Chicago Tribune reporters work for Federal Government
Thomas Barton, Investigative Reporter
In an interview with veteran reporter Barbara Hollingsworth, Chicago Tribune reporters John Chase and Jeff Coen revealed that the Feds gave them the tapes and transcripts that the U.S Attorney's office still refuses to share with anyone else.
That begs this question: Why did the Feds give the Trib reporters, and only the Trib reporters, access to this incendiary material?
Here’s our answer: So that Chase and Coen could assure you that there’s "Nothing to hear on these tapes, folks. Move along now."
Consequently, we believe the Trib reporters colluded with the Feds, with the complicity of the Tribune management, in order to dupe you, the public.
We also question why we’ve heard no outrage from Rod Blagojevich or his attorneys. Do you suppose there’s a "back-room deal" to trade Blago's silence for his early-release from prison?
John Chase and Jeff Coen have revealed none of the taped conversations, they say the Feds gave them, that recorded Blago’s conversations with multiple prominent persons in the Washington D.C. halls of power.
To change that, why don’t Chase and Coen start by sharing the Rahm Emanuel-taped conversations with Chicagoans? He is our Mayor, after all.
As this story unfolds, and as the true reasons for Patrick Fitzgerald having been appointed U.S. Attorney Northern District of Illinois become clear, it will also become clear that this level and scope of corruption requires the co-operation of the Chicago media.
The struggle to remain a free people requires an honest "Fourth Estate." And today, Chicago doesn't have one.
Read Hollingsworth's article here: Source of Leaked Transcripts of Blagojevich Tapes
H/T Chicago Daily Observer:
Why no Grand Jury? Chicago Tribune reporter John Chase involved in a crime. AGAIN!
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?
Does Judith Miller have any thoughts on the subject? We'll ask her.
Developing.......
Stunning development in Chicagogate: Publisher of Blagojevich book “Golden” confesses
<< 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........
Now that Jesse Jackson, Jr. is a convicted liar and thief
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.
Rod Blagojevich: How could I be guilty of selling, if Jesse Jackson Jr. was not guilty of buying?
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?
Dept. of Justice turns a blind eye for U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, and against the First Amendment
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 here: http://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?
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald “Most Dangerous Man”
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.........
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald’s war against the truth
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.
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)
To: carolyn.mcniven@usdoj.gov
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.....
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