asked Peraica rhetorically. Federal officials have never publicly given any such indication.
"If you know of some (investigation), I would certainly take a look at that (returning a donation)," Peraica said.
Michael could not be reached for comment Monday.
Regarding the donor with the Clean Air violations, Peraica responded that he thinks Alvarez is "getting desperate here".
Hang on, there's still more...
At a later date, State Attorney Anita Alvarez was so bold as to attempt to set someone up for Dr. Michael. She gave the task to her best pit bull, Mr. Robert Podlasek. He just happens to be the very same attorney from the Financial Crimes Unit that is, to this day, still terrorizing Cook County political prisoner Annabel Melongo.
Alvarez's attempt in the Michael case fell short. The intended victim was familiar with "The Chicago Way" and was able to duck, so to speak. Although, that's not to say the victim escaped unharmed.
Cook County State Attorney's Office is the "Muscle" and the complicit Chicago media knows a lot more than they’re reporting. But then, what else is new?
Rahm Emanuel takes control of the “Muscle”
Hugo Floriani, Investigative Reporter
Any politician who wants to wield supreme power in Chicago must control the Cook County State Attorney's Office.
The Chicago Sun Times, Rahm Emanuel's Pravda, took a big step toward giving that power to the Mayor.
For those not familiar with Chicago politic's, put simply, it's a protection racket. And the Cook County State Attorney's Office is the "Muscle".
Here's how it works: Eight years ago, Mayor Daley controlled "The Machine". So it was dictated - probably not by His Honor himself, but by others - that there'd be no real investigation into the death of David Koschman, and that the Chicago media would ignore the event.
Why? Because the man responsible for David Koschman's premature death was a Daley family member, and, therefore, a protected member of "The Machine".
Fast forward to present day: The current Mayor, Rahm Emanuel, needs to control the States Attorney's Office. So his journalistic minions at the Chicago Sun Times resurrect, and then use, the tragedy of David Koschman's death, to dismantle the power of State's Attorney Anita Alvarez, and thereby future discredit the"Daley Machine," so Rahm can replace it with the "Emanuel Politburo".
It's that simple. And it's that disreputable.
The investigation into the death of David Koschman was derailed eight years ago due to political power.
It was resurrected in order to gain political power.
Justice doesn't figure into the equation.
Welcome to the People's Republic of Crook County.
The Cook County States Attorney's Office is the "Muscle" in Chicago, and Rahm "Never let a crisis go to waste" Emanuel, is well on his way to taking control of it.
Bye, bye, Anita
Related Story on how the "Muscle" and the media operates in Chicago:
Annabel Melongo, the Machine's Political Prisoner.
Rod Blagojevich to be released from prison
Thomas Barton, Investigative Reporter
All indications are that the former governor of Illinois Rod Blagojevich will be set free mid 2013.
This is being done in the usual Chicago Way - smoke and mirrors narrative put out by the Chicago media to deceive the public, while deals are made in the back-room.
The deafening silence you hear from Rod Blagojevich's legal team in the midst of John Chase and Jeff Coen running around town saying that they have listened to the never made public wiretap tapes, and that there is nothing on them, says it all, the deal is done.
This is the same legal team that consumed Blago's $3,000,000. campaign fund in his first trial, running around town screaming the tapes will prove Blago's innocent if only the people could hear them all.
Listen to what Sam Adam Jr. had to say on Dec 8, 2011, no doubt before the back-room negotiations were concluded.
Did Sam Adam, Jr. mean, if only John Chase and Jeff Coen could hear them his client would be exonerated?
And Mr. Sheldon Sorosky - aren't you in the process of an appeal for Blago?
How does John Chase and Jeff Coen, running around town claiming there is nothing on any of the government wiretap recordings of Blago that exonerates him, not concern you as his attorney?
Sheldon aren't you the least bit curious how John Chase and Jeff Coen got their hands on the non-public tapes and transcripts?
And then there's Rod's loving partner in crime and Dick Mell's daughter Patti, why is she silent on the matter?
Could it be because recently her husband has publicly asked her out on a date next August, and that she has stated she believes this will be the last holiday season he spends in prison?
So, Patti believes her husband is going to serve approximately 1 year of a 14 year sentence, at a time when Chase and Coen are claiming the tapes do not point to anything other than Blago's guilt.
There will be time for us to address how the "Blagojevich Show" got to this point, and what can be done to stop this back-room deal and insure that justice is served by Blago paying his debt to society behind bars.
However, what should be most concerning to honest law-abiding citizens at the moment is, why is the government involved in this back-room deal with Blago?
Most of all. Why are we expected to take John Chase and Jeff Coen's word for anything?
Didn't the USAO just call them liars?
Time for the public to hear the tapes and read the transcripts that everyone keeps talking about.
Time for some honest answers.
Hey Chicago Tribune, what kinda Journalism is that?
Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
The traditional rules of journalism apparently don't apply to the Chicago Tribune. Now it's the rules of "Forward Journalism" that they follow.
For example:
Basic rule #1 - When you get the inside scoop on a wiretap the government's running on a sitting governor, you don't make a decision at 10:20 p.m. to derail the government's investigation, while, at the same time, flushing the biggest news story of the year down the drain with a John Chase phone call warning Gov. Blagojevich that the feds are listening.
Unless you "report" for the Chicago Tribune.
Basic rule # 2 - When you write the self-described definitive book about the Rod Blagojevich affair, as reporters John Chase and Jeff Coen claim to have, and the U.S. Attorney's office publicly takes issue with the honesty of your claims, you back up your story with evidence that supports your words.
Unless you work for the Chicago Tribune
Basic rule #3 - When the honesty of reporters is challenged by the U.S. government, the Editor stands by his or her reporters, or excepts responsibility for their mistakes and makes the appropriate changes to protect the integrity of the newspaper.
Unless you're an Editor at the Chicago Tribune.
Ever since the U.S. Attorney's Office of the Northern District of Illinois went on the record disputing claims made by Chase and Coen, the two Tribune reporters have been mute, refusing to comment.
Not only are they not responding to troubling accusations from the USAO, Tribune editor Gerould Kern, and the publisher of "Golden," the Chicago Review Press, are, also, hunkered down refusing to comment.
So is that the new style of "Forward Journalism"?
We, at IP2P, subscribe to the American traditional rules of journalism. We call for honest answers from the Tribune, on behalf of the citizens of Chicago, and Illinois.
They deserve the truth
More Interesting Articles
- Laura Loomer blocks reporter from viewing her Tweets!
- Why was AE4HF founder Sherry Walker threatening patriots?
- Did the covid “vaccine” affect Scott Kirby’s menstrual cycle?
- AE4HF spokesperson: Watching my podcast without donating is “theft”!
- John C. Sullivan – quite possibly the dumbest Deep State attorney ever!
- United Airlines CEO is a World Economic Forum puppet
- “Vaccine” Mandate News: The face of AE4HF refuses to answer any questions!
- Why is AE4HF’s spokesperson scrubbing his own podcasts from the internet?
Links
- Big Government
- Bill Baar's West Side
- Chicago Daily Observer
- Citizen WElls
- Doug Ross @ Journal
- Illinois Review
- Newsalert
- PeterLance.com
- RBO2.com
- The Blaze
- The Ulsterman Report