www.justiceforchandra.com

[James Anderson]

Condit repeatedly lied about his whereabouts on the afternoon of May 1, 2001. He lied about the length of his meeting with Dick Cheney. He claimed he went to a doctor, but when pressed he could not provide a name for that doctor. He lied about meeting with a reporter from ABC at a DC resturaunt, a lie that was exposed by the reporter who he claimed to have had the meeting with.

On top of this you have DC detectives, Ralph Durant and Lawrence Kennedy, who were working on the Levy case and saw the crime scene the day Chandra was discovered in the woods. They were certain she was lured in there by her killer, and that she must have known and trusted that person. FBI agent Greg McCrary also stated that someone in her personal life did this to her. All of this, along with many details and facts that I won't go into here, should be enough to erase any doubt you might have about whether Condit was directly responsible for what happened to Chandra Levy that day.

[peripeteia]

Greetings James:

Welcome aboard, and I don't think you'll find any dissenders here against what you've written. Condit has not supplied a reliable alibi. Condit states he was in his office. I've a big problem with this alibi, as the California Energy Crisis Meetings commenced at 1pm. Condit had been with the Preisdent the day before on April 30 and later met with Dick Cheney after lunch for 20 minutes which ended at 1250 thereabouts May 1st, the topic of discussion was the energy crisis in California.

So why then does Condit get a briefing from Cheney and then not go to the meetings, which were in the same building as his office, the Rayburn building. I listened to the entire tapes of the two days and there is little question that Gary Condit was should have attended these meetings.

Why was he not at these meetings is the question????? As agricultural rep. for california, his constituents absolutely would have expected Gary to be at these meetings. So he sits up in his office from 1pm until 5 pm when he allegedly went to a Doctor. He provides no persons as an alibi who spoke to him on the phone or visited his office, and all the members from California are sitting down at the energy meetings. This is not believeable.

Ironically enough Cheney's office first reported Condit as having been there the 30th and not the first. Condit had been at the White House on the 30th, one wonders why Cheney's office made this slip, and the meeting was only for about 15-20 minutes.

My guess is that Condit was not in his office, and I'd be surprized if someone at the energy crisis meetins did not call or visit Condit's office to see if he was coming. Very surprized that someone was not looking for him at this time?

And like you James, I could go on and on.......Gary needs a polygraph administered by the police and then he needs to stand up before the grand jury.
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.

[rd]

James and kate, I have to agree. The simple questions of alibis of close friends, family, and intimates would need to be answered in any investigation, and Chandra's disappearance no different because a Congreeman wa sinvolved, especially when it's a government intern that disappears.

I think one of the most intriguing chapters of Murder on a Horse Trail is located here in Alibi.

It adds some details to what you are saying here. This is a shocking story.

rd

read the online true crime mystery novel
Murder on a Horse Trail: The Disappearance of Chandra Levy
_________________
ralph@ee.net

[benn]

I am wondering if the FBI could not be queried more about their investigation on the Chandra Levy disappearance. The problem seems to be that there is no one to step forward to try to get more information from the FBI about their investigation of the case perhaps through the Freedom of Information Act.

If Condit lied to the FBI while being questioned, then that should be a felony. At least that is what little I know about lying to the FBI. The possibility that Condit lied to the FBI should be enough reason for the FBI to investigate the case more thoroughly.

That brings the case back to the problem I mention in my first paragraph here, that there is no one to step forward in court to challenge Condit, and what he did and what he said concerning the investigation.

If Condit could not be challenged directly then that is where the FBI investigation comes in again. The FBI questioning of gardner pastor Otis Thomas seems to be questionable. Otis did not have an attorney with him. A long time after the questioning, by the FBI, I sent an email to the NAACP in Modesto and told them that Thomas should have been represented by an attorney when he was being questioned. At the very least an attorney would have been a witness as to what questions were asked and what Thomas's answers were. I did not receive a reply to my email, but that can be understood from many points of view.

Did Thomas lie to the FBI, or didn't he lie? The FBI said he lied, but the FBI has not shown up in court anywhere showing evidence that Thomas lied. Surely Thomas was outgunned by the FBI when he was questioned by them. Thomas had been threatened over the telephone, along with his daughter Jennifer. Thomas was receiving a lot of unwanted publicity, publicity that was not doing him any good and that amounted more to being notoriety Thomas told the media that he had lied, but that would have been an easy way out for him, providing the FBI did not prosecute him, which they have not.

The Chandra Levy investigation was certainly a political investigation as well as a missing persons and murder investigation. Although the FBI is supposed to be impartial it is obvious that the FBI might sometimes be swayed by politics, or the politics of the people leading the FBI at a particular time. Whatever possibly injurious evidence that showed up concerning Congressman Condit might also have been injurious to the Republican Party, and to those in the White House also at that particular time.

So we the public do not know if Otis Thomas lied about his daughter dating Congressman Condit. Evidently Thomas first told this story to the Levys shortly before Chandra disappeared. It has not been reported anywhere that I have seen that any of the Levys thought that Thomas had fabricated a story.

Thomas's story, if true, would be a bombshell, perhaps too big for some political figures to withstand, though I do not know all of whom that might include. This is surely a part of the investigation that has been shoveled under the table.

Witnesses not given a chance to testify before the grand jury, witnesses not interrogated thoroughly, the Stanislaus County Sheriff's Department kept out of most of the investigation even though Thomas and his daughter were threatened in that vicinity. That is the story of the Chandra Levy case. Perhaps even some of the records of the civil proceedings initiated by Condit could be forced out into the open by a court. The political emphasis of the case has changed. Maybe one of these days we will see some new news get put into the media about the Chandra Levy Cold case, cold because no one seems to have the clout or the desire to bring more facts out into the open. There seems to be something that says: Don't solve this case, Don't even try.

Antidote: Who has the clout and the desire to keep resisting more investigation of this case? The clout and the desire work both ways, for and against more and better investigation. Good working against Evil. May the Evil receive its due.

benn

[fallout]

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

Hello and a happy Thanksgiving to everybody:

I noticed the message at the beginning of this thread and your inquiry so -
thought I'd respond..

I am not as familiar with Joyce Chiang's connections with law enforcement or intelligence but I do still hold to the theory that Chandra Levy had applied for a position with the FBI, the CIA and the NSA. Because of the background checking process I believe it is possible that one of the agencies became aware of her relationship to Gary Condit and that this information may have been used against Condit.

Is it possible that Condit, a member of the House Intelligence Sub Comm.,might have had some advance notice about 9/11? Was he aware of the work of the Able Danger data mining project and its identification of Mohammed Atta and the other hi-jackers a year before the WTC attacks? Could Condit have said something about this to Chandra?

Or, did Condit, a native of Oklahoma, have some special knowledge about the bombing of the Murrah building and the singling out of Timothy McVeigh as the lone bomber while Chandra was involved in assisting with the press leading up to the execution?

Was Condit a serial pillowtalk blabbermouth and did this get Chandra killed?

That's my theory. I'm just not sure what classified knowledge Chandra gleaned from Condit and which agency or branch of government got nervous enough to kill her.

My sighting of the treeclimber makes me think it was a military operation. For that reason we will have to work harder to find Justice for the girl.

Cheers,
James

[rd]

benn, I agree, many questions to answer about OC Thomas and what Chandra asked Condit about, to be sure. At this point, I will have to say that I have been stunned at the lack of any publically displayed interest in asking those questions. Exposed in Murder on a Horse Trail explains those questions and what they are about.

People tried very hard in the beginning to answer them. Jennifer's note on the door refers to Mrs. Levy knocking on their door and Jennifer not wanting to talk to her. There was more than one meeting with the family where they sought answers, and got them.

Not only them, but the FBI, Washington Post in six interviews, and Modesto Bee carefully asked him background questions. And they got not only answers to additional questions, but details of threats to his family, with him crying at times, and yet not once said anything that could have been shown by dogged political reporters to have been made up.

It culminated with OC apologizing to the Levys in the FBI office, saying he had made it all up. But that only raises more questions.

Yet no one in a position to ask ever mentions it again, including the Levys, who you think would be just slightly miffed that their daughter disappeared when they called her and warned her about what he said. But no, no one says anything.

What are the possibilities? One is that they somehow know he made it all up and know there are no answers to get. I find that one hard to understand.

For example, who is the father of the child? Whoever the father is that wanted the secrecy of his name withheld on the birth certificate may not have been happy about Chandra's family asking Condit about it. Who knows? When you have questions like this, you get answers and see where they lead. But no one seems to be interested in the answers, or they know the answers and aren't interested in talking about it.

With the child being mulatto, we know the father is white. As I explain in Chapter Exposed, OC either didn't know who the father was or thought it was someone other than Condit, which is incomprehensible in itself when one talks of an affair his daughter is having with Condit but then allegedly gets pregnant with another white man because why, someone tells him it was someone else?

And yet, how to explain that he was stunned to find that his daughter was having an affair with an older man (note he didn't say a Congressman, or even an older white man, but just an older man, just a man too old for her. That I find strange as well).

And there is the question of why the child was never mentioned by the Levys or OC in any of the interviews, and only found out by research by the NY Post and confirmed by a neighbor. So was everybody protecting this child from unwanted publicity, or was everyone terrified of what the child implied and therefore terrified of lawsuits from Condit, or did no one but OC even know about a child?

And even if there's no truth to what OC said, how could anyone know the reaction to such lurid rumors about Condit that Chandra was asking him about. Who knows what she told either him or Carolyn in forcing the issue such that Carolyn hopped on a plane to DC, and Chandra disappeared.

Whatever the answer, the one unacceptable reason for the silence is benign neglect. There is nothing benign about this neglect of Chandra's investigation.

rd

[peripeteia]

I believe that Condit is still obligated to appear before the grand jury, and answer the questions. Condit gives the appearance of being above the law. No one should be above the law, including the FBI CIA, and
Americans have no avenue to call law enforcement and governments into question and accountability, nor is there any system of checks to kept members of the congress and senate in check, and the President, except for empeachment. There should be a court of Public Enquiry in every state in the United States, and Chandra's murder is a prime example.

Why had not Condit appeared YET before the grand jury. It is my understanding that the grand jury in Chandra's murder can be reconvined at anytime. Is the District Attorney's office complicit in keeping information from the Grand Jury??????
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.

[blondie]

He did appear, but did not answer questions. I think he was there about 5 minutes from what I remember reading.

[peripeteia]

Blondie, I thought he had a five minute meeting with the District Attorney, and not the grand jury, and that he pleaded the 5th.
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.

[rd]

He pleaded the 5th. Unknown if the DA tried to question him in front of the grand jury to obtain it in front of the grand jury or if he just accepted it without putting him in front of the grand jury as a witness. I think I vaguely recall the DA could handle it either way.

But for sure it was short and sweet, and Condit wasn't about to answer any questions. Never did, never will. Prima facie evidence of guilt, although legal types say that's just par for the course, it's what they advise in fact.

Like I say, prima facie evvidence of guilt. Condit just hopes people think it's guilt of ethical improprieties, not murder.

rd

[benn]

Condit and Clinton. I ask myself sometimes why former President Clinton does not go around in silence not answering questions. Clinton and Condit both had serious legal problems, and if I remember correctly they both had the same lawyer.

Now Clinton talks and Condit does not talk. There must be some reasons why. We can not third degree anyone to make him talk, but still it seems only right to want to know why someone does not answer questions under oath. What is the best flavor today, Gary?

benn

[blondie]

I think he appeared, but I'm not sure. Didn't he have Mark Geragos at that time who went to the grand jury with him?

[rd]

Yep, Geragos says he and Condit were discussing with each other how they were sure Chandra would be found next month, in May.

And she was.

rd

[propria]

There must be some reasons why.


yup, there sure are, benn ...

despite his many failures and foibles, and even in the face of the well established fact that some 67 or so people associated with the clintons ended up dead under 'interesting' circumstances in most cases, bill clinton was not directly connected to anyone's death ... he can afford to talk because he's already out of the white house, which was the only cost he risked paying if he went public with talk of his wrongdoing. condit, on the other hand, has also lost his political power platform, but he still has to keep his mouth shut on the subject of his wrongdoing with his young lover because if he lets the wrong word slip in public even one time he might very well find himself nose to nose with an arrest warrant for the death of chandra levy.


nanci
_________________
the Truth has a name, and there is power in that Name!

[Rainbow]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/690309/posts
The Chandra Levy Chronology/Update #11

We haven't heard anything from the "fixer" woman. Could the letter be from her?

In the National Enquirer, Susie Borges Rossi claimed she had an affair with Condit between 1988 and 1991. She told the Enquirer that Condit had a "fix-it" team on his staff that was prepared to dispose of a dead body, should the need arise. The plan, Rossi said, was readied in case Condit expired during one of his secret trysts. She reportedly said, "If he knows how to get rid of his own body, clearly he knows how to get rid of Chandra's body."
Rossi is quoted as saying, "He gave me a set of instructions to follow," which included a secret number where she could reach the congressman's 'paid operative' - a woman - in case of just such an emergency.

"Don't phone anyone from the hotel room," Rossi said Condit told her. "Leave me where I lay, call a cab and go to a pay phone far away. Then call the woman at the private phone number. She will know what to do with my body before the police or press find out about me."


According to Rossi, the same female staffer had instructions on "which documents in his office to destroy." "I have no doubt that he made Chandra disappear," Rossi told the tabloid.


The FBI interviewed Ms Rossi. A federal grand jury is preparing to hear from the many women Condit was involved with.