|
JOHN MCCAIN,
WARTS AND ALL A Look At The Candidate's Mob Ties
By Edward Zehr
As reports
filtered in from the precincts in Delaware on Tuesday night it
quickly became apparent that George W. Bush had buried the
mainstream media's candidate, John McCain, in a two-to-one
landslide. The final count was Bush: 51 percent, McCain: 24 percent,
Forbes: 21 percent and Keyes: 4 percent. (Don't bother looking for
the results in your local newspaper or on network TV -- the
mainstream media are treating them as "Most Secret," for their eyes
only, not to be disseminated to the proles under any circumstances).
Even McCain's 18-point margin in New Hampshire was dwarfed by Bush's
massive 27-point win. Doesn't count, huffed the media. McCain didn't
campaign in Delaware. Which of course leads in to the question that
the media did not have to answer because they saw to it that it
didn't get asked: why didn't McCain campaign in Delaware? The answer
should be quite apparent to anyone who is familiar with such things.
In Delaware the Republican primary is restricted to Republicans.
Democrats masquerading as Republicans are not allowed to pick the
GOP candidate as they are in states such as New Hampshire and South
Carolina. California will be an interesting test case. At present
the law states that "independents" may vote in the GOP primary, but
only the Republican votes would count in selecting delegates for the
GOP national convention. This has spurred a number of left-wing
zealots in the Bay Area to queue-up in order to switch their
registration to Republican at the last minute. (They've been at
loose ends since the collapse of Communism). But help may be on the
way. There is a move underway in the Democrat-controlled state
legislature to allow the Democr...er, "independents" to select the
delegates to the GOP convention. Some may call it "democracy." I
prefer to call it by its rightful name: vote fraud.
Stung by the double digit drubbing he received in New Hampshire at
the hands of Democrats voting in the Republican primary for Senator
John McCain under the guise of "independents," Texas Gov. George W.
Bush hit back hard last week. McCain, says George Dubya, is a big
hypocrite for taking contributions from the fat cats even as he
denounces the practice as corrupt. McCain responded with a smirk
(that went unnoted by the press) that Bush is displaying "a little
sign of desperation." No doubt the senator is correct, but how does
that answer the charge of hypocrisy? Even CBSNEWS.com was unwilling
to give McCain a pass on that one. They noted that his rejoinder
"may be true. But it's not a substantive response." Of course, CBS
wound up concluding that McCain's decision to say one thing and do
another was completely justified on purely pragmatic grounds. What
else is one to expect of boomer brats raised on situation "ethics"
and "moral" relativism?
The WOW! (Gee) response of the mainstream media puppeteers to
McCain's big win was nowhere more obvious than at the New York Times
which gushed on and on about the fact that three weekly "news"
magazines had placed the senator's mug shot on their covers, as
though this were some sort of spontaneous natural phenomena and not
part of a well-oiled propaganda campaign to pick the weakest
Republican candidate and then bushwack him in the general election.
The last time they (partially) succeeded in this strategy was 1952,
when Eisenhower, an outsider, beat Sen. Robert Taft (known at the
time as "Mr. Republican") for the GOP nomination, with the help of a
media propaganda blizzard. As soon as Ike was nominated the media,
which only a few weeks previously had been singing in unison his
fulsome praise, turned on him with a vengeance. Ike, after all, was
just a big dumb military doofus who didn't understand diddley squat
about running a nation, they implied. Some insolent punk kid
reporter put a question to the candidate, concluding with words to
the effect that, of course, he couldn't be expected to understand
the intricacies of politics. Ike fixed him with a look of utter
incredulity (the best expression in his repertoire) and asked, using
a tone of voice much favored by drill instructors, "How the [bleepity-bleep]
do you think I got to be a five-star general?"
Those who cleared the American educational system prior to the Great
Dumbing-Down will recall that Eisenhower cleaned the clock of
Democratic candidate Adlai Stevenson that year, carrying with him
both houses of Congress. However, there is reason to doubt that
history will repeat itself with McCain in the starring role this
time. For one thing, the only argument the media were able to raise
against Ike is that he wasn't very smart (i.e. didn't agree with
them). This is a hard sell against a man who had only a few years
previously led a rather large American army to
victory in Europe. The case against McCain will be a good deal
easier to make, as I will demonstrate. Since all of this is going to
be known before November, it would be better to consider its impact
now than to walk blindly into the trap being set for us by the
left-liberal propagandists of the mainstream press.
THE DEATH OF THE MYTH OF THE HERO
Ted Sampley is a former Green Beret and a veteran of the Vietnam
War. He has long been a political activist who, according to the
Wilmington, NC, Morning Star, "has never shrunk from a fight, even
when his allies were few and his enemies numerous..." He once even
received an accolade for his reporting in the "Darts & Laurels"
column of the Columbia Journalism Review, a remarkable achievement
in view of his political orientation relative to theirs. Sampley,
who maintains the U.S. Veteran Dispatch Web site, broke the story
that the "unknown soldier" from the Vietnam War was quite well known
to Army authorities and had been for years. The Army was obliged,
with much embarrassment, to hand over the remains to the dead
soldier's family, who had not been properly notified until Sampley
blew the whistle. More recently Sampley has been exposing Sen. John
McCain's intemperate, and at times vicious, attacks upon his fellow
former POWs whose only "offense" would seem to be that they have
tried to assist the families of American POWs who have been
callously abandoned by their government to years of hellish torment.
McCain has repeatedly slandered authentic war heroes such as "Red"
McDaniels, whose boots he isn't fit to shine, and even had the
Justice Department investigate organizations whose sole purpose was
to get an accounting of the fate of family members, with a view to
bringing criminal action against them. According to Sampley "He
accused the activists of fraud because in some of their fund-raising
literature they claimed that the U.S. government knowingly left U.S.
POWs behind after the Vietnam War and that some remain alive today."
The JD could find no grounds for such action, indeed they would have
stirred up a hornet's nest had they brought indictments, because all
indications are that the government did, in fact, knowingly leave
POWs behind. Why then has Sen. McCain been so vindictive in going
after these groups? What possible political benefit could he hope to
gain thereby? Perhaps more to the point, why has he been so diligent
in playing Little Sir Echo to the government of Vietnam by seconding
every demand on their wish list? And if, as he recounted in his
book, "Faith of My Fathers," his captors had strung him up by his
fractured arms, causing him hours of excruciating agony, why did he
hasten to embrace the Grand Inquisitor, Col. Bui Tin, on the
occasion of the latter's visit to Washington to testify before a
Senate committee? Surely he must have been aware that Bui Tin was
responsible for the torments suffered not only by himself, but by
his fellow prisoners at the "Hanoi Hilton." It is difficult to
believe that the senator's great show of affection for his former
tormentor was entirely genuine. Could he have been influenced by the
knowledge that Col. Bui Tin was in a position to turn his
interrogation records over to the committee, and had already
discussed the possibility of doing just that? To characterize this
man as a "war hero" seems an exaggeration, to say the least. If one
examines the record it is clear that McCain had little control over
the things that happened to him. Was he tortured? Yes, but so was
everyone else at the Hanoi Hilton. It wasn't run like an airline --
that is, newcomers were not shown a chart of the accommodations and
asked, "Which do you prefer, tortured or non-tortured?" Getting
batted around by the staff was a regular part of the room service at
the Hanoi Hilton. McCain implies in his book that he was singled out
for "special attention" because his father was an important Navy
admiral. Yet foreign press accounts published at the time indicate
that it was McCain himself who called the attention of his captors
to his father's important position.
One vet observed sardonically, "He [McCain] used his celebrity, his
father was Adm. McCain, to gain special treatment for injuries
received. Although everyone has a breaking point his was amazingly
low! He has referred to POW/MIA families as "whiners and vultures,
and lunatic fringe."
And that would appear to be the sticking point with many former
POWs; why has McCain been so disrespectful, not to say abusive, to
the families of POW/MIAs? They come to Washington in desperation,
seeking help to locate their loved ones only to be subjected to a
torrent of abuse by the terrible-tempered senator, who then goes so
far as to sick the Justice Department on them. This sort of behavior
by an elected official requires some explanation, but none has been
forthcoming. (Needless to say, McCain's bootlicking toadies in the
mainstream press would never dream of asking him such awkward
questions). Instead we are offered boilerplate endorsements by
pro-McCain veterans who, for all their impressive decorations, seem
a bit shell-shocked by it all.
J. Thomas Burch Jr., chairman of the National Vietnam and Gulf War
Veterans Committee in supporting George W. Bush had attacked John
McCain's record on veteran's affairs, alleging that the senator had
neglected legislation dealing with Agent Orange and Gulf War
Syndrome and had done virtually nothing to assist families of
POW/MIAs still missing in Vietnam. That is putting it almost too
charitably -- in pushing for an investigation of "malfeasance" by
MIA activists, McCain said, "The people who have done these things
are not zealots in a good cause. They are the most craven, most
cynical and most despicable human beings to ever run a scam." Yet,
when Mr. Burch suggests that the senator was not as supportive as he
might have been, the whole kneejerk- liberal, mainstream media
propaganda apparat goes into high dudgeon. Mr. Burch would seem to
have touched a nerve. Ignoring the senator's scurrilous and
unfounded allegations against the families of POW/MIAs, the McCain
campaign issued the following announcement regarding charges leveled
at their brave lad:
"Distinguished POWs and Medal of Honor recipients have publicly
repudiated these offensive, shameful statements. Perhaps the most
absurd statements came from a veteran named Tom Burch, who, while
appearing with Governor Bush, said, McCain came home (from 5 years
as a POW in Vietnam) and forgot us (veterans)."
Speaking of offensive, shameful statements, I wonder how McCain's
flacks would characterize his statement that Navy Capt. Eugene "Red"
McDaniel (Ret.) is "a fraud and a dishonorable man who preys upon
the families of those still unaccounted for in the war." McDaniel,
who has been characterized by journalist Monika Jensen-Stevenson as
"one of the most tortured Americans in the history of war" (and who,
in contrast to Sen. McCain, did not break), had committed the
unpardonable offense in McCain's eyes of drafting a letter, signed
by fifty of his fellow POWs, urging that our government not lift the
embargo on Vietnam until they provided a full accounting of all
American POW/MIAs. The McCain campaign document featured statements
by Congressional Medal of Honor recipient and Vietnam POW, Colonel
Bud Day, U.S. Air Force (Ret.) and Lieutenant Colonel Orson Swindle,
U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.), also a Vietnam POW, who lauded McCain "for
his service to our nation and to the welfare of our veterans." Don't
get me wrong, the country owes a debt of gratitude to anyone who
wears the Congressional Medal of Honor and to those who underwent
the extreme rigors of captivity in Vietnam. While their statements
are chock-a-bloc with fulsome praise of the senator and run through
the usual laundry list of goodies that most any politician would
offer veterans: "reforming the military health care system;
improving veterans health care, and eliminating federal income taxes
for military service members who are deployed or stationed
overseas," etc., McCain's defenders are a little short on specifics
as to why the senator invariably seemed to place the interests of
Vietnam above those of American POW/MIAs. For example when the
Missing Service Personnel Act of 1996 came up on the Senate Floor
for debate, Senator McCain characterized this legislation as
"un-necessary" and "burdensome." Nevertheless, this "unnecessary and
burdensome" legislation was backed by the man who wore a POW
bracelet for McCain throughout the years of his captivity,
then-majority leader Bob Dole.
The McCain campaign statement cites the senator's support for
"legislation requiring disclosure of classified POW/MIA information
and improving accounting methods, McCain has devoted considerable
time and energy to seeking the fullest possible accounting of our
POW/MIAs..."
Promises, promises. How is it then that a full accounting has never
been made? (In order to understand that we must read the fine
print).
... and to providing that all information concerning their fate be
subjected to full public scrutiny, so long as the declassification
of this information does not violate the privacy of POW/MIA family
members or compromise U.S. intelligence sources and methods.
Unh-hunh. Notice how the real kicker, the "compromising" of U.S.
intelligence has been mixed in with "the privacy of POW/MIA family
members" in order to muddy the issue. "National security" has been
the last refuge all along of the scoundrels responsible for covering
up the unspeakably shameful abandonment of American POWs held
captive in Vietnam. And John McCain, for reasons he seems reluctant
to explain, has played right along with their dirty game. It is time
for the senator to stop hiding behind recipients of the
Congressional Medal of Honor and answer direct questions on this
issue put to him on behalf of the REAL heroes he has slandered.
People such as Maj. Mark Smith, former Green Beret and POW, and
Capt. "Red" McDaniel. Advocates of the POW/MIA families whom the
senator has viciously slandered have made the serious allegation
that he has attempted to impede their every effort to get a full
accounting. It is disheartening to see people of the caliber of
Orson Swindle and Bud Day used in a political charade by a
politician who is unwilling to confront his accusers face to face.
It is less surprising that five senators who served in the military
during the Vietnam era would come to McCain's defense. The fact that
four of them are Democrats is further confirmation that McCain is
the Democrat's favorite Republican candidate. You can draw your own
conclusions about their motives, which seem obvious enough to me.
The point of all this is that the smiling image of the senatorshown
to us by the mainstream media is not the real man. So whois the real
John McCain?
ALL IN THE FAMILY
McCain dumped his first wife after she had been disabled in an auto
accident. Although this woman had worked tirelessly to get him
released from captivity, he did not hesitate to betray her with
other women upon finding her crippled when he returned home. In
fact, McCain has racked up quite a reputation as a womanizer. This
time he was determined to do it right. Since he had no fortune of
his own, he acquired one through his second marriage. Sampley writes
that the senator's net worth is "possibly as much as $1.2 million or
more, excluding personal residences . . . McCain listed his [second]
wife, Cindy, as the source of most of his assets. . ." According to
the Phoenix Gazette of May 19, 1987, "the bulk of McCain's assets
consisted of stock in the Glendale firms -- Hensley & Co., a beer
distributorship headed by his father-in-law; Western Leasing Co.,
which leases trucks and equipment; and Eagle Enterprises, which
invests in real estate and stock."
In fact, the senator married the daughter of one of the richest men
in Arizona. It seems that McCain got more than just a wife in the
bargain, he married into a family that already had quite a
reputation in that state. Since family ties are always somewhat
convoluted and difficult to track, I have prepared a chart to assist
the reader in following the narrative.
JOHN McCAIN
FAMILY PORTRAIT
Kemper Marley, Sr.---------------+
land & liquor baron |
| |
| |
| |
+----------+-----James Hensley |
| | Eugene Hensley ----------+ |
| | (managers for Marley) | |
|daughter | | |
| +-->Rich Scheffel 5 yrs. in<--+ |
| lobbyist for prison for |
Cindy Hensley----+ Anh.-Busch skimming |
| | | scam |
|wife | |$ |
| | | |
+----JOHN McCAIN | politicians |
| /| | | |
| | favors | Max Dunlap<--???--+
| contrib. | | |
| | | | |contract?
| | / | |
| +--Charles Keating | John Adamson
| | | | Jimmy Robison
| | shopping ctr.<--+investment |
| | | |murder
| +-------+ | |
| | | Don Bolles
+---->free trips<----+ Arizona Republic
| reporter
| who
| wrote about Marley
Stole drugs from<---+ causing him to resign American Voluntary
appointment to Ariz.
Medical Team to Racing Commission
feed her drug habit.
The situation in
Arizona was, for a long time, reminiscent of that line in "Memphis
Blues" that goes, "Mistah Ed Crump, he runs this town." Only "The
Man" in Arizona was named Kemper Marley, beer baron extraordinaire,
player with real estate and other lucrative ventures too numerous to
mention. At the time of his death in 1990, Marley was said to own "5
square miles of Carefree -- the highest priced real estate in
Arizona," according to left-wing columnist Brian Downing Quig. Sort
of like having hotels on Boardwalk AND Park Place, in addition to a
monopoly on booze -- but of course that's the name of the game.
Right after the Second World War Kemper Marley had a monopoly on
liquor distribution in Arizona, which is every bit as good as having
a license to steal. In 1948 his company, United Liquor, ran afoul of
federal liquor laws -- fifty-two of his employees went to jail,
including Jim Hensley who is presently the father- in-law of Senator
John McCain. Some say that Hensley took a fall for Marley. Hensley
was general manager of Marley's firm at the time. Be that as it may,
when Hensley re-emerged from the slam, Marley rewarded him with a
Budweiser distributorship which is now said to be worth $200
million, even though Hensley was prohibited from working in the
liquor industry for the remainder of his days. And who stands to
inherit this? John McCain and his devoted spouse, who else?
But Marley was more than just an entrepreneur. Quig writes that for
forty years "Marley bankrolled Harry Rosenzweig who doled out
Marley's great wealth to a slate of Republican candidates who were
almost universally successful in obtaining high political office."
But that isn't all -- it seems that "Marley was able to control the
Democratic party as well. Every congressman and every senator in
Arizona currently owes his position to the Marley machine." So you
see, it's sort of like W.C. Handy said: "Mistah Ed Crump, he runs
this town." Crump controlled the Tennessee Democratic Party from his
stronghold in Memphis, and ran the state's Republican Party as a
sort of sideline, using a venerable old gentleman named Perry Howard
as his front man. (In those days the Republicans were the "colored
man's party" in Tennessee). But that was years ago. Unfortunately,
we seem to have made little progress in the interim.
Anyway, is the plot beginning to make sense? Can you see the broad
outlines of John McCain's strategy taking shape here? Do we really
need a diagram to understand how he got his start in politics?
Clearly he has had his eye on the prize for some time now, and is
completely unsentimental as to how he attains it. Oh, say the
senator's partisans, his former wife remains completely loyal to
him. Yeah. I'll leave that part of the scenario to the reader's
imagination.
Richard Scheffel, a lobbyist for Anheuser-Busch, is said to have
boasted that Sen. McCain's father-in-law used him as a conduit to
funnel money to politicians. Sampley quotes an Arizona newspaper as
saying that, "Cars, homes and bank accounts of 18 people, including
eight state legislators, were confiscated in a civil racketeering
lawsuit that paints a portrait of lawmakers eager to sell their
influence for as little as $660 and as much as $750,000." Although
Scheffel was not targeted in the civil suit, he is said to have been
paid $20,000 to approach legislators who showed an interest in
selling their votes for hard cash, as part of an apparent sting
operation, according to the Phoenix Gazette of February 6, 1991. The
same newspaper identified Jim Hensley as "a financial godfather to
hosts of lobbyists" in a story that appeared on March 16 the same
year.
It would seem that Sen. McCain has not always been such an ardent
advocate of campaign finance "reform." A Phoenix Gazette editorial
published on December 8, 1987 asked:
"So why has Sen. McCain, R-Ariz., gone to unprecedented lengths to
block reform of the Senate campaign finance system? Why does he
oppose letting this important matter even come to a vote? Perhaps
it's because he is a prime beneficiary of the special interest
funding of congressional elections. McCain raised over $2.5 million
for his 1986 election . . . more than $760,000 of his campaign funds
came from political action committee (PACs) . . . especially
disturbing are the contributions to McCain's campaign coffers from
PACs outside of Arizona."
Ah, but that was then. As soon as the opportunity opened up for him
to curry favor with the mainstream media by backing the "reform"
measure he had so steadfastly opposed all along, the scales fell
from his eyes -- McCain saddled up and went galloping down the road
to Damascus (as H.L. Mencken used to say of such miraculous
political conversions, an allusion to St. Paul). Let's face it
folks, that boy done SEEN the light.
Why did Sen. McCain help Mr. Charles Keating fight off those federal
regulators who had become so inquisitive about the way he had been
running Lincoln Savings and Loan? What's this -- a twinge of deja
vu? (Here's to you, Jim McDougal, wherever you are). The Arizona
Republic reported on October 8, 1989, that "John McCain contends
there was no conflict in his helping Keating battle federal
regulators." And yet, in the same article we are told, "Documents
show that Sen. John McCain's wife, Cindy, and father-in-law, James
W. Hensley are the largest investors in Fountain Square Shopping
Center. Their partnership is managed by subsidiaries of American
Continental Corp., run by Charles H. Keating, Jr."
That's not a conflict of interest? The senator's wife and
father-in-law, the source of all his wealth, are the biggest
investors in a business enterprise run by the man he is helping to
keep federal investigators at bay, but the senator sees no conflict
here? The newspaper reported that "when an Arizona Republic reporter
asked him about business ties between his wife, Cindy McCain, and
Keating," the senator snarled, "That's the spouse's involvement, you
idiot." Gosh, I'm sure glad he cleared that up. Wouldn't do to have
anyone think there's something shady going on.
But, of course the mainstream press just can't under-STAND why
Arizona newspapers keep saying all those mean, hurting things about
their fair-haired boy. "You do understand English, don't you?"
McCain explained in the same conversation. The Republic article
continued, "Not content with just bullying reporters, McCain tried
belittling them: 'It's up to you to find that out, kids.' . . .
McCain wasn't talking to liars. He wasn't talking to juveniles. The
senator was talking to two reporters." Isn't that what the
mainstream newsies have been saying about the senator of late -- he
knows how to talk to reporters? Got that, George Dubya? They like it
when you treat 'em rough. But investments were not the whole story.
The Arizona Republic reported on October 8, 1989 that:
"Sen. John McCain had more than a constituent relationship with
Charles H. Keating, Jr. prior to 1987 . . . the McCains -- sometimes
with their daughter and baby sitter -- made at least nine trips at
Keating's expense from August 1984 to August 1986 aboard either
Keating's American Continental Corporation's jet or chartered planes
and helicopters owned by Resorts International. Three of the trips
were for vacations at Keating's luxurious retreat in the Bahamas."
But shucks all get-out -- dudn' mean a thing. The senator would do
as much for anyone. Why he's just as helpful as can be -- unless you
happen to be the relative of a POW/MIA. The Arizona Republic
reported on August 24, 1994, that Sen. McCain's wife, Cindy, had
admitted in a series of interviews with the media that she had been
"addicted to the painkillers Percocet and Vicodin" from 1989 to 1992
and admitted to stealing the drugs from the American Voluntary
Medical Team. She had used her position as president of this
charitable organization to continue her habit of taking 15 to 20
pills a day. The normal dosage for a seriously ill patient would be
6 to 10 pills per day, and only for a short period of time. On the
following day, the same newspaper carried an article that revealed
one of the former employees of the medical team had "accused her of
demanding that he commit perjury in adoption proceedings for her
daughter, Bridget."
What were the consequences of all this? Apparently nothing much.
Rank has its privileges and privilege has its perks, as John McCain,
the admiral's son, well knows. The mainstream media who were so
outraged at the thought that George W. might have snorted coke 27
years ago (he gets away with it while ordinary people go to jail)
have been strangely silent about this episode.
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FAMILY
But what role does Kemper Marley play in John McCain's extended
family? I think that we could reasonably assign him the role of
"godfather." It is difficult to believe that McCain would ever have
made it to Congress without Marley's approval. Apparently nobody
from Arizona made it to Congress without his approval -- and that
includes Barry Goldwater. Do you begin to see why these smelly
situations never get exposed? Back in the days when I was walking a
precinct for Goldwater -- some time back before the Flood -- an
acquaintance, who happened to be a Democrat, told me that my
candidate had been seen from time to time in the company of "Jewish
gangsters." I dismissed this out of hand. Not only was the guy nuts,
he was clearly an anti-Semite. The following quote regarding a crook
named Gus Greenbaum is from Brian Quig:
"Greenbaum was a Phoenix socialite seen at all the society balls in
Phoenix, usually in the company of the Barry Goldwaters and Harry
Rosenzweigs. In 1958 Greenbaum and his wife were found dead in their
bed -- their throats cut. This inaugurated a series of grisly
gangland-style slayings." Yes, I know that Quig is a left-wing
ding-a-ling, but that doesn't make his information wrong, does it?
Would that it did. (Actually, Goldwater's acquaintance with
Greenbaum is well established). John McCain, like a lot of others,
made his Faustian bargain in order to have a career in politics. It
wasn't the first he had made, nor was it his last. If we continue to
put such people at the head of our government, in time the entire
country will become as rotten as Arkansas and Arizona already are.
On second thought, a country that would abandon its sons to endless
torment in Communist captivity as this country has done under the
tutelage of the bureaucracy and the mainstream press, is pretty far
gone already.
Kemper Marley, the Arizona godfather, certainly didn't lack for
connections. In 1948, when so many of his employees were sent to
prison, Marley had a slick mouthpiece who kept him in the clear. The
lawyer's name is William Rehnquist, who is presently the Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court. Mind you, I'm not suggesting that
there is anything shady about lawyers keeping their clients out of
prison -- that, after all, is their job, even if the clients are
guilty. The point is that Marley was very well connected with the
power elite.
Marley was often seen on the periphery of scandalous or illegal
activity, but was never directly implicated in any of it, although
strong suspicions persist even to the present day, particularly with
regard to the murder of an Arizona Republic reporter named Don
Bolles. According to Michael Wendland, who belonged to a group of
journalists known as the "Investigative Reporters and Editors" that
set up shop in Arizona to investigate the slaying, the group
concluded that Marley was behind the killing of the Don Bolles.
It seems that Marley had arranged his own appointment to the state's
racing commission by then-Gov. Gov. Raul Castro when Bolles began
writing a series of articles about him detailing his checkered past.
Bolles' expose forced Marley to resign from the commission. One of
the revelations involved Eugene Hensley, the brother of McCain's
father-in-law, who had done five years in a federal prison for
skimming profits from a business venture. This is a well-known
tactic used by organized crime figures. Bolles also mentioned that
the Hensleys had sold their dog track to an individual connected
with Emprise Corp., a mobbed-up dog track interest. Sen. McCain has
been seen in the company of the principals of Emprise, according to
Sampley. Quig notes that Bolles' motives in writing the articles may
not have been entirely pure -- he appeared to have been living
beyond his means and had been dealing with certain underworld
figures. When he testified before the House Organized Crime
Committee, Bolles had asked for and was given immunity.
Bolles was killed when a bomb was detonated beneath his car. He
lived long enough to gasp, "They finally got me. The Mafia. Emprise.
Find John (Harvey) Adamson." The police arrested Mr. Adamson who
admitted placing the bomb, but maintained that it had been detonated
by Jimmy (The Plumber) Robison. (It seems that Robison actually was
a plumber who only did such odd jobs as a sideline). Tom Fitzpatrick
of the Phoenix New Times wrote in an article dated February 10,
1993, that Phoenix police believed Marley wanted revenge against
Bolles and sought the help of a local contractor named Max Dunlap
who owed him a favor. Marley had once loaned Dunlap a million
dollars and later told him that he needn't bother paying it back.
All of which brings to mind that line mumbled by Marlon Brando in
his portrayal of The Godfather, "Sometime, maybe nevah, I ask for a
favah in retoin." The state prosecuted Dunlap for allegedly hiring
Adamson to carry out the murder of Bolles, and Adamson, in turn, is
alleged to have hired Robison to assist him. All three were
convicted and sent to death row. Robison was subsequently acquitted
in a retrial which he was granted on appeal. Dunlap remains in
prison. Both he and Robison maintain that they are innocent. Marley
was never arrested. He died in 1990. According to Quig, the Phoenix
police prepared a profile of Marley about a week after the murder of
Bolles. It showed that at one time Marley had been directly
connected with the Capone mob operating the Transamerica Wire
Service, used by bookies throughout the country. It was established
for Capone's successors in 1941 by Gus Greenbaum. Another member of
the "Arizona Project" as the journalist's task force was known, a
reporter named Don Devereux, thinks they may have been taken in by
local authorities. "We accepted very uncritically their scenario. In
retrospect, we were very naive to get led around," he said later.
"It really isn't something that we should be running around
congratulating ourselves about," After most of the reporters had
departed, Devereux stayed on and continued to dig into the Bolles
case as a reporter for the Scottsdale (Ariz.) Progress. It was
largely on the basis of his reporting that Dunlap and Robison were
granted new trials. Robison was acquitted and Dunlap was convicted
again. Just to illustrate how the political fix works in Arizona,
Democratic Sen. Dennis DeConcini was in big trouble when he came up
for re-election in 1990. He had been caught creaming $5 million in
an Arizona land deal on the basis of his inside information as a
senator. The Arizona machine which controlled both parties in the
state did not want to lose DeConcini's seniority, so they talked the
Republicans into putting up their weakest candidate -- sort of like
the corrupt political machine that seeks to run this country is
attempting to do right now with John McCain's candidacy. Their
choice to run against DeConcini was a hapless individual named Keith
DeGreen who was such a red- hot Republican he hadn't even bothered
to vote in the previous two elections.
But surely all of this amounts to guilt by association. You bet it
does -- with a vengeance. A man who aspires to be President of the
United States has no business consorting with known criminals. But
how can John McCain avoid this? He married into the family. Does
that help to put the following news clip from the January 17, 1995,
Arizona Republic into perspective? "About 300 guests turned out
Saturday night to celebrate the 90th birthday of Joseph 'Joe
Bananas' Bonanno, retired boss of New York's Bonanno crime family.
He retired to Tucson in 1968. . . John McCain, R-Ariz., and Gov.
Fife Symington sent their regards by telegram."
Fife Symington was too crooked even for Arizona -- he was forced to
resign as governor of the state after being convicted on six counts
of fraud in connection with his corrupt real estate dealings. He was
subsequently sentenced to two and one-half years in prison.
Symington and McCain had been thick as thieves (so to speak) for
years prior to the governor's little run-in with the law. They even
shared attorneys and political consultants. John McCain has never
been known to play on a level field, he always has to have a leg-up.
As a junior officer in the Navy he avoided being washed out of
flight school despite his dearth of ability because his father was a
high-ranking admiral. As soon as he saw his opportunity to score big
in political and financial circles in Arizona, he dumped the
disabled wife who had worked so tirelessly for him while he was a
POW and married into the crime-family that ran the state at that
time. He played off his father's position while he was a POW in
order to get special treatment.
When the "mainstream" (left-wing) media came knocking at his door
with a proposition to support him in the presidential primaries in
return for his backing of campaign finance "reform," McCain jumped
at the opportunity. Never mind that this legislation would deprive
his own party of the capability to be heard in future political
campaigns and give the leftist media a monopoly on political
discourse in the country, thereby undermining the democratic
process.
Such treachery comes naturally to McCain -- selling out and stabbing
his former friends in the back is his preferred tactic. Ask the
families of the POW/MIAs who enthusiastically backed McCain when he
first ran for Congress only to be dry-gulched by him when he no
longer found them useful. As a gratuitous sadistic flourish, McCain
even had them investigated by the Justice Department on trumped-up
charges. The fact that they were exonerated on all counts has yet to
make an impression on McCain's airhead supporters who continue to
trumpet the phony charges in deceitful neo-McCarthyite fashion. John
McCain is an abysmal mediocrity who would never have made it on a
level playing field. He was fifth from the bottom of his class at
the Naval Academy. He racked up three life threatening "Dangerous
Downs" at flight school -- the last one for flying his aircraft into
the sea while asleep -- enough to get anyone without his political
influence bounced down the back stairs. As for his record as a
senator, can anyone remember a single significant thing this man has
accomplished in more than a dozen years as a member of that august
body? Anything other than sell out the POWs and promote the
interests of Communist Vietnam, that is. To those who have recently
determined that we just HAVE to have this man as our next president,
I pose the following question: why?
Edward Zehr can
be reached at ezehr@capaccess.org
Published in the Feb. 14, 2000 issue of The Washington Weekly
Copyright 2000 The Washington Weekly (http://www.federal.com)
Reposting permitted with this message intact
|