Salem Radio refuses to expose Blagojevich hoax and consequent election meddling behind it!
Marty Watters, Investigative Reporter
Amy Jacobson, co-host of Salem Radio's Morning Answer Show, received a block-buster document that would lead to exposing the real reason corrupt DoJ officials took down the sitting governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich.
As explained here:
https://illinoispaytoplay.com/2018/06/13/robert-mueller-has-a-history-of-meddling-in-elections/
Jacobson was provided the protective order from the Blagojevich case. It proves that not only did the Deep State not want the public to hear all the FBI wiretap recordings in the Blagojevich saga, Blago himself does not want the public to hear them. And, he never did!
Initially Jacobson said she would confront Blagojevich with this new revelation as reported here:
But then Jacobson decided that she did not want to report this important development. Management at Salem Radio is standing squarely behind her decision, saying they trust her.
Remember now, that this is the same Amy Jacobson who was fired by NBC for taking her kids swimming at a suspected murderer's (Craig Stebic) house.
Jacobson most recently made national news by battling Illinois governor J.B Pritzker in court over whether or not she is a real reporter.
When Jacobson won her battle with Pritzker, her Station Manager, Jeff Reisman, celebrated the victory by declaring the following:
“Amy Jacobson has a long history in Chicago as a dogged journalist who asks tough questions. We’re happy that she can finally get back to doing what she does best – asking the questions that are on the minds of so many in our audience.”
Reisman did not respond to any of my phone calls or emails.
However when confronted with Jacobson's refusal to set the record straight and report the truth about the Blagojevich protective order Reisman's boss Salem Radio Network Vice President of News, Tom Tradup, explained to me that Jacobson was not really a reporter.
Talk about wanting to have your cake and eat it too.
David Santrella the president of Salem's broadcast media weighed in telling me that he does believe Jacobson to be a reporter and that Jacobson told him her radio audience wouldn't care about the Blagojevich hoax and that it is old news.
Santralla did make a point of telling me that he did not discuss any of this with Jacobson's co-host Dan Proft.
Does Jacobson run the show?
So, as it stands, Jacobson decided, on behalf of Salem Media, that Rod Blagojevich and his attorneys lying about wanting the public to hear all the FBI wiretap recordings is old news!
Really?
Blagojevich and his attorneys are to this day claiming they want the pulic to hear all the tapes. But that they can't because of a protective order.
Feb. 19, 2020 - Blagojevich attorney Sam Adam Jr.:
“To this day those tapes are under protective order. No one’s allowed to hear 'em; I’m not allowed to tell you what’s on 'em,"
What Adam Jr. does not tell us is that his client Rod Blagojevich is really the one who is preventing him from talking about those recorded connversations. Not a protective order!
Jacobson's co-host Dan Proft, who is an attorney and political insider in Illinois, slipped and let the Blago hoax cat out of the bag when interviewing Tribune reporter Jeff Coen. It happened when Proft blurted out that Blago can tell us about his conversations with Rahm Emanuel and others anytime he wants.
What Proft failed to do in this interview after he let slip that Blago can divulge his conversations with Rahm Emanuel was ask his guest Coen what Rahm and Blago talked about.
(Coen interview 8:45 mark)
https://youtu.be/ec6X2JkaEgM
Proft and Jacobson both know that Coen publicly claims to have been provided all the FBI wiretap recordings and transcripts.
Why are Proft and Jacobson not asking Coen what Emanuel and Blagojevich discussed?
Why would Jacobson think a topic that she said was lighting up the radio station phone lines during this interview be something her audience does not care about?
Worse yet, months after the Coen interview Proft and Jacobson interviewed Robert Blagojevich and they allowed him to tell the same old tired lie about wanting all the tapes to be heard.
(Robert Blago interview 4:40 min. mark)
https://youtu.be/p_MSuAkC6SI
Again Proft and Jacobson failed to ask about what was captured on the recordings despite knowing that the Blagojevich brothers can and always could divulge that information anytime they please.
Now why would Proft and Jacobson not want to know what was on those tapes?
Could it be that Proft and Jacobson know that asking these questions would expose that the Blagojevich takedown was a scheme carried out by President Bush's FBI Director Robert Mueller to protect Barrack Obama and his corrupt friends?
Here's the kicker. Rod Blagojevich himself relunctantly admitted recently (Feb. 23, 2020) during an interview with Eric Bolling that he can tell us what is on those tapes.
(9:00 min. mark)
https://m.facebook.com/WICSABC20/videos/1098644737163222/
Kudos to Bolling!
Now the question I have for the George W. Bush friendly management at Salem Media is this:
Why are you okay with your radio personalities promoting a false narrative, and suppressing block-buster news that would help expose the real reason that corrupt DoJ officials in the Bush administration after a six year "investigation" finally took down Governor Rod Blagojevich?
Election medlling is nothing new for this bunch.
And the meddling will continue if the media is not held to account for their complicity.
Salem Corporate
4880 Santa Rosa Road
Camarillo, CA 93012
Phone: 805.987.0400
More to come...
Patrick Fitzgerald withheld damning evidence against Robert Blagojevich
Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
Robert Blagojevich is on a book tour trying to sell the idea that former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald was using him to secure a conviction of his brother, former Governor Rod Blagojevich.
What Robert fails to realize is that his book, "Fundraiser A", tells a completely different story.
In fact, Robert's book confirms for us that the prosecutors withheld damning evidence against him and his brother, Rod, from the jury and the American public.
Case in point: Robert states in his book that he was playing a "game of chicken" with prosecutors.
Here is an excerpt from Robert's book that proves that to be true:
"Day Nineteen: Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Noted in my journal this day:
'Mike [Ettinger] spoke with [Assistant U.S. Attorney Reid] Schar again this morning, Schar wanting to know if I was going to testify. Mike told him I was. Schar's response was that he had other tapes that haven't been played that he could play if he needed. Mike told him to bring it on. I told Mike I won't testify if they drop the charges against me. That was a nonstarter for Mike, he just looked at me. This means they are threatening to use more tapes to get me not to testify."
Normally prosecutors salivate over the prospect of a defendant taking the witness stand.
Ask yourself this: Why would a prosecutor threaten a defendant in hopes of preventing him from taking the stand?
Why would Robert think the prosecutors would drop the case against him rather than see him take the stand?
Well, Robert took the stand, and the prosecutor delivered on his threat, as illustrated by this excerpt from Sun Times reporter Natasha Korecki's book.
"Rob was convincing on direct examination. Next was cross-examination by Niewoehner, who tore into the pristine image Ettinger created. Rob stumbled as Niewoehner asked about a tape that hadn't been played - a November 5, 2008 discussion. 'If you can get Obama to get Fitzgerald to close the investigation on you, it completely provides you with total clarity,' Niewoeher qouted Rob telling his brother.
Rob testified that this exchange had nothing to do with [Valerie] Jarrett's appointment and that it was instead meant 'in context of what politicians do'. He seemed caught off guard, though, and the tension in the courtroom was palable. If the prosecution could do this to Rob in less than 15 minutes, what would they do to his brother?"
So Robert, the day after getting elected president, you and Rod thought Obama would get Fitzgerald to close the investigation just because that's "what politicians do"?
Really Robert? Don't you mean crooked politicians?
And Robert, do you really expect us to believe that asking Obama to get Fitzgerald to close the investigation on your brother had nothing to do with the offer to appoint Valerie Jarrett to the U.S. Senate seat Obama vacated?
Like they say, let's go to the tape!
Here's a question that Fitzgerald was asked but he refused to answer.
Why did the prosecution not present such a damning recording in their case against Robert and Rod?
They obviously did not want that tape on record because it would implicate other well known politicians who were being protected by Fitzgerald.
If Robert did not take the stand, we would have never known that he and Rod had reason to believe Obama would call off Fitzgerald and close the investigation if Rod appointed Jarrett to the U.S Senate.
But Robert did take the stand and Fitzgerald's office met him head on by using a single quote from the wiretap tape that they are still withholding to this day. The quote the prosecutors used can only be found in trial transcripts due to the fact that they never entered the tape or transcripts of it into evidence.
Clearly both the prosecutors and the defendants in this case do not want the full contents of that wiretap tape to be made public. Thus the "game of chicken" Robert referred to in his book.
By the way Robert, you spent a good part of your book calling Patrick Fitzgerald a liar. While I do not disagree with you on that assertion, I would like to point out that when you say "you beat him at his own game" and you were playing a "game of chicken" with him, that you are in fact boasting that you're a better liar!
Since you like to play games Robert, how about we play a game of truth or dare?
If you won't tell the truth, I dare you to release the full transcript of that November 5, 2008 conversation between you and your brother.
Or would that take away the leverage that you are using to get Rod out of prison?
More to come...
Alert: Chicago Tribune columnist Eric Zorn caught telling the truth!
Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
Chicago Tribune columnist Eric Zorn recently was caught doing something that has his employer and the U.S. Attorney's Office very upset.
He told the truth!
In an unguarded moment of honesty, Zorn let fly that the Chicago Tribune did in fact warn Rod Blagojevich that the feds were recording him.
You might say Zorn had a "Gruber" moment, and like Jonathan Gruber, he hoped it would go un-noticed.
Here's what Zorn had to say about IP2P's reporting of what he said:
"Not that it matters, really, but I didn't know I was speaking on the record for 'Ernie Souchak,' the brave blogger who has adopted the pseudonym of a John Belushi character. Next time you might want to say you're seeking a quote for publication. Though scrolling through the last year's worth of entries there is not a single reader comment on any of the posts on this blog, so I'm not sure anyone is going to see what I said anyway."
So Zorn claims he thought he was speaking off the record when he said that the Tribune warned Blago.
And now that he's clearly on the record, he's hoping no one will see what he had to say.
God forbid Zorn print the truth in his own column at the Tribune.
No, instead Eric "Gruber" Zorn is praying for a "Change of Subject."
Hey Eric, here's an idea: let's talk about the sealed Blago wiretap tapes the Tribune won't share with the public.
Developing story...
Related: Chicago Tribune reporters work for Federal Government
Eric Zorn: John Chase did not warn Blagojevich – the Chicago Tribune did
Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
Chicago Tribune columnist Eric Zorn has come out in defense of his "hilarious" position that the phone call Tribune reporter John Chase made to the Blagojevich camp on December 4, 2008 did not serve as a warning.
Zorn's reasoning: Blagojevich would have read that he was being recorded by the feds in a Tribune article the very next morning.
Zorn was asked:
"Do you understand that Robert and Rod canceled a meeting with Jesse Jackson Jr.'s money man, Raghuveer Nayak, due to Chase's phone call?"
He replied:
"And do you understand they would've canceled that meeting anyway because of what was in the paper that morning?"
So let me get this straight, Eric. Your contention is that John Chase's late night phone call did not warn Blago that the feds were recording him - but that the article the Tribune published the following morning did.
Ok, Eric, have it your way.
However, now that you have reluctantly conceded that the Chicago Tribune did in fact warn Robert and Rod Blagojevich, perhaps you can explain why former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald was OK with the Trib's decision.
More to come...
Related: Robert Blagojevich dodged going to prison
Robert Blagojevich: Chicago Tribune warned my brother about federal wiretap
Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
Robert Blagojevich recently acknowledged that Chicago Tribune reporter John Chase warned his brother, Rod Blagojevich, that the feds were recording him.
Blagojevich emerged in response to Tribune reporter Eric Zorn's ridiculous position that:
"Chase wasn't warning Blago he was being recorded, he was telling him a story was running the next day about him being recorded."
Wow, Eric. Are you joking?
Here's what Robert Blagojevich called Zorn's assertion that Chase did not warn Rod: "Hilarious!"
Keep in mind that Robert canceled his planned meeting the following morning with Jesse Jackson, Jr.'s money man, Raghuveer Nayak, as a result of Chase's late night phone call.
A meeting whose sole purpose was to hammer out the terms of Jackson's purchase of the U.S Senate seat vacated by Barack Obama!
Remember Robert was one of the biggest benefactors of Chase's infamous phone call to the Blago camp on December 4, 2008.
So if he considers it a warning, who is Eric Zorn - or anyone else to say it was not?
Related: Patrick Fitzgerald’s “not not denial” that he warned Blagojevich
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald named as source of leak.
Robert Blagojevich dodged going to prison
Chicago Tribune reporter John Chase goes on the record: Why he warned Blagojevich about the wiretap
Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
Chicago Tribune reporter John Chase went on record saying that the reason he made the late night phone call warning Rod Blagojevich that federal agents were recording him was because he "did not want to get scooped on the story".
Chase's ridiculous statement made it very clear that he was not expecting to be asked any common sense follow-up questions.
Big mistake, John!
Keep in mind that the Tribune had been cooperating for 2 months with U.S Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's office and had agreed not to run a story about the wiretap on Blagojevich.
But when Chase was asked what happened on Dec. 4, 2008 for the Tribune to abruptly change from cooperating with the feds to exposing their wiretap, he was at a loss to give a coherent answer.
Chase was then asked if he or anyone else at the Tribune called Patrick Fitzgerald or anyone else at the U.S. Attorney's Office to let them know that the Tribune was going to expose their wiretap that night?
He was stumped, and refused to answer this simple yes or no question.
Here is why Chase could not answer that particular question.
If Chase had called Patrick Fitzgerald and informed him that the Tribune was now going to expose the feds' wiretap on Blago, wouldn't Fitz try to convince the Trib to wait just one more day?
After all, Blagojevich's brother, Robert, was scheduled to meet with Raghuveer Nayak, Jesse Jackson Jr's money man, to discuss the terms of Jackson's purchase of Barack Obama's U.S Senate seat the very next day.
Blagojevich and Jackson would both have been caught red-handed if Chase had not made that call warning Blago.
On the other hand, if Chase had not called the prosecutors office Fitzgerald would have been justifiably furious at the Tribune for derailing the biggest case of his career.
Instead, Fitzgerald thanked the Tribune for its cooperation, and later gave Chase and Jeff Coen access to the sealed wiretap tapes and transcripts even though the two Trib reporters blew his wiretap out of the water.
All indications are that Fitzgerald was quite OK with Chase warning Blago that night. But obviously Chase can't tell us that.
Even more telling: Chase did not deny that he knew Robert Blagojevich and Nayak were going to meet the next day before he made that late night phone call.
It is becoming increasingly clear that Chase is having a difficult time keeping track of his lies. In his book, "Golden", he contradicts himself by saying that he was chosen by Tribune editors to make the phone call to Blago.
So which is it, John?
Did you:
(A) make the call to inform Blago that the feds' were recording him because you wanted to be remembered as the reporter who blew Fitzgerald's case?
or
(B) make the call because your editors who had been cooperating with Fitzgerald told you to?
It's the simple questions that often prove to be the most difficult for liars to answer.
When Chicago Sun Times reporter Natasha Korecki was asked why she was not asking these questions, she replied: "No reporter wants to make another reporter look bad."
Even when it means not reporting the truth.
Wow! "Only in Chicago."
Chicago Tribune reporter Jeff Coen’s own personal “Tell-Tale Heart” got him arrested
Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
The recent arrest of Chicago Tribune reporter Jeff Coen for deliberately causing $1,500 worth of damage to a CTA train has many asking: Why?
What makes a 43-year-old "adult" do such a bizarre thing?
We at IP2P have every reason to believe the answer is very simple: it's a cry for help. Coen is experiencing his own version of the ageless Edger Allen Poe classic "Tell-Tale Heart" and it is taking its toll on him.
You see, Coen is living a big lie, and he fears his secret will soon be fully exposed.
Coen's troubles started when he agreed to fabricate stories surrounding the Blagojevich investigation and consequent trials.
Remember, Coen was the co-author of the article used as an excuse to warn Rod Blagojevich that his friend and former chief-of-staff, John Wyma, was cooperating with the feds and that Blagojevich was being recorded.
From there, Coen sought to cash in on lies he was asked to tell by telling even bigger whoppers in a book.
You might remember that work of fiction: "Golden". You know, the one in which Coen and his co-author, John Chase, claimed they had copies of all the Blagojevich wiretap recordings and that they had listened to all of the them.
Well as those lies have begun to unravel, so has Jeffrey.
The thought of being exposed for writing a book filled with lies has been weighing heavily on Coen's mind. (We know this for a fact. ) And there is a real possibility that Coen has come to realize that being exposed as a habitual liar is inevitable.
The fear of being found out resulted in Coen's obvious mental breakdown, causing him to go ballistic on a CTA train.
Let's all hope that Jeff accepts the counseling that has been offered to him, and heeds the wisdom of another ageless classic, "The truth will set you free", before it is too late and he seriously hurts someone.
Jeff, we hear your cry for help. Now just tell the truth...
Human Behavior Consultant Virginia Clemm Contributed
Blagojevich attorney caught on wiretap fixing case!
Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
Blagojevich attorney Michael Ettinger was caught on a wiretap trying to bribe a cop in order to fix a criminal case in Illinois.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff,
v.
John GERVASI, Michael Ettinger, and Charles Soteras, Defendants.
WILLIAM T. HART, District Judge.
The August 1982 Grand Jury returned a seven count indictment against the defendants John Gervasi ("Gervasi"), Michael Ettinger ("Ettinger"), and Charles Soteras ("Soteras"), charging violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 1343 and 1952. Gervasi and Ettinger are attorneys admitted to practice in the State of Illinois. In 1977, Soteras was a defendant in a criminal case in the Circuit Court of Cook County, charged with car theft. Gervasi and Ettinger represented Soteras on the car theft charge.
The federal indictment alleges that the three defendants conspired to bribe a police officer, Daniel Furay ("Furay"), to arrange for the dismissal of the car theft charges against Soteras. The defendants have filed a number of pretrial motions attacking the indictment, and also have moved to suppress key evidence in the case. All of the parties have filed excellent briefs in support of their positions. The Court rules on these motions as follows.
Read more.. http://www.leagle.com/decision/19831194562FSupp632_11072.xml
Michael Ettinger was caught so red-handed, all he could do was argue to suppress the evidence of the wiretap transcripts in his criminal case.
Well, it being Chicago, coupled with the fact that Ettinger was represented by a team of the Chicago Mob's favorite lawyers - Samuel V.P. Banks, Edward Genson, Jeffrey B. Steinback - Ettinger did escape going to prison.
However, he did not entirely escape consequences.
After a long, drawn-out-battle, the Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission (ARDC) had no choice but to suspend Michael D. Ettinger's law license for two years.
ATTORNEY'S REGISTRATION AND PUBLIC DISCIPLINARY RECORD
Public Record of Discipline and Pending Proceedings:
Case(s) below are identified by caption and Commission case number. If there is more than one case, the cases are listed in an order from most recent to oldest. A case may have more than one disposition or more than one component to a disposition, in which situation each disposition and component is also listed separately within that case record, again in an order from most recent to oldest.
Click on Rules and Decisions ("R & D") to access any documents regarding this lawyer that are in Rules and Decisions. R & D contains all disciplinary opinions of the Supreme Court and most other Court orders and board reports issued since 1990. If R & D does not contain the decision that you are seeking, contact the Commission's Clerk's office for assistance. Contact information for the Clerk's office is available at Office Hours.
In re Michael David Ettinger, 86CH0175
Disposition: Suspension for a specified period
Effective Date of Disposition: April 21, 1989
End Date of Disposition: April 21, 1991
Definition of Disposition: Suspension for a specified period reflects a determination that the lawyer has engaged in misconduct and that the misconduct warrants an interruption of the lawyer's authority to practice law during the suspension period, which is a fixed period of time identified in the Supreme Court's order. The lawyer is not authorized to practice law during the period of the suspension.
Two years? Ettinger got off easy!
FYI, Blagojevich attorney Sam Adam Sr. represented Ettinger in the ARDC case.
After his suspension, it did not take Ettinger long to reunite with his old pal, Ed Genson.
In 1993 Ettinger joined Genson and his band of cohorts in representing a couple of their fellow Chicago lawyers who, like Ettinger, had a proclivity to participate in the illegal practice of fixing court cases. Ettinger, Genson, and the fellas represented Judge Adam Stillo Sr. and his nephew, attorney Joseph Stillo in a case that featured FBI informant Robert Cooley as the prosecution's star witness.
U.S. v. STILLO
NOS. 94-2678, 94-2679.
BACKGROUND
Defense attorney Robert Cooley first met Judge Stillo at a party in 1976. Cooley asked the judge whom he should see to fix a criminal case assigned to Judge Stillo. Judge Stillo, knowing that Cooley was a frequent supplier of bribes to other judges and public officials, told Cooley that he would deal with him directly. Not long after the party, Judge Stillo accepted a bribe from Cooley to fix a misdemeanor case. Judge Stillo met with Cooley before trial and agreed to find Cooley's client not guilty. After the trial Cooley met with Judge Stillo in his chambers. Cooley asked the judge whether $100 was an appropriate payment. Judge Stillo responded: "Whatever you think" and accepted the $100 in cash.
Read more... http://www.leagle.com/decision/199561057F3d553_1543.xml/U.S.%20v.%20STILLO
Considering Michael Ettinger's past and his unique set of friends, is it really plausible that Ettenger did not know that Invest Financial Corporation, a company that Robert Blagojevich was CEO of, was investing money for Betty Loren Maltese and the town of Cicero?
Not only did Robert Blagojevich dodge a bullet by not going to prison, so did his attorney.
But the media has shamelessly let Robert Blagojevich and his attorney get away with claiming victim status.
Perhaps it's time to correct that notion..... more to come.
Blagojevich still has copy of wiretap transcripts
Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief
Robert Blagojevich proclaims to have returned all copies of wiretap tapes and transcripts provided to him by the feds in his and Rod's trial.
But he still has a copy.
That's because one set of Robert's transcripts were not provided by the feds. He made his wife, Julie, transcribe all the tapes. Or so he says.
"[She] never one time wavered in her belief in me and worked real hard in doing transcriptions of the tapes, when I could not bear to listen to them. She would sit there with the headphones on so I didn’t have to listen, and she would transcribe for hours and hours" Robert said.
When asked if all copies of Julie's transcripts were also given to the federal prosecutors, Robert refused to answer.
Of course they weren't.
Credit this slick move to Blago attorney Michael Ettinger. Nice try Michael, but no cigar!
Perhaps Julie Blagojevich will tell us about the recorded conversations of Rahm Emanuel and other power brokers that her husband made her transcribe?
How about it, Julie? What do ya say?
Chicago Sun Times complicit in Chicagogate cover-up
Annabel Kent, Chicago Media Critic
Natasha Korecki, Chicago Sun Times
Sun Times reporter Natasha Korecki continued the paper’s Chicagogate cover-up with her latest article that misleads Times’ readers about the Blagojevich saga.
In a recent piece, Korecki characterized Robert Blagojevich's call for Jesse Jackson, Jr. to be indicted for attempted bribery as a call for Jackson to simply "come clean."
What does "come clean" mean? Confess to his preacher, priest, rabbi or imam?
Korecki now wants Times readers to believe that it was by luck, and not by design, that Chicago was cheated out of the opportunity to learn about Jesse Jackson, Jr.’s.(J.J.,Jr.) attempt to buy the senate seat vacated by Barack Obama.
Attention Natasha, there’s good news:
J.J., Jr. can still be indicted for attempting to bribe Robert and Rod Blagojevich.
And that good news gets better: Robert Blagojevich is now willing to co-operate with the feds and help prove J.J., Jr.’s role in the attempted bribery. Yes, that’s right, Natasha. The time is ripe to harvest the truth.
So, will the Times join IP2P and Robert Blagojevich in their call for acting U.S. Attorney Gary Shapiro to indict Jesse Jackson Jr.?
Gary S. Shapiro
We await your response. But, realistically, we only expect to hear the sound of crickets.
Why?
Because the Chicago Sun Times, and its faux reporters, are complicit in the Chicagogate cover-up as the once-credible, dead-tree news outlet continues to mislead it readers about the Blagojevich saga.
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