Probable Cause with Sibel Edmonds- Hastert Case: How the COINTELPRO II Bucket Turned into a Can of Worms

Three FBI Field Offices, Four Agents, One Linguist, and A Bucket Full of Dirties … Literally Right & Left

Welcome to the 24th edition of Probable Cause. This is our third episode on the ‘Real’ case of Dennis Hastert. In our first segment I briefly explained the case and why it is likely to be dropped or lost-on-purpose, and provided you with the broad picture of involved interests and those with much at stake if the case were to proceed as a real case. In our second episode we went back twenty years to when the new FBI covert and illegal operations targeting high-profile US officials, elected and appointed, began.

For this episode I’ll be covering the three-year period between 1999 and 2002 when the Executive Branch’s ‘Perfect Plan’ became complicated by inadvertently collected unwanted information, loss of control over lower FBI agents leading multiple and overlapping operations, and the change of administration in January 2001- the period when their good plan proved to be far from a perfect plan. During this period the executive branch’s select COINTELPRO II bucket turned into a big can of worms- a can that was filled with not only dirty Republican representatives but dirty Democrats as well. A can that contained not only elected officials but several high-profile appointed figures- some of whom became major visible players in the new administration.

As always, our next episode will be based on your reaction, critique, responses and questions posed in the comments section below.

*Full Transcript available here

*To listen to our previous episodes on this topic click here

Listen to the full episode here (Per many requests now open to public):

You can subscribe below to listen to this podcast, as well as all others on our site.


Show Notes

Sibel Edmonds State Secrets Gallery

Dan Burton: Pakistan Lobbyist's Memo Alleges Shakedown by House Probe Leader

Dan Burton Fathered Child In Extramarital Affair

Dan Burton: Pro-Pakistan American lawmakers in trouble

Stephen Solarz as the Chairman of the U.S. Government-Funded Central Asian-American Enterprise Fund

An Ex-Leader in Congress Is Now Turkey’s Man in the Lobbies of Capitol Hill

The Price of Independence: $1 billion

Tom Lantos' Tarnished Legacy

Not Revising History on Tom Lantos

Chicago! Not the Musical, but the Action-Suspense Docudrama!

Who’s Afraid of Sibel Edmonds?

Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky’s Husband Indicted

Rep. Schakowsky's Husband Charged

Bob Creamer: Congresswoman’s Husband Pleads Guilty to Two Felonies

Bob Creamer: Truth, Justice ... and Fraud

Schakowsky is most-frequent flier among state's congressional delegation

Who is Marc Grossman?

Marc Grossman: Treason at the State Department

Sibel Edmonds Vindicated: FBI Reveals Investigation Continues

Obama Administration’s Neocon Easter

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.


  1. 344thBrother says:

    @Sibel. Downloading now with pleasure.
    Thanks for opening up the occasional important episode for public use. I will share them with the people and groups (Mostly on FB) that I regularly communicate with . Hopefully this experiment will result in some more people signing up and some well deserved money flowing into your coffers.

    Keep the faith

  2. albatross0612 says:

    I wonder if there any connections to Hastert and Livingston’s roles in the impeachment of Bill Clinton and their roles later in the Turkish Lobby. In other words is the Turkish Lobby a cushy assignment for a certain click after their time in government. A couple things i also find interesting 1) that Bob Livingston’s wikipedia page has him listed a Knight of Malta, 2) General James Jones, Obamas former NatSecAdv is now Chairman of the ATC.
    Thank You for more outstanding follow up.

  3. Jenny Watson says:

    Wow, Sibel such a wealth of explosive information. I’ve only recently become a subscriber and I’m so glad I did! I’ve been following this series and checking out your past podcasts on the Dennis Hastert case as well as other Probable Cause episodes. I’ve also really been enjoying the BFP Roundtable series and DisInfo Wars episodes from the archive. Between the podcasts, the links and the comment section there is so much valuable information on this site – I don’t know why it took me so long to subscribe!

    I found BFP via The Corbett Report (which is another rich source of info) I’ve watched a lot of your work with James and I’m also going over your Gladio B Series on there. Another fantastic piece of work with such detailed research.

    I’m fairly new into my journey of truth seeking, shall we call it, and I’m not sure where I’d would be getting my knowledge from without sane, factual, reliable resources like this community and other places like The Corbet Report. I really appreciate the work that you’re doing and am looking forward to going through the links you’ve provided here and the next episode!

  4. Thanks for the link collection!

  5. Reading back Leahy and Grassley’s letter to Ashcroft
    it only refers to Melek Can’s job.

    Is there a written version of the June-July 2002 Senate Judiciary Committee hearings where you testified?

  6. I presume the article in The Independent relates to this, would you expand in a future episode?

  7. “Open to public”. Were there that many requests ?

    • Hi Willy,

      Between FB/Twitter messages and e-mails … around 200 or so. Definitely not enough. But nonetheless, I did it this time. I won’t make a habit of it. This is why I call this site the home of irate minority with emphasis on minority.

  8. Looking back at
    it is remarkable that Giraldi guessed that your case involved the neocons:

    “But beyond that, the Edmonds revelations become more serpentine and appear to involve AIPAC, Israel and a number of leading neoconservatives who have profited from the Turkish connection.”

    Had you given any hints to that effect? I can’t find any before the date of that column.

    • CuChulainn says:

      and PG does not hide his own affiliations.
      olivier you were asking about Bob Parry–he used to work for newsweek, sister to wapo, langley’s favorite newspaper. he won the George Polk award for journalistic courage; check out the roster of past winners.
      Polk was killed by the commies in Greece, except that he was actually killed by MI6 with help from CIA & W. Lippmann et al. in covering up the death of their colleague (here at 20 min– stick around to the end to watch DV give Kati a spanking)
      as Soral says, a journalist is either a whore or unemployed, but a journalist who gets the Polk award is a real… Glenn Greenwald (sorry to offend those who may share GG’s proclivities)

      • Thanks for that link ChuChu.

        Maybe we can generalize Soral’s thesis: A human is either a whore or unemployed. I’m sure there’s exceptions, but the whole idea of being and staying employed in the end is that you execute the wishes of the paymaster, even if they override your personal morality, which is pretty much what is meant by a whore.

        This quote even goes back to Cicero (himself an establishment whore if we believe Parenti):
        “whoever gives his labor for money sells himself and puts himself in the rank of slaves.”

        • CuChulainn says:

          precisely, Olivier–there can be no human emancipation without abolition not only of the state, but also of money and the commodity. Talk of rebellion or revolution without demanding this emancipation is just a higher form of submission. This demand is inconceivable to most English-speakers; they will tell you how useful money can be, if rightly used; they absolutely refuse the words of Christ, “no man can serve two masters,” imagining that they can master money; their voluntary prison is impregnable.

          That which is for me through the medium of money – that for which I can pay (i.e., which money can buy) – that am I myself, the possessor of the money. The extent of the power of money is the extent of my power. Money’s properties are my – the possessor’s – properties and essential powers. Thus, what I am and am capable of is by no means determined by my individuality. I am ugly, but I can buy for myself the most beautiful of women. Therefore I am not ugly, for the effect of ugliness – its deterrent power – is nullified by money. I, according to my individual characteristics, am lame, but money furnishes me with twenty-four feet. Therefore I am not lame. I am bad, dishonest, unscrupulous, stupid; but money is honoured, and hence its possessor. Money is the supreme good, therefore its possessor is good. Money, besides, saves me the trouble of being dishonest: I am therefore presumed honest. I am brainless, but money is the real brain of all things and how then should its possessor be brainless? Besides, he can buy clever people for himself, and is he who has power over the clever not more clever than the clever? Do not I, who thanks to money am capable of all that the human heart longs for, possess all human capacities? Does not my money, therefore, transform all my incapacities into their contrary?

          If money is the bond binding me to human life, binding society to me, connecting me with nature and man, is not money the bond of all bonds? Can it not dissolve and bind all ties? Is it not, therefore, also the universal agent of separation? …

          Shakespeare stresses especially two properties of money:
          1. It is the visible divinity – the transformation of all human and natural properties into their contraries, the universal confounding and distorting of things: impossibilities are soldered together by it.
          2. It is the common whore, the common procurer of people and nations.

          The distorting and confounding of all human and natural qualities, the fraternisation of impossibilities – the divine power of money – lies in its character as men’s estranged, alienating and self-disposing species-nature. Money is the alienated ability of mankind.
          That which I am unable to do as a man, and of which therefore all my individual essential powers are incapable, I am able to do by means of money. Money thus turns each of these powers into something which in itself it is not – turns it, that is, into its contrary.

          If I long for a particular dish or want to take the mail-coach because I am not strong enough to go by foot, money fetches me the dish and the mail-coach: that is, it converts my wishes from something in the realm of imagination, translates them from their meditated, imagined or desired existence into their sensuous, actual existence – from imagination to life, from imagined being into real being. In effecting this mediation, [money] is the truly creative power.

          No doubt the demand also exists for him who has no money, but his demand is a mere thing of the imagination without effect or existence for me, for a third party, for the [others], and which therefore remains even for me unreal and objectless. The difference between effective demand based on money and ineffective demand based on my need, my passion, my wish, etc., is the difference between being and thinking, between that which exists within me merely as an idea and the idea which exists as a real object outside of me.

          If I have no money for travel, I have no need – that is, no real and realisable need – to travel. If I have the vocation for study but no money for it, I have no vocation for study – that is, no effective, no true vocation. On the other hand, if I have really no vocation for study but have the will and the money for it, I have an effective vocation for it. Money as the external, universal medium and faculty (not springing from man as man or from human society as society) for turning an image into reality and reality into a mere image, transforms the real essential powers of man and nature into what are merely abstract notions and therefore imperfections and tormenting chimeras, just as it transforms real imperfections and chimeras – essential powers which are really impotent, which exist only in the imagination of the individual – into real powers and faculties. In the light of this characteristic alone, money is thus the general distorting of individualities which turns them into their opposite and confers contradictory attributes upon their attributes.

          Money, then, appears as this distorting power both against the individual and against the bonds of society, etc., which claim to be entities in themselves. It transforms fidelity into infidelity, love into hate, hate into love, virtue into vice, vice into virtue, servant into master, master into servant, idiocy into intelligence, and intelligence into idiocy.

          Since money, as the existing and active concept of value, confounds and confuses all things, it is the general confounding and confusing of all things – the world upside-down – the confounding and confusing of all natural and human qualities.

          He who can buy bravery is brave, though he be a coward. As money is not exchanged for any one specific quality, for any one specific thing, or for any particular human essential power, but for the entire objective world of man and nature, from the standpoint of its possessor it therefore serves to exchange every quality for every other, even contradictory, quality and object: it is the fraternisation of impossibilities. It makes contradictions embrace.

    • Found it!

  9. “US court dismisses 9/11 lawsuit against Saudi Arabia”

  10. Gary Binmore says:

    This stuff is great, Sibel.
    You’d think the prurience of the subject matter would attract some interest, even among those who don’t care their government is completely compromised and undemocratic. To me it’s fascinating and hilarious – somewhat of a fitting sequel to Classified Woman. Beyond Kafka into the dingy and depraved.

    As for Robert Parry – he’s very good on a lot of things, probably the best source out there on Iran-Contra and the October Surprise – but he won’t touch 9/11. Lost History is very good though.

  11. Robert Beal says:

    “Per many requests now open to public”

    I hope that gains you more subscribers than you lose.

  12. Jenny Watson says:

    Sibel, I can vouch that it got you at least one, and that was after you opened it to the public!

    Glad to be part of the irate minority – your story is so vast and exposes do much wrongdoing that I am surprised that it is not attracting more attention, although, I guess that’s probably the same reason that it’s not attracting more attention. It’s way too big to be broken…

  13. CuChulainn says:

    this broadcast is astonishing for its clarity and courage, but also for its lack of resonance–the fact that this is not being widely reported, even in the “alternative” sphere (remember when used to talk about Sibel?) is itself proof of how locked down journalism has become. even within BFP it has not generated the same discussion comparatively trivial podcasts have.
    particularly interesting is the role of the non-elected players as targets of this investigation. is it a coincidence that an investigation designed to protect Clinton in the Lewinsky case turned up so much on the WINEP crowd? these players went from strength to strength, even more powerful under Bush than under Clinton. they also played a key role in bringing us the Iraq War.
    Amos Perlmutter was a mentor to Richard Perle & close to others in the WINEP crowd. he was a history prof at AU, had fought for Israel in 1948 (alongside Nasser, he claimed), much connected at least intellectually to the network Sibel’s agents were on to. his project was to create a Turkish lobby on the model of the Israel lobby. i happened to speak with him ca. 7pm on election night 2000; he assured me that, come what may, GW Bush would be the next president.
    as Debord wrote in 1988, in the integrated spectacle the mafia is at the heart of the state.

    • Katie Stewart says:

      Thank you CuChulainn for saying exactly what I’ve been wanting to say better than I could say it. Why isn’t this generating more discussion here??!! While I’m not surprised the MSM is ignoring it, I don’t understand why members here are arguing about feminism or fake whistleblowers but barely touching this. Those are interesting topics, but this stuff, this stuff should have Americans kicking their politicians out of office RIGHT NOW! I have a much, much greater appreciation for what must be such a frustration for Sibel. And I’m wracking my brain trying to think of more ways to spread this information to the US population that I am rapidly losing faith in.

      • It may just be that this is not so polarizing. I mean, there is no argument to be had. It’s like a bunch of crows in a field of corn. Nothing really to fight over and it is not like someone else will eat all of it. It is just there and there’s not much to do but pick at it as can be done.

        In the Ron Paul thread it is more like people’s view points are a carcass a bunch of vultures are fighting over. Lots more to be said.

        • A Name,

          That depends on the ‘fight.’ Believe it or not, coverage can (possibly) have an impact on this court case. A plea agreement, with almost zero coverage, gives another big advantage to those above. And that’s what many are doing: making it so easy for the deep state.

          Why does it have to be about ‘fight’? This case boils down to collective voices, no matter how minor/little, making bigger sound than one or two messengers. How passive people can be? Even when ‘things’ presented to them on a silver platter, they fail to engage in tiniest action. Pathetic.

          • Want people to call loud mouth Jones and call him out one why he is not covering this? I am not a person fit… … … I sound like a dumbass basically. It would be better for someone with a better presence to do this I think. Probably best to call in for on air comments and not tell them that you are about to put him on the spot on this.

            Jones is disinfo I am now sure. But he has and audience big enough to support his relatively decadent life style. Big enough to grab attention.

            I would think that would be the best way to get the dinowhores to pick it up.

          • Actually, would that be a good idea or best refrained from?

          • Script for fit person:

            “Hello, Sibel Edmonds on that boiling frogs post has been covering this whole Dennis Haster baby f%&+&$g scandal and I am wondering why you haven’t been covering it. I mean, it would be nice if you would at least try to keep up the appearance that you are still a warrior of truth. You think you could have her on for an interview and actually shut up when she’s talking? Bye.”

            Peter Collins would be great for this. His sarcastic sounding voice would really make it work.

            And it needs to be worded harshly. Put him on the spot and call him out on live air so he can’t run away from it.

            Needs to be a voice he wont know.

            And lie when you say why you are calling in to catch them off guard.

            I dont think I could pull it off if I tried this.

          • CuChulainn says:

            don’t see why one needs to “call anyone out” on this, why not simply inform all media, alternative and mainstream, about the significance of Sibel’s recent statements, their public availability, their deep pertinence to the (possibly) forthcoming trial?
            then, if those media continue to refuse to cover this news, then we might ask them why not.
            another venue, for those who are in the Chicago area, might be to demonstrate publicly in front of scheduled hearings.
            we can all contact e.g. the Chicago Tribune to bring this to their attention, and then ask, if it happens, why it has been overlooked. a snail mail letter still gets attention; emails may too; for those who do FB and Twitter, they might have an impact

          • CuChu,

            Way back when the Vanity Fair article came out we kept contacting Chicago publications. The lack of response, the censorship/blackout level was amazing. Now keep in mind: Vanity Fair had 5+ credible sources, they went through two layers of legal review to make sure there was nothing that could be used against them legally, the article went through three different fact-checking process … and then they published. Meaning: publishing/writing about Hastert would have presented ‘ZERO’ risk to these other (including Chicago) publications- They were dealing with facts that were checked and lawsuit-proofed, the work, most of it, was done for them. Yet, not a single word on the story.

            Additionally ask yourself this: You’d expect the partisan agenda on the Democratic Party side would have had a firework with a piece like this (Hastert, Republican, Speaker of the House at the time). Yet, not a peep from them; not one. Don’t you find this odd? One of their props, CREW, began a follow up investigation (together with a press release), and then suddenly, they pulled back, and went mum. My DC sources told me that: They were made aware of the deeper facts involving both parties, and were told to black it out completely. As you know, four years later, when I release Jan Schekowsky’s name, I came under intense attacks from the ‘D’ party players. From insults, to hate latters … you name it.

            Anyhow, that was my experience with Chicago Tribune and other IL/Chicago publications.

          • CuChulainn says:

            even on websites that might not be reporting the news, there are comments sections and forums:

          • Ronald Orovitz says:

            Well, remember that this is Chicago we’re talking about, where virtually every police officer, gov’t official, newspaper editor, etc. has been on the take for the past century. Even a celebrated radical like Saul Alinsky started his career with Al Capone’s outfit!

            And, speaking of radicals, you have to wonder about Bernadine Dorhn and Bill Ayers – how did they go from bombing the Pentagon and Capitol to getting a cozy job at a prestigious law firm and a tenured professorship respectively?…

            Prof. Mary Grabar: A review of Ayers’ curriculum vitae shows a rapid path through the educational system after he came out of hiding in 1979 for his involvement in bombings of U.S. government buildings with the domestic terrorist group Weatherman. Charges were dropped after the Carter Justice Department charged the two FBI agents with illegal surveillance….

            In other words, their prosecution was tainted by ‘Fruit of the Poisonous Tree’. Also noted in the linked article, Ayer’s daddy “headed Commonwealth Edison and sat on the board of the Chicago Tribune”. So, forget about the Chicago Tribune. In fact, forget about Chicago – the corruption is so deeply ingrained that I doubt it could ever be expunged. Could we just quarantine the town? The problem is that the infection has metastasized to the national gov’t, in large part via the CIA. As Sam Giancana himself put it, the “Outfit” and the CIA are two sides of the same coin.

            The last politicians who made a serious effort against organized crime in America were John F. Kennedy and particularly his brother Bobby, even as JFK owed his election win to Sam Giancana. That was a major “marker” (to use outfit lingo) that the Kennedys did not honor, and so we see what happened to them.

          • CuChulainn says:

            maybe the question is, why did VF and David Rose stick their necks out? is Condé Nast any different from other media houses? was it seen in those days as a partisan issue? the Rose article does not read that way. has there been any follow through from VF? has David Rose been “turned”?

          • “maybe the question is, why did VF and David Rose stick their necks out?”- From the start it was decided that to keep it from getting “too complicated/too tedious” the focus would be WBs & Hastert case. Also, maybe having a British reporter on it helped.

            “is Condé Nast any different from other media houses?”- No no no no no. The chief editor was very active within ‘D’ community.

            “was it seen in those days as a partisan issue?”- Yes. A- During Bush period; B- during all my gag order/court/Supreme Court period dealing with Bush/Ashcroft people

            “has there been any follow through from VF?”- Not whatsoever. ‘Silence of the Wolves’;-)

            “has David Rose been “turned”?” Appears that way- At least since 2008.

          • How the crap do you call him on air? I always wondered if his callers were staged.

        • CuChulainn says:

          thank you Sibel. everything fits. in case you missed GG: Denny Hastert is Contemptible, But His Indictment Exemplifies America’s Over-Criminalization Pathology

          • CuCu,

            This is a man with very ‘Similar’ skeletons in his own closets (including using minors in his porno films). Is he preempting what may be coming for him one day? Because the gov has been quiet (for a good reason) on what they have on him, including ‘sexual’ offenses.

    • CuChu,

      ‘Astonishing’ is putting it mildly. Just see how fast this same non-responsive majority raises its voice and demands for more whistleblowers and juicy scandals.

      Sometimes, I feel we have finished the move from ‘morally ambivalent’ to ‘morally decayed.’ When nothing moves them. Nothing.

      What happened to those Mega Financial Corp execs after 2008? Their names, their roles, none of it was classified or secret. Yet, what really happened to them? Nothing. Why? Because were was the real outrage, action/riot to demand it? A few weeks of some ‘Occupy’ rallies here and there, and then, psssst, fizzled to nothing.

      We have covered the topic of ‘apathy’ here. I think we are seeing the final/last stage of it.

      I’d say: ‘disgusting.’

  14. CuChulainn says:

    the spectator’s fundamental attitude is passivity; what passes for action is narcissism
    The spectacle presents itself as something enormously positive, indisputable and inaccessible. It says nothing more than “that which appears is good, that which is good appears. The attitude which it demands in principle is passive acceptance which in fact it already obtained by its manner of appearing without reply, by its monopoly of appearance.
    The basically tautological character of the spectacle flows from the simple fact that its means are simultaneously its ends. It is the sun which never sets over the empire of modern passivity. It covers the entire surface of the world and bathes endlessly in its own glory.

    • CuChulainn,
      I have recently started to try to tackle Debord and The Spectacle. It’s been worth the challenge.
      As for what passes for action is narcissism, you see it especially anymore when it comes to charities and other social action movements. It is all just marketing to appeal to ego. That you are doing your part to raise “awareness” by dumping a bucket of ice on your head, or running a 5K to be a warrior against something or “buy our product and do your part in the fight”. Passivity is “i did my part, I made a donation, played in a golf tournament, buy x product” then posted all over facebook and twitter how good I am!

      • CuChulainn says:

        thanks lizzie, there is a good new translation of SoS by Ken Knabb, with notes; Verso press has a nice edition of the Comments

        your examples illustrate the pervasive unconsciousness, the lack of self-awareness– “The spectacle is the nightmare of imprisoned modern society which ultimately expresses nothing more than its desire to sleep. The spectacle is the guardian of sleep.”

        because Sibel sticks scrupulously to the facts her work illustrates the dialectical movement of history as exposed by Marx and Debord–e.g. her video “who’s at the top of the pyramid” describes the constellation of productive forces which make terrorism integral to our political economy

        the submissiveness both of the spectator and the spectacle’s owners are already implicit in commodity fetishism, in the world of exchange and accumulation. only the abolition of political economy can end this voluntary servitude.

        as you mentioned, ego is the heart of the matter. the ego tempts us to imagine spectacular roles for ourselves in the prison of masturbatory imagination. ultimately Marx and Debord are showing us how to overcome the ego and the nightmare world it creates–in this way they are, as Marx himself avowed, profoundly antimarxist.

        “The consciousness of desire and the desire for consciousness are identically the project which, in its negative form, seeks the abolition of classes, the workers’ direct possession of every aspect of their activity. Its opposite is the society of the spectacle, where the commodity contemplates itself in a world it has created.”

      • CuChulainn says:

        how France joined the spectacle (don’t worry, subtitles!)

      • CuChulainn says:

        hi Lizzie
        thought of your 5k example this morning at the gym–this is how charity is marketed in Crossfit gyms (property of the zionist flagwaver, militarist and coach potato Greg Glassman):
        the message is that exercise can also be an act of charity–and certification that we are good folks after all (and don’t both us about Hastert or any number of corpses of the subhumans)

        • Yuk. Those “sweat Angels” are the epitome of what I was trying to describe. Also, many times they aren’t just capitalizing on ego. It’s grief that is targeted. I saw this firsthand losing someone very close to me to breast cancer in 2008. As if donning our pink products is going to erase the pain of losing our Denise. But it sure makes lots of money. Novocaine for the soul.

  15. Ribbit-Mark says:

    How many members here have contacted the media to alert them of the far deeper Hastert scandal?
    If so, what was their response?

    • Other than ‘you’? None I know of (By the way, I received your e-mail;-). Consider your self ‘the other one’ I mentioned in my previous comment (“making bigger sound than one or ‘two’ messengers). So, the two of us that I know of, Ribbit-Mark.

      Is this something new? Of course not. For every 500 who paid lip service during my court battles/NSWBC activism/gag orders, I had one or two who took a stand and actually joined the battle. Then, some, have the audacity to come and say, “Why don’t you do more? Why don’t you revive NSWBC? Why don’t you …?” Believe me or not, those disgust me far more than those who say nothing … Yuck!

      • I am guilty of inaction. I’m also guilty of having a Facebook account (nobody here has shamed anyone for that, this is my own personal sense of embarrassment here). So in an attempt to cancel out these two shameful things about myself, I took the step just now of posting a summary of this issue, with links to the first podcast in this series, on my own wall plus the FB pages of a couple of US news sites (including the San Jose Mercury News, in honor of their once having published an actual investigation, RIP Gary Webb). Not exactly a media blizzard, but slightly more than I had done five minutes ago. Since I’m in the UK, I’ll solemnly swear to write a traditional letter to the papers in my region.

        FYI, what I specifically posted were slightly customized variations on this:

        Would it make the news if a former Speaker of the House was a known pedophile who engaged in actual treason, in a case that also implicated many other high-level officials including Clinton in extremely serious crimes, and this could all be proven?

        Answer: no.

        FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds has opened up some extremely revealing podcasts to the public, normally behind a paywall. It’s all about how the Hastert indictment, which only scratches a tiny bit of the surface, will be dropped because of what a real trial would reveal.

        She doesn’t fear libel suits because they wouldn’t dare. There’s documentation for everything.

        Hastert is currently under indictment for something trivial, which still invites real coverage. The lack of media interest thus far makes this a story about how the world works, here and now, not just a story about some contemptible corrupt politician from another decade.

        Fascinating and lurid, the investigation that turned up more than it bargained for: [link to podcast]

    • Katie Stewart says:

      Such a good question, ribbit-mark! I have been stewing all day on contacting local (Bend, Oregon) news sources and govt representatives. Sibel, do you mind if I do? Because I’m about ready to stand in front of the KTVZ office daily, or the Bulletin, or the Source, or city hall, whatever….

  16. Jenny Watson says:

    I couldn’t agree more with the comments on here about the astonishing lack of apathy surrounding these revelations, the complete and defeating silence around this in the MSM and even the lack of conversation on this from the BFP community. I’ve come in late to the game and have been catching up on a lot of the Probable Cause and other podcasts on here and often spend as long reading the comments threads as I do on the podcast. But this, which seems the pinnacle of Sibel’s revelations thus far and yet seemingly so little interest.

    I have shared the Sibel’s post on my Facebook although I have very”friends” and linked to it on comment threads whenever relevant. It hadn’t occurred to me though to simply contact journalists, radio shows and other media. I’m going to do that but perhaps the fellow subscribers could give me a bit of advice…

    I’m not sure I could do a quick short summary of Sibel’s case justice, perhaps I should use Sibel’s introduction to this series:

    “In her new series new series Sibel intends to shed light on obscured facts surrounding Dennis Hastert and his case, his Chief of Staff and loyal partner in crime, the illegal and immoral conduct involving Hastert and several other US officials that took place between 1997 and 2002, other high-profile participants, the parties that were not only fully aware of these activities but were also documenting-recording them, and the highest-level beneficiaries that have much to lose if real trials were to take place or real reporting were to be made public by the mainstream media.”

    Any advice? I would really like to try to help, Sibel. I’m outraged that this can stay so low on the radar and that people can be so disengaged.


    • NO! You gotta grab their attention. These are reporters, not fancy pants people.

      Just tell them “There’s this Denny Haster baby f-ing scandal, and you need to cover it and invite Sibel for an interview”.

      And what about that Utah reporter you talked to once? What was her name?

  17. Jenny Watson says:

    * very ‘few’ “friends”

  18. CuChulainn says:

    this is a minimalist approach, but how about:
    Dear …
    May i bring your attention to the very significant recent statements of Sibel Edmonds about the Hastert case and related matters? I believe they would be of great interest to you and your readers/listeners/viewers.
    Transcripts of these statements can be found in recent columns listed here:
    The statement themselves can be heard in public-access podcasts at the Boiling Frogs Post website.
    Sincerely yours…

  19. Jenny Watson says:

    CuChulainn, thank you very much. I need to work on being succinct, it’s not one of my strong points but this is perfect, concise and to the point. Let’s see how it does…

    I’ll start sending it round and post here with any updates. Thanks again!

  20. Okay, here’s what needs to be done.

    1) call every reporter or outlet you can think of that might listen

    2) Dont word it like your talking to the f-ing pope. You need to think in terms of headline. Headlines aint polite. Theyre engaging. You gotta engage poeple. Talking like some professor aint engaging people.

    And also, we should work on the flood technique. The flood technique is when you bombard an entity with so many requests they can no longer refuse to ignore the issue.

    I think we should start with Jones. I still have no idea how to call him on air, but if we could get people to call, message, and email his show over and over and over again maybe he will pay some attention and call her for an interview.

    He has the reach to get this out there and he has an interest in appearing to be real alternative so it would be in his show’s best interest to pick this up.

  21. On that note, do you have enough members to flood Jones? If people know anyone willing they should get their aquaintances to help with the flood.

  22. Hi Sibel,

    Thanks for a very clarifying piece. This gives me a much better context in which to place / understand your previous information drops. It motivated me to go back and read past articles about your case, in particular the ones, which has kept me busy enough not to post a reaction here before..

    As to the more generalized apathy that you note: Even though your episode is very valuable TO ME because I consider you very credible, and because what you’ve said fits so well (i.e. is consistent) with my preexisting mental picture of the landscape. I expect the effect on other people to be very different, as they typically have a different understanding of the world. Telling them about your story, showing them the Northwoods document, or say the Loose Change doc, it all leads to a-priori dismissal, because the message doesn’t jive with their paradigm. Paradigms tend to have a set of mutually reinforcing beliefs, in the same way that a wall consists of mutually supporting bricks. And so, yes, I tend to not propagate the message outside of our flock.

    Curious what other people think.

    • Start the flood. That’s what I think. You change the landscape you change the wall.

    • Continued after a night’s sleep:

      I don’t mean to defend apathy here. And I’m also not putting down the value of Sibel’s testimony. I’m just trying to take into account a rational expectation of what effect this story would have on different people. So for example let’s look at the following three groups of people:
      1. Our Irate minority
      2. The Alex Jones public
      3. The network news public

      Public 2 is ready for this story but Alex himself if I understand is probably not, and so we have a small wall between 1 and 2, and I agree it would be good to cross that wall.

      Now next there is a big wall between 2 & 3, in that public 3 ITSELF is not receptive to this message because of their paradigm, their set of mutually reinforcing beliefs.

      Hacking away at one of the bricks in their wall of beliefs will identify you as an ideological enemy just like a spider will identify a fly trying to break loose at the other side of the web. My limited experience is that hacking away at the wrong brick can actually be counterproductive. On the other hand, it is THOSE people that are the most interesting to flip.

      I’m still looking for the right tactic if any exists to be used to take down a person’s paradigm. If somebody has success stories to share I’d be curious to learn from them. There’s probably no tactic that works for everybody, but even turning a single person would be an experience worth sharing.

      • Katie Stewart says:

        I see your perspective, Olivier. And feel that way too as I go out around town or talk with the parents of my kids’ friends and find myself simply avoiding any of these topics because of the immediate defensive posture these subjects generate. But then, I visit my elderly, very conservative grandmother who has never said a word to me about politics before, and even she comments on how our nation has fallen, and I begin to think that more and more people really are waking up to the corruption. I have had some success opening the eyes of my family members, it is possible. The problem, as I see it, is getting people to actually do something about it. People are angry, for so many reasons, and they are seeing through the lies little by little (the whole ISIS thing is just too ridiculous). But they don’t know how they can change it, or they are too afraid to try (guilty myself on both counts for many years!). I have to believe that somewhere the right thread exists that can unravel everything. Either I believe that, or I may as well curl into a ball of depression and leave it to my kids and their generation to struggle with.

      • Katie, yes same here, I do in fact believe that there might be a way to improve this situation. I have no illusions about my current effectiveness though, and in the meantime I’m very curious, and learning something new every day is a very enjoyable thing for me. Whether it’s about raking in new data, or about drawing conclusions, or about the methods to convey those conclusions to other people. It’s fascinating and important at the same time.

  23. Actually, when dealing with small town newspapera and such it may be better to take the more tact approach.


    That site has a list of news outlets and links to their contact pages. It makes finding contacts much faster.

  25. I thought I should say this somewhere

    I have had at least two instances recently where a file download that I did not initiate started loading a file into my phone. It was not an update. It was just some random jibberish named file.


    This group is now up. There is no edit option so make sure you proof read.

  27. Sibel ought to call Alex, record it, and ask him if he would like to have her on. I would like to hear the response.


    Go there and ask alex why he isnt covering this and interviewing Sibel.

    For some reason no post button appears in my browser.

  29. ed nelson says:

    I Sibel, sorry I just thought of you…. here is my trash comment: To Wayne Madsen:

    ed nelson (Golden State)
    Having read Sibel’s book, I remmber some of it relating to Hastart: Don’t hold me to it, but just sayin’… Hastard was integral to the problem that Sibel’s experienced in unearthing treason in inter agency corruption.

    My take is that any particular emphasis on Hastart’s pedophilia,

    Is primarily a way to make a false ”redherring” dodge the hugely more important weird TREASONOUS aspects of Hastart. And his horrible involvement with international monstrous criminals.

    Read Sibel’s ”Classified Woman” she tells of a bunch of shit there!!

  30. ed nelson says:

    Sorry I couldn’t type it better, but my take” is: that they want to empthesyse the pervert dimension… to invert the treason dimension!

    Of course all the pervets are compromised… that gives the…( ”they’ who pull the stings..’ entities” , a pretty good … handy deal…. but perverts…. Really… is that how low they have to have got…. ?

  31. ed nelson says:

    I guess, after reading your book…and a few other hundred etc…

    I rememmber Hastart was a part of the Chacago team…. he had aconnection with a particular man and wife team , and other operators… who were complete counter espeonoge bastards!

    You couldn’t get no help even from the best of the best …..’Ole timerr…because… … of course… the ole SOB… is only about a year from pension…!

    Sad f’n storie X 10

    Ed N

  32. ed nelson says:

    Hi Oritz! I see you are ”spooning” Sibel…

  33. I’m not sure not sure how everyone feels about this but here goes-what his victims? They are out there and who knows how many there are. There was a woman who came out and said her brother was molested by Hastert at Yorkville High School. Jolene something? HAs anyone been in contact with her? She might be able to provide a lot of background information that was withheld from the MSM. And she might have gained a great deal of new information and contacts since she spoke out. Also, even though the coverage of his indictment and the indictment itself are completely convoluted, it did get coverage. He was back in the spotlight. His name and face all over the media. There are countless victims out there who saw it and maybe might speak out.

    • Lizzie,

      This is one of the reasons I’ve been working on this. Considering the fact that there is no Statute of Limitation on Rape/Sexual Molestation, keeping this intensely out in public would go along way to encourage ‘others’ (there are many, including those who were violated after he was ‘seated’ in Congress) to come forward.

      Also, it increases the chances of ‘some’ of the FBI agents (and a couple in IL-DOJ office) with direct knowledge coming forward (whether off-the-record with media or directly as WBs). We have this very small/short window of opportunity (albeit with very small chance/probability).

      • Sorry for all the typos in my first post.
        His victims of sexual abuse could be powerful allies in the fight to expose all of Hastert’s crimes. And quite frankly, they are the ones who suffered his physical violence. They deserve first crack at some justice in all this.
        Also, with the media exposure-not only are his name and picture out there but now allegations of sexual abuse and the fact that he had put more than a million cash into shutting someone up. I was hoping that that might motivate someone to at least go after him in a civil suit. However, that can be headed off in his lawyers office with a big check and a non-disclosure agreement.

  34. Also, I wonder if there are any lawsuits in the works by any victims.

  35. Ronald Orovitz says:

    Another prospective SotH bites the dust… What do we know about the site and where are they getting their dirt?…

    Putting themselves in league w/:.. “Hustler Magazine — don’t laugh they brought down Bob Livingston!” -with a little help from their friends, that is.

    A run of the mill affair between consenting adults would appear to be the worst they had on McCarthy. Could this mean they have something much worse – and all the more potent for keeping them in line – on candidate(s) waiting in the wings?

    • HI Ronald…. How’s things?…. Over here I guess I’m OK…. but I am worried!!!
      I am worried when Daemonic/forces have taken over the biggest, hugest ,unbelievable,

      These Bastards maskarade as …. “this or that ‘christian or Jew”

      Sorry, I don’t have any punch-line for some humour here…. which is needed!

  36. CuChulainn says:

    i didn’t notice Sibel’s interview with Global Research linked here, but it’s a good one–

  37. When trying to spread this to other outlets what exactly should be done? Letters to the editor? Some sort of enticement to look into the case? And if they look into it where do we tell them to look? What sort of coverage is being sought?

  38. What if we pooled money and took out an ad in a high traffic area calling for whistle blowers and victims in this Hastert case to speak out? Sibel doesn’t want to do interviews so the only other places to get info are other whistle blowers and victims.

    Maybe a billboard or a full page add or some digital equivelant? It may make coming forward seem more viable to make such a request so public. If the victims and whiste blowers allow this to blow over they are effectively enabling it. It could guilt trip them.

  39. Announcement:

    James Corbett is preparing an EyeOpener Video Report on Dennis Hastert. It should be up on Tuesday or Wednesday this week.

    In conjunction with that, to complement it (by reaching more, informing more), for a limited time, I am offering both my e-books (The Lone Gladio & Classified Woman) at $1.99 (under $2!!) at Amazon Kindle Site. Please go grab a copy or two, and invite others to do the same. Reading those books will go a long way to provide outsiders with a better context, needed set of facts.

    So please put the word out. Urge people to gran the copies and read them both. Here are the links to both Kindle Books:
    The Lone Gladio: $1.99

    Classified Woman-The Sibel Edmonds Story: $1.99

    Considering the small price tag, encourage those who can to buy an extra copy and give it out as a gidt to a friend.

    Let’s see how much traction we can get.

    Thank you all,


  40. Hi Sibel, it’s only ole’… Eddie down here in the wine country….
    but what I say… is… when I read your book: ”Clasified Woman” is that I remember that you were perplexed about the fact that nobody of any count would come to help you! when you need help, even the best folks there where you worked, walked away, making you … ”radio-active” and that is so sad

    I remembert from the book… that there was one old time guy that you were pretty sure would help…. and he turned punk on you … because he didn’t want to jepardize his retirement agreement…. etc!

    And that the subject/theme of the book mainly states: the corruption of these agencies…. who are the agencies who …. sorry to say…. watch over all of us…. ready to pounce if you make any wrong move!!! !!! haha!

  41. ed nelson says:

    hi Sibel,,,Hi all of your subscibers… (so srry , I have eyesight issues)I mean it counters my tooucch type thing!
    its’s kinda like I candt seee the sreen do can’t make corrections and all that good stuff!

  42. ed nelson says:

    sibel is the greatest

  43. ed nelson says:

    /Users/ednelson/Desktop/Picture 20.png0

    .if I did this right I am the scond guy from the left the ship was on its last voyaage to be scrapped.

  44. ed nelson says:

    /Users/ednelson/Desktop/Picture 20.png

  45. ed nelson says:

    I don’t thinkk thant I coule transpher my ph-ot s see herr maybe I can flot it ove right here /Users/ednelson/Desktop/Screen shot 2015-10-10 at 11.02.09 AM.png/Users/ednelson/Desktop/Picture 20.png

    well I sent too lettss us see if I can put a photo onto this Sibel blog.

  46. ed nelson says:
  47. ed nelson says:

    /Users/ednelson/Desktop/Screen shot 2015-10-10 at 11.02.09 AM.png

  48. ed nelson says:

    hi Sibel andothers…… Ijustfoundout that Ican’t paste anyhing tothissite…
    /Users/ednelson/Desktop/Picture 20.png
    I tried to past a photo…. no go, mabybe I will tru again… but I know it’sno go!

  49. ed nelson says:

    /Users/ednelson/Desktop/Picture 20.png

    Sibel baby… i can’t evensend you a photo /Users/ednelson/Desktop/Picture 20.png

  50. ed nelson says:

    wow tour site is so poor annd limited that a guy can’tnsend you a screenshot…. much less any real good info on anything!… Hence you are aphony

Speak Your Mind