Phil Angelides serves as chairman of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission appointed by the leadership of the House and Senate. I informed him June 8th of evidence confirming the presence of organized crime in looting the nation’s pension plans. As Senate Finance Committee counsel, 1980-87, the pension area was a central focus of my work.

I was also familiar with his role, while State Treasurer of California (elected in 1998 and again in 2002), as an ex officio member of the board of the nation’s first and third largest public pension plans, both in California. The vice-chairman is Bill Thomas, a former Congressman and chairman of the House Committee on Ways & Means, the committee in charge of pension legislation in the House of Representatives.

Thus I was initially heartened at the interest of Mr. Thomas. At his request, I was happy to offer brief introductory testimony (recorded at the Commission office) and to follow up with a written submission (below). As a good faith investigation would confirm, transnational organized crime has been treating these “funds under management” as a means to line their own pockets—akin to the “casino skim” from the early days of the national crime syndicate.

The oral testimony was not well received. Further, it appears that confirmed facts in the written testimony were not pursued. Had the evidence been pursued consistent with the Commission’s charter, investigators would have by now arranged for testimony from three individuals who are firsthand witnesses to the sophisticated modus operandi by which this looting proceeds in plain sight yet, to date, with impunity—to the detriment of retirees, future retirees and Americans at large. Those  witnesses were not contacted and a follow-up inquiry call was not returned.

Thus the question: for whom is Phil Angelides working?

Oftentimes, the political past offers clues to present behavior. In this case, it was while serving as chair of the California Democratic Party that he oversaw the first-ever election to the U.S. Senate of two Jewish females from the same state the same year (1992): Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein who chairs the Senate Committee on Intelligence.

As referenced in Guilt By Association, the first release in the Criminal State series, it was “Chicago Outfit” money that migrated from California to dominate the Democratic Party, the Hollywood studios and the Republican Party.

Both the grandfather and the great-grandfather of Chicagoan Penny Pritzker, Barack Obama’s top fundraiser, were lawyers for organized crime. Chicago’s Crown family (ne Krinsky) share a similar lineage in Ashkenazi organized crime while also owning a quarter interest in General Dynamics, arguably the nation’s largest corporate beneficiary both of the War on Terrorism and taxpayer outlays for Homeland Security.

Boxer is best known for pressing  in 2010 for a Senate resolution declaring an “unbreakable bond” with Israel as a means to assert the Senate’s loyalty to the Zionist enterprise. No one has yet fully assessed the impact of today’s version of the National Crime Syndicate and its impact on: (a) the nation’s pension plans, (b) how the U.S. was induced to war in the Middle East on false intelligence, and (c) the relationship between the two.

A good faith investigation of the facts provided to Mr. Angelides would have clarified that relationship. Thus the question: for whom is Californian Phil Angelides working?

Rather than follow the facts wherever they may lead (per the Commission’s charter), he and Mr. Thomas chose another course. The 911 Commission chose a similar course when its leaders chose not to investigate this same evidentiary trail despite the fact that both Chairman Tom Kean and Vice-Chairman Lee Hamilton were provided a similar evidentiary trail on April 12, 2004, as was Executive Director Phillip Zelikow. How do I know that? I hand-delivered that evidence to ensure it was signed for at the 911 Commission office.

Then as now, the challenge for representative government lies in how best a long-deceived citizenry can ensure that “our” government acts consistent with the facts and in compliance with the rule of law. That course of action must be distinguished from acting consistent with what officials may believe to be true or what they may need to believe is true.

As an example of what can be proven by a good faith investigation by this Commission (or by the 911 Commission), these two analyses confirm the gravity of the ongoing capital crimes being aided and abetted by those—such as Messrs. Angelides and Thomas—who decline to follow the facts—wherever they may lead:

America Needs Pakistan’s Help – Again from Veterans Today

The Real Origins of Barack Hussein Obama – from Veterans Today

These accounts were provided in April 2004 to the 911 Commission. The 911 Commission interviewed more than 1200 people but refused to speak with James M. Rockefeller. In similar fashion, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission has thus far declined to take the testimony of Mr. Rockefeller or Ron Burd, his attorney since 1992 despite its direct relevance to the mandate set in the Commission charter.

The written testimony to the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission appears below along with the cover letter to Mr. Angelides and a summary of supporting exhibits provided on DVD to Chairman Angelides and to Commission investigator Bruce McWilliams. Note the parallels throughout to the 911 Commission whose report has since been disavowed not only by its leadership and several members but also by senior staff.

As with accountability for the false intelligence that induced the U.S. to war on fixed intelligence, accountability for this ongoing financial crisis commences with ensuring that this Commission conducts its investigation consistent with its Congressional mandate to follow the facts wherever they may lead. If the facts underlying this financial crisis are followed in good faith, they will lead to the same trans-generational criminal syndicate that took the U.S. to war on false pretenses.

Those who fail to follow these facts can rightly be accused of giving aid and comfort to an enemy. They can also rightly be charged with adhering to an enemy by failing to protect this nation from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. In short, the failure to follow this evidentiary trail — wherever it may lead — suggests complicity in an ongoing form of treason.

©  EsinIslam.Com