22Nov/13

Sen. Chuck Grassley caught with his pants down

Share

Hugo Floriani, Investigative Reporter

IMG_1323.PNG

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….
https://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/13

Judith Miller exposed “Plamegate” as a cover-up

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

IMG_1183.PNG

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/13

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”

https://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
4Oct/13

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

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

By allowing former Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey to appoint Patrick Fitzgerald "Special Counsel" to investigate "Plamegate" based on what he knew to be a lie, former Department of Justice (DoJ) Inspector General Glenn A. Fine became complicit in fraud perpetrated against the American people.

When asked why he allowed Comey to appoint a "Special Counsel" to investigate who exposed Brewster Jennings and Associates and Valerie Plame as CIA, when he (Fine) knew that it was Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman that did so in 2001(2 years earlier), Fine said he'd rather not talk about it.

When pressed to deny that he allowed Comey to appoint Fitzgerald based on a lie, Fine declined to do so.

Here is what we know:

Inspector General Glenn Fine whose sole purpose was to make sure that officials at the Dept of Justice do not abuse the immense powers they've been granted, is not denying that he knowingly allowed officials to abuse that power.

Here is what we need to learn:

Why did Fine allow DoJ officials to break the law?

And, how many other acts of corruption and abuse of power did Glenn Fine allow during his ten year reign as Inspector General that began in Dec 2000?

If we allow the Dept. of Justice to be above the law, then what?

Much more on DoJ corruption to come.....

Share
1Oct/13

Judith Miller blows the whistle on “Special Counsel” Patrick Fitzgerald

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

Judith Miller may be a reluctant whistleblower, however blowing the whistle on former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald is the only way to describe Miller's recent comments.

In a recent phone interview Miller was asked:

Q: Judith, you do know that Dick Armitage was not who outed Brewster Jennings & Associates as a CIA front?

A: Yes, a lot of people knew.

Q: So, you're aware of the fact Patrick Fitzgerald fabricated a reason to come after your source?

A: I'm... it's not that simple.

No, Judith it really is that simple.

As the interview with Miller proceeded, there was no disagreement on the fact that "Special Counsel" Patrick Fitzgerald knew Marc Grossman was the person who exposed Brewster Jennings and Valerie Plame as CIA in 2001. (two years before Armitage claimed he did)

And, that Fitzgerald had her (Miller) jailed on a false premise. (although she claims "it's complicated")

Miller also acknowledged that just confirmed FBI Director James B. Comey was involved in the deception. When the urgency of going public with what she knew about Fitzgerald and Comey was stressed, Miller replied "I am going to tell my story my way. I have earned the right."

Miller was pressed further on the fact that James Comey had not been sworn-in as FBI Director as of the time of the interview, and that it was important for her to go public with what she knows before he was.

Clearly that did not happen, and James Comey was sworn-in as FBI Director. However, Comey can be removed from his position for cause when the truth is made part of the official record.

And Judith, lets face it.

The best "shield law" a journalist could hope for is that the Dept. of Justice start following the laws that are already on the books. Your coming forward with the truth about Fitzgerald will go a long way to making that happen.

And, perhaps give the 1st Amendment a fighting chance to survive the all out war our government has waged against it.

More to follow

Share
26Sep/13

UPDATE: Former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald guilty of Subornation of Perjury

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

IMG_0967-0.PNG

Not only is former U.S Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald guilty of obstructing justice and lying to the court, you can add the crime of suborning perjury to the growing list of problems facing the man once touted as the modern day Elliot Ness.

When "Special Counsel" Patrick Fitzgerald put former Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman on the stand to testify in the trial of U.S. v Libby, Fitzgerald knowingly committed the crime of "suborning perjury."

You see, thanks to FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, the Dept of Justice and Fitzgerald knew that it was Marc Grossman who exposed Brewster Jennings & Associates and Valerie Plame as CIA in the summer of 2001. And therefore, Fitzgerald knew the testimony Grossman was giving under oath in the Libby trial to be false.

That's a crime. And, its called "subornation of perjury", a felony that could get Fitzgerald up to five years in prison.

Former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald has been contacted. However, he is refusing to answer any questions.

Developing..........

UPDATE Sept. 26th 4pm

Courtesy of boilingfrogspost.com

Share
18Sep/13

Fitzgate: Former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald guilty of “obstruction of justice” and lying to the court.

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

Former Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald withheld exculpatory evidence from Lewis “Scooter” Libby, former Vice President Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff, during Libby’s 2007 trial, which was part of Fitzgerald’s highly publicized investigation into the outing of former covert CIA agent Valerie Plame, according to sworn testimony in an unrelated 2009 case.

The breach of Libby’s due process rights occurred in the courtroom of U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton, who is now Chief Judge of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court.

Walton sentenced Libby to 30 months in federal prison after he was found guilty of two counts of perjury, one count of obstruction of justice, and one count of making false statements to the FBI during the investigation.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s “Brady Rule,” named for its 1963 decision in Brady v. Maryland, requires prosecutors to disclose all favorable material evidence that could be used to defend or even exonerate a defendant.

But Fitzgerald failed to divulge to either Libby or his defense attorneys that the Department of Justice (DOJ) already had in its possession material evidence that Plame’s covert identity had been revealed back in 2001 - by Fitzgerald’s key witness against Libby.

Former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, who was given Top Secret clearance to translate FBI wiretaps executed by field agents, some going back to 1998, was deposed in Jean Schmidt v. David Krikorian, an obscure 2009 Ohio Elections Commission case.

Under oath, Edmonds stated in her 2009 deposition that, in the summer of 2001, then Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman was recorded by the FBI informing “a certain Turkish diplomatic entity who was also an independent operative of a company called Brewster Jennings…to be warned that Brewster Jennings was a government front….and for those Turkish individuals to be told to stay away from Brewster Jennings.” At the time, Plame was working undercover at Brewster Jennings.

In outing the CIA front company, Grossman outed Plame’s CIA covert operational status two years before the DOJ opened, on September 26, 2003, a criminal investigation into the potential unauthorized disclosure of Plame’s CIA employment status, and over five years before jury selection began, on January 16, 2007, in the trial of Scooter Libby.

In the Ohio deposition, Edmonds also testified that she translated FBI tapes in which the unnamed Turkish diplomat who had received Grossman’s warning then “contacted the Pakistani military attaché and discussed with the person who was there about this fact and also told them, warned them to stay away from Brewster Jennings.”

In a phone interview Edmonds said she personally informed DOJ Inspector General Glenn A. Fine, during a two-and-a-half-hour recorded interview conducted at the Justice Department before Libby’s 2005 indictment, that the “CIA disassembled the company after doing an assessment estimate” of the damage Grossman’s disclosure cost its counterintelligence operation.

Also, a FBI agent “personally went to Patrick Fitzgerald and told him he needed to get the documents that established that Brewster Jennings had been outed long ago to defense and prosecution attorneys.”

Edmonds said, “There was no Brewster Jennings – it didn’t exist after January of 2002.” She added, “They (DOJ) knew it was outed, and they knew who did it,” at least a year before syndicated columnist Robert Novak first mentioned Plame in his July 14, 2003 column.

The simple fact is, that by withholding this evidence: Former U.S Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald is guilty of obstruction of justice and lying to the court.

When a “Special Counsel" is appointed to investigate "Fitzgate," will the range of special powers be granted to that person that recently-sworn-in F.B.I. Director James B. Comey once granted to Fitzgerald in Plamegate?

Contributors to this article to be named at a later date.

Share
22Jul/13

Illinois U.S. Attorney’s Office caught lying

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

Shared Ethics in Government Breakfast Meeting- March 14, 2013

 

On May 6, 2013, veteran reporter Barbara Hollingsworth, who now writes for CNS News, reported that Chicago Tribune reporters John Chase and Jeff Coen revealed that the feds were their source for the sealed Blagojevich wiretap tapes and transcripts the reporters refer to in their book "Golden."

Following that story, IP2P has just learned this:

Months before Chase and Coen's source was revealed, Randall Samborn, spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney's Office, insisted that the government did not give Chase and Coen access to the Blago tapes or transcripts. That claim was documented in the email below.

From: Randall.Samborn@usdoj.gov
To: < redacted >
Sent: Wed Dec 5 07:28:01 UTC 2012
Subject: RE: Media inquiry re USA v Blagojevich

Let me be clear, the government did not provide the authors access to any non-public materials and I reject your assertion. As I said, we are done with this.

From: < redacted >
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 1:25 PM
To: Samborn, Randall (USAILN)
Subject: Re: Media inquiry re USA v Blagojevich

Randall

Are you refusing to give me the same access that was given to John Chase and Jeff Coen?

(Name redacted)

Imagine Samborn's surprise when he learned that Chase and Coen "burned" their source by revealing that it was, in fact, the U.S. Attorney’s office that gave them access to the court sealed documents they refer to in their book. Below is Samborn's response when asked about the new development.

From: Randall Samborn (USAILN)
To: < redacted >
Sent: 2013-05-14 18:01:35 +0000
Subject: RE: Media inquiry (Tribune reporters)

No comment

From: < redacted >
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 12:49 PM
To: Samborn, Randall (USAILN)
Subject: Media inquiry (Tribune reporters)

Mr. Randall Samborn

Tribune reporters John Chase and Jeff Coen have revealed that the federal government was the source that provided them with the Blagojevich wiretap tapes and transcripts that were under court seal and never made public.

What is your response to Chase and Coen exposing the Federal Government as their source?

(Name redacted)

Chicago Tribune reporters work for Federal Government

https://illinoispaytoplay.com/2013/05/06/chicago-tribune-reporters-work-for-federal-government/

So, after the feds insisted they did not provide access to the Tribune reporters, and Chase and Coen revealed that the feds did, the federal government has now changed its position to "No Comment."

It’s obvious that the feds gave Chase and Coen access to sealed material, and then lied about it. And that begs this question: Why the lie?

The Tribune won’t ask that question because they’re part of the lie. And the Sun Times won’t ask because they’re complicit in the lie. So we ask it here. Why the lie?

As well as: What other lies during the Blago saga were told by the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and advanced by the Tribune?

Developing story......

Share
17Jul/13

Valerie Plame is now “Fair Game”

Share

Hugo Floriani, Investigative Reporter

Valerie Plame Wilson is now fair game for inquires by refusing to answer even the simplest of questions about the story and trial associated with her name.

So we ask: Valerie, how long have you known former Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman?

Seems like a simple question, right?

Well, maybe not. You see, it turns out that, according to court records in U.S. v Libby, the Wilson's have long known Grossman.

According to sworn testimony in a deposition of Sibel Edmonds in 2009, Grossman was the man who outed Brewster Jennings & Associates as a CIA front organization, and Valerie Plame, who worked there, as a CIA employee. That happened two years before Lewis "Scooter" Libby asked Grossman about Joe Wilson and about his famous trip to the nation of Niger on behalf of senior officials in the Directorate of Operations Counter-proliferation Division of the CIA.

Wilson's trip to Niger in the spring of 2002 was about determining the veracity of Saddam Hussein's alleged attempt to purchase enriched uranium (yellowcake).

For you true-history buffs, here’s the story around that event:

In the Summer of 2001, Marc Grossman, a friend of the Wilson's, illegally, according to the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, divulged to Turkish operatives that Brewster Jennings, and consequently Valerie Plame who worked there, were associated with the CIA. This is according to sworn testimony by Edmonds.

Then, in the spring of 2002, the CIA asked Valerie Plame's husband, Joe Wilson, to go to Niger and determine if Saddam Hussein purchased yellowcake.

On September 26, 2003, the CIA asked the Department of Justice to investigate who outed Brewster Jennings and Valerie Plame as CIA. This came after Plame had already been outed by Grossman in 2001.

On October 1, 2003, Grossman's boss at the State Department, Deputy Secretary Richard Armitage, took responsibility for outing Plame as CIA; however, he was told by the Dept. of Justice to keep the information secret..

On December 30, 2003, then U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald was appointed "Special Counsel" by current FBI Director Nominee James B. Comey. Fitzgerald then went on a forty-month, taxpayer-funded fishing trip that caught Libby for allegedly lying to the FBI.

It’s clear why Plame won’t answer the question: How long have you known former Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman? Doing so would reveal how long she knew the man who actually blew her cover as a CIA “operative.” And that person wasn’t Libby or the late columnist, Robert Novak.

It was Mark Grossman.

All this begs the question: So what was the phony witch hunt that netted Libby really all about?

At IP2P, we’re trying to find out the answer to that question.

Share
11Jul/13

ALERT: Obama’s nominee for FBI Director in jeopardy!

Share

Ernie Souchak, Editor-in-Chief

James B. Comey's confirmation as FBI Director may be in jeopardy due to one unanswered question:

How many times can you out a CIA operative?

This question arises from sworn testimony given by FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds, who was gagged by the federal government under the State Secrets Privilege.

However, Edmonds testified under oath that Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman originally outed Valerie Plame as a CIA employee. Grossman did this in 2001 when he warned Turkish operatives to stay away from Plame’s employer, Brewster Jennings & Associates, because it was a front for the CIA.

Marc Grossman at an American-Turkish Council meeting

In other words, stay away from Valerie Plame – she works for the CIA.

According to Edmonds’ sworn testimony, given in a deposition in 2009 for Schmidt v. Krikorian, Grossman revealed Plame's identity as a CIA operative in the summer of 2001, and DoJ Inspector General Glenn A. Fine was briefed by Edmonds concerning these assertions while she was still an FBI employee.

Edmonds was fired from her job as an FBI translator on March 22 2002.

So, if Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA employee was blown in the summer of 2001 by Marc Grossman, and Inspector General of the DOJ, Glenn A. Fine was fully briefed on this crime, why did then Attorney General John Ashcroft recuse himself from overseeing the Plame case and allow his deputy Comey to appoint U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald as Special Counsel, tasked with finding the culprit who outed a CIA employee who had already been previously outed?

Incidentally, court records confirm Plame's husband, Joe Wilson, and Grossman were friends.

Listen to a portion of Edmonds’ sworn testimony below.

Testimony regarding Brewster Jennings & Associates starting at 6:00

Transcript of full testimony here:

http://www.bradblog.com/Docs/SibelEdmondsDeposition_Transcript_080809.pdf

We at IP2P believe that it’s important that Comey be asked - and answer - questions about his appointment of a Special Counsel in the Plame charade.

Let your congressional representatives know you want answers before they confirm any new DOJ officials.

Senate Judiciary Committee Members here:

http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/about/members.cfm

Share