Chandra Levy

[Guest guest]

 

If Gary Condit didn't kill Chandra Levy, he's the unluckiest adulterer in Washington. Until late April, he was just another horny Congressman, cheerfully nailing -- like many if not most of his colleagues -- one of the town's vast herd of obliging interns. Not his own intern, perish the thought, but some other fellow's: after all, three years ago, when President Clinton ran into a little difficulty intern-wise, Congressman Condit was one of the few Democrats to vote for the impeachment inquiry, so it was important for him to set an example and only screw around with young federal employees not directly under his authority.

 

Anyway, there he is, getting it on with this year's curvy Jewish Californian intern, who thinks he looks like Harrison Ford and every so often starts yakking about how she wants to have his baby, which is the sort of thing hot guys like him and Harrison have to put up with. And then suddenly, on April 30th, she vanishes, leaving a neat apartment with nothing to catch the eye of the investigating constabulary except a photograph of the 24-year-old intern with the 53-year-old devoted husband, father and Baptist minister's son. In the two-and-a-half months between the disappearance of his "friend" and his belated recollection last week that, oh yeah, now you mention it, they were having sex after all, we have learned nothing about the fate of Miss Levy but an awful lot about America's most famous obscure Congressman -- the special phone line (playing soft'n'easy favourites) he set up for his multiple mistresses to dial in on; the child he allegedly sired by the 18-year-old daughter of a Pentecostal preacher; his phenomenal leg-over record during his days in the California State Assembly, where he was known as "Gary Condom" and where female staffers planned a "Condoms for Condit" fundraiser to ensure that he would at least be able to practise "safe sex"; the unsafe sex he has a penchant for, according to one mistress; the way she first suspected he was two-timing her -- well, actually three-timing, if you're old-fashioned enough to include his wife -- when she looked under his bed and discovered a string of neckties roped together like a Tie Rack bondage special.

 

None of this would be known to the world had Miss Levy stuck around. So, if, as he insists, he had nothing to do with her disappearance, you can understand why the four-flushing, seven-timing, eight-lines, press-*9-for-bondage-sessions Democrat looks increasingly peeved as the camera crews dog his appearances in the Capitol. Of all the interns in all the pads of all the swingers in all the District of Columbia, why did his have to disappear? Why couldn't The Mystery Of The Missing Mistress have starred, say, fellow stickman the Reverend Jesse Jackson?

 

Against that, it has to be said that since April 30th Gary Condit has been doing a superb impersonation of a guilty man, even before anyone thought there was anything to be guilty about. There was his first, instant reaction to the news that Chandra's mom hadn't heard from her in a couple of days ("Would you like me to put up a $10,000 reward?"); his strange comment to his other other woman, "flame-haired flight attendant" Anne Marie Smith ("I'm going to have to disappear for a while ... I think I may be in some trouble"); the Clintonesque false affidavit his lawyers drafted for Miss Smith to sign denying she'd had an affair with him; his staff's habit of insisting at every opportunity that he doesn't have a car ("Carolyn Condit, the Congressman's wife, arrives from California at 7:30 p.m. ET. Rep. Condit, with a staffer because he has no car, picks her up at the airport. They go to a Xando coffee shop") -- i.e., he couldn't have put the body in the trunk of the car, because he doesn't have a car to put the body in; and the pants with the noticeable red stain which the Congressman's ferocious high-rent shyster, Abbe Lowell, refused to let police remove from his apartment. In fairness to Mr. Condit, possibly it's an old ketchup stain arising from his small part in the 1978 film Attack of the Killer Tomatoes.

 

Indeed, the only thing to be said in his favour is that Condit's behaving so guiltily that, if this were a Hollywood movie, he'd be the guy you assume did it until five minutes before the end, when in a stunning courtroom coup de théâtre, Perry Mason reveals that the popular Democratic Congressman was in fact framed by an embittered Republican opponent. Real life is duller: The obvious suspect is usually the guy who did it. But let's do as we should and presume innocence. If he's not a killer, there's a prima facie case of obstruction of justice and subornation of perjury. As we know from impeachment days, for Democrats such piffling offences don't "rise to the level" of high crimes. With Clinton, the defence was that it was only about sex; but, with Condit, it's not only about sex, it's about possible murder: Monica Meets OJ, in tabloid-speak. Yet throughout two long months of calculated sabotage of a police investigation Democrats have been in full Clinton mode, or as House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt told the Associated Press: "Gary is co-operating in every possible way with the police ... He's doing what he's been asked to do." Even as Gephardt was blandly standing by his man, Federal officials were opening a criminal investigation into whether the Congressman had obstructed justice.

 

What does a Democrat have to do to get disowned by his party? In public, Dems deplore the intrusion into Condit's "private" life. In private, some have cited his sleaziness as the best evidence of his innocence: Why would he kill this mistress when he's never killed any of the others? So what if, as some reports have it, she was pregnant? He didn't mind when the 18-year-old preacher's gal got knocked up. And, naturally, everyone understands that Gary lied because he wanted "to protect his family." If he had a "romantic relationship," that's his business.

 

"Romantic" hardly seems the word. As Chandra's aunt tells it, her young niece had to spend much of the day alone in Condit's apartment waiting for him and the best that Auntie could advise to while away the hours was to try to please him by arranging his shirts according to colour. The Congressman's apologists think all that's fine -- the special phone line, the love child, the no-emission-without-a-tie stuff -- just so long as he didn't slice Chandra's head off and stick it in his freezer. But, if as seems likely Miss Levy is dead, it's because she lived by Condit rules. He insists, for example, that none of his girlfriends are to carry ID when they're at his apartment. When Chandra vanished, her ID, her driver's licence and credit cards, were found back at her place. The Congressman invited his young constituent to compartmentalize her life -- to conduct a clandestine affair, behind closed doors, her formal identity left behind at home. Suppose she started doing that with some other guy, one who's less of a paragon of integrity than dear old Gary.

 

Congressmen are not like Westminster-style MPs, wedged onto the benches of the Commons, sharing offices and one aged secretary. A member of the House of Representatives has multiple offices and a vast professional staff, and all the time in the world to "mentor" as many interns as he wants. The received opinion says that we must be careful to criticize Gary Condit only for his stonewalling of the police and not for his multiple affairs. But the latter led to the former, and the absurdly aggrandized status of modern-day Representatives encourages both. Seedy deception, droit de seigneur, an enabling staff, and uncritical colleagues: That's the world Gary Condit lives in and, in some furtive corner thereof, Chandra Levy may well have died in. As long as Democrats insist that it's OK to screw interns, stewardesses and teenagers just so long as you don't murder 'em, the Condits and Clintons will carry on defining decadence down. After all, whatever happened to Chandra, there's plenty more where she came from. Or as the announcement on Gary Condit's Web site put it: "INTERN OPPORTUNITIES. Whether interning in Modesto, Merced, or Washington D.C., working in one of Rep. Condit's offices can be an extremely rewarding experience ..."

 

 

 

[Gauracandra 1]

To me, if the Congress wants to get any credibility, they should pass a real simple law that says NO member of Congress may have any intimate relations with staff members while a member of Congress. If they do, and it is found out, they will be immediately removed from office. Plain and simple. There was a poll done and 80% of Americans would not want their kids working as interns for a Republican or Democrat (the number may not be exact, but its magnitude is close). All these politicians must view interns as one of the perks of the job (like corporate paid holidays to ski resorts to "discuss issues"). Just goes to show what sort of politicians are running our country. And this Condit guy serves on the Intelligence Committee, holding the most secret information we have. It would be so easy to blackmail this guy it aint even funny. And given his low class nature I'm sure he'd spill every secret on the U.S. rather than lose his next election because he is an adulterer.

 

Gauracandra

[Guest guest]

<font color="blue">

I think that housecleaning is what is going on with the Condit investigation. I think it started BEFORE Chandra disappeared.

 

Caught and Confessed FBI spy Hansson made a spectacular deal with the feds to spare his life and keep some of his pension for his family. He must have proved to them that he had valuable information about people who are bigger and badder than himself in the government "service".

 

I contend that some time ago Hansson dropped the dime that a member of the House Intelligence Committee was Dirty in every way and supplied documents and information to foreign agents. The House members were watched and it took about a week for them to figure out that Condit had a lot to hide. They made the deal with Hansson after that, and began work to expose the sordid side of

Condit so they could take him into custody for a reason other than espionage and continue following other leads to get the others who have been partying on blood money by betraying our nation.

 

Daschle is worried:

</font>

 

Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle said Sunday that he suspects scandal-scarred Congressman Gary Condit isn't the only member of the House Intelligence Committee whose tawdry secret life makes him a ripe target for blackmail.

 

 

But the nation's number one elected Democrat indicated that's no reason that Condit or other Intelligence Committee members he didn't name shouldn't be handling the nation's most sensitive secrets.

 

 

Asked by NBC "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert whether he thought Condit's vulnerability to blackmail means he should recuse himself from the key intelligence post, Daschle dismissed the suggestion, saying, "There are probably others that are subject to blackmail as well."

 

 

House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, who has the last word over whether the California Democrat is removed from the post, apparently agrees that Condit's admitted affair with missing 24-year-old intern Chandra Levy -- as well as allegations he tried to cover up sexual relationships with at least two other women -- don't render him unfit to handle super-sensitive U.S. secrets.

 

 

"All political questions should be addressed after the whereabouts of (Levy) are addressed," Gephardt's spokesman Erik Smith told the New York Post Sunday.

 

 

But Gephardt did not address suspicions that other House Intelligence Committee Democrats may be vulnerable to blackmail over Condit-like misconduct.

 

 

During President Bill Clinton's 1999 Senate impeachment trial, then-Senate Minority Leader Daschle struck a deal with his Republican counterpart Trent Lott not to investigate evidence that Clinton had been blackmailed by foreign intelligence services who are believed to possess recordings of his phone sex sessions with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

 

 

Here's the full exhange between Daschle and Russert:

 

 

RUSSERT: Would it be in the country's best interests that a congressman -- who's apartment has been searched, has given a DNA sample, has in fact given a lie detector test, has been accused of asking that an affidavit be signed improperly during this critical period -- that he recuse himself from the House Intelligence Committee, where he's privy to all our nation's secrets?

 

 

DASCHLE: Well, Tim, you put your finger on the right word -- "accused." That's what he stands of right now, he's accused of some things that I don't think anybody can prove at this point. The real focus has to be on finding Chandra Levy. That's where the investigation needs to go. Until we know the facts, I think it's highly premature to come to any conclusions about Mr. Condit or anybody else.

 

 

RUSSERT: But he is vulnerable to blackmail in his current situation.

 

 

DASCHLE: Well, he may be. But there are probably others that are subject to blackmail as well. I think the real issue is how do you find some solution to this tragedy. And the best way to do that is to keep the focus on where it should be and that is (on) Chandra Levy.

 

 

[Guest guest]

The Central Intelligence Agency downgrades its security briefings to House Intelligence Committee members in the presence of

suspected security risks like Rep. Gary Condit, former House Intelligence Committee member Bob Dornan said late Monday.

 

"I served eight years on that committee," Dornan told Fox News Channel's "Hannity & Colmes." We had one person that had

dealings with a Communist government down in the Caribbean in Grenada. And it degraded all the intel-briefings."

 

"The CIA people told me, 'Come and get that briefing again. Come over to Langley or have us come and we'll sweep your

office. Because we degrade the briefing because that person has a staffer who's dealing with this government."

 

Dornan said that any Intelligence Committee member like Condit who leads a secret double life is blackmailable and recognized

as a security risk.

 

On Sunday, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle set off a firestorm of speculation when he told NBC's Tim Russert that other

Intelligence Committee members besides Condit may be guilty of blackmailable misconduct.

 

RUSSERT: But (Condit) is vulnerable to blackmail in his current situation.

 

DASCHLE: Well, he may be. But there are probably others that are subject to blackmail as well.....

 

More than 36 hours later, Daschle has neither retracted nor clarified his explosive comment.

[mahak 0]

Haribol, I wish any attempting "housecleaner" the best of luck. It is my first-hand experiance, however, that anyone who gets anywhere close to the criminal activity going on in political or military or intelligence communities (and I aint talking sex scandal, even to the point of offing the victim), will be dealt with by what is known as the "policy of ridicule", a policy that has worked well with anyone investigating such things as 1.) the mass influx of paramilitary weaponry to the bangers of Southcentral LA in the eighties with cheap cocaine, 2.) Rampant espionage within agencies, especially FBI, CIA, 3.) Routine destruction of records of severe failures in our military procurement systems that show blatant treason by highly placed military officers as well as civilians in the SES (Senior Executive Service).

 

Any housecleaning that takes place in these issues if blowing on boils, with the whistleblowers set up and killed or imprisoned, or set up in the most gruesome of crimes.

 

Id like to see honesty and integrity in our system, which always had potential, but all Ill ever see is death on all fronts, and if ya think Im paranoid, then live your life thinking that Ray killed MLKing or that muslims serving Elijah Muhammed killed Malcolm X in an internescene war.

 

Clinton didnt have 50 offed like the right wing whackos would have you believe, this sets one up for the "policy of ridicule (a sub-policy of MKUltra)", but know for sure he signed the death warrant for both Brown and Hillary's friend.

 

Conduit? He nailed her in more ways than one, but he knows nothing about how any of it went down. Hes a do-gooder, he may just be a set up rube for getting too close on other issues.

 

Please read title 50 of the US Code, then get back to me and say they cant do that.

 

later, mahak

 

PS to rX, cant make the show, but if my daughter makes it (shes working on weapons now, at seventeen, chip off the old blockhead, at keyport NUWES), i told her to go introduce herself (tulasi) and maybe she be backstage.

[Guest guest]

<h3>Condit's class act</h3>

 

by Bill O'Reilly

 

Not since the death of John F. Kennedy Jr. has so much TV news time been spent on reporting so little. Dan Rather is right if you just look at the surface of the Gary Condit-Chandra Levy story: Young girl disappears, older lover lies about sex, authorities can't find her. End of story for Dan and many other traditional journalists.

 

But there's far more to this story than that. This is a tale about class, power and apathy. Congressman Condit chose to not help an American family in anguish. When Chandra disappeared on May 1, the Levy family was confused and concerned. They needed every bit of information they could get to at least put things into perspective. Did their daughter take a trip? Or was her disappearance more sinister? It took the Levys days before calling the police – they kept hoping Chandra would show up.

 

Phone records show that Chandra Levy called Gary Condit several times on a secret line shortly before she disappeared. Surely the Levy family has a right to know what those calls were about. But the congressman kept silent, preferring to protect his reputation rather than inform police about the calls Chandra made to him before her strange disappearance. It took the Washington, D.C., cops three interviews before Condit admitted his close relationship with Chandra.

 

If you were related to this missing young woman how would you feel about Condit's actions? Would you justify them as some have done, citing privacy? Would you ignore them as Dan Rather wants to do? Or would you get angry and want the world to condemn the Congressman?

 

If one of the Bush daughters or Chelsea Clinton disappeared and Gary Condit held back information about it do you think Dan Rather would ignore the situation? Do you think Condit's peers in Congress would clam-up about his behavior? You know the answer to those questions. So why are the Levys any different than the Bushes or the Clintons?

 

The answer lies in how the powerful treat working class Americans. The Levys are just an everyday family. Condit knew they had no clout and was not afraid to put his own self-interest above their desperate need. The elite media considers the Levys part of the "masses." Their pain and concerns are not as important as families who have power and influence.

 

This is so wrong it is painful. A congressman has callously and calculatingly abused an American family and some powerful editors don't see it as an important story? If that isn't classism, I don't know what is. Unfortunately, alert Americans are used to seeing this kind of stuff. The power brokers that control much of the media are simply not interested in the little guy or the little family.

 

Let me ask you a series of questions: Could crack houses exist in Georgetown? Would the good citizens of Beverly Hills tolerate a decaying high school? Could the Crips and Bloods roam the streets of Nantucket? You know the answer to those questions as well. The press would be all over those situations.

 

The elite media in this country should be ashamed. It pays lip service to the plight of the working class but never dirties its hands with their actual lives. That would be unsavory and not popular at swank cocktail parties in Manhattan or South Hampton. Why bother emphasizing the Condit story if it's just an ordinary family that's getting hurt? Where's the importance in that?

 

All Americans should be furious with Gary Condit for not helping the Levys. The media and our elected officials should be clamoring for him to resign simply on that basis. But that is not even close to happening.

 

So once again our leaders and the elite media are showing us exactly who they are. Don't let this lesson pass you by. Remember.

 

 

[This message has been edited by rand0M aXiS (edited 07-26-2001).]

[Guest guest]

Front Page Editorial, New York Post

STEVE DUNLEAVY, 7/30/01

 

IF THE Chandra Levy tragedy had happened here, I can promise that law enforcement in New York would have done three things:

 

 

* Grilled Gary Condit like a steak rather than how the D.C. cops treated the probe - like a snack served at four polite chats.

 

 

* Told Abbe Lowell, Condit's lawyer, who has laid down the rules for police questioning of his client, to put a giant sock in his mouth.

 

 

* Had every single record of Condit's ages ago, after a grand jury was impaneled, making the congressman the target of a probe into obstruction of justice and suborning perjury.

 

 

Here we are on Day 91 since Chandra's name has become synonymous with a heart-wrenching mystery, and active cops here, together with retired veterans, were stunned to hear yesterday the words of D.C. Police Chief Charles Ramsey.

 

 

He told Tim Russert on NBC's "Meet the Press" that his cops have not yet thoroughly checked Condit's alibi May 1, the day she disappeared, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., when the congressman said he was working in his office.

 

 

"We have not locked down every minute of his [Condit's ] timeline," Ramsey said.

 

 

He further revealed that they have not yet verified Condit's phone records from his office on that day.

 

 

Day 91? Hello?

 

 

A senior NYPD source said yesterday: "I don't want to be in a position of criticizing another police department, but let it be said the New York City Police Department, in their agenda of investigation, would have put more priorities in the way we went about it, very different priorities."

 

 

On Condit's fourth visit to the police in D.C., as both parties amiably chatted, Lowell had told cops they could not ask his client about dumping a watch box reportedly given to him by a former lover, and they could not ask him anything having to do with allegations of obstructing justice.

 

 

One of the most enduring presences in criminal and trial law for the past 25 years, Barry Slotnick, told me yesterday: "I wish I could have got the same deal for some of my clients in the past, but a lawyer in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles or any other city can't pull that act.

 

 

"Here a grand jury would have been impaneled ages ago, and even if Condit didn't appear or took the Fifth, a grand jury has wide powers of subpoena.

 

 

"All telephone records, all credit-card records, even his laundry records would have been firmly in hand of the police and investigators a long time ago."

 

 

There have even been unconfirmed reports that Condit's wife, Caroline, actually spoke on the telephone to Levy the night before she disappeared, but so far nothing has been scheduled for D.C. cops to interview her again.

 

 

Slotnick added: "You don't need Columbo on this case to do a basic investigation, but something has caused the D.C. cops to act with kid gloves, in a manner that couldn't happen anywhere else in the country.

 

 

"I would assume he has concerns, far beyond relations with his family, that he wants to hide."

 

 

Lanny Davis, special counsel to Bill Clinton during Monicagate, was more blunt yesterday: "It must be that he is hiding something."

 

 

Let the experts in Washington talk about Condit's political future, and let the moralists judge what some would say is an inappropriate affair.

 

 

But let's address the simple question of law and order, which couldn't happen with New York's Finest but on Day 91 of this anguish appears to be going with leaps and staggers under Washington's politest.

[Guest guest]

CHANDRA’S DANGEROUS KNOWLEDGE

 

By Jim Rarey

July 31, 2001

 

This writer has been challenged by several rs to provide more information on which the scenario was based in the Medium Rare article of July 26th (Condit’s Rock and a Hard Place). In that article it was postulated that Chandra Levi may have come into possession of information that made her dangerous to powerful people, not necessarily Gary Condit, that required her “elimination.”

 

Consequently, please bear with us while we “build the case.”

 

It appears obvious that Chandra is (was) a bright inquisitive girl and young woman with a penchant for intrigue.

 

In high school Chandra joined the Explorer Scouts police program where she sometimes worked undercover to catch retailers selling alcohol to minors. She was also a writer for the school newspaper.

 

 

After her 1995 high school graduation she spent four years at San Francisco State University majoring in journalism with a minor in criminal justice. She entered the graduate program at the University of Southern California (USC) working toward, and earning, a masters degree in public administration.

 

The USC program required a number of internships in lieu of a dissertation, which Chandra fulfilled with a vengeance.

 

An in depth article by Washington Times writer Frank J. Murray, entitled “Who is Chandra Levy,” outlines an extensive and curious convergence with the Condit family.

 

From August 1998 to August 1999 she was an editorial assistant in the sports department of the Modesto Bee newspaper, a part of a newspaper chain including the Sacramento Bee which is a left leaning partisan supporter of California Democrats.

 

Overlapping that internship was a stint at the Modesto police department where she worked as a clerk. Condit’s older brother is a Modesto police officer who was demoted in rank stemming from unauthorized purchases and disposal of firearms from the police inventory of confiscated weapons.

 

During the period she was with the police department, Chandra, then 22, had a year-long affair with another police officer Mark Steele, ten years her senior. Steele, in an interview with the Los Angeles Times, said Chandra took it hard when he broke off the relationship and continued to pursue him. Steel is no longer with the department.

 

For three months in 1999, ending in December, Chandra interned in the lobbying office of Republican Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan.

 

From February to June 2000 she interned on the legal staff of Democrat Governor Gray Davis. Two of Gary Condit’s offspring were also on Davis’ staff at that time. Son Chad was the governor’s liaison to the Central Valley at a starting salary of $95,234 a year. Daughter Cadee made $30,000 a year as a Davis press aide. It is not known if Chandra knew or even met Condit’s daughter and son.

 

In October of 2000 Chandra started her intern job at the Bureau of Prisons in Washington, D.C. According to Murray’s article, “Her job at the Bureau of Prisons information office required her to do Internet searches and scan newspapers to prepare daily news summaries, answer telephone calls and mail, and help with special projects. In one, she coordinated media attendance at planning sessions for the execution of Oklahoma bomber Timothy McVeigh.” (Emphasis added.)

 

According to a Washington Post story, Chandra’s duties also included researching Bureau of Prison records.

 

In an earlier article, this writer had speculated that Chandra, during her research, may have come across evidence supporting allegations made on the Internet that Dr. Louis Jolyn (Jolly) West had visited McVeigh in prison a number of times. One such article asserted the number of visits was seventeen.

 

Dr. West (since conveniently deceased) was deeply involved in mind control experiments with ties to the CIA. At one time West had tried to set up a department at UCLA, where he was a professor, involving melting of brain synapses to control the subjects’ minds. These rumors had fostered the belief in some that McVeigh was indeed a “Manchurian Candidate” programmed for the Oklahoma bombing. McVeigh at one time claimed that a microchip had been implanted in him while in the service.

 

It is entirely reasonable to suggest that Chandra may have uncovered such evidence during her search of bureau records. If she let the wrong person, including Condit, know she had that evidence, she may have signed her own death warrant.

 

In the writer’s last article, it was also suggested that the intelligence community might be trying to divert attention from Condit to relieve pressure on him from some damaging disclosure he could make.

 

Supporting that suspicion is one fact of which knowledgable readers will immediately grasp the significance. The FBI’s lead investigator on the Levy case is one Bradley J. Garrett. According to author and investigative reporter Todd Fahey, who specializes in intelligence affairs, Garrett was the FBI’s lead investigator in the murder of intern Mary Caitlan Mahoney at a Georgetown Starbucks coffeeshop as well as the “suicide” of White House Counsel Vince Foster.

 

If there is a diversion or cover-up in progress, this writer does not believe it is to save Gary Condit. It most surely would be to hide a much larger issue with national security implications.

 

 

<center>Permission is granted to reproduce this article in its entirety.</center>

 

The author is a free lance writer based in Romulus, Michigan. He is a former newspaper editor and investigative reporter, a retired customs administrator and accountant, and a student of history and the U.S. Constitution.

 

If you would like to receive Medium Rare articles directly, please contact us at jimrarey@provide.net .

 

Although not necessary, we would appreciate an indication of the city and/or state or country (If outside the USA) in which you are located to give us an idea as to where our articles are being received.