Congress covering up bribes by targeting US Attorney?

What's the fastest way to hide bribes? You buy a laundromat.

What if that doesn't work? You go after the prosecutor.

Sibel Edmonds sure knows how to make some waves. And the Bush Administration sure has something to worry about.

Sibel was the one who was monitoring the Turkish language tapes. Guess what she heard? The Grand Jury knows.

Maybe now we know the real reason Hastert was going after Fitzgerald -- Fitzgerald was going after Hastert?

From the Chicago Tribune:

The former senator questioned whether House Speaker Dennis Hastert, the state's top Republican, would support the prosecutor when President Bush decides whether to extend his term in Chicago.Ref

Gosh, what could possibly cause Hastert to be so upset?

Let's take a look at this gem from Vanity Fair, via Raw Story:

Vanity Fair floats allegations GOP chief Hastert took Turkish bribes

So will the Congress shut down Fitzgerald before the Grand Jury indictments are unsealed?

Let's see how many Congressmen are indicted by Fitzgerald. I'd sure like to see the number of Senators who were calling for Fitzgerald to be shut down . . .and they just happened to be a little to cozy with the Turks.

Hastert, why didn't you do what Tom Delay did and set up a PAC?

Oh, that's right. Maybe you did: It's called calling for an unlawful invasion of Iraq, knowing that certain constituents would get consulting, I mean consulting contracts and you'd get rewarded?

Let's hope none of them are related to the problem audits in Iraq. All that money showing up in duffel bags.

$9B. Hastert, is any of that money showing up in your accounts, or did you hide the money in the oil-for-food accounts and kickbacks?

What you can do

Ask the Iraqi auditors to see if any of the checks got cashed or funds finally showed up in any accounts associated with Hastert.

Update

US Air Force Investigators re-open case

Vanity Fair author David Rose stated on Democracy Now that the US Air Force Office of Special Investigations has reopened the investigation into the Air Force Major DOUG DICKERSON whose wife, Melek Can Dickerson, allegedly was dissuading FBI agents from looking into the matters: Allegations of bribes paid by Turkish organizations to State Department and Department of Defense [DoD] personnel.

OSI had previously closed the issue, and David Rose believes the case has been reopened because of his article and his list of 100+ questions which received no formal response.

Dickerson's wife was also assigned to Sibel Edmond's language translation unit in the FBI. Allegedly, Dickerson's wife invited Sibel to a meeting with various personnel who were working directly or indirectly with the Turkish government and were willing to pay funds to either have information "not reviewed" or "provide information" on an ongoing basis to personnel not authorized to receive this information.

Links of Interest Here are links to copies of the article. Here is the Democracy Now taped interview and transcript, Wednesday, August 10th, 2005. [Notice: Sibel is unable to answer specific questions on names] Sibel Edmonds homepage and timeline AF OSI information technology priorities The article discusses a number of US government officials who have been retaliated against for speaking out; these former government officials have formed a coalition to encourage whistleblowers: National Security Whistleblowers Coalition. Discussion of Vanity Fair article Sibel's 2002 letter asking for an investigation into Dickerson Discussion of Sibel's 2002 letter to DoD IG For backgrounds, here is one of Sibel's 2002 interviews related to these issues. Video of Sibel Edmonds with Daniel Ellsberg

Allegedly, Dickerson's wife was routing information related to these personnel and classifying the information as "not needing a followup," all the while knowing the information was important and should have been reviewed.

The issue arises because the agents who are reviewing the initial translations have to rely on the translators to screen the information. What happens is people like Sibel will get the raw data, and then they transcribe it.

Other people who are not as fluent in the language are assigned a review role in that they take the transcribed information [not yet translated] and then assigned it certain priorities for follow-up.

IN other words, because of the language issues, the US agents are at a disadvantage. This is a pattern we have seen in the SCORPION operation and also the ongoing alleged bribery by various contractors in Iraq. Firms are alleged to have paid bribes to the Iraqi nationals assigned to translate for the US military and/or contracting oversight personnel. Translators, because of their proximity and ability to influence the communications, have allegedly been paid enormous sums to steer US development contracts at excessive prices to specific firms.

Sibel is reported to speak Azerbijani, Farsi, and Turkish.

The author states that he has an informant, not Sibel, who can confirm the details of what Sibel was listening to and transcribing.

According to the Informant, the Turks were putting pressure on the US Government over two issues:

1. Attack helicopter sales to Turkey in 1990 to fight the kurds. The goal of the alleged bribes to US elected officials was to ensure the helicopter sales were approved.

2. A retraction of the US statement on the 1915 Armenian Genocide. The Vanity Fair author reports that the US 2000 Armenian Genocide resolution was initially supported by Hastert because of the Armenian voters in California. However, on the eve of the vote, Hastert allegedly stated that he was withdrawing support for the resolution because he was deferring to then President Clinton. Vanity Fair author was surprised by this strange change in that Hastert was no fan of Clinton during the impeachment proceedings and it remained unclear why Hastert would suddenly defer.

According to the informant, the US-dollar figure of $500,000 was the price Congressman Hastert would need to have the statement pulled. The informant states that this dollar figure was discussed in the electronic communications, intercepted through Echelon, and transcribed by Sibel Edmonds.

It remains unclear whether the $500,000 was ever transferred, or whether the payoff was actually through third parties or front organizations posing as political donations.

At this juncture, it remains up to the Grand Jury to look into the following issues:

A. Were any of the organizations which provided direct campaign contributions to Dennis Hastert actually front organizations to channel money from the Turks to Congressman Hastert?

B. What is the relationship between various US lobbyist trips to the government of Azerbaijan, the country which Sibel was apparently intercepting communications from?

C. How does the Azerbaijan-language issue fit in with Osama bin Ladin's offices located in Baku, Azerbaijan?

D. How much of the funding from various entities and allegedly provided to Dennis Hastert is the fruit of drug funding?

Sibel emphasized that she was under gag orders. However it is her belief that the gag orders are not related to the reported DoD reason of "national security."

Sibel emphasized that she has given multiple reports to the DoJ IG, the 9-11 Commission, and the Senate Judiciary Committee. IN all cases, the receiving agency has conformed her claims.

Rather, it is Sibel's contention that the real reason for the Gag orders on her is to keep her quiet about the alleged drug money flowing from Central Asia and the Middle East into the campaign coffers of multiple US elected officials.

Sibel further identified the DoJ, DoD, and State Department as having various personnel who are aware of the activities and have failed.

Sibel states that the information she has relates to 9-11. In light of the Scorpion Case and Able Danger classified operations, we remain concerned that the House and Senate Intelligence Committees have not aggressively overseen or reviewed the various intelligence operations related to WMD, Iraq, Office of Special Plans, or 9-11.

It is Sibel's contentions that there is significant and material information which the 9-11 Commission has been denied, has not reviewed. In light of the Scorpion and Able Danger classified options, we concur with her concern: There are multiple indicators that material information related to the 9-11 investigation was not provided by DoD.

We believe that the reason for the "non-disclosure" and the apparent non-cooperation with the Fitzgerald Chicago grand jury has nothing to do with national security, or a desire to "hunt down terrorists," nor does it related to a JTTF/DOJ desire to "gather intelligence information".

Rather, the sole objective of the non-compliance, inaction, and smearing efforts has to with protecting those who are knowledgeable, failed to act, and had a duty to take action but have failed.

In the coming weeks Sibel Edmonds plans to go before the Supreme Court to have her case heard. There will be amicus briefs filed.

Sibel remains concerned that DOJ has not looked into the matter. Moreover, given the initial closeout by US Air Force OSI into the Major Douglas issues, we share Sibel concerns that there has been insufficient reviews of these matters remain concerned that there has been no independent review of the following issues:

Drug funding flowing to US lobbyists then to US elected officials;

Official US government personnel efforts to leak the status of ongoing investigations into Sibel Edmonds with the objective of intimidating others from speaking out;

Official US government elected official efforts to threaten to cut off funding, change votes, retract legislation, adjust official policy, withhold action, or other wise act in a corrupt way allegedly based on funding, influence, and other actions from the Turks;

The alleged failure of DoD, DoJ, and the State Department Inspector Generals to openly provide a fully accounting of the information which Sibel has provided;

The apparent inappropriate gag orders placed on Sibel Edmonds for her to remain silent bout issues unrelated to national security, but more related to efforts to allegedly hide the source, knowledge, existence, and evidence of drug funding allegedly provided to Congressman Hastert and other elected officials campaign offices and campaign funding;

The apparent failure of DoJ personnel to review the matters; and/or the efforts by personnel in the White House and/or senior DoJ management to shut down investigations by FBI personnel into these matters;

Further, we remain concerned that the ongoing DoJ investigation into the RNC funding issues could be stonewalled. Based on information and belief it appears as though personnel inside DoJ have discussed various campaign and funding issues with noncleared personnel; have discussed in a "round about way" the emerging evidence related to the DoJ investigation into the RNC campaign issues; and we believe that there have been tip offs to various lobbyists and campaign contributors who have sent personnel to Azerbaijan.

We remain unclear to what extent AlQueda has penetrated DoJ, what information these personnel inside DoJ have provided to various lobbyists and campaign contributors related to the ongoing DoJ investigation into the RNC funding issues, or to what extent, if any, personnel inside DoJ have provided material information to those who are receiving money from various government officials from the Middle East and Central Asia.

We believe that GCHQ in London is well aware of the funding trail, the ongoing discussions between DoJ personnel and outside consultants/lobbyists. It remains a matter of law to what extent the Grand Jury looks into the Echelon personnel communications from DoJ and the various DC-based lobbyists who act on behalf of governments located in Central Asia; and to explore what funding has been provided direction or indirectly from Central Asia and/or the Middle East to various front organizations, lobbyists, conulstants, or other organizations which may have allegedly provided this funding to Speaker of the House Hastert.

We recommend that Prosecutor Fitzgerald or another Grand Jury inter alia:

A. Issue subpoenas to GCHQ in London seeking the wire intercepts, e-mail traffic, voice, and instant messaging from the Department of Justice Legislation Liasion office to and from any and all private lobbyists within the DC area; and

B. follow-up with a second review of all funding traces, trips, and official/non-official travel by these lobbyists to Azerbaijan, the source of the funding, and whether the funds are properly reconciled and accounted for in the ongoing RNC budget investigations.

We remind all who are looking into this matter that Office of Special Investigation documents are kept in back-up files for 25 years. Thus there is no merit to any argument that the investigation notes have been lost, are outdated, or the "files are not kept." On the contrary, if the files are not kept, retained, ore retrieved, Air Force OSI needs to explain why despite the 25-year archiving policy this information is not available.

Further, there are backs of the information within GCHQ, and this information remains outside the American's control.

Summary

It appears as though outside government forces have material methods to ship funding through various entities to US elected officials.

It remains clear that DoJ personnel continue to discuss with private contractors and lobbyists various concerns they have with ongoing investigations into the funding flows, outside influence.

DoJ investigations into these matters have been compromised, shut down, and otherwise affected. We allege that these are issues of interest and should be investigated by an empanaled Grand Jury.

We continue to receive anecdotal reports that personnel inside State, DoJ, and DoD are asserting "national security" as the basis for classification, detention, harassment, surveillance, and smearing. In reality, it appears the actual objective of these efforts is to hide the flow of funds in exchange for weapons transfers, basing rights, and official US personnel actions that are contrary to US law.

It is of concern that information within DoD has not been provided to the 9-11 commission. This means that not only did the intelligence committees do a white wash on the information they did get; but they also knowingly failed to dig into the "rest of the information" that personnel knew should have been delivered, or they were reckless in not providing this information.

The information that the Grand Jury needs can be subpoenaed through DoJ, DoD, CIA Legislative Liaison office. If they are not cooperative, we recommend that GCHQ in London be contact.

Here's a hint: We have transcripts of the information confirming discussions between DoJ and outside lobbyists. If they don't cooperative or they deny the conversations occurred, or the "information is not available," you can get them for obstruction of justice:

The conversations took place;

There are records of those conversations;

If the records are not available they can be provided through other methods in order to impeach the witnesses before the grand jury.

DoJ has already shown it is a problem. DoJ personnel have allegedly discussed issues with lobbyists. It remains unclear what relationship these lobbyists have with the White House or to what extent this information is being back briefed to either CIA, State, DoD, or other governments in Central Asia.

Update

Lawsuit to get information on Hasterts campaign contributions.

Look for the connections between Bolton, Able Danger, and Sibel Edmonds:

Information flows;

Internal claims of "walls," but NSC still able to collate the information at the DSP;

Smeaering of whistleblowers.

Update

Here's an example of a whistleblower suing the Army for demoting her because she made sure the contracts were properly issued, not rubber stamped by the morons in the White House: Bunnatine Greenhouse.

House Govt reform committee also passed a bill [ House Sponsor: Todd Platts, R-Pa, H.R. 1317, RSS/XML track] to expedite whistleblower claims.

". . .if the Office of Special Counsel does not act on a whistleblower claim within 180 days, federal employees can take the claim to federal district court.

. . . [snip]

The House bill mirrors a Senate bill introduced by Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, and Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, which was unanimously approved by the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs in May.

Ref