Accusations of Lesbian Tryst Used To Blackmail Representative From Illinois


09/23/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
JanschakowskyAccording to a former FBI interpreter turned whistleblower, Representative Jan Schakowski was targeted by Turkish foreign agents. According to Sibel Edmonds, Rep. Schakowski is bisexual, and the Turks sent a female agent to seduce Rep. Schakowski. According to Ms Edmonds, Rep. Schakowski was added to an investigation regarding a blackmail ring originating out of Turkey. Others who were compromised, according to Ms Edmonds, include Dennis Hastert (R-IL), Bob Livingston (R-LA), Dan Burton (R-IN), Roy Blunt (R-MO), Stephen Solarz (D-NY), and Tom Lantos (D-CA, deceased).

Representative Jan Schakowski represents Illinois’ 9th district, and is married to lobbyist Robert Creamer. In 2004, Creamer was sentenced to five months in jail on charges relating to bank fraud and mishandling of money stemming from his activities as executive director of the Illinois Public Action Fund. According to Ms Edmonds, Rep Schakowski has grown children, though none are listed publicly.

According to Ms Edmonds, Rep. Schakowski is bisexual, and a female Turkish agent set out to seduce her. The foreign agent targeted Rep. Schakowski after the death of the Representative’s mother, and even attended her mother’s funeral. The two were taped in a sexual liaison, and the intent was to blackmail the Representative. According to Ms Edmonds, Schakowski was added to the investigation that was on going into this blackmail ring in 2000.

Representative Schakowski has vehemently denied that this affair took place. Her communications director Trevor Kincaid compared the original article in the American Conservative to the birther conspiracies surrounding President Barack Obama and called it a “hit piece”. The major piece of evidence against the allegations stems from the fact that Representative Schakowski’s mother passed away in 1987 and not in 2000 when she was supposedly seduced by this Turkish spy. In fact, a quick review of the newspapers in the years between 1999 and 2004 produced no article concerning the death of Ms Schakowski’s mother, and the death of the parent of a Congresswoman would have been in the news in some form.

Also, according to Ms Edmonds, the affairs took place at Rep. Schakowski’s townhouse, which never existed.

Ms Edmonds stated emphatically that she is more than willing to take a polygraph test to show the veracity of her own statements if Rep. Schakowski is willing to do so as well. Polygraphs are, according to the National Academy of Sciences, only just better than chance at getting anything accurate. They are too easily fooled. While they can be used as an interrogative tool, they are not considered accurate enough to be admitted into evidence in more than a narrow window. In other words, the challenge to have a polygraph test is rather worthless.

In the interview conducted by Phil Giraldi, Ms Edmonds was incredibly specific that the townhouse belonged to Representative Schakowski and that the affair began shortly after her mother’s funeral. However, in her reply to Rep. Schakowski’s denial, Ms Edmonds softened the language a great deal to make them far from specific. Kincaid believes that the fact that so many of the facts that were presented by Ms Edmonds were so quickly and easily destroyed through basic, public records discredits the rest of the allegations.

Bradblog Original Story
Bradblog Rebuttal Story
American Conservative Interview

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


Related Posts with Thumbnails

18 Comments

  1. This is like some “The Spy Who Touched Me” racy dime store lesbian novel. And in my own political backyard. Must. Investigate. Further.

  2. With regard to the NAS review that you mentioned, they actually stated that a single issue polygraph test (the type of test which would be appropriate for these two women), is closer to 86% accurate. Even that is an underestimate. Many studies which have been published in prestigious, peer-review journals report accuracy rates as high as 96%.

    • Sei

      Unfortunately, unless it is 100% accurate, then the use of it even for this show would be worthless. Ms Edmonds’ assertions are thrown into doubt simply because of the fact that she has now changed what she states that she said in going from the specific to the general.

  3. Sei

    Dr. Rovner, on that, we agree. This is one of those cases where the ‘challenge’ to have dueling polygraphs is intended to make the Representative look bad and level accusations of how she is ‘hiding something’. It is intended to hide the fact that she got caught using misinformation.

    The point I was trying to make by including that information in the article was simple. I really do want to disabuse people of the notion that having someone come in to take a polygraph is going to be the ‘eureka’ moment in an investigation, and that they are not totally, perfectly accurate the way that many people believe that they are.

  4. Not to belabor a point, but sometimes a polygraph test is the turning point in an investigation (see the latest post on my blog, PolygraphReality.wordpress.com

  5. Sei

    Dr. Rovner,

    As part of an entire investigation, they can be vital to uncovering the truth. Your points are entirely valid, and help to elaborate something that, in the article, I did not have, what I felt, was adequate space to elaborate on fully. I thank you for the link to your site as well.

  6. Your welcome. If you ever have any questions about polygraph and its application or scientific research, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Trackbacks and Pingbacks

Leave a Reply