|
Edited on Sun Jul-13-08 02:10 PM by Peace Patriot
about Chandra Levy's disappearance: What did Dick Cheney know about Gary Condit and his mistresses, on the day that Levy disappeared (May 1, 2001)? Cheney met with Condit that day, some time between 12:00 and 3:00 pm--Levy's revised disappearance hours.
In June 2001, Condit released his schedule for May 1. The hours between 12:00 and 3:00 were blank except for a meeting with Dick Cheney at 12:00. What is peculiar about this meeting is, a) that, according to Cheney aides (who were planting Cheney's version of the meeting in Newsweek three months later, in August 2001), no one--not reporters, not FBI/DC police--ever asked Cheney or his aides any questions about that meeting (not even, did it occur? how long? who was present?); b) the FBI/DC police initially said that Levy disappeared circa 10:00 am, but just before Cheney aides planted Cheney's version of the meeting in Newsweek (three months later), the FBI/DC police revised her disappearance time to early afternoon (coinciding with the Cheney/Condit meeting). (For one thing, the length of Condit's blank time period in early afternoon might be gaged by how long the meeting was; Cheney aides said 20 minutes long, routine political meeting, two aides present. For another, the meeting now coincided with her true presumed disappearance hours; Cheney could have given Condit a much more substantial alibi during that period--and didn't--and (what it looks like to me) it took him three months to decide not to).
As to b), one line of investigation might be: Was info on Levy's disappearance window (that it was early afternoon, not mid-morning) withheld from the public until Cheney had time to get his version of the meeting straight and witnesses lined up, and until he could get this version planted in the press? Why no one ever asked Cheney about this meeting (if Cheney aides were telling the truth), is certainly odd. The revision of Levy's disappearance hours, which was said to have been based on her computer use, is another oddity. The FBI lab had her computer for three months, and couldn't figure out her disappearance hours more quickly than that? A ten year old could have done it, in seconds. It's a possibility that her true presumed disappearance time was withheld from the public for genuine police reasons. But it sure didn't look that way to someone (me) following the news at that time. There was a sudden announcement at the end of the summer--just before the Cheney item in Newsweek--that she had disappeared in the early afternoon, and what seemed like cover for that story, a high profile re-search of Rock Creek Park, with front page photos of lines of cadets, because her computer (three months on) had revealed her MapQuest search of Rock Creek Park. (That's another thing that a ten year old could have found out, in seconds.)
A possibly related big news story at the time was the House Intelligence Committee investigation of the FBI. Condit sat on that committee, privy to many secrets. Was this an initial Bushite purge of the FBI? Was Condit a Cheney mole on that committee? (--thinking of the potential content of the Cheney/Condit meeting that day). (It seems likely, too, that Cheney had an FBI or private dossier on Condit and his mistresses.)
Condit had contacts within the FBI. When Levy's mother had called him to look into Chandra's whereabouts (she was expected home for her graduation, and hadn't arrived), Condit called contacts of his in the FBI and they and Condit conducted a search of Levy's apartment without a warrant (very irregular; makes (or used to make) evidence inadmissible). Also, Levy apparently asked Condit to get her a job with the FBI--after her Bureau of Prisons internship was abruptly terminated several weeks ahead of time (just before she disappeared). FBI and Bureau of Prisons conduct around Levy's employment needs investigation.
Those who get defensive about investigation of Condit because he is a Democrat should remember that Condit was one of only 10 Democrats who voted FOR the first Bush tax cut for the rich--a very close vote, and a very important one, that occurred on May 3, 2001, two days after Chandra Levy's disappearance. Condit was the leader of the "Blue Dog" Democrats (Bush ass-kissers) and the darling of the new Bush White House. He it was who proposed requiring all public buildings to post the Ten Commandments.
My opinion of Cheney is that whacking somebody's troublesome mistress, in exchange for an important vote, would be a matter of routine housekeeping. But there may have been other things at stake. This was the 3-month period leading up to 9/11. Donald Rumsfeld pulled all NORAD emergency decision-making into his own hands in June, while the 'news' corps were obsessing over the more lurid aspects of Condit's sex life, and while they were failing to ask Dick Cheney any questions about his meeting with Condit. Cheney had already carved up the map of Iraq's oil fields, in his secret oil execs' meetings in the spring (around the time that Levy was apparently pressuring Condit to divorce his wife and marry her). In August, Coleen Rowley was frantically requesting her FBI bosses to give her a FISA warrant to get into the computer of suspected terrorist she had in custody--when the high profile search of Rock Creek Park was occurring (possible cover for Cheney on the Cheney/Condit meeting). The two stories are certainly interwoven as to time. Were they interwoven as to substance, in any way?
John O'Neil (who was hot on the Al Qaeda money trail in Yemen) was drummed out of the FBI that summer (on the ridiculous charge that he left his briefcase in a room full of FBI agents, alleged to be a security breach--?). He took a private security job in the WTC the week of 9/11, and died therein. Is it possible that the House Intel Committee investigation of the FBI was a way of distracting the FBI during THE peak period of danger, prior to 9/11, when the Yemeni and Saudi visitors were freely entering the country and running around getting flight lessons and lap dances and so on? And, if true, what was Condit's role in the purge and/or distraction of the FBI?
Chandra Levy's body--or rather her bones--were found a year later (May 2002) in Rock Creek Park, not far off one of the paths of the high profile search in late summer 2001. It's hard to figure how that body was missed in the 2001 searches, and subsequently. Rock Creek Part is an urban park, and not that big. Maintenance personnel? Hikers? Dogs? How did they miss a body not far off a path?
In any case, you gotta wonder what the WaPo is going to come up with, at this point. Have their ace reporters finally asked the right questions, of the right people? (har-har) Is this just more lurid distraction with the bonus that the suspect is a (ahem) 'Democrat'? Is it prep for 9/11-part two? Does WaPo have something on FBI or Bureau of Prisons underlings whom the Bushites need to target at this point? Has someone else--private investigator, white hat FBI--come up with something on Cheney, and the WaPo is pre-empting it with the 'official' story?
In spring 2001, I had been in disgruntled, demoralized retreat from politics for a while--especially "Beltway" politics and 'news.' The Chandra Levy story began to interest me when Condit released his schedule in June, containing that flashing red alert about Condit meeting with Cheney at 12:00. I looked and looked for ANY follow-up on it. There was none. Then, in early August, in Newsweek came this bit from Cheney aides giving their version of the meeting--basically using Newsweek as their private propaganda organ. I remember thinking at the time: 'Well, that does it! The Washington press corps has gone completely over to the dark side. Our country is in BIG TROUBLE.'
I think it will be fascinating to try to guess what WaPo is really up to. A TWELVE-PART series! Wow! Will it just be nostalgia for that great prurient lead-up to 9/11, and simpler days, when the public was more malleable? Just a re-hash of the known bullshit? Maybe a way of suppressing the vote in November, by promoting the public's utter disgust with Bush/Cheney, our 'Democratic' ('Blue Dog') Congress, and the cauldron of corruption in Washington DC? If it were one or two stories--or even three or four stories--I'd say, yeah, it's just psyops. But a 12-part series!? I think this is likely to have an even more devious purpose. What will it be?
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
