Sibel Edmonds Rebukes Dennis Hastert Attorney's Rebuttal to Charges ...

[cascadiance]

... of Bribery

Brad's Blog just put up an exclusive announcement of Sibel Edmonds rebutting Dennis Hastert's printed rebuttal in the latest issue of Vanity Fair. Sounds like Hastert and company are afraid to come out with an unsanitized version of their "truth", and yet they are feeling the need to respond to Sibel's and Vanity Fair's allegations.

From: http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002384.htm

-----------------

EXCLUSIVE: Sibel Edmonds Rebukes Dennis Hastert Attorney's Rebuttal to Charges of Bribery
'Gag Ordered' FBI Whistleblower Gives Statement to BRAD BLOG Questioning Letter to Vanity Fair by House Speaker's Legal Counsel

Calls on Hastert to 'Come Clean' on $500k in Un-Itemized Campaign Donations, Relationship With Turkish Interest Groups

In the September 2005 issue of Vanity Fair, a lengthy feature article on former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds discussed a number of claims that Edmonds has by and large been disallowed from expressing publicly.

Her attempts at whistleblowing on the malfeasance and cover-ups she alleges to have witnessed during her time at the bureau in late 2001 and early 2002 -- during which she translated covert wiretaps recorded prior to 9/11 -- have been silenced by the U.S. government. An arcane "states-secret privilege" has been applied to her which effectively "gag orders" her from discussing her claims including allegations which the Dept. of Justice's own Inspector General found to be "credible" and "serious" and "warrant a thorough and careful review by the FBI," according to a declassified version of their investigation into her claims.

One of the allegations discussed by reporter David Rose in the VF article concerned FBI intercepts out of Chicago that Edmonds claims to have listened to. Reportedly, those intercepts suggest that U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL), may have been bribed by a large number of small "donations" emanating from shadowy Turkish interest groups. Such donations, $199 and smaller, are not required to be itemized in public filings according to Federal Election Commission rules.

Rose's article reports that Hastert's campaign received nearly $500,000 in such "un-itemized contributions" between 1996 and 2000. By contrast, Tom DeLay (R-TX), one of the House's best fundraisers, received just under $100,000 in such contributions. Only one other congressman, Clay Shaw (R-FL), received more in such contributions than Hastert, bringing in just over $550,000, during that same period.
...

Also note that Luke Ryland has a good analyses of this rebuttal on his blog too at:

http://wotisitgood4.blogspot.com/2006/02/hasterts-genocide.html

http://wotisitgood4.blogspot.com/2006/02/sibel-hastert.html

http://wotisitgood4.blogspot.com/2006/02/more-on-hastert-and-sibel.html

[Mnemosyne]

1. .

[wiggs]

2. IMO, if Hastert's attorney feels the need, at this time,

If Hastert's attorney feels the need, at this time, to bring this issue up then...I conclude something about Hastert is going to hit the news soon. Why would he remind the public about Sibel's allegation? Why not let it just sit there like other forgotten issues?

Something is coming down the pike.

Good for Sibel.

[cascadiance]

5. If Shrub and Cheney might plan to step down soon...

to avoid impeachment, etc. and the consequences of such after the 2006 election if the Dems control congress then, perhaps they are trying to also either clear up Hastert's name, or get him out of the picture too, so that they can have someone that won't be "touchable" as the Speaker of the House to take over for Bush if and when they both resign... Something does seem to be up though...

[TInCanCommunications]

3. How in the world is Edmonds at the center of every story?

I'm beginning to doubt her credibility.

[cascadiance]

4. Using that logic, then everyone in this administration's credibility...

is in the toilet... Have you seen many others question her credibility? I think that congress knows a lot more of what she knows, and they certainly felt her stories that she gave to the 9/11 commission, etc. had merit, even though they've not been able to talk about it. If there were serious (and provable) doubts of her credibility, she'd have been "outed" a long time ago.

Please don't question this patriot's courage and determination unless you can provide some concrete reason why we shouldn't. We need more people like her to take the risks she's taking and not get slapped down by those like us that should be supporting her.

[oldlady]

6. It's just because her story has been unfolding in the courts

and so slow moving that every time she gives us a new crumb, we've already forgotten the original story. The Turkish donations tie into AIPAC, where the original story began.

[Wilms]

7. K&R n/t

[hootinholler]

8. during which she translated covert wiretaps recorded prior to 9/11

Were these covered by warrants? Anyone know?

-Hoot

[mom cat]

9. I wonder what the story is on Clay Shaw (R - FL) and his 550,000 in

contributions.

[ngGale]

10. Kick....

:donut:

[Nothing Without Hope]

11. ***Two related du posts:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2349872&mesg_id=2349891
1-4-06 This one excerpts and links to the Vanity Fair article.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2353538
1-6-06 Sibel Edmonds: Blogger on the right track!

And K & R with thanks. Oh, what Sibel could tell us!