JULY 23, 2001
The Condit non-investigation
© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com

Early on in the Gary Condi(r)t soap opera, a savvy political consultant in California suggested to me "the fix is in." He suggested that the fact the Washington, D.C., police are apparently the lead investigative agency might be a method of guaranteeing form over substance. He and others have a low professional regard for the competence of the D.C. police and, frankly, facts in evidence to date suggest there may well be some validity to such a suspicion.

Another political consultant said, "Having the D.C. cops investigate Gary Condit is better than having the U.S. Park Police investigate the Vince Foster death."

In my July 9th column about Condit, I wrote:

Rep. Gary Condit's political career is probably toast. Perception vs. reality, form over substance, fact and fiction -- all chronic clichés and catch phrases and all applicable to the growing controversy over the California congressman and his alleged/ presumed/ implied/ and now admitted relationship with missing government intern, Chandra Levy.
Additionally, I opined, "Condit is in fat trouble. Although his most grievous conduct may only end up being testosterone-induced stupidity, his mishandling and mismanagement of the issue will probably destroy his political career by a thousand small cuts rather than one fatal blow."

A couple of days later, John Fund at the Wall Street Journal made a good counter-argument in his piece, "He's Still Bread." Fund, for whom I have great personal and professional respect, wrote, "Despite what you've heard, Gary Condit isn't toast -- yet." However, affection and respect notwithstanding, John is wrong.

There is a growing list of reasonable, good questions flying through cyberspace that strangely, apparently haven't yet made it to a D.C. police to-do list.

  1. Have the videotapes from the cameras behind Levy's apartment building been secured and reviewed?
  2. Why did it take two and half months to get a search of Condit's apartment (especially since he had lied to police on two occasions)?
  3. If the Levy case really is a "missing person" report -- as we are told ad nauseum on a daily basis -- why the massive manpower drain from homicide detectives to wannabe police recruits still in training? Form over substance?
  4. For a guy allegedly innocent of any wrong doing, he sure has a talent for "acting" guilty of something. Before the cops belatedly searched his apartment, he was seen dumping what turned out to be a watchcase in a dumpster that subsequently proved to be a gift from yet another paramour.
  5. The Abbe Lowell-orchestrated polygraph test is as useless as mammary glands on a bull.
  6. Evidence suggests Condit is at least guilty of:
Condit may or may not have had any involvement in the disappearance of Chandra Levy, but his congressional skirts are certainly not clean.

I haven't yet tried to quantify the size of Condirt's alleged harem. However, Ollie North recently put the known number at 29 -- so far. And that was before Anne Marie Smith opened the closet to the potential of male sexual partners and kinky carryings on.

Is Condit benefiting from the glass-house finesse in which disingenuous, duplicitous colleagues fear throwing the first stone because they are diffident about having another Larry Flynt pop up to investigate those who would presume to articulate righteous indignations about their own sleazy or inappropriate behaviors?

Some folks are calling on the Ethics Committee to take some immediate action to expel him under Article I of the Constitution. Ha! There ain't no way, no how in our lifetime the self serving, deaf, dumb, blind, neutered Ethics Committee is going to do jack-spit. These are the same career pols who specifically changed the rules to preclude anyone outside from even calling for an ethics investigation. You can expect a Bill Clinton-led call for abstinence sooner than this Ethics Committee doing anything significant.

Perhaps I've become too cynical. Hey, even a broken clock can be correct twice a day. If you feel compelled to join the crowd calling for congressional-ethics anything go for it. However, meanwhile, you might also consider something potentially more positive and realistic.

Gary Condit is a national security risk by merit of his intelligence. Regardless of whether he is able to hang around to secure his congressional pension, and whether or not his constituents choose to return him to office so he can continue to abuse his authority to maintain his strange life style, the guy is a risk. Once upon a time government discriminated against homosexuals and philanders (supposedly) because they were subject to being blackmailed or leaking secrets via pillow talk. Those apparently antiquated concerns still have merit.

I encourage everyone to contact the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Porter Goss. Express your concerns about Condit as a national security risk and suggest he be removed from at least that committee seat. You can call (202) 225-2536 or fax (202) 225-6820.

Former federal prosecutor Joe DiGenova claims the D.C. cops should be treating the Chandra Levy case as a murder investigation and the congressman should be suspect. D.C. cops keep reminding us the congressman is not a suspect. Well, hey -- they haven't yet opened a criminal investigation. If or when they do, you damn-betcha Condit will be at least a suspect. The FBI apparently is investigating but they are playing it close to the vest and, unlike the D.C. police, are not holding daily press briefings.

Of the probable Levy scenarios, the suicide option has pretty much been discounted. Therefore, she has either been the victim of foul play or she is hiding somewhere. Regardless of whatever does or does not result with the Levy investigation, Condit is -- or should be -- toast.