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. ed nelson says:

    Jeesus h cchristpher

  2. samadams73 says:

    I’m surprised to see so few comments…please don’t misinterpret this as lack of interest on our part!!!

  3. samadams73 says:

    (Oops, didn’t see “older comments”)

  4. 344thBrother says:


    This is a bit late, but you wrote 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. ”

    I did not know this about the Statute of Limitations! Very good information there. I thought the statute only applied to murder. So, even if Denny boy has spit the big hook for now, there are plenty of people out there with tiny hooks in the water for him. Will he wind up being caught in the end? Probably not, but I’m guessing that the water feels very warm and crowded with bright, shiny, pointy objects for our pedophile friend.

    You also mentioned above that you it was surprising that the Democrats didn’t jump on Hastert and instead remained silent. It doesn’t surprise me, using the fish analogy, there’s an entire school of pedophiles, deviants, abusers, rapists, adulterers, cheats, thieves and other filth in both parties. I’m sure none of them want to invite heat upon themselves by flaming others.

    PS. I think that most of my comments tend to be almost (Mind numbingly) simple. I think this is from my interaction with the rest of the public on a daily basis and in truncated/simplified speech to get a thought across that might resonate. If I am being overly plebeian, please let me know and I’ll dial it back.

    Thank you and God bless us every one.

    • 344thBrother says:

      Continuing with the boring fish analogy… How many of the Public, actually know about things like this and are themselves afraid of bringing (And thus receiving) heat and light to this subject?

      Afraid of losing their jobs, their pensions, their Social Security, their life, their home. Afraid of the gestapo, afraid of surveillance. Afraid of their own sordid history. Afraid of the lies that might be told about them. Afraid to lose their friends or family members over some divisive issue.

      No wonder people like sports. It’s risk free as long as you sit in the right side of the stands and root for the right team.

      This line of thought makes me sad.


  5. – Now I understand why Hastert was able to remain Speaker in Congress for so long. Hastert knew also the weak spots of the Clinton & Bush administration(s) and the judicial system.
    – I still think that Hastert deliberately wanted to have some sort of trial. I think our “Denny Boy” was – more or less – fed up with paying extortion money to one of his “lovers”. The trial and all the publicity exposed the blackmail scheme. And now the blackmail racket has ended for Hastert. No more bleeding (of money) by Hastert.

    • Ribbit-Mark says:

      Will2 says:
      I still think that Hastert deliberately wanted to have some sort of trial. I think our “Denny Boy” was – more or less – fed up with paying extortion money to one of his “lovers”. The trial and all the publicity exposed the blackmail scheme. And now the blackmail racket has ended for Hastert. No more bleeding (of money) by Hastert.

      On the contrary, since details of the blackmail side of the story will not be made public ‘Individual A’ will have free reign to continue blackmailing Hastert.

      Also everyone seems to assume that ‘Individual A’ is a former student from 40+ years ago.

      Who is to say that they are not a victim from Hastert’s days in public office?

    • – I also think the US government WANTED to have some sort of conviction. It wanted to make an example out of Hastert. Hastert was/has been a prominent figure in the US political establishment and therefore punishing Hastert would have made a GOOD example for other persons who also made “structured money withdrawals”. Hastert simply had to be punished “come hell or high water”. But Hastert knew too many “Secrets” and therefore was able to avoid a more severe punishment. That’s why a “Plea deal” was the minimum the DoJ was able to get. But I DO think this plea deal/conviction served a useful purpose: “we are watching you !!!”.

Speak Your Mind